Agenda packet, regular meeting, first session — Mayor and City Council, October 7, 2026 (part 6 of 7)

MIDDLE MANAGEMENT
20013 ACCOUNTANT III MID MGT 520 $ 7,204.67 $ 7,276.26 $ 7,349.06 $ 7,420.65 $ 7,493.44 $ 7,565.03 $ 7,640.26 $ 7,716.69 $ 7,791.92 $ 7,867.13 $ 7,943.58 $ 8,022.44 $ 8,102.52 $ 8,181.39 $ 8,261.46 $ 8,340.34 $ 8,424.05 $ 8,506.57 $ 8,590.28 $ 8,674.00 $ 8,757.72 Monthly 20457 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUPERVISOR MID MGT 484 $ 6,020.48 $ 6,081.14 $ 6,140.60 $ 6,201.25 $ 6,261.92 $ 6,321.38 $ 6,384.46 $ 6,447.56 $ 6,510.66 $ 6,574.96 $ 6,638.05 $ 6,703.58 $ 6,770.30 $ 6,837.04 $ 6,903.76 $ 6,969.29 $ 7,039.66 $ 7,108.82 $ 7,179.18 $ 7,248.35 $ 7,317.51 Monthly 20320 ANIMAL SERVICES MANAGER MID MGT 526 $ 7,423.06 $ 7,498.28 $ 7,572.31 $ 7,646.32 $ 7,720.31 $ 7,794.34 $ 7,873.22 $ 7,950.84 $ 8,028.53 $ 8,106.16 $ 8,185.04 $ 8,266.31 $ 8,347.62 $ 8,430.13 $ 8,511.41 $ 8,593.92 $ 8,680.06 $ 8,765.00 $ 8,851.15 $ 8,937.29 $ 9,023.43 Monthly 20319 ANIMAL SERVICES SUPERVISOR MID MGT 478 $ 5,843.34 $ 5,901.57 $ 5,959.81 $ 6,018.04 $ 6,076.30 $ 6,135.73 $ 6,196.40 $ 6,258.29 $ 6,318.95 $ 6,380.84 $ 6,441.49 $ 6,505.80 $ 6,571.33 $ 6,635.62 $ 6,699.94 $ 6,764.24 $ 6,832.17 $ 6,898.92 $ 6,966.85 $ 7,034.80 $ 7,102.75 Monthly 20620 AQUATICS SUPERVISOR MID MGT 468 $ 5,558.21 $ 5,614.02 $ 5,669.82 $ 5,725.64 $ 5,781.45 $ 5,837.27 $ 5,895.50 $ 5,953.74 $ 6,011.99 $ 6,070.22 $ 6,128.46 $ 6,190.33 $ 6,250.99 $ 6,312.88 $ 6,373.54 $ 6,435.43 $ 6,499.73 $ 6,564.04 $ 6,628.34 $ 6,692.66 $ 6,756.94 Monthly 20169 ASSOCIATE PLANNER MID MGT 530 $ 7,573.52 $ 7,648.73 $ 7,725.17 $ 7,800.40 $ 7,875.63 $ 7,952.07 $ 8,030.94 $ 8,111.02 $ 8,189.88 $ 8,269.95 $ 8,348.82 $ 8,432.54 $ 8,516.25 $ 8,599.99 $ 8,683.71 $ 8,767.42 $ 8,854.78 $ 8,942.14 $ 9,029.50 $ 9,118.06 $ 9,205.44 Monthly 20250 BUILDING INSPECTION SUPERVISOR MID MGT 542 $ 8,040.65 $ 8,120.72 $ 8,200.79 $ 8,280.89 $ 8,362.19 $ 8,442.26 $ 8,527.18 $ 8,610.92 $ 8,695.85 $ 8,779.55 $ 8,864.49 $ 8,953.04 $ 9,041.64 $ 9,130.21 $ 9,218.77 $ 9,307.34 $ 9,400.77 $ 9,494.19 $ 9,586.41 $ 9,679.85 $ 9,773.27 Monthly 20263 BUSINESS REGISTRATION MANAGER MID MGT 530 $ 7,573.51 $ 7,648.73 $ 7,725.17 $ 7,800.40 $ 7,875.62 $ 7,952.06 $ 8,030.94 $ 8,111.03 $ 8,189.89 $ 8,269.96 $ 8,348.82 $ 8,432.55 $ 8,516.25 $ 8,599.99 $ 8,683.70 $ 8,767.42 $ 8,854.78 $ 8,942.14 $ 9,029.51 $ 9,118.07 $ 9,205.44 Monthly 20271 BUYER MID MGT 460 $ 5,341.01 $ 5,394.42 $ 5,447.79 $ 5,501.17 $ 5,554.55 $ 5,607.94 $ 5,664.98 $ 5,720.79 $ 5,776.59 $ 5,832.42 $ 5,889.43 $ 5,947.67 $ 6,007.12 $ 6,065.37 $ 6,124.82 $ 6,183.06 $ 6,244.93 $ 6,306.82 $ 6,368.69 $ 6,430.58 $ 6,492.44 Monthly 20460 CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR MID MGT 514 $ 6,992.34 $ 7,062.72 $ 7,131.87 $ 7,202.25 $ 7,271.40 $ 7,341.78 $ 7,415.78 $ 7,488.58 $ 7,562.60 $ 7,635.40 $ 7,709.42 $ 7,785.85 $ 7,863.50 $ 7,939.93 $ 8,017.59 $ 8,094.03 $ 8,175.33 $ 8,256.62 $ 8,336.70 $ 8,417.99 $ 8,499.28 Monthly 20923 COMMUNITY RECREATION MANAGER MID MGT 556 $ 8,621.83 $ 8,707.98 $ 8,794.11 $ 8,880.26 $ 8,966.41 $ 9,052.55 $ 9,143.55 $ 9,233.33 $ 9,324.33 $ 9,415.33 $ 9,505.11 $ 9,600.97 $ 9,695.60 $ 9,790.25 $ 9,886.09 $ 9,980.73 $ 10,080.24 $ 10,180.94 $ 10,280.42 $ 10,379.93 $ 10,479.42 Monthly 20925 COMMUNITY RECREATION PROGRAM SUPERVISOR MID MGT 488 $ 6,141.79 $ 6,203.68 $ 6,264.35 $ 6,326.22 $ 6,388.11 $ 6,448.77 $ 6,513.09 $ 6,577.39 $ 6,642.91 $ 6,707.21 $ 6,771.51 $ 6,839.46 $ 6,907.41 $ 6,974.14 $ 7,042.08 $ 7,110.03 $ 7,181.61 $ 7,251.98 $ 7,323.58 $ 7,393.94 $ 7,465.53 Monthly 20504 COMMUNITY SERVICES CENTER SUPERVISOR MID MGT 458 $ 5,288.84 $ 5,341.01 $ 5,394.42 $ 5,446.58 $ 5,499.96 $ 5,553.36 $ 5,607.94 $ 5,663.75 $ 5,719.57 $ 5,775.38 $ 5,829.99 $ 5,888.21 $ 5,946.46 $ 6,005.92 $ 6,064.16 $ 6,122.41 $ 6,183.06 $ 6,244.93 $ 6,305.60 $ 6,366.29 $ 6,428.15 Monthly 20781 COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICER SUPERVISOR MID MGT 480 $ 5,901.57 $ 5,961.02 $ 6,019.25 $ 6,078.72 $ 6,138.16 $ 6,196.40 $ 6,258.29 $ 6,320.15 $ 6,382.04 $ 6,445.15 $ 6,507.00 $ 6,571.33 $ 6,636.84 $ 6,702.36 $ 6,766.67 $ 6,832.17 $ 6,900.13 $ 6,968.07 $ 7,037.24 $ 7,105.18 $ 7,173.12 Monthly 20424 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER MID MGT 585 $ 9,963.75 $ 10,063.24 $ 10,162.75 $ 10,262.23 $ 10,361.72 $ 10,461.21 $ 10,566.76 $ 10,671.11 $ 10,775.46 $ 10,879.81 $ 10,984.15 $ 11,094.54 $ 11,204.98 $ 11,314.18 $ 11,424.59 $ 11,533.78 $ 11,649.03 $ 11,764.32 $ 11,879.57 $ 11,994.85 $ 12,110.11 Monthly 20604 CRIME ANALYST SUPERVISOR MID MGT 514 $ 6,992.34 $ 7,062.72 $ 7,131.87 $ 7,202.25 $ 7,271.40 $ 7,341.78 $ 7,415.78 $ 7,488.58 $ 7,562.60 $ 7,635.40 $ 7,709.42 $ 7,785.85 $ 7,863.50 $ 7,939.93 $ 8,017.59 $ 8,094.03 $ 8,175.33 $ 8,256.62 $ 8,336.70 $ 8,417.99 $ 8,499.28 Monthly 20600 CRIME FREE PROGRAM COORDINATOR MID MGT 490 $ 6,203.68 $ 6,265.55 $ 6,327.46 $ 6,389.33 $ 6,451.20 $ 6,513.09 $ 6,578.59 $ 6,644.13 $ 6,708.41 $ 6,773.94 $ 6,839.46 $ 6,907.41 $ 6,976.57 $ 7,044.51 $ 7,112.47 $ 7,181.61 $ 7,253.21 $ 7,324.79 $ 7,396.38 $ 7,467.97 $ 7,540.76 Monthly 20616 CUSTODIAL SUPERVISOR MID MGT 477 $ 5,814.21 $ 5,872.44 $ 5,930.69 $ 5,988.93 $ 6,045.93 $ 6,104.18 $ 6,166.06 $ 6,226.74 $ 6,287.40 $ 6,349.29 $ 6,409.95 $ 6,474.26 $ 6,538.55 $ 6,601.65 $ 6,665.96 $ 6,730.26 $ 6,798.20 $ 6,864.95 $ 6,932.88 $ 6,999.63 $ 7,066.35 Monthly 20200 DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) SPECIALIST MID MGT 560 $ 8,795.33 $ 8,883.90 $ 8,971.26 $ 9,059.83 $ 9,147.19 $ 9,235.76 $ 9,327.97 $ 9,420.18 $ 9,512.39 $ 9,604.63 $ 9,696.83 $ 9,793.89 $ 9,890.96 $ 9,988.02 $ 10,085.09 $ 10,182.15 $ 10,284.07 $ 10,385.98 $ 10,487.91 $ 10,588.61 $ 10,690.52 Monthly 20441 ENGINEERING ASSOCIATE MID MGT 532 $ 7,648.73 $ 7,725.17 $ 7,801.63 $ 7,878.05 $ 7,954.50 $ 8,030.94 $ 8,112.23 $ 8,192.30 $ 8,272.39 $ 8,352.46 $ 8,432.55 $ 8,517.49 $ 8,601.20 $ 8,686.13 $ 8,769.84 $ 8,854.78 $ 8,943.36 $ 9,031.91 $ 9,120.51 $ 9,209.06 $ 9,297.64 Monthly 20444 ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT MANAGER MID MGT 560 $ 8,795.33 $ 8,883.90 $ 8,971.26 $ 9,059.83 $ 9,147.19 $ 9,235.76 $ 9,327.97 $ 9,420.18 $ 9,512.39 $ 9,604.63 $ 9,696.83 $ 9,793.89 $ 9,890.96 $ 9,988.02 $ 10,085.09 $ 10,182.15 $ 10,284.07 $ 10,385.98 $ 10,487.91 $ 10,588.61 $ 10,690.52 Monthly 20024 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE MANAGER MID MGT 551 $ 8,409.49 $ 8,493.20 $ 8,578.14 $ 8,661.86 $ 8,745.59 $ 8,829.30 $ 8,917.87 $ 9,006.44 $ 9,095.01 $ 9,183.59 $ 9,270.95 $ 9,364.38 $ 9,456.57 $ 9,549.99 $ 9,642.24 $ 9,734.43 $ 9,832.71 $ 9,929.78 $ 10,026.84 $ 10,123.90 $ 10,222.19 Monthly 20025 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR MID MGT 523 $ 7,313.86 $ 7,386.66 $ 7,459.47 $ 7,532.27 $ 7,606.27 $ 7,679.07 $ 7,755.51 $ 7,833.18 $ 7,909.61 $ 7,986.05 $ 8,062.49 $ 8,143.78 $ 8,223.85 $ 8,305.15 $ 8,385.22 $ 8,466.51 $ 8,550.25 $ 8,635.17 $ 8,720.11 $ 8,805.03 $ 8,889.97 Monthly 20092 FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR MID MGT 515 $ 7,027.52 $ 7,097.91 $ 7,168.28 $ 7,238.65 $ 7,307.80 $ 7,378.16 $ 7,452.19 $ 7,526.20 $ 7,600.20 $ 7,674.23 $ 7,747.02 $ 7,824.68 $ 7,902.31 $ 7,979.99 $ 8,057.64 $ 8,135.30 $ 8,216.58 $ 8,297.87 $ 8,379.16 $ 8,460.45 $ 8,541.74 Monthly 20060 FOOD SERVICE SUPERVISOR MID MGT 478 $ 5,843.34 $ 5,901.57 $ 5,959.81 $ 6,018.04 $ 6,076.30 $ 6,135.73 $ 6,196.40 $ 6,258.29 $ 6,318.95 $ 6,380.84 $ 6,441.49 $ 6,505.80 $ 6,571.33 $ 6,635.62 $ 6,699.94 $ 6,764.24 $ 6,832.17 $ 6,898.92 $ 6,966.85 $ 7,034.80 $ 7,102.75 Monthly 20160 FORENSICS SUPERVISOR MID MGT 543 $ 8,080.68 $ 8,160.75 $ 8,242.05 $ 8,323.34 $ 8,403.43 $ 8,484.71 $ 8,569.66 $ 8,654.58 $ 8,739.53 $ 8,824.44 $ 8,908.16 $ 8,997.95 $ 9,086.52 $ 9,176.32 $ 9,264.87 $ 9,354.67 $ 9,448.08 $ 9,541.53 $ 9,634.94 $ 9,728.37 $ 9,821.80 Monthly 20490 FORESTRY SUPERVISOR MID MGT 542 $ 8,040.65 $ 8,120.72 $ 8,200.79 $ 8,280.89 $ 8,362.19 $ 8,442.26 $ 8,527.18 $ 8,610.92 $ 8,695.85 $ 8,779.55 $ 8,864.49 $ 8,953.04 $ 9,041.64 $ 9,130.21 $ 9,218.77 $ 9,307.34 $ 9,400.77 $ 9,494.19 $ 9,586.41 $ 9,679.85 $ 9,773.27 Monthly 20100 GRANTS MANAGER (U) MID MGT 506 $ 6,719.33 $ 6,786.07 $ 6,852.81 $ 6,920.75 $ 6,987.50 $ 7,054.22 $ 7,125.80 $ 7,196.17 $ 7,266.55 $ 7,336.92 $ 7,407.29 $ 7,481.31 $ 7,555.32 $ 7,629.34 $ 7,703.34 $ 7,777.35 $ 7,855.00 $ 7,933.88 $ 8,011.53 $ 8,089.18 $ 8,166.84 Monthly 20170 LEAD FORENSICS SPECIALIST MID MGT 516 $ 7,062.72 $ 7,133.08 $ 7,203.45 $ 7,273.82 $ 7,345.42 $ 7,415.78 $ 7,489.81 $ 7,563.81 $ 7,637.82 $ 7,711.84 $ 7,785.85 $ 7,864.72 $ 7,942.37 $ 8,020.02 $ 8,097.68 $ 8,175.33 $ 8,257.83 $ 8,339.10 $ 8,420.42 $ 8,502.91 $ 8,584.22 Monthly 20388 LIBRARY CIRCULATION SUPERVISOR MID MGT 460 $ 5,341.01 $ 5,394.42 $ 5,447.79 $ 5,501.17 $ 5,554.55 $ 5,607.94 $ 5,664.98 $ 5,720.79 $ 5,776.59 $ 5,832.42 $ 5,889.43 $ 5,947.67 $ 6,007.12 $ 6,065.37 $ 6,124.82 $ 6,183.06 $ 6,244.93 $ 6,306.82 $ 6,368.69 $ 6,430.58 $ 6,492.44 Monthly 20385 LIBRARY NETWORK ADMINISTRATOR MID MGT 492 $ 6,265.55 $ 6,328.66 $ 6,390.54 $ 6,453.63 $ 6,516.72 $ 6,578.59 $ 6,644.13 $ 6,710.84 $ 6,776.37 $ 6,841.89 $ 6,907.41 $ 6,976.57 $ 7,045.73 $ 7,114.88 $ 7,184.04 $ 7,253.21 $ 7,325.99 $ 7,398.81 $ 7,470.39 $ 7,543.20 $ 7,615.98 Monthly 20387 LIBRARY PROGRAM COORDINATOR MID MGT 450 $ 5,081.36 $ 5,132.32 $ 5,183.28 $ 5,234.25 $ 5,285.20 $ 5,336.16 $ 5,389.54 $ 5,441.72 $ 5,495.11 $ 5,548.48 $ 5,601.90 $ 5,658.90 $ 5,714.72 $ 5,770.52 $ 5,826.34 $ 5,882.15 $ 5,941.61 $ 5,999.85 $ 6,059.30 $ 6,117.55 $ 6,176.99 Monthly 20484 MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR MID MGT 522 $ 7,277.47 $ 7,350.27 $ 7,423.06 $ 7,494.66 $ 7,567.46 $ 7,640.26 $ 7,716.69 $ 7,793.12 $ 7,869.57 $ 7,946.00 $ 8,022.44 $ 8,102.52 $ 8,183.84 $ 8,263.88 $ 8,343.97 $ 8,424.05 $ 8,507.76 $ 8,592.70 $ 8,676.43 $ 8,761.35 $ 8,845.07 Monthly 20555 NPDES MANAGER MID MGT 525 $ 7,386.66 $ 7,460.68 $ 7,534.70 $ 7,608.71 $ 7,681.50 $ 7,755.51 $ 7,833.18 $ 7,910.82 $ 7,988.46 $ 8,066.13 $ 8,143.78 $ 8,225.06 $ 8,306.37 $ 8,387.63 $ 8,468.96 $ 8,551.45 $ 8,636.38 $ 8,722.54 $ 8,807.45 $ 8,892.39 $ 8,978.54 Monthly City of San Bernardino - Citywide Salary Schedule
Version Date: 6.9.2026 (CORRECTED)
Approval Date: 10.07.26
4 Packet Page. 951
City of San Bernardino - Citywide Salary Schedule
Effective July 6, 2026 - CORRECTED
20178 PARK RANGER SUPERVISOR MID MGT 480 $ 5,901.57 $ 5,961.02 $ 6,019.26 $ 6,078.72 $ 6,138.16 $ 6,196.40 $ 6,258.28 $ 6,320.15 $ 6,382.04 $ 6,445.14 $ 6,507.00 $ 6,571.32 $ 6,636.84 $ 6,702.36 $ 6,766.67 $ 6,832.17 $ 6,900.13 $ 6,968.07 $ 7,037.24 $ 7,105.18 $ 7,173.12 Monthly 20603 PARKS AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR MID MGT 534 $ 7,725.17 $ 7,802.84 $ 7,880.49 $ 7,956.92 $ 8,034.59 $ 8,112.23 $ 8,193.51 $ 8,274.81 $ 8,354.90 $ 8,436.17 $ 8,517.49 $ 8,602.40 $ 8,688.55 $ 8,773.48 $ 8,858.41 $ 8,943.36 $ 9,033.14 $ 9,122.92 $ 9,211.50 $ 9,301.28 $ 9,391.07 Monthly 20400 PERMIT SERVICES SUPERVISOR MID MGT 494 $ 6,328.66 $ 6,391.74 $ 6,454.83 $ 6,517.93 $ 6,581.04 $ 6,645.34 $ 6,710.85 $ 6,777.58 $ 6,844.33 $ 6,911.04 $ 6,976.57 $ 7,046.93 $ 7,116.09 $ 7,186.46 $ 7,255.64 $ 7,325.98 $ 7,398.80 $ 7,472.81 $ 7,545.63 $ 7,618.40 $ 7,692.43 Monthly 20772 POLICE DISPATCH SUPERVISOR MID MGT 514 $ 6,992.34 $ 7,062.72 $ 7,131.87 $ 7,202.25 $ 7,271.40 $ 7,341.78 $ 7,415.78 $ 7,488.58 $ 7,562.60 $ 7,635.40 $ 7,709.42 $ 7,785.85 $ 7,863.50 $ 7,939.93 $ 8,017.59 $ 8,094.03 $ 8,175.33 $ 8,256.62 $ 8,336.70 $ 8,417.99 $ 8,499.28 Monthly 20765 POLICE RECORDS SUPERVISOR MID MGT 464 $ 5,448.99 $ 5,503.62 $ 5,558.21 $ 5,612.80 $ 5,667.40 $ 5,722.01 $ 5,779.03 $ 5,836.05 $ 5,893.07 $ 5,950.11 $ 6,007.12 $ 6,067.79 $ 6,127.23 $ 6,187.91 $ 6,247.37 $ 6,308.03 $ 6,371.12 $ 6,434.20 $ 6,497.31 $ 6,560.40 $ 6,623.50 Monthly 20019 PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT MID MGT 550 $ 8,367.03 $ 8,450.75 $ 8,534.45 $ 8,618.18 $ 8,701.91 $ 8,785.61 $ 8,874.20 $ 8,961.56 $ 9,048.90 $ 9,137.47 $ 9,224.84 $ 9,317.05 $ 9,409.27 $ 9,501.47 $ 9,593.70 $ 9,685.91 $ 9,782.96 $ 9,880.03 $ 9,977.08 $ 10,074.15 $ 10,171.22 Monthly 20864 PROCUREMENT CONTRACT SPECIALIST MID MGT 520 $ 7,204.67 $ 7,276.26 $ 7,349.06 $ 7,420.65 $ 7,493.44 $ 7,565.03 $ 7,640.26 $ 7,716.69 $ 7,791.92 $ 7,867.13 $ 7,943.58 $ 8,022.44 $ 8,102.52 $ 8,181.39 $ 8,261.46 $ 8,340.34 $ 8,424.05 $ 8,506.57 $ 8,590.28 $ 8,674.00 $ 8,757.72 Monthly 20949 PROPERTY AND EVIDENCE SUPERVISOR MID MGT 494 $ 6,328.66 $ 6,391.74 $ 6,454.83 $ 6,517.93 $ 6,581.03 $ 6,645.34 $ 6,710.84 $ 6,777.58 $ 6,844.33 $ 6,911.05 $ 6,976.57 $ 7,046.93 $ 7,116.10 $ 7,186.46 $ 7,255.64 $ 7,325.99 $ 7,398.81 $ 7,472.81 $ 7,545.63 $ 7,618.42 $ 7,692.43 Monthly 20243 SENIOR PLANNER MID MGT 567 $ 9,108.37 $ 9,199.36 $ 9,290.37 $ 9,381.36 $ 9,472.35 $ 9,563.36 $ 9,659.20 $ 9,755.05 $ 9,849.71 $ 9,945.54 $ 10,041.41 $ 10,142.10 $ 10,242.80 $ 10,342.30 $ 10,443.01 $ 10,543.72 $ 10,649.27 $ 10,754.84 $ 10,860.39 $ 10,965.94 $ 11,070.29 Monthly 20995 STATION MANAGER MID MGT 490 $ 6,203.68 $ 6,265.55 $ 6,327.46 $ 6,389.33 $ 6,451.20 $ 6,513.09 $ 6,578.59 $ 6,644.13 $ 6,708.41 $ 6,773.94 $ 6,839.46 $ 6,907.41 $ 6,976.57 $ 7,044.51 $ 7,112.47 $ 7,181.61 $ 7,253.21 $ 7,324.79 $ 7,396.38 $ 7,467.97 $ 7,540.76 Monthly 20336 TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIAN MID MGT 502 $ 6,585.89 $ 6,651.40 $ 6,718.13 $ 6,783.64 $ 6,849.18 $ 6,915.91 $ 6,985.07 $ 7,054.22 $ 7,123.38 $ 7,192.54 $ 7,261.70 $ 7,333.27 $ 7,406.07 $ 7,478.87 $ 7,551.67 $ 7,624.48 $ 7,700.92 $ 7,776.14 $ 7,852.58 $ 7,929.03 $ 8,005.45 Monthly 20437 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ASSOCIATE MID MGT 532 $ 7,648.73 $ 7,725.17 $ 7,801.63 $ 7,878.05 $ 7,954.50 $ 8,030.94 $ 8,112.23 $ 8,192.30 $ 8,272.39 $ 8,352.46 $ 8,432.55 $ 8,517.49 $ 8,601.20 $ 8,686.13 $ 8,769.84 $ 8,854.78 $ 8,943.36 $ 9,031.91 $ 9,120.51 $ 9,209.06 $ 9,297.64 Monthly 20438 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AND SYSTEMS ANALYST MID MGT 552 $ 8,451.96 $ 8,535.69 $ 8,620.61 $ 8,705.56 $ 8,789.25 $ 8,874.20 $ 8,962.76 $ 9,051.35 $ 9,139.90 $ 9,228.50 $ 9,318.26 $ 9,410.48 $ 9,503.90 $ 9,597.34 $ 9,690.75 $ 9,784.17 $ 9,881.25 $ 9,979.52 $ 10,076.59 $ 10,174.88 $ 10,273.15 Monthly 20370 TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND LIGHTING SUPERVISOR MID MGT 533 $ 7,687.57 $ 7,764.02 $ 7,841.65 $ 7,918.10 $ 7,994.54 $ 8,072.20 $ 8,152.29 $ 8,233.57 $ 8,313.65 $ 8,394.93 $ 8,475.03 $ 8,559.94 $ 8,644.88 $ 8,729.81 $ 8,814.74 $ 8,898.46 $ 8,988.24 $ 9,076.81 $ 9,165.38 $ 9,255.18 $ 9,343.74 Monthly

PART-TIME
00300 APPRENTICE (PT) NA 381 $17.13 $17.30 $17.47 $17.64 $17.81 $17.98 $18.16 $18.34 $18.53 $18.70 $18.88 $19.07 $19.26 $19.45 $19.64 $19.83 $20.03 $20.22 $20.42 $20.62 $20.82 HOURLY 00194 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATOR (PT) NA 493 $29.94 $30.24 $30.54 $30.84 $31.14 $31.44 $31.75 $32.07 $32.38 $32.69 $33.01 $33.34 $33.67 $34.00 $34.33 $34.66 $35.01 $35.35 $35.70 $36.05 $36.39 Hourly 00605 CRIME DATA TECHNICIAN (PT) NA 380 $17.03 $17.19 $17.36 $17.53 $17.70 $17.87 $18.05 $18.23 $18.40 $18.58 $18.77 $18.95 $19.14 $19.33 $19.51 $19.70 $19.89 $20.08 $20.28 $20.48 $20.68 Hourly 00054 CUSTODIAL AIDE (PT) NA 380 $17.03 $17.19 $17.36 $17.53 $17.70 $17.87 $18.05 $18.23 $18.40 $18.58 $18.77 $18.95 $19.14 $19.33 $19.51 $19.70 $19.89 $20.08 $20.28 $20.48 $20.68 Hourly 00083 EXTRA RELIEF HEAVY LABORER (PT) NA 380 $17.03 $17.19 $17.36 $17.53 $17.70 $17.87 $18.05 $18.23 $18.40 $18.58 $18.77 $18.95 $19.14 $19.33 $19.51 $19.70 $19.89 $20.08 $20.28 $20.48 $20.68 Hourly 00259 FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM SPECIALIST (PT) NA 380 $17.03 $17.19 $17.36 $17.53 $17.70 $17.87 $18.05 $18.23 $18.40 $18.58 $18.77 $18.95 $19.14 $19.33 $19.51 $19.70 $19.89 $20.08 $20.28 $20.48 $20.68 Hourly 00308 LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINEE NA NA $34.77 $34.77 Hourly 00361 LIBRARY PAGE (PT) NA 368 $17.03 $17.19 $17.36 $17.53 $17.70 $17.87 $18.05 $18.23 $18.40 $18.58 $18.77 $18.95 $19.14 $19.33 $19.51 $19.70 $19.89 $20.08 $20.28 $20.48 $20.68 Hourly 00133 LIFEGUARD (PT) NA 377 $16.96 $17.12 $17.29 $17.46 $17.63 $17.80 $17.98 $18.16 $18.33 $18.51 $18.69 $18.88 $19.07 $19.25 $19.44 $19.63 $19.82 $20.02 $20.21 $20.41 $20.61 Hourly 00192 POLICE CADET (PT) NA 380 $17.03 $17.19 $17.36 $17.53 $17.70 $17.87 $18.05 $18.23 $18.40 $18.58 $18.77 $18.95 $19.14 $19.33 $19.51 $19.70 $19.89 $20.08 $20.28 $20.48 $20.68 Hourly 00520 POLICE CALL TAKER (PT) NA 396 $19.85 $24.14 Hourly 00331 POOL MANAGER I (PT) NA 421 $20.91 $21.12 $21.33 $21.54 $21.74 $21.95 $22.17 $22.39 $22.62 $22.83 $23.05 $23.28 $23.52 $23.74 $23.97 $24.20 $24.44 $24.69 $24.93 $25.17 $25.41 Hourly 00333 POOL MANAGER II (PT) NA 443 $23.33 $23.57 $23.80 $24.03 $24.27 $24.50 $24.74 $24.99 $25.23 $25.48 $25.73 $25.98 $26.24 $26.50 $26.75 $27.01 $27.28 $27.55 $27.82 $28.09 $28.36 Hourly 00222 RECREATION AIDE (PT) NA 368 $17.03 $17.19 $17.36 $17.53 $17.70 $17.87 $18.05 $18.23 $18.40 $18.58 $18.77 $18.95 $19.14 $19.33 $19.51 $19.70 $19.89 $20.08 $20.28 $20.48 $20.68 Hourly 00244 RECREATION LEADER (PT) NA 375 $17.98 $18.15 $18.32 $18.51 $18.69 $18.88 $19.06 $19.24 $19.43 $19.63 $19.82 $20.01 $20.20 $20.41 $20.61 $20.81 $21.01 $21.21 $21.43 $21.64 $21.86 Hourly 00230 RECREATION SPECIALIST (PT) NA 400 $18.83 $19.02 $19.21 $19.40 $19.58 $19.77 $19.97 $20.17 $20.37 $20.56 $20.76 $20.97 $21.17 $21.38 $21.59 $21.80 $22.02 $22.23 $22.45 $22.67 $22.89 Hourly 00256 RECREATION SUPERVISOR (AQUATICS) (PT) NA 481 $28.20 $28.48 $28.77 $29.05 $29.33 $29.61 $29.91 $30.20 $30.50 $30.80 $31.09 $31.40 $31.71 $32.03 $32.34 $32.65 $32.98 $33.30 $33.63 $33.95 $34.28 Hourly 00266 SECURITY OFFICER I (PT) NA 378 $17.04 $17.21 $17.38 $17.55 $17.72 $17.90 $18.07 $18.25 $18.43 $18.60 $18.79 $18.98 $19.16 $19.34 $19.53 $19.73 $19.92 $20.12 $20.31 $20.51 $20.71 Hourly 00265 SECURITY OFFICER II (PT) NA 402 $19.02 $19.21 $19.40 $19.59 $19.78 $19.97 $20.17 $20.37 $20.57 $20.77 $20.97 $21.18 $21.39 $21.59 $21.81 $22.02 $22.23 $22.45 $22.68 $22.90 $23.12 Hourly 00283 SENIOR LIFEGUARD (PT) NA 396 $18.46 $18.64 $18.83 $19.01 $19.19 $19.38 $19.58 $19.77 $19.96 $20.16 $20.35 $20.55 $20.76 $20.96 $21.16 $21.37 $21.58 $21.80 $22.01 $22.22 $22.44 Hourly 00294 SENIOR RECREATION LEADER (PT) NA 382 $18.62 $18.80 $18.99 $19.18 $19.37 $19.55 $19.75 $19.94 $20.14 $20.33 $20.53 $20.73 $20.94 $21.14 $21.35 $21.56 $21.77 $21.99 $22.20 $22.42 $22.64 Hourly 00019 STUDENT INTERN (PT) NA 380 $17.03 $17.19 $17.36 $17.53 $17.70 $17.87 $18.05 $18.23 $18.40 $18.58 $18.77 $18.95 $19.14 $19.33 $19.51 $19.70 $19.89 $20.08 $20.28 $20.48 $20.68 Hourly 00301 VETERINARIAN - PER DIEM NA NA $187.50 $187.50 Hourly

POLICE MANAGEMENT
50141 ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE SBPMA P6 $ 26,655.51 $ 26,655.51 Monthly 50283 POLICE CAPTAIN (U) SBPMA P5 $ 21,772.90 $ 21,772.90 Monthly 50402 POLICE LIEUTENANT SBPMA P4 $ 18,500.24 $ 18,500.24 Monthly

POLICE SAFETY
40466 DETECTIVE/CORPORAL SBPOA P2 $ 9,739.80 $ 10,498.46 $ 11,257.15 $ 12,014.63 $ 12,773.30 $12,401.26 Monthly 40751 POLICE OFFICER SBPOA P1 $ 8,387.68 $ 9,090.87 $ 9,795.29 $ 10,498.46 $ 11,201.66 $10,875.40 Monthly 40332 POLICE SERGEANT SBPOA P3 $ 11,021.96 $ 11,874.69 $ 12,727.47 $ 13,581.44 $ 14,434.18 $14,013.77 Monthly

POLICE CIVILIAN
33017 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN I (FLEX) - POLICE SBPCA 399 $ 3,946.31 $ 3,985.20 $ 4,024.08 $ 4,064.16 $ 4,103.06 $ 4,143.15 $ 4,184.44 $ 4,225.77 $ 4,267.07 $ 4,308.39 $ 4,349.70 $ 4,393.43 $ 4,437.17 $ 4,480.93 $ 4,524.66 $ 4,567.18 $ 4,613.35 $ 4,659.52 $ 4,704.47 $ 4,750.65 $ 4,795.59 Monthly 33018 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN II - POLICE SBPCA 419 $ 4,359.41 $ 4,403.15 $ 4,446.89 $ 4,490.62 $ 4,534.38 $ 4,578.11 $ 4,623.06 $ 4,669.24 $ 4,715.43 $ 4,760.37 $ 4,806.54 $ 4,855.14 $ 4,902.52 $ 4,951.12 $ 4,998.51 $ 5,047.11 $ 5,096.91 $ 5,147.95 $ 5,197.76 $ 5,248.79 $ 5,298.60 Monthly 33709 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT - POLICE SBPCA 400 $ 3,965.76 $ 4,004.63 $ 4,044.73 $ 4,084.84 $ 4,123.70 $ 4,163.80 $ 4,205.10 $ 4,247.63 $ 4,288.94 $ 4,330.24 $ 4,371.55 $ 4,415.29 $ 4,459.04 $ 4,502.80 $ 4,546.52 $ 4,590.27 $ 4,636.43 $ 4,682.60 $ 4,728.76 $ 4,773.74 $ 4,819.89 Monthly 33758 COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICER SBPCA 427 $ 4,536.80 $ 4,582.97 $ 4,627.93 $ 4,672.89 $ 4,719.06 $ 4,764.00 $ 4,811.39 $ 4,858.78 $ 4,907.37 $ 4,954.76 $ 5,002.14 $ 5,051.96 $ 5,101.78 $ 5,152.82 $ 5,202.63 $ 5,252.44 $ 5,304.67 $ 5,356.93 $ 5,410.40 $ 5,462.63 $ 5,514.87 Monthly 33603 CRIME ANALYST SBPCA 493 $ 6,305.84 $ 6,369.02 $ 6,432.21 $ 6,495.38 $ 6,557.35 $ 6,620.53 $ 6,687.35 $ 6,752.97 $ 6,819.79 $ 6,885.39 $ 6,952.22 $ 7,021.48 $ 7,090.73 $ 7,159.99 $ 7,230.45 $ 7,299.72 $ 7,372.60 $ 7,445.51 $ 7,518.40 $ 7,591.31 $ 7,664.20 Monthly 33602 CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OFFICER SBPCA 493 $ 6,305.84 $ 6,369.02 $ 6,432.21 $ 6,495.38 $ 6,557.35 $ 6,620.53 $ 6,687.35 $ 6,752.97 $ 6,819.79 $ 6,885.39 $ 6,952.22 $ 7,021.48 $ 7,090.73 $ 7,159.99 $ 7,230.45 $ 7,299.72 $ 7,372.60 $ 7,445.51 $ 7,518.40 $ 7,591.31 $ 7,664.20 Monthly 33707 EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT - POLICE SBPCA 430 $ 4,606.06 $ 4,651.01 $ 4,697.18 $ 4,743.35 $ 4,789.52 $ 4,835.70 $ 4,884.30 $ 4,932.89 $ 4,980.27 $ 5,028.88 $ 5,077.48 $ 5,128.50 $ 5,179.55 $ 5,229.35 $ 5,280.39 $ 5,331.41 $ 5,384.88 $ 5,438.33 $ 5,491.79 $ 5,545.26 $ 5,597.49 Monthly 33165 FORENSICS SPECIALIST I (FLEX) SBPCA 448 $ 4,964.13 $ 5,013.21 $ 5,062.30 $ 5,112.58 $ 5,161.66 $ 5,211.92 $ 5,263.40 $ 5,316.08 $ 5,366.84 $ 5,367.53 $ 5,420.21 $ 5,472.88 $ 5,526.74 $ 5,581.82 $ 5,636.88 $ 5,690.74 $ 5,745.80 $ 5,803.26 $ 5,860.71 $ 5,918.18 $ 5,975.65 Monthly 33166 FORENSICS SPECIALIST II SBPCA 478 $ 5,851.42 $ 5,909.76 $ 5,968.08 $ 6,026.39 $ 6,084.71 $ 6,144.25 $ 6,205.00 $ 6,266.97 $ 6,327.72 $ 6,389.67 $ 6,450.43 $ 6,514.82 $ 6,580.43 $ 6,644.83 $ 6,709.23 $ 6,773.61 $ 6,841.66 $ 6,908.48 $ 6,976.52 $ 7,044.56 $ 7,112.60 Monthly 33515 MARKETING & PUBLIC RELATIONS SPECIALIST SBPCA 461 $ 5,375.15 $ 5,429.83 $ 5,483.29 $ 5,536.74 $ 5,590.21 $ 5,644.88 $ 5,700.77 $ 5,756.65 $ 5,813.77 $ 5,869.65 $ 5,926.77 $ 5,986.30 $ 6,044.62 $ 6,104.16 $ 6,163.69 $ 6,223.23 $ 6,285.18 $ 6,347.15 $ 6,409.13 $ 6,472.31 $ 6,534.27 Monthly 30178 PARK RANGER SBPCA 397 $ 3,906.23 $ 3,945.09 $ 3,985.19 $ 4,024.08 $ 4,062.95 $ 4,101.83 $ 4,143.15 $ 4,184.44 $ 4,224.55 $ 4,265.85 $ 4,307.17 $ 4,349.70 $ 4,393.44 $ 4,435.97 $ 4,479.69 $ 4,522.22 $ 4,567.18 $ 4,613.36 $ 4,658.31 $ 4,703.27 $ 4,748.22 Monthly 33581 PARKING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SBPCA 380 $ 3,589.10 $ 3,624.34 $ 3,660.78 $ 3,697.23 $ 3,732.49 $ 3,768.92 $ 3,806.60 $ 3,844.24 $ 3,881.92 $ 3,919.60 $ 3,957.25 $ 3,996.14 $ 4,036.22 $ 4,075.10 $ 4,115.21 $ 4,155.30 $ 4,196.61 $ 4,237.92 $ 4,279.22 $ 4,320.54 $ 4,363.06 Monthly 33848 POLICE FLEET MAINTENANCE EXPEDITOR SBPCA 398 $ 3,925.65 $ 3,965.76 $ 4,004.63 $ 4,043.52 $ 4,083.61 $ 4,122.49 $ 4,158.31 $ 4,205.10 $ 4,246.43 $ 4,287.73 $ 4,329.04 $ 4,371.57 $ 4,415.30 $ 4,457.83 $ 4,501.57 $ 4,545.31 $ 4,590.27 $ 4,636.43 $ 4,681.38 $ 4,726.35 $ 4,772.51 Monthly 33218 POLICE PERSONNEL AND TRAINING TECHNICIAN SBPCA 457 $ 5,269.45 $ 5,321.71 $ 5,375.15 $ 5,427.40 $ 5,479.64 $ 5,533.10 $ 5,587.78 $ 5,643.66 $ 5,698.33 $ 5,754.23 $ 5,808.91 $ 5,867.23 $ 5,925.55 $ 5,983.87 $ 6,042.18 $ 6,100.51 $ 6,161.24 $ 6,222.01 $ 6,282.76 $ 6,343.52 $ 6,405.47 Monthly 33219 POLICE RECORDS TECHNICIAN I (FLEX) SBPCA 369 $ 3,397.13 $ 3,431.16 $ 3,465.18 $ 3,499.19 $ 3,533.22 $ 3,567.24 $ 3,602.47 $ 3,638.93 $ 3,674.16 $ 3,709.39 $ 3,745.85 $ 3,783.50 $ 3,819.96 $ 3,857.62 $ 3,895.28 $ 3,932.94 $ 3,971.84 $ 4,011.93 $ 4,050.80 $ 4,089.68 $ 4,129.79 Monthly 33220 POLICE RECORDS TECHNICIAN II SBPCA 390 $ 3,772.57 $ 3,810.23 $ 3,847.90 $ 3,885.57 $ 3,923.24 $ 3,960.90 $ 4,000.99 $ 4,039.87 $ 4,079.95 $ 4,120.06 $ 4,158.95 $ 4,200.25 $ 4,242.77 $ 4,284.08 $ 4,325.39 $ 4,366.70 $ 4,410.44 $ 4,454.20 $ 4,497.93 $ 4,541.67 $ 4,585.41 Monthly 33947 PROPERTY AND EVIDENCE TECHNICIAN I (FLEX) SBPCA 411 $ 4,189.32 $ 4,230.63 $ 4,273.15 $ 4,314.46 $ 4,356.99 $ 4,398.30 $ 4,442.03 $ 4,486.98 $ 4,530.73 $ 4,574.47 $ 4,618.20 $ 4,664.38 $ 4,710.55 $ 4,756.72 $ 4,802.89 $ 4,849.06 $ 4,897.66 $ 4,946.26 $ 4,994.86 $ 5,043.45 $ 5,092.06 Monthly 33948 PROPERTY AND EVIDENCE TECHNICIAN II SBPCA 472 $ 5,678.90 $ 5,736.02 $ 5,791.90 $ 5,849.00 $ 5,906.10 $ 5,962.00 $ 6,022.75 $ 6,079.00 $ 6,141.82 $ 6,201.35 $ 6,260.89 $ 6,322.86 $ 6,386.03 $ 6,447.99 $ 6,511.17 $ 6,574.35 $ 6,639.96 $ 6,705.57 $ 6,771.19 $ 6,836.80 $ 6,902.42 Monthly 33770 RANGEMASTER SBPCA 465 $ 5,483.29 $ 5,539.18 $ 5,593.86 $ 5,648.53 $ 5,703.19 $ 5,757.87 $ 5,816.18 $ 5,873.30 $ 5,930.41 $ 5,988.73 $ 6,045.84 $ 6,106.59 $ 6,167.34 $ 6,226.87 $ 6,287.61 $ 6,348.36 $ 6,411.53 $ 6,474.73 $ 6,539.12 $ 6,602.29 $ 6,665.48 Monthly 33710 SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT - POLICE SBPCA 375 $ 3,500.40 $ 3,535.65 $ 3,570.88 $ 3,606.11 $ 3,640.14 $ 3,675.37 $ 3,711.81 $ 3,749.48 $ 3,785.93 $ 3,822.39 $ 3,858.83 $ 3,897.71 $ 3,936.60 $ 3,975.48 $ 4,014.36 $ 4,052.02 $ 4,093.33 $ 4,133.43 $ 4,173.53 $ 4,214.84 $ 4,254.92 Monthly

POLICE DISPATCH
32767 POLICE DISPATCHER I (FLEX) SBPDA 433 $ 4,906.72 $ 4,955.83 $ 5,004.93 $ 5,054.03 $ 5,103.15 $ 5,152.25 $ 5,204.01 $ 5,255.76 $ 5,306.20 $ 5,357.97 $ 5,409.73 $ 5,464.15 $ 5,518.56 $ 5,571.66 $ 5,626.07 $ 5,680.49 $ 5,737.56 $ 5,794.63 $ 5,850.37 $ 5,907.44 $ 5,964.50 Monthly 32768 POLICE DISPATCHER II SBPDA 464 $ 5,726.94 $ 5,784.01 $ 5,842.40 $ 5,899.48 $ 5,956.55 $ 6,013.62 $ 6,073.35 $ 6,134.39 $ 6,194.11 $ 6,253.85 $ 6,314.89 $ 6,377.26 $ 6,440.98 $ 6,503.35 $ 6,567.06 $ 6,630.77 $ 6,697.13 $ 6,762.17 $ 6,828.53 $ 6,894.90 $ 6,961.25 Monthly #DENOTES CLASSIFICATION HAS AN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT
City of San Bernardino - Citywide Salary Schedule
Version Date: 6.9.2026 (CORRECTED)
Approval Date: 10.07.26
5 Packet Page. 952
City of San Bernardino - Citywide Salary Schedule
Effective July 6, 2026 - CORRECTED
(U) DENOTES UNCLASSIFIED
City of San Bernardino - Citywide Salary Schedule
Version Date: 6.9.2026 (CORRECTED)
Approval Date: 10.07.26
6 Packet Page. 953

CONSENT CALENDAR
City of San Bernardino
Request for Council Action
Date: October 7, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Vanessa Carder, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department
Department: Parks & Recreation & Community Services
Subject: Adopt Resolution Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 24-992 for the Modernization of Older
Californians Act/Nutrition Services Grant FY 2024-2027 (All Wards)
Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2026-166:

1. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to accept and approve Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 24-992 with the San Bernardino County Department of Aging and Adult Services – Public Guardian for the Modernization of Older Californians Act (MOCA)/Nutrition Services Grant, providing an additional $90,000 and increasing the total Not-toExceed contract amount from $189,900 to $279,900, and extending the contract term through September 30, 2027; and

2. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to conduct all negotiations, execute, and submit all necessary documents associated with the grant award; and

3. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2026/27 budget in both revenues and expenditures and appropriate the additional $90,000 grant award in accordance with the County-authorized budget and contract requirements.

Executive Summary
The San Bernardino County Department of Aging and Adult Services – Public Guardian issued Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 24-992 for the Modernization of Older Californians Act (MOCA)/Nutrition Services Grant. Amendment No. 2 provides an Packet Page. 954
additional $90,000, increasing the total Not-to-Exceed contract amount from $189,900 to $279,900, and extends the contract term through September 30, 2027. The additional funding will support eligible grant-funded activities in accordance with the County-authorized budget and contract requirements through September 30, 2027.

There is no City match requirement.

Background
The Modernization of Older Californians Act/Nutrition Services (MOCA) grant offers mutually beneficial intergenerational activities to promote greater understanding and respect between generations through activities, excursions, and events. It strengthens older adults’ recovery and resilience from the isolation and health impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic, by bringing participants of the Older Californians Nutrition Program (OCNP) together with children and adults. The City of San Bernardino provides a senior nutrition program for adults 60 years of age and older, offering lunch meals Monday through Friday, year-round, and serving more than 65,000 meals annually to an average of 266 individual clients across six (6) nutrition sites. These sites include 5th Street Senior Center, Perris Hill Senior Center, Hernandez Community Center, Lytle Creek Community Center, New Hope Family Life Center, and Highland Senior Center. The Older Californian Nutrition Program (formerly the Senior Nutrition Program) is supported by funding received from the San Bernardino County Department of Aging and Adult Services – Public Guardian (DAAS-PG).

Discussion
The City originally applied for and received the Modernization of Older Californians Act – Nutrition Services Grant from the County of San Bernardino. The original grant award of $99,900 provided funding for intergenerational activities and nutrition program infrastructure improvements. Amendment No. 1 subsequently provided an additional $90,000, increasing the total contract amount to $189,900 and extending the contract through September 30, 2026.

The programs also offer individuals an opportunity to socialize with others while promoting health and well-being through nutrition. Additionally, the program aims to reduce social isolation for seniors, with efforts related to planning, development, and implementation of activities and programs that bring participants of the Older Californians Nutrition Program together with children, teens, or adults.

Of the original $99,900 grant allocation, the City expended $17,016.55 on eligible intergenerational programming and program equipment, leaving $82,883.45 unexpended. The original funding supported the first year of activities described below, as well as the purchase of a commercial refrigerator, a stove for Hernandez Community Center, and two power washers.

During the first year of intergenerational programming, from September 2024 through September 2025, the City recorded 2,018 participants ranging in age from infancy to over 100 years old. Of those participants, 987 were ages 0–59 and 1,031 were ages Packet Page. 955
60 and older. Programming at four community centers and two senior centers included art, cooking, technology, gardening, swimming, and social activities designed to bring generations together.

Activities included Paint & Pastries (385 participants), Eats, Treats & Healthy Drinks (402), Smart, Play, Social (104), a Frozen intergenerational experience (100), Ice Cream Socials (332), and Luau Family Swim Night (88). The Grandparents’ Day Celebration had 536 registered participants and drew more than 1,000 community members. Growing Together gardening activities were offered on a walk-in basis; individual participation was not tracked. These results demonstrate community participation across age groups and support continuing intergenerational activities through the amended grant term.

On July 9, 2026, the San Bernardino County Department of Aging and Adult Services – Public Guardian transmitted Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 24-992 to the City of San Bernardino for review and approval. Amendment No. 2 provides an additional $90,000, increasing the total Not-to-Exceed contract amount from $189,900 to $279,900, and extends the contract term through September 30, 2027. Proposed intergenerational activities may include a Grandparent’s Day Celebration, Eats/Treats/Healthy Drinks all-age cooking classes, Paint, Projects & Pastries, Arts & Crafts, Cultural events, gardening programs, Ice Cream Social, Summer festivities, holiday events and programs. These activities will take place at both the 5th Street and Perris Hill Senior Centers and other community centers and local venues.

Staff recommends acceptance and approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 24- 992, which provides an additional $90,000 and increases the total Not-to-Exceed contract amount to $279,900. The additional funding will support eligible grant-funded activities in accordance with the County-authorized budget and contract requirements through September 30, 2027. Any purchases made using grant funds will be completed in accordance with the City of San Bernardino's applicable procurement policies and procedures. There is no City match requirement associated with this grant award. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals
This proposal aligns with Goal No. 1: Financial Stability by securing a long-term revenue source and creating a framework for spending decisions, Goal No. 2:

Focused, Aligned Leadership and Unified Community by developing and implementing a community engagement plan, and Goal No. 3: Improved Quality of Life by providing intergenerational activities that bring participants of the Older Californians Nutrition Program (OCNP) together with children or adults and capacity and infrastructure improvements for the OCNP.

Fiscal Impact
The MOCA/Nutrition Services Grant contract term is October 22, 2024 through September 30, 2027. Amendment No. 2 provides an additional $90,000, increasing the total Not-to-Exceed contract amount from $189,900 to $279,900. The City will appropriate the additional $90,000 in FY 2026/27 and expend it in accordance with the Packet Page. 956
County-authorized budget and contract requirements through September 30, 2027.

Conclusion
It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2026-166:

2. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to conduct all negotiations, execute, and submit all necessary documents associated with the grant award; and

Attachments
Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – Original Contract No. 24-992
Attachment 3 – Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. 24-992 (24- 992 A-1)
Attachment 4 – Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 24-992 (24- 992 A-2)
Ward:

All Wards
Synopsis of Previous Council Actions:

On December 4, 2024, The Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024- 232, to amend the FY 2024/25 budget in both revenues and expenditures, and appropriate $99,900 in grant award funds to be used towards intergenerational activities and
infrastructure improvements.

On January 17, 2024, The Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024- 018, approved the purchase of a mobile diesel generator through Home and Community Based Services (HCBS)
Senior Nutrition Infrastructure Grant Program.

On November 5, 2025, The Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025- 386, accepting and approving Amendment No. 1 to Contract Packet Page. 957
No. 24-992, increasing the total contract amount to
$189,900, and appropriating an additional $90,000 in grant award funds for intergenerational activities and infrastructure improvements.

Packet Page. 958
Resolution No. 2026-166
Resolution 2026-166
October 7, 2026

Page 1 of 4 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-166

RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA,

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO
ACCEPT AND APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
CONTRACT NO. 24-992 WITH THE SAN BERNARDINO

COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF AGING AND ADULT
SERVICES – PUBLIC GUARDIAN FOR THE

MODERNIZATION OF OLDER CALIFORNIANS

ACT/NUTRITION SERVICES GRANT, PROVIDING AN
ADDITIONAL $90,000 AND INCREASING THE TOTAL
NOT-TO-EXCEED CONTRACT AMOUNT FROM $189,900
TO $279,900; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR

DESIGNEE TO CONDUCT ALL NEGOTIATIONS AND
EXECUTE AND SUBMIT NECESSARY DOCUMENTS; AND

AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND

MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO AMEND THE FISCAL
YEAR 2026/27 BUDGET IN BOTH REVENUES AND

EXPENDITURES AND APPROPRIATE THE ADDITIONAL
$90,000 GRANT AWARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

COUNTY-AUTHORIZED BUDGET AND CONTRACT
REQUIREMENTS.

WHEREAS, The City of San Bernardino is contracted (County Contract #24-992) with the San Bernardino County Department of Aging and Adult Services – Public Guardian (DAAS-PG) as one of eight (8) nutrition providers in the County; and WHEREAS, On December 4, 2024, the Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-232, to amend the FY 2024/25 budget in both revenues and expenditures, and appropriated $99,900 (County Contract No. 24-992) in grant award funds to be used towards intergenerational activities and infrastructure improvements; and WHEREAS, on September 10, 2025, the County of San Bernardino transmitted Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. 24-992, providing an additional $90,000, increasing the total contract amount from $99,900 to $189,900, and extending the contract term through September 30, 2026; and
WHEREAS, on November 5, 2025, the Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-386, accepting and approving Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. 24-992 and appropriating the additional $90,000 in grant award funds; and Packet Page. 959
Resolution No. 2026-166
Resolution 2026-166
October 7, 2026

Page 2 of 4 ends

WHEREAS, on July 9, 2026, the San Bernardino County Department of Aging and Adult Services – Public Guardian transmitted Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 24-992 to the City of San Bernardino for review and approval, providing an additional $90,000, increasing the total Not-to-Exceed contract amount from $189,900 to $279,900, and extending the contract term through September 30, 2027; and

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. The Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino hereby authorize the City Manager or designee to accept and approve Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 24-992 for the Modernization of Older Californians Act (MOCA) - Nutrition Services grant through the Department of Aging and Adult Services – Public Guardian (DAAS-PG).

SECTION 3. The City Manager or designee is hereby authorized to accept the additional $90,000 in grant award funds provided through Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 24-992.

SECTION 4. The Director of Finance and Management Services is hereby authorized to amend the Fiscal Year 2026/27 budget in both revenues and expenditures and appropriate the additional $90,000 grant award in accordance with the County-authorized budget and contract requirements.

SECTION 5. That the City Council finds this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty, as in this case, 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.

SECTION 6. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable.

SECTION 7. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.

APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the Acting City Clerk this 7th day of October 2026.

Helen Tran, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
Packet Page. 960
Resolution No. 2026-166
Resolution 2026-166
October 7, 2026

Page 3 of 4 ends

Attest:

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Approved as to form:

Albert J. Maldonado, City Attorney
Packet Page. 961
Resolution No. 2026-166
Resolution 2026-166
October 7, 2026

Page 4 of 4 ends

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
I, Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2026-166, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of October 2026 by the following vote:

Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT
SANCHEZ _____ _____ _______ _______
IBARRA _____ _____ _______ _______
FIGUEROA _____ _____ _______ _______
SHORETT _____ _____ _______ _______
KNAUS _____ _____ _______ _______
FLORES _____ _____ _______ _______
ORTIZ _____ _____ _______ _______
WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Bernardino this 7th day of October 2026.

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Packet Page. 962

THE INFORMATION IN THIS BOX IS NOT A PART OF THE CONTRACT AND IS FOR COUNTY USE ONLY Department of Aging and Adult
Services – Public Guardian
Department Contract Representative Jammie Maalouf, Contract Analyst Telephone Number (909) 386-8395
Contractor City of San Bernardino
Contractor Representative Trudy Panowicz
Telephone Number (909) 384-5434
Contract Term October 22, 2024 through
September 30, 2026
Original Contract Amount $99,900
Amendment Amount $90,000
Total Contract Amount $189,900
Cost Center 5292501036
Grant Number (if applicable) 800292
IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

AMENDMENT NO. 1
It is hereby agreed to amend Contract No. 24-992, as follows:

SECTION D. TERM OF CONTRACT
Amend Section D. Term of Contract to read as follows:

1. This Contract is effective as of October 22, 2024, and is extended from the previous expiration date of September 30, 2025 to expire on September 30, 2026 but may be terminated earlier in accordance with provisions of this Contract.

SECTION F. FISCAL PROVISIONS
Amend Section F. Fiscal Provisions to read as follows:

1. The maximum amount of reimbursement under this Contract shall not exceed $189,900 and shall be subject to availability of other funds to the County. The consideration to be paid to Contractor, as provided herein, shall be in full payment for all Contractor's services and expenses incurred in the performance hereof, including travel and per diem.

Contract Number
24-992 A-1
SAP Number
Packet Page. 1013
All other terms and conditions of Contracts No. 24-992 remain in full force and effect.

This Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which so executed shall be deemed to be an original, and such counterparts shall together constitute one and the same Contract. The parties shall be entitled to sign and transmit an electronic signature of this Contract (whether by facsimile, PDF, or other email transmission), which signature shall be binding on the party whose name is contained therein. Each party providing an electronic signature agrees to promptly execute and deliver to the other party an original signed Contract upon request.

FOR COUNTY USE ONLY
Approved as to Legal Form Reviewed for Contract Compliance Reviewed/Approved by Department Jacqueline Carey-Wilson, County Counsel Patty Steven, Contracts Manager Sharon Nevins, Director Date Date Date
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY City of San Bernardino
(Print or type name of corporation, company, contractor, etc.) By
Dawn Rowe, Chair, Board of Supervisors (Authorized signature - sign in blue ink) Dated: Name Eric Levitt
SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY OF THIS (Print or type name of person signing contract)

DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD Title City Manager
Lynna Monell
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
San Bernardino County
(Print or Type)
By Dated:

Deputy
Address 290 N. D Street
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Packet Page. 1014
Standard Contract Page 1 of 4

THE INFORMATION IN THIS BOX IS NOT A PART OF THE CONTRACT AND IS FOR COUNTY USE ONLY Department of Aging and Adult
Services – Public Guardian
Department Contract Representative Ivy Zhang
Telephone Number (909) 387-2806
Contractor City of San Bernardino
Contractor Representative Trudy Panowicz
Telephone Number (909) 384-5434
Contract Term October 22, 2024, through
September 30, 2027
Original Contract Amount NTE $189,900
Amendment Amount NTE $ 90,000
Total Contract Amount NTE $279,900
Cost Center 5292501036
Grant Number (if applicable) N/A
IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

AMENDMENT NO. 2
It is hereby agreed to amend Contract No. 24-992, as follows:

SECTION A. DEFINITIONS
Amend Section A. to add Definitions 33 and 34.:

33. Budgeted Award - The amount of funding authorized by the County for Contractor use at contract execution. Contractor may not incur costs beyond this amount without an approved budget adjustment.

34. Not to Exceed (NTE) Amount - The maximum total compensation authorized under this Agreement. This amount cannot be exceeded without a formal written amendment.

SECTION C. GENERAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS
Amend Section C. to add Paragraphs 68 through 72.:

Contract Number
24-992 A-2
SAP Number
4400026962
Docusign Envelope ID: CDBB114A-38EC-8533-80D5-9A3C63098E82 Packet Page. 1015
Revised 7/1/24 Page 2 of 4

68. Covenant Against Contingent Fees - The Contractor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit the work outlined within this contract. There has been no agreement to make commission payments in order to obtain the work outlined within this contract. For breach or violation of this warranty, the County shall have the right to terminate or at its discretion to deduct from the contract or otherwise recover the full amount of such commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee.

69. Fraud and Programmatic Abuse Reporting - The Contractor shall immediately report to the County and the California Department of Aging (CDA) any incidents of alleged fraud or programmatic abuse. The Contractor shall maintain all records, documents, or other evidence of fraud or abuse until notified by the County or CDA.

70. Compliance with State Contract Act and Unruh Civil Rights Act - In performing services under this contract, the Contractor shall comply with all applicable provisions of the State Contract Act (Public Contract Code §10295 et seq.) and the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code §51), as required when program allocations exceed $100,000 or when otherwise applicable.

71. Remedies for Noncompliance - In the event of Contractor noncompliance with the terms, conditions, or specifications of this contract, the County may impose appropriate remedies, including but not limited to: withholding of payments, contract suspension, contract termination, reduction of budget, and modification of contract terms as allowed under 45 CFR 92.36.

72. Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment (31 U.S.C. § 1352 (as amended)) - Contractor certifies on Attachment F that it will not and has not used Federal appropriated funds to pay any person or organization for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a member of Congress, officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with obtaining any Federal contract, grant or any other award covered by 31 USC 1352. Contractor shall also disclose to the County any lobbying with non-Federal funds that takes place in connection with obtaining any Federal award.

SECTION D. TERM OF CONTRACT
Amend Section D, Paragraph 1 to read as follows:

1. This Contract is effective as of October 22, 2024, and is extended from the original expiration date of September 30, 2026, to expire on September 30, 2027, but may be terminated earlier in accordance with provisions of this Contract. The Contract term may be extended for one (1) additional one (1) year period by mutual agreement of the parties.

SECTION F. FISCAL PROVISIONS
Amend Section F, Paragraph 1. to read as follows:

1. Total compensation under this Contract shall not exceed the Not to Exceed (NTE) amount of $279,900, which represents the maximum possible payment under this Contract which can only be exceeded with a formal written Amendment. The budgeted award amount identified by the County at execution is the actual amount authorized for Contractor use. Any increase above the budgeted award may be made only if additional federal or state funds become available and only through a formal written Budget Adjustment.

Contractor shall not provide services or incur costs beyond the County authorized budget.

All funding under this Contract is contingent on the availability of federal and state funds. Both the initial allocation and any amendments are tentative and may change based on actual funding received. If funding is reduced, delayed, or cancelled, the County may reduce, suspend, or terminate the Contract, and the Contractor will be paid only for services provided up to the effective date of the change.

Docusign Envelope ID: CDBB114A-38EC-8533-80D5-9A3C63098E82 Packet Page. 1016
Revised 7/1/24 Page 3 of 4
The consideration to be paid to Contractor, as provided herein, shall be in full payment of the annual allotted budget for all Contractor’s services and expenses incurred in the performance hereof, including travel and per diem.

ATTACHMENTS:

Remove and replace Attachment C. VENDOR ASSURANCE OF COMPLIANCECR-50) Add Attachment F. ANTI-LOBBYING CERTIFICATION
Docusign Envelope ID: CDBB114A-38EC-8533-80D5-9A3C63098E82 Packet Page. 1017
Standard Contract Page 4 of 4
All other terms and conditions of Contract No. 24-992 remain in full force and effect.

This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which so executed shall be deemed to be an original, and such counterparts shall together constitute one and the same Amendment. The parties shall be entitled to sign and transmit an electronic signature of this Amendment (whether by facsimile, PDF, or other email transmission), which signature shall be binding on the party whose name is contained therein. Each party providing an electronic signature agrees to promptly execute and deliver to the other party an original signed Amendment upon request.

FOR COUNTY USE ONLY
Approved as to Legal Form Reviewed for Contract Compliance Reviewed/Approved by Department Jacqueline Carey-Wilson, Deputy County
Counsel
Lisa Rivas-Ordaz, Contracts Manager Sharon Nevins, Director Date Date Date
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY City of San Bernardino
(Print or type name of corporation, company, contractor, etc.) By
Dawn Rowe, Chair, Board of Supervisors (Authorized signature - sign in blue ink) Dated: Name Vanessa Carder
SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY OF THIS (Print or type name of person signing contract)

DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE

CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
Title
Director of Parks, Recreation, and
Community Services
Lynna Monell
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
San Bernardino County
(Print or Type)
By Dated:

Deputy
Address 290 North D Street
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Docusign Envelope ID: CDBB114A-38EC-8533-80D5-9A3C63098E82 7/30/2026
8/4/2026 8/6/2026 8/10/2026
Packet Page. 1018

ATTACHMENT C
CR-50 Vendor Assurance of Compliance Rev. 12.24

VENDOR ASSURANCE OF COMPLIANCE WITH

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY

WELFARE DEPARTMENT

NONDISCRIMINATION IN STATE

AND FEDERALLY ASSISTED PROGRAMS
NAME OF VENDOR/RECIPIENT: City of San Bernardino
HEREBY AGREES THAT it will comply with Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 as amended; the Food Stamp Act of 1977, as amended and in particular Section 272.6; Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; California Civil Code Section 51, et seq., as amended; California Government Code Section 11135- 11139.8, as amended; California Government Code Section 12940; California Government Code Section 4450; Title 22, California Code of Regulations Section 98000 – 98413; Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 3105A(e); the Dymally-Alatorre Bilingual Services Act (California Government Code Section 7290- 7299.8); Section 1808 of the Removal of Barriers to Interethnic Adoption Act of 1996; and other applicable federal and state laws, as well as their implementing regulations [including 45 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 80, 84, and 91, 7 CFR Part 15, and 28 CFR Part 42], by ensuring that employment practices and the administration of public assistance and social services programs are nondiscriminatory, to the effect that no person shall because of ethnic group identification, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, color, disability, medical condition, national origin, race, ancestry, marital status, religion, religious creed, political belief, or other applicable protected basis be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal or state financial assistance; and HEREBY GIVE ASSURANCE THAT it will immediately take any measures necessary to effectuate this agreement.

THIS ASSURANCE is given in consideration of and for the purpose of obtaining any and all federal and state assistance; and THE VENDOR/RECIPIENT HEREBY GIVES ASSURANCE THAT administrative methods/procedures which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination or defeating the objectives of the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) Manual of Policies and Procedures (MPP) Division 21, will be prohibited.

BY ACCEPTING THIS ASSURANCE, the vendor/recipient agrees to compile data, maintain records and submit reports as required, to permit effective enforcement of the aforementioned laws, rules and regulations and permit authorized CDSS and/or federal government personnel, during normal working hours, to review such records, books and accounts as needed to ascertain compliance. If there are any violations of this assurance, CDSS shall have the right to invoke fiscal sanctions or other legal remedies in accordance with Welfare and Institutions Code Section 10605, or Government Code Section 11135-11139.8, or any other laws, or the issue may be referred to the appropriate federal agency for further compliance action and enforcement of this assurance.

THIS ASSURANCE is binding on the vendor/recipient directly or through contract, license, or other provider services, as long as it receives federal or state assistance.

By: Date:
(Authorized signature - sign in blue ink)
Name: Vanessa Carder Address: 290 North D Street
(Print or type name of person signing contract)
Title
Director of Parks, Recreation, and
Community Services
San Bernardino, CA 92401
(Print or Type)
Docusign Envelope ID: CDBB114A-38EC-8533-80D5-9A3C63098E82 7/30/2026
Packet Page. 1019

ATTACHMENT F

Page 1 of 1 ends

ANTI- LOBBYING CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that:

1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of an agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.

2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, “Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,” in accordance with its instructions.

3. The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.

4. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.

5. The Contractor, _______________________, certifies or affirms the truthfulness and accuracy of each statement of its certification and disclosure, if any. In addition, the Contractor understands and agrees that the provisions of 31 U.S.C. Chap. 38, Administrative Remedies for False Claims and Statements, apply to this certification and disclosure, if any.
________________________________________
Signature of Contractor’s Authorized Official
Vanessa Carder, Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services ________________________________________
Name and Title of Contractor’s Authorized Official
_____________________
Date
City of San Bernardino
Docusign Envelope ID: CDBB114A-38EC-8533-80D5-9A3C63098E82 7/30/2026
Packet Page. 1020

CONSENT CALENDAR
City of San Bernardino
Request for Council Action
Date: October 7, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Darren Goodman, Chief of Police
Department: Police
Subject: Fiscal Year 2025/26 Budget Amendment of $30,000 – State Asset Forfeiture Gang and Drug Special Revenue Fund (All Wards)
Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2026-167:

1. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2025/26 budget for the State Asset Forfeiture Drug and Gang Special Revenue Fund to establish $30,000 in expenditure appropriations; and

2. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to make any necessary technical adjustments to the FY 2025/26 budget to implement the amendment.

City Manager's Comments
The City Manager recommends approval of the Budget amendment.

Executive Summary
The proposed action amends the FY 2025/26 budget for the State Asset Forfeiture Gang and Drug Special Revenue Fund by $30,000, establishing the appropriation for an approved expenditure incurred during the fiscal year. The amendment will bring the adopted budget into alignment with actual fiscal activity in the fund.

The amendment will be funded entirely from available resources within the restricted special revenue fund and will have no impact on the General Fund.

Background
The City maintains the State Asset Forfeiture Gang and Drug Special Revenue Fund within the Police Department’s budget for funds received pursuant to California Health Packet Page. 1021
and Safety Code Section 11489(b)(2)(A)(i). These funds are restricted for programs designed to combat drug abuse and divert gang activity.

Prior to expenditure, requests for the use of funds are submitted to the San Bernardino County Asset Forfeiture Panel for review and approval. For FY 2025/26, the Panel approved the Police Department’s request to disburse $30,000 for the Police Impact Youth Mentorship and Police Activities League (PAL) programs through the San Bernardino Police Foundation.

At the time the request was approved, there was no expenditure appropriation that had been established in the FY 2025/26 budget for the program. However, the City confirmed that sufficient resources were available in the special revenue fund, and the Department received authorization from the Finance Department to proceed with the expenditure. The $30,000 was subsequently disbursed to the San Bernardino Police Foundation during FY 2025/26.

Discussion
A budget amendment was intended to be brought forward during FY 2025/26 mid-year budget review to establish the corresponding expenditure appropriation; however, the amendment was not brought forward at that time.

As a result, the $30,000 expenditure was recorded without a corresponding expenditure appropriation. The proposed amendment will establish the necessary $30,000 expenditure appropriation and align the FY 2025/26 adopted budget with the actual expenditure incurred.

Approval of the proposed amendment will have no impact on the General Fund. The amendment will be funded entirely from available resources in the State Asset Forfeiture Gang and Drug Special Revenue Fund.
2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals
This action aligns with the following:

Key Target Goal #1: Improved Operational and Financial Capacity. This action ensures that the City’s adopted budget accurately reflects actual fiscal activity and that expenditures from restricted revenue funds are appropriately budgeted and accounted for.

Fiscal Impact
There is no impact to the General Fund. The amendment increases expenditure appropriations in the State Asset Forfeiture Gang and Drug Special Revenue Fund by $30,000 and will be funded entirely from available resources within the restricted special revenue fund.

Conclusion
It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2026-167:

Packet Page. 1022

2. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to make any necessary technical adjustments to the FY 2025/26 budget to implement the amendment.

Attachments
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 2026-167 State Asset Forfeiture Gang and Drug Fund FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment
Attachment 2 – FY 2025-26 Asset Forfeiture Gang and Drug Prevention – Disbursement Approval
Ward:

All Wards
Synopsis of Previous Council Actions:

N/A
CC
Eric Levitt, City Manager
Packet Page. 1023
Resolution No. 2026-167
Resolution No. 2026-167
October 7, 2026

Page 1 of 3 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-167

RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA,

AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND

MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO AMEND THE FISCAL
YEAR 2025/2026 BUDGET FOR THE STATE ASSET

FORFEITURE DRUG AND GANG SPECIAL REVENUE
FUND TO ESTABLISH $30,000 IN EXPENDITURE

APPROPRIATIONS AND TO MAKE ANY NECESSARY

TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS TO THE FISCAL YEAR
2025/2026 BUDGET TO IMPLEMENT THE AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino (“City”) maintains the State Asset Forfeiture Drug and Gang Special Revenue Fund designed to combat drug abuse and divert gang activity (“Forfeiture Fund”) within the Police Department’s budget for funds received pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 11489(b)(2)(A)(i), which restricts its use to programs designed to combat drug abuse and divert gang activity; and WHEREAS, the City was notified that the San Bernardino County Asset Forfeiture Panel (“Panel”) approved the Police Department’s request to expend thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) (“Disbursement”) for the Police Impact Youth Mentorship and Police Activities League (“PAL”) programs through the San Bernardino Police Foundation (“Foundation”) on June 4, 2025; and WHEREAS, although sufficient Forfeiture Fund resources were available and the Police Department was authorized to proceed, the Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2025/2026 budget did not include a corresponding expenditure appropriation; and
WHEREAS, the Disbursement was subsequently disbursed to the Foundation during FY 2025/2026; and
WHEREAS, the proposed budget amendment will align the FY 2025/2026 budget with the Forfeiture Fund’s actual fiscal activity, is funded entirely from available Forfeiture Fund resources, and has no impact on the General Fund.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct, and are incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. Approval. The Mayor and City Council (“Council”) hereby approve the budget amendment and authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services (“Finance Director”) to amend the FY 2025/2026 budget for the Forfeiture Fund to establish thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) in expenditure appropriations.

Packet Page. 1024
Resolution No. 2026-167
Resolution No. 2026-167
October 7, 2026

Page 2 of 3 ends

SECTION 3. Authorization. The Finance Director is authorized to make any necessary technical adjustments to the FY 2025/2026 budget to implement the amendment authorized by this Resolution.

SECTION 4. California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Council finds that this Resolution is not subject to CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that the activity authorized by this Resolution has no possibility of causing a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 5. Severability. If any section or provision of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, or contravened by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining sections and/or provisions of this Resolution shall remain valid. The Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution, and each section or provision thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more section(s) or provision(s) may be declared invalid or unconstitutional or contravened via legislation.

SECTION 6. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; cause the same to be entered among the original resolutions of the City; and make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the Council in the minutes of the meeting at which time same is passed and adopted.

SECTION 7. Effective Date. This Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.

APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 7th day of October 2026.

Helen Tran, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
Attest:

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Approved as to form:

Albert J. Maldonado, City Attorney
Packet Page. 1025
Resolution No. 2026-167
Resolution No. 2026-167
October 7, 2026

Page 3 of 3 ends

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
I, Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2026-167, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of October 2026 by the following vote:

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Packet Page. 1026
Packet Page. 1027
Packet Page. 1028
Packet Page. 1029

DISCUSSION
City of San Bernardino
Request for Council Action
Date: October 7, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Lynn Merrill, Director of Public Works
Department: Public Works
Subject: Award of Construction Agreement of the San Bernardino Library Norman Feldheym Branch Improvements Project
to Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. in the amount of
$8,323,998.45 and approval of a Task Order for Construction Management and Inspection Services with TKE Engineering, Inc. intheAmountof $270,761.(Ward 1)
Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California:

1. Approve the award of a Construction Contract with Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc., in the amount of $8,323,998.45 for the San Bernardino Library Norman Feldheym Branch Library Improvements Project; and

2. Approve a Task Order with TKE Engineering, Inc. for Construction Management and Inspection Services for the Project in an amount not to exceed $270,761; and

3. Authorize a Project contingency budget in the amount of $644,606.96 for unforeseen costs necessary to complete the Project, bringing the total Project budget to $10,224,196.41; and

4. Authorize the Director of Finance Management Services to amend the FY 2026/27 Capital Improvement Plan budget with an additional $469,754.70 from the Public Improvement Fund, $500,000 from the Public Use Facilities Fund, $75,000 from the Library Facilities Fund, $516,246.55 of Library Facilities Funding from the Feldheym Library Improvement Project (8940), and $2,253,825.16 of Measure S Funding from the selected Alternative for the Project; and
Packet Page. 1030

5. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all documents with Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. and TKE Engineering, Inc. necessary to implement the Project; and

6. Authorize the City Manager or designee to expend the contingency fund, if necessary, to complete the Project; and

7. Take one of the following actions:

Alternative A
Approve Resolution No. 2026-168 Authorize the reallocation of Measure S funding from multiple City Projects up to an amount not to exceed $2,253,825.16 to provide sufficient funding to complete the Feldheym Library Branch Improvements Project. or alternatively
Alternative B
Approve Resolution No. 2026-169 Authorize $2,253,825.16 from the City’s Measure S Fund Balance to provide sufficient funding to complete the Feldheym Library Branch Improvements Project.

City Manager's Comments
The City Council has three alternatives based on the fact that the construction bid exceeds the initial budget for this project and would require $2,253,825 in additional Measure S Funds. The City Council could either take from the General Fund Fund Balance or by asking Public Works to bring back options to reduce other Measure S projects or a combination of the two approaches.

Another alternative would be to reject all bids and rebid the project. To do that would require substantially reducing the scope of the project and would require the use of State Funds to be extended.

Executive Summary
The proposed Construction Contract with Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. will commence the construction phase of the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library Improvement Project (“Project”). The Project includes critical structural repairs, replacement of the HVAC system and windows, electrical and lighting upgrades, security system upgrades, repairs to interior walls and improvements to physical accessibility throughout the facility.

These renovations will address decades of deferred maintenance and modernize the library's infrastructure, which has remained largely unchanged since the building was constructed in 1985. Upon completion, the improvements will enhance the building's safety, energy efficiency, accessibility, and overall functionality for library patrons and staff. The project is funded through Public Improvement Fund, Public Use Facilities Fund, and Library Facilities Fund.

Packet Page. 1031
Background
The Norman F. Feldheym Public Library, located at 555 West 6th Street, is a critical resource for the community, especially for residents facing economic and linguistic barriers. Since its construction in 1985, the facility has developed several structural and operational deficiencies. The library suffers from leaking windows, outdated electrical wiring, a deteriorating foundation, and an inefficient HVAC system that fails to regulate temperatures effectively. Additionally, inadequate lighting contributes to excessive heat and high energy costs. The Project will address these issues through essential maintenance, energy efficiency upgrades, and modernization efforts to improve both digital and physical accessibility.

City staff, in collaboration with architectural and engineering experts, conducted a comprehensive assessment of the building’s condition. This evaluation confirmed the need for extensive renovations, including HVAC improvements, electrical and lighting upgrades, window replacements, and enhancements to security systems.

The Project will also address applicable accessibility requirements and improve access to the facility for library patrons and staff.

On December 6, 2023, the Mayor and City Council accepted a grant from the California State Library Building Forward Library Facilities Improvement Program in the amount of $6,409,370.00 to help fund the Project. The grant funds may be used for eligible Project costs associated with the renovation and modernization of the library.

On January 17, 2024, the Mayor and City Council approved a task order with Transtech Engineering for program management services for the Norman F.

Feldhym Library Revitalization project, as part of the existing Professional Services Agreement for On-Call Engineering Services and authorize the Finance Director to issue a purchase order in the amount of $197,600 for the Feldheym Library Project.

On February 19, 2025, Bell Design Group (BDG) was awarded a Design Services Agreement to provide conceptual design, construction design, and construction support services in the amount of $319,000.

On December 3, 2025, the Mayor and City Council of the approved Amendment No.1 to the Design Services Agreement with Bell Design Group in the amount of $78,700 for the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library Improvement Project, increasing the not to exceed amount to $397,700.

Discussion
The completion of the design phase marks a significant milestone for the Norman F Feldheym Public Library Facilities Improvement Project and allows the City to proceed with the construction phase. The proposed construction constract with Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. will implement the approved plans and specifications developed during the design process, including critical structural repairs, HVAC and window Packet Page. 1032
replacements, electrical and lighting upgrades, security system upgrades, repairs to interior water damage, foundation repairs, and accessibility improvements.

The Project was publicly advertised for competitive bidding through PlanetBids on June 11, 2026, and bids were opened on July 16, 2026. A total of nine (9) sealed bids were received.

List of Bidders
# Name of bidder City Total base bid
1 Tovey/Shultz Construction,
Inc. Lake Elsinore, CA $ 8,120,974.10
2 Blackstone Builders Inc.
(Nonresponsive) Riverside, CA $ 8,551,882.00
3 NKS Mechanical Contracting,
Inc. Anaheim, CA $ 8,875,321.75
4 First Trade LLC – YMC Irvine, CA $ 8,778,000.00
5 Elegant Construction, Inc.
(Nonresponsive) Irvine, CA $8,989,000.00
6 Spec Construction Co. Inc.
(Nonresponsive) Ontario, CA $ 9,265,000.00
7 Far West Contractors Corp.
(Nonresponsive) Placentia, CA $9,340,000.00
8 Caliba Inc.
(Nonresponsive) Anaheim, CA $9,388,181.00
9 Jergensen Construction, Inc. Oak Hills, CA $ 11,588,000.00 After review, staff determined that Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc., of Lake Elsinore, California, submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid in the amount of $8,120,974.10. Staff verified the firm’s compliance with the applicable bid requirements, including its contractor’s license and Department of Industrial Relations registration. Staff therefore determined that Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder and recommends awarding the Construction Contract to the firm.

In addition to the base bid amount, an additive allowance of $203,024.35 is recommended to address concealed conditions with the walls where work is to be performed for windows, doors, and related project items.

The total construction contract consists of a base bid in the amount of $8,120,974.10 Packet Page. 1033
and additional bid item totaling $203,024.35, for a total construction contract amount of $8,323,998.45.

In addition to the construction contract, approval of a task order with TKE Engineering, Inc. (TKE) is recommended to provide construction management and inspection services (CMCI) for an amount not to exceed $270,761. TKE was selected as the most qualified bidder using an informal request for proposals from the City’s approved oncall consultants list.

List of Consultants
# Consultant Name City
1 TKE Engineering, Inc. Riverside, CA
2 Z&K Consultants, Inc. Riverside CA
3 Willdan Engineering, Inc. Industry, CA
4 CSG Consultants, Inc. (Declined to submit proposal) Irvine, CA In addition to the construction contract and CMCI services costs, $644,606.96 is recommended for unforeseen costs to complete the Project. The total project cost is summarized in the table below.

Approved Design and Administrative Costs
Professional Services Agreement with Transtech $197,600 Design Services Agreement with Bell Design Group $397,700 City/Administrative Staff Costs (based on grant agreement) $389,530 Design and Administrative Cost Subtotal $984,830.00
Proposed Construction Cost
Construction Contract with Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. $8,323,998.45 CMCI services with TKE Engineering, Inc. $270,761
Contingency Budget $644,606.96
Construction Cost Subtotal $9,239,366.41
Total Project Cost $10,224,196.41
Funding for this Project is through the California State Library Building Forward Library Facilities Improvement Program Grant in the amount of $6,409,370.00. A summary of the Project budget is provided below.

Project Budget
Building Forward Library Facilities Grant $6,409,370.00 Total Project Cost ($10,224,196.41)
Project Shortfall ($3,814,826.41)
With a total Project cost of $10,224,196.41, the Project budget has an existing shortfall Packet Page. 1034
of approximately $3,814,826.41.

Staff recommend allocating funding from multiple sources to provide sufficient funding for the project. The amounts listed below are available special funding amounts that are applicable to the Project for a total of $1,561,001.25.

Special Fund Allocations
Public Improvement Fund $469,754.70
Library Facilities Fund $75,000.00
Public Use Facilities Fund $500,000.00
Feldheym Improvements Project – (8940) (Library Facilities Fund) $516,246.55 Total Special Fund Allocation $1,561,001.25
Accounting for the recommended special funding allocation of $1,561,001.25 leaves a shortfall amount of $2,253,825.16.

Remaining Funding Need
Project Shortfall ($3,814,826.41)
Special Fund Allocation $1,561,001.25
Remaining Funding Needed ($2,253,825.16)
For the remaining shortfall of $2,253,825.16, staff recommend selecting from one of the proposed alternatives to provide Measure S funding for the Project.

Alternative A
Approving Alternative A would reallocate Measure S funding from multiple existing projects up to $2,253,825.16.

The projects included in this recommendation are as follows:

Project Reason
Amount
Reallocated
Newmark Ballfield
Lighting Project (8890)
Anticipated surplus funding due to
project nearing completion $300,000.00
Speicher Multi-Purpose
Field Lighting (8891)
Anticipated surplus funding due to
project nearing completion $200,000.00
Rudy Hernandez
Community Center
Fencing (8865)
Improved maintenance in the
surrounding area led to reduced security
needs.
$250,000.00
Hill & Acacia Storm
Drain (9070) Anticipated surplus funding. $500,000.00
Norton Gym Pickleball
Courts (8947)
Project on hold pending stakeholder
discussions regarding property sale $1,003,825.16
Total Measure S Funding Allocation $2,253,825.16
Packet Page. 1035
The recommended projects list based on approximate fund balances and may be adjusted depending on the amount of funding available. Additionally, a list of projects with available Measure S allocations has also been provided in Attachment 6 for review.

Alternative B
Approving Alternative B would an additional $2,253,825.16 from the City’s Measure S Fund Balance.

The proposed Project budget, including either Alternative A or Alternative B, would be as follows:

Proposed Project Budget
Building Forward Library Facilities Grant $6,409,370.00 Special Fund Allocation $1,561,001.25
Alternative A or Alternative B (Measure S) $2,253,825.16 Total Project Budget $10,224,196.41
2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals
This Project is consistent with the City's Key Strategic Targets and Goals, including Goal No. 2a: Focused, Aligned Leadership and Unified Community - Build a culture that attracts, retains, and motivates the highest qualified talent, and Goal No. 3c:

Improved Quality of Life - Evaluate and enhance the quality of public services.

Awarding the construction contract will advance these goals by delivering critical facility improvements that enhance the accessibility, functionality, and long-term sustainability of the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library, ensuring it continues to serve the evolving needs of San Bernardino residents.

Fiscal Impact
The total proposed Project budget of $10,224,196.41 consists of the following:
• $6,409,370.00 of previously approved grant funding from the California State Library Building Forward Library Facilities Improvement Program • The items listed below are recommended to address the project shortfall of $3,814,826.41:
o Special Fund Allocations totaling $1,561,001.25 from the following Funds:
▪ $469,754.70 from the Public Improvement Fund
▪ $75,000 from the Library Facilities Fund
▪ $500,000 from the Public Use Facilities Fund
o CIP Project Fund Transfer of $516,246.55 (Library Facilities Funds) from the Feldheym Improvements Project (8940)
Packet Page. 1036
o $2,253,825.16 of Measure S funding from the selected Alternative.

Conclusion
It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California:

2. Approve a Task Order with TKE Engineering, Inc. for Construction Management and Inspection Services for the Project in an amount not to exceed $270,761; and

3. Authorize a Project contingency budget in the amount of $644,606.96 for unforeseen costs necessary to complete the Project, bringing the total Project budget to $10,224,196.41; and

5. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all documents with Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. and TKE Engineering, Inc. necessary to implement the Project; and

6. Authorize the City Manager or designee to expend the contingency fund, if necessary, to complete the Project; and

7. Take one of the following actions:

Packet Page. 1037
Attachments
Attachment 1 Contract for Construction with Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc.

Attachment 2 Bid Proposal - Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc.

Attachment 3 Bid Tabulation
Attachment 4 Resolution 2026-168 approving Alternative A Attachment 5 Resolution 2026-169 approving Alternative B Attachment 6 List of Measure S Funded Projects in FY 2026/27 Attachment 7 Location Map
Ward:

Ward 1
Synopsis of Previous Council Actions:

December 6, 2023 Acceptance of the California State Library Building Forward Library Facilities Improvement Program Grant Award for the Norman F. Feldheym Central Library Revitalization Project January 17, 2024 The Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approved task order Transtech004 to Transtech Engineering for program management services for the Norman F. Feldhym Library Revitalization project, as part of the existing Professional Services Agreement for On-Call Engineering Services, and authorize the Finance Director to issue a purchase order in the amount of $197,600 for the Feldhym Library Project.

February 19, 2025 Award a Design Services Agreement to Bell Design Group for the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library Improvement Project in the amount of $319,000 (Ward 1)
December 3, 2025 The Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approved Amendment No.1 to the Design Services Agreement with Bell Design Group in the amount of $78,700 for the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library Improvement
Project, increasing the not to exceed amount to $397,700.

CC: Eric Levitt, City Manager
Packet Page. 1038

SAN BERNARDINO LIBRARY
NORMAN FELDHEYM BRANCH IMPROVEMENTS -39- 00 52 13 – CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION 00 52 13 – CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION
This Contract for Construction (“Contract”), No. GB 26-015 is made and entered into this 7 th day
of October 2026 by and between the CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO , with its principal place of business at Vanir Tower, 290 North D Street, San Bernardino, California 92401, sometimes hereinafter called the “City” and TOVEY/SHULTZ CONSTRUCTION, INC sometimes hereinafter called “Contractor.”
WITNESSETH: That the parties hereto have mutually covenanted and agreed, and by these presents do covenant and agree with each other as follows:

ARTICLE 1. SCOPE OF WORK.

The Contractor shall perform all Work within the time stipulated in the Contract, and shall provide all labor, materials, equipment, tools, utility services, and transportation to complete all of the Work required in strict compliance with the Contract Documents as specified in Article 5, below, for the following Project:

SAN BERNARDINO LIBRARY NORMAN FELDHEYM BRANCH IMPROVEMENTS Contractor is an independent contractor and not an agent of the City. The Contractor and its surety shall be liable to the City for any damages arising as a result of the Contractor’s failure to comply with this obligation.

ARTICLE 2. TIME FOR COMPLETION.

Time is of the essence in the performance of the Work. The Work shall be commenced on the date stated in the City’s Notice to Proceed. The Contractor shall complete all Work required by the Contract Documents within 150 WORKING DAYS from the commencement date stated in the Notice to Proceed. By its signature hereunder, Contractor agrees the time for completion set forth above is adequate and reasonable to complete the Work.

ARTICLE 3. CONTRACT PRICE.

The City shall pay to the Contractor as full compensation for the performance of the Contract, subject to any additions or deductions as provided in the Contract Documents, and including all applicable taxes and costs, the sum of EIGHT MILLION THREE HUNDRED TWENTYTHREE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED NINETY-EIGHT DOLLARS AND FORTY-FIVE CENTS ($8,323,998.45). Payment shall be made as set forth in the General Conditions. The City will pay to Contractor compensation based upon the prices set forth in the Bid Schedule.

ARTICLE 4. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.

Contractor acknowledges that the City will sustain actual damages for each and every Day completion of the Project is delayed beyond the Contract Time. Because of the nature of the Project, it would be impracticable or extremely difficult to determine the City’s actual damages.

Accordingly, in accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, it is agreed that the Contractor will pay the City the sum of $1,500 for each and every calendar day of delay beyond the time prescribed in the Contract Documents for finishing the Work, as Liquidated Damages and not as a penalty or forfeiture. In the event this is not paid, the Contractor agrees the City may Packet Page. 1039

SAN BERNARDINO LIBRARY
NORMAN FELDHEYM BRANCH IMPROVEMENTS -40- 00 52 13 – CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION deduct that amount from any money due or that may become due the Contractor under the Contract. This Section does not exclude recovery of other damages specified in the Contract Documents. Liquidated damages may be deducted from progress payments due Contractor, Project retention or may be collected directly from Contractor, or from Contractor's surety. These provisions for liquidated damages shall not prevent the City, in case of Contractor's default, from terminating the Contractor.

ARTICLE 5. COMPONENT PARTS OF THE CONTRACT.

The “Contract Documents” include the following:

Notice Inviting Bids
Instructions to Bidders
Bid Forms
Bid Acknowledgement
Bid Schedule
Bid Guarantee
Designation of Subcontractors
Information Required of Bidders
Non-Collusion Declaration Form
Iran Contracting Act Certification
Public Works Contractor DIR Registration Certification
Performance Bond
Payment (Labor and Materials) Bond
Contract for Construction
General Conditions
Specifications
Addenda
Construction Plans and Drawings
Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction “Greenbook”, latest edition, Except Sections 1-9
Applicable Local Agency Standards and Specifications, as last revised Reference Specifications
Approved and fully executed Change Orders
Permits
Any other documents contained in or incorporated into the Contract Appendix “A” – City of San Bernardino Business Registration Application Form Appendix “B” – Location Map
The Contractor shall complete the Work in strict accordance with all of the Contract Documents.

All of the Contract Documents are intended to be complementary. Work required by one of the Contract Documents and not by others shall be done as if required by all. In the event of conflict, the various Contract Documents will be given effect in the order set forth in the General Conditions. This Contract shall supersede any prior agreement of the parties.

ARTICLE 6. PROVISIONS REQUIRED BY LAW AND CONTRACTOR COMPLIANCE.

Each and every provision of law required to be included in these Contract Documents shall be deemed to be included in these Contract Documents. The Contractor shall comply with all requirements of applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations, including, but not Packet Page. 1040

SAN BERNARDINO LIBRARY
NORMAN FELDHEYM BRANCH IMPROVEMENTS -41- 00 52 13 – CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION limited to, the provisions of the California Labor Code and California Public Contract Code which are applicable to this Work.

ARTICLE 7. INDEMNIFICATION.

Contractor shall provide indemnification and defense as set forth in the General Conditions.

ARTICLE 8. PREVAILING WAGES.

Contractor shall be required to pay the prevailing rate of wages in accordance with the Labor Code which such rates shall be made available at the City’s Office or may be obtained online at http://www.dir.ca.gov and which must be posted at the job site.

ARTICLE 9. FALSE CLAIMS.

Contractor acknowledges that if a false claim is submitted to the City, it may be considered fraud and Contractor may be subject to criminal prosecution. Contractor acknowledges that the False Claims Act, California Government Code sections 12650, et seq., provides for civil penalties where a person knowingly submits a false claim to a public entity. These provisions include within their scope false claims made with deliberate ignorance of the false information or in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the information. In the event the City seeks to recover penalties pursuant to the False Claims Act, it is entitled to recover its litigation costs, including attorneys’ fees. Contractor hereby acknowledges that the filing of a false claim may the Contractor to an administrative debarment proceeding wherein Contractor may be prevented from further bidding on public contracts for a period of up to five (5) years. [REMAINDER OF PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK]
Packet Page. 1041

SAN BERNARDINO LIBRARY
NORMAN FELDHEYM BRANCH IMPROVEMENTS -42- 00 52 13 – CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Contract has been duly executed by the above-named parties, on the day and year above written.

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
By:

Eric Levitt, City Manager
ATTEST:

By:

Telicia Lopez, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Best Best & Krieger LLP
City Attorney

TOVEY/SHULTZ CONSTRUCTION, INC
By:

Its:

Printed Name:

By:

Its:

Printed Name:
____________________________________
Contractor’s License Number and
Classification
____________________________________
DIR Registration Number
(CONTRACTOR’S SIGNATURE MUST BE NOTARIZED AND CORPORATE SEAL AFFIXED,

IF APPLICABLE)

END OF CONTRACT
Packet Page. 1042
Packet Page. 1043
Packet Page. 1044
Packet Page. 1045
Packet Page. 1046
Packet Page. 1047
Packet Page. 1048
Packet Page. 1049
Packet Page. 1050
Packet Page. 1051
Packet Page. 1052
Packet Page. 1053
Packet Page. 1054
Packet Page. 1055
Packet Page. 1056
Packet Page. 1057
Packet Page. 1058
Packet Page. 1059
Packet Page. 1060
Packet Page. 1061
Packet Page. 1062
Packet Page. 1063
Packet Page. 1064
Packet Page. 1065
Packet Page. 1066
Packet Page. 1067
Packet Page. 1068
Packet Page. 1069
Packet Page. 1070
Packet Page. 1071
Packet Page. 1072
Packet Page. 1073
Packet Page. 1074
Packet Page. 1075
Packet Page. 1076
Packet Page. 1077
Packet Page. 1078
Packet Page. 1079
Packet Page. 1080
Packet Page. 1081
Packet Page. 1082
Packet Page. 1083
Packet Page. 1084
Packet Page. 1085
Packet Page. 1086
Packet Page. 1087
Packet Page. 1088
Packet Page. 1089
Packet Page. 1090
Packet Page. 1091
Packet Page. 1092
Packet Page. 1093
Packet Page. 1094
Packet Page. 1095
Packet Page. 1096
Packet Page. 1097
Packet Page. 1098
Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price 1 GENERAL PER THE SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 350,553.22 $ 350,553.22 $ 117,505.52 $ 117,505.52 $ 290,000.00 $ 290,000.00 $ 160,000.00 $ 160,000.00 2 SITEWORK PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 365,654.00 $ 365,654.00 $ 392,415.00 $ 392,415.00 $ 357,000.00 $ 357,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 3 CONCRETE PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 216,593.00 $ 216,593.00 $ 167,050.00 $ 167,050.00 $ 42,500.00 $ 42,500.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00 4 MASONRY PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ - $ - $ 89,950.00 $ 89,950.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 5 METALS PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 175,995.00 $ 175,995.00 $ 144,951.00 $ 144,951.00 $ 361,000.00 $ 361,000.00 $ 350,000.00 $ 350,000.00 6 WOOD AND PLASTICS PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 216,568.00 $ 216,568.00 $ 249,750.00 $ 249,750.00 $ 255,000.00 $ 255,000.00 $ 65,000.00 $ 65,000.00 7 MOISTURE PROTECT PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 100,800.00 $ 100,800.00 $ 38,951.00 $ 38,951.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 142,000.00 $ 142,000.00 8 DOORS AND WINDOWS PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 815,987.00 $ 815,987.00 $ 1,019,106.00 $ 1,019,106.00 $ 815,000.00 $ 815,000.00 $ 1,085,000.00 $ 1,085,000.00 9 FINISHES PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 836,942.00 $ 836,942.00 $ 1,000,394.00 $ 1,000,394.00 $ 886,000.00 $ 886,000.00 $ 990,000.00 $ 990,000.00 10 SPECIALTIES PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 98,146.00 $ 98,146.00 $ 70,406.00 $ 70,406.00 $ 73,000.00 $ 73,000.00 $ 221,000.00 $ 221,000.00 11 FURNISHINGS PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ - $ - $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 140,000.00 $ 140,000.00 12 MECHANICAL PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 1,540,280.00 $ 1,540,280.00 $ 2,166,570.28 $ 2,166,570.28 $ 2,132,000.00 $ 2,132,000.00 $ 3,500,000.00 $ 3,455,000.00 13 ELECTRICAL PER THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 2,508,810.00 $ 2,508,810.00 $ 2,382,461.00 $ 2,382,461.00 $ 2,268,000.00 $ 2,268,000.00 $ 3,315,000.00 $ 3,515,000.00 14 CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION PER THE SPECIFICATIONS 1 LS $ 894,645.88 $ 894,645.88 $ 1,035,810.96 $ 1,035,810.96 $ 1,138,500.00 $ 1,138,500.00 $ 1,230,000.00 $ 1,230,000.00 Apparent Low
Bidder Bidder 2 Bidder 3 Bidder 4 Bidder 5 Bidder 6 Bidder 7 Bidder 8 Bidder 9 $8,120,974.10 $8,875,321.76 $8,778,000.00 $0.00 $11,508,000.00 $8,120,974.10 $8,551,882.00 $8,875,321.75 $8,778,000.00 $8,989,000.00 $9,265,000.00 $9,340,000.00 $11,588,000.00 $0.00 N/A $0.01 $0.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A -$80,000.00
A1. CONCEALED CONDIITONS ADDITIVE ALLOWANCE 1 LS $203,024.35 $203,024.35 $213,797.00 $213,797.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $231,625.00 $231,625.00 $203,024.35 $213,797.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $231,625.00 $8,323,998.45 $213,797.00 $8,875,321.76 $8,878,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $11,739,625.00

NON RESPONSIVE BID NON RESPONSIVE BID
Bidder 3

NKS MECHANICAL
CONTRACTING, INC.

NON RESPONSIVE BID

1. BID TABULATION
PROJECT NAME: SAN BERNARDINO LIBRARY - NORMAN FELDHEYM BRANCH IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO: 13686

BID TABULATION
Apparent Low Bidder Bidder 2 Bidder 4 Bidder 5 Bidder 6 Bidder 7 Bidder 9

JERGENSEN CONSTRUCTION,
INC.

BID ITEM & DESCRIPTION

BID RANKING

TOVEY/SHULTZ CONSTRUCTION,
INC. BLACKSTONE BUILDERS INC. FIRST TRADE LLC - YMC ELEGANT CONSTRUCTION, INC. SPEC CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. FAR WEST CONTRACTORS
CORP. CALIBA INC.

Bidder 8

TOTAL BID AMOUNT CALCULATED BASED ON UNIT PRICES

TOTAL BID AMOUNT INDICATED BY BIDDER

CALCULATION CORRECTIONS TO BID AMOUNT SUBMITTED BY CONTRACTOR BASED ON CALCULATED BID AMOUNT

ADDITIVE

ADDITIVE TOTAL

NON RESPONSIVE BID NON RESPONSIVE BID
BASE BID + ADDITIVE TOTAL
S:\ENGINEERING\RFCA's\2026 All\10-07-2026\Feldhey Library Improvements\BID TABULATION.xlsxBID TABULATION (2) 1 of 1 Packet Page. 1099
Resolution No. 2026-168
Resolution No. 2026-168
October 7, 2026

Page 1 of 4 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-168

RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR

OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO AMEND THE FY
2026/27 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BUDGET WITH AN
ADDITIONAL $469,754.70 FROM THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT FUND, $500,000 FROM THE PUBLIC USE FACILITIES FUND, $75,000 FROM THE LIBRARY FACILITIES FUND, $516,246.55 FROM THE FELDHEYM LIBRARY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (8940), AND $2,253,825.16 FROM MULTIPLE EXISTING CIP PROJECTS FOR THE PROJECT.

WHEREAS, the Norman F. Feldheym Central Library Revitalization Project is currently being implemented as the Norman F. Feldheym Library Branch Improvements Project, Project No. 13686 (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2023, the Mayor and City Council Authorized the Grant Application, Acceptance, and Execution of the Grant Funds of $6,409,370 for the Project from the State of California Budget Act of 2023 (SB 101); and
WHEREAS, additional funding is necessary to complete the construction phase of the project in the amount of $3,814,826.41; and
WHEREAS, an additional funding appropriation from the Public Improvement Fund, Library Facilities Fund, Public Use Facilities Fund, Feldheym Improvements Project (8940), and other CIP Project Budgets is recommended to provide sufficient funding for the n Project.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. The Director of Finance and Management Services is hereby authorized to amend the FY2026/27 CIP Budget Capital Improvement Plan with an additional $469,754.70 from the Public Improvement Fund, $75,000 from the Library Facilities Fund, $500,000 from the Public use Facilities Fund, $516,246.55 from the Feldheym Improvements Project (8940) and $2,253,825.16 of Measure S funding from various existing CIP Project Budgets.

SECTION 3. The Mayor and City Council hereby approve an increase of $3,814,826.41in the total budget for the Norman F. Feldheym Central Library Revitalization Project, increasing the total budget from $6,409,370 to $9,239,366.41.

SECTION 4. CEQA. The City Council finds that the Norman F. Feldheym Central Library Revitalization Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15302, Replacement or Reconstruction (“Class 2”).

Packet Page. 1100
Resolution No. 2026-168
Resolution No. 2026-168
October 7, 2026

Page 2 of 4 ends

The Class 2 exemption applies to the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures or facilities where the new structure or facility will be located on the same site as the structure or facility replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity. The Project consists of minor improvements to and reconstruction of the Feldheym Library.

The City Council has also considered whether any exception to the Class 2 categorical exemption set forth in State CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 applies to the Project and finds that no exception applies for the following reasons:

A. Location. The location exception set forth in State CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2(a) applies only to projects relying on the Class 3, Class 4, Class 5, Class 6, or Class 11 categorical exemptions. Because the City is relying on the Class 2 exemption, the location exception does not apply.

B. Cumulative Impact. The Project would not result in a significant cumulative impact on the environment. There are no successive projects of the same type in the same place that, over time, would result in a significant cumulative impact, and the Project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant environmental effect.

C. Unusual Circumstances. The Project does not involve unusual circumstances, and there is no reasonable possibility that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.

D. Scenic Highways. The Project would not result in damage to scenic resources, including trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway.

E. Hazardous Waste Sites. The Project site is not included on any list of hazardous waste and substance sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5.

F. Historical Resources. The Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The Project site does not contain a historical resource, as defined by CEQA.

The City Council further finds that the determination that the Project is exempt from CEQA reflects the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis.

SECTION 5. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable.

SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.

APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 7
th day of October 2026.

Packet Page. 1101
Resolution No. 2026-168
Resolution No. 2026-168
October 7, 2026

Page 3 of 4 ends

Helen Tran, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
Attest:

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Approved as to form:

Albert J. Maldonado, City Attorney
Packet Page. 1102
Resolution No. 2026-168
Resolution No. 2026-168
October 7, 2026

Page 4 of 4 ends

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
I, Telicia Lopez, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2026-168, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 7 th day of October 2026, by the following
vote:

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Packet Page. 1103
Resolution No. 2026-169
Resolution No. 2026-169
October 7, 2026

Page 1 of 4 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-169

RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR

WHEREAS, the Norman F. Feldheym Central Library Revitalization Project is currently being implemented as the Norman F. Feldheym Library Branch Improvements Project, Project No. 13686 (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2023, the Mayor and City Council Authorized the Grant Application, Acceptance, and Execution of the Grant Funds of $6,409,370 for the Project from the State of California Budget Act of 2023 (SB 101); and
WHEREAS, additional funding is necessary to complete the construction phase of the project in the amount of $3,814,826.41; and
WHEREAS, an additional funding appropriation from the Public Improvement Fund, Library Facilities Fund, Public Use Facilities Fund, Feldheym Improvements Project (8940), and the Measure S Fund is recommended to provide sufficient funding for the Project.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

Packet Page. 1104
Resolution No. 2026-169
Resolution No. 2026-169
October 7, 2026

Page 2 of 4 ends

E. Hazardous Waste Sites. The Project site is not included on any list of hazardous waste and substance sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5.

The City Council further finds that the determination that the Project is exempt from CEQA reflects the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis.

SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.

APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 7
th day of October 2026.

Packet Page. 1105
Resolution No. 2026-169
Resolution No. 2026-169
October 7, 2026

Page 3 of 4 ends

Helen Tran, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
Attest:

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Approved as to form:

Albert J. Maldonado, City Attorney
Packet Page. 1106
Resolution No. 2026-169
Resolution No. 2026-169
October 7, 2026

Page 4 of 4 ends

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
I, Telicia Lopez, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2026-169, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 7 thday of October 2026, by the following
vote:

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Packet Page. 1107
Attachment 7
CIP Projects with Available Measure S Funds
Note: Remaining budget column is approximate until the completion of the carryover process.

Project Amended Budget Expenditures Remaining Budget w/o Encumbrances 8859 Ruben Campos Center Demo 493,928.08 230,510.18 263,417.90 8865 Hernandez Ctr fencing 250,000.00 0.00 250,000.00
8867 Citywide Irrigation System #1 250,000.00 0.00 250,000.00 8868 Park Restrooms Replace/Renovate 996,925.17 7,163.84 989,761.33 8869 Baseball/Softball field #1 989,663.26 0.00 989,663.26 8890 Newmark ballfield Ltg System 720,215.50 115,754.71 604,460.79 8891 Speicher Park Field Ltg 349,884.48 111,675.80 238,208.68 8946 One Stop permitting Center GB 23 400,000.00 0.00 400,000.00 8947 Norton Gym Pickleball courts PR 1,200,000.00 11,717.96 1,188,282.04 8948 Perris Hill Sr Ctr Ren PR 23-001 396,535.31 0.00 396,535.31 8955 Sierra Way Storm Drain SD 23-001 4,000,000.00 0.00 4,000,000.00 8958 Street Sweeping Sign SS 23-003 1,515,448.00 0.00 1,515,448.00 9016 City Hall Engineering & Space St 248,532.00 0.00 248,532.00 9017 Bridge Management Mster Plan 500,000.00 0.00 500,000.00 9070 Hill & Acacia Storm Drain 1,500,000.00 3,375.01 1,496,624.99 9133 CA Theatre HVAC Repl GB26-002 750,000.00 15.42 749,984.58 9134 Regal Theatre HVAC Repl GB26-003 50,000.00 0.00 50,000.00 9135 Villasenor Surfacing GB26-004 50,000.00 0.00 50,000.00 9136 R Hernandez Roof Repl GB26-006 400,000.00 0.00 400,000.00 9137 CH/201A & B Roof Repl GB226-007 500,000.00 0.00 500,000.00 9143 Del He Park Field/Track PR25-002 500,000.00 0.00 500,000.00 9144 Electric & 40th Trail PR25-003 350,000.00 0.00 350,000.00 9147 Minor Park Improvements PR26-004 750,000.00 0.00 750,000.00 Packet Page. 1108
Attachment 7
Location Map
500 ft
N
➤
Packet Page. 1109

DISCUSSION
City of San Bernardino
Request for Council Action
Date: October 7, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Eric Levitt, City Manager;
Luis Portillo, Director of Economic Development
Department: Economic Development
Subject: Shandin Hills Golf Club General Fund Budget
Appropriation and Amendment (Ward 5, Ward 6)
Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2026-170:

1. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to appropriate funds in the amount of $500,000.00 for the Shandin Hills Golf Club to cover payroll and operational deficit costs during the interim period while the audit is being finalized;

2. Authorizing the Director of Finance & Management Services, or designee, to amend the FY 2026/2027 Operating Budget in the amount of $500,000.00 from the General Fund for the Shandin Hills Golf Club, and increasing the Economic Development Department’s Real Property Division revenues and expenditures budgets to reflect the receipt and expenditure of the funds; and

3. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services, or designee, to issue a purchase order in the amount of $500,000.00 to Local Golf Management, LLC.

City Manager's Comments
During our review of the Shandin Hills operations it was determined that the City does not currently and has not in previous years had an appropriation for expenditures of funds at the golf course. Instead of an appropriation (budget), there has been an account set up where LGM has placed funds into a bank account and then expended out of the bank account. We have recently set up a bank account with City oversight that is used by the LGM. We are additionally through this action setting up an appropriation. The audit is looking at the cash calls as part of the audit (additional cash needed through a General Fund subsidy). We are unsure if $500,000 is sufficient for Packet Page. 1110
the Fiscal Year but will establish a base line with staff able to come back to City Council if further appropriation is required. This appropriation would be for the operational account. In addition, the City Council has appropriated $1 million in the Capital Fund.

Executive Summary
The City owns Shandin Hills Golf Club, which is operated by Local Golf Management, LLC (LGM) under a five-year Management Agreement effective June 1, 2023. The agreement places day-to-day operations with LGM, while the City retains approval, funding, account-control, inspection, and audit rights. The City is currently working with Eadie & Payne LLP to complete an agreed upon audit procedures engagement for the period of June 1, 2023, through May 31, 2026.

On August 19, 2026, Finance provided the City Council with an update on the status of the audit. As part of that discussion, the City Council directed staff to incorporate additional items into the scope of the engagement. Staff put together an expanded scope based on the Council meeting. The audit (financial review) is split into two parts in order to provide the first phase of the report to the Council when completed while the expanded scope has extended the anticipated timeline for completion of the entire report.

While the audit remains ongoing, as of September 24, 2026, the Economic Development Department has funded three Shandin Hills cash calls from LGM totaling $255,371.02 for payroll and operating expense deficits. Staff is requesting funding to reimburse the Economic Development Department for these amounts and additional funding to address the management fee, and potential payroll and operational cash calls through December 31, 2026.

Recent cash calls have also resulted in delays in processing due to requests being received shortly before scheduled check runs and incomplete supporting documentation in the information provided with the requests. Establishing funding specifically for Shandin Hills will allow the department to process future cash calls from funds designated for the golf course.

The funding requested is intended to address the immediate cash-flow needs of Shandin Hills should there be additional payroll or operational deficits while the audit is completed. Once the audit (financial review) is finalized, the City will have more complete and verified records of the applicable revenues, expenditures, cash calls, and related financial activity, which will allow staff to reconcile outstanding amounts and determine how much additional action is necessary at a future City Council meeting.

Background
On May 3, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-058, approving Amendment No. 3 to the Interim Management Agreement with CF Shandin Hills Arcis LLC. On May 17, 2023, the Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-063, approving the current Management Agreement with LGM. The current agreement took effect June 1, 2023, and runs through May 31, 2028, unless ended earlier under its terms or continued month-to-month by mutual agreement.

Packet Page. 1111
The agreement provides for a $180,000 annual management fee, paid at $15,000 per month and adjusted annually by the Consumer Price Index (CPI). LGM must operate under a City-approved Annual Plan, maintain the operating account required by Section 6.1.1, provide monthly and annual reports, notify the City of projected overruns, and maintain a five-year capital plan. Section 6.3 makes the City responsible for approved working capital and operating needs under the agreement and Annual Plans.

That funding responsibility is real, but it does not replace Council appropriation, an approved plan, or supporting records. Article 10 treats major capital improvements costing more than $25,000 separately and leaves them within the City's control and discretion.

The December 13, 2024, report covered selected activity from June 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024. It was a limited-scope examination, not a full financial audit. The report concluded that LGM followed the agreement in all material respects for the elements examined, and it identified four control matters: no City signer had been added to the operating account; merchant-processing statements were not reconciled to deposits; only one person had the safe combination and there was no backup access procedure; and inventory counts were not performed monthly. The present engagement includes procedures to determine the status of those matters.

On August 16, 2023, the Council approved future consideration of a review of contracts for City-owned revenue-producing properties, including Shandin Hills. The current review follows that accountability objective and uses the independent review right in Section 6.8 of the Management Agreement.

On July 15, 2026, the City Council Adopted Resolution No. 2026-121, authorizing Bank of America and designated City officers for the Shandin Hills operating accounts. This provided the City direct access to the banking operations at Shandin Hills.

On August 19, 2026, Finance brought forward an item for the City Council to receive and file in which the current Shandin Hills Audit Update was provided and discussed.

Council provided staff direction to add additional items into the scope of engagement and from that direction the engagement letter with Eadie & Payne is being modified appropriately along with the updated completion timeline.

Discussion
The current Shandin Hills Management Agreement with LGM provides for City responsibility for approved working capital and operating needs under the agreement and applicable Annual Plans. At the same time, City funding remains subject to the City’s appropriation, approved plans, and supporting documentation. Since the audit is ongoing and not finalized, staff is seeking a temporary funding solution to address the immediate cash-flow requirements without prejudging the audit findings or the ultimate reconciliation of Shandin Hills revenues and expenditures.

To date, four cash calls have required the Economic Development Department to Packet Page. 1112
advance funds for Shandin Hills expenses. The payments issued were:

Cash Calls: Checks Issued in the Amount of: Payment to Cover:
07/23/2026 $20,000.00 Payroll
08/06/2026 $35,953.74 Payroll
09/03/2026 $59,945.28 Payroll, SCE, and the
Water Department
9/24/2026 $139,472.00 Management Fees
and Operational
Funds to cover
projected payroll,
vendors, insurance,
upcoming utilities,
maintenance, and
other Operating
Expenses through
September 30, 2026.

Total Paid as of
9/24 /2026
$255,371.02
The Department funded the above cash calls directly while awaiting resolution of the audit and related funding matters. The requested action will restore the Economic Development Department’s budget for the $255,371.02 already expended and established additional funding capacity for potential cash calls and the management fee anticipated through December 31, 2026.

Staff has also experienced administrative and processing delays associated with these cash calls. Requests have, in some instances, been received only one day before the City’s scheduled check run, and supporting documentation not provided until after the checks have already been cut and provided to LGM. These circumstances reduce the time available for departmental review, Finance and Accounts Payable processing, verification of supporting documentation, and completion of the City’s normal payment process. Establishing sufficient funding in advance will not eliminate the need for appropriate review and documentation, but it will allow the department to respond more efficiently when cash call needs arise.

The additional funding requested is intended as interim funding through December 31, 2026, rather than a determination that all future cash calls are allowable or ultimately payable by the City. Once the expanded agreed-upon audit procedures are complete, the City will have a verified record of applicable revenues, expenditures, cash calls, management fees, and related financial activity. Staff can then reconcile the outstanding amounts and return to the City Council with any additional recommendations or corrective actions warranted by the audit findings.

Packet Page. 1113
Strategic Goals and Priorities
The request aligns with Goal No 1: Improved Operational & Financial Capacity. It established a reliable record and gives the City Council a documented basis for corrective action and future funding decisions.

Fiscal Impact
The General Fund impact associated with this request is $500,000.00 The Fiscal FY26-27 Operating Budget would need to be amended; and the Economic Development Department Real Property Division revenues and expenditures budgets would be increased accordingly.

Conclusion
It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2026-170:

1. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to appropriate funds in the amount of $500,000.00 for the Shandin Hills Golf Course to cover operational and payroll short fall costs during the interim period while the audit is being finalized; and

2. Authorizing the Director of Finance & Management Services to amend the FY 2026/2027 Operating Budget in the amount of $500,000.00 from the General Fund for the Shandin Hills Golf Course, and increasing the Economic Development Department’s Real Property Division revenues and expenditures budgets to reflect the receipt and expenditure of the funds; and

3. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services, or designee, to issue a purchase order in the amount of $500,000.00 to Local Golf Management, LLC.

Attachments
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 2026-170
Attachment 2 – Management Agreement between the City of San Bernardino and LGM
Attachment 3 – Cash Call Signed Payment Acknowledgement Letters Ward:

Fifth Ward
Synopsis of Previous Council Actions:

May 3, 2023 Mayor and City Council Adopted Resolution No. 2023-058, approving Amendment No 3 to the Interim Management Agreement with CF Shandin Hills Arcis LLC.

May 17, 2023 Mayor and City Council Adopted Resolution No. 2023-063, Packet Page. 1114
approving the Management Agreement with Local Golf Management, LLC.

August 16, 2023 Mayor and City Council approved future consideration of a review of contracts for City-owned revenue-producing properties, including Shandin Hills Golf Club.

July 15, 2026 Mayor and City Council Adopted Resolution No. 2026-121, authorizing Bank of America and designated City officers for the Shandin Hills operating accounts.

August 19, 2026 Mayor and City Council Received and Filed the Shandin Hills Golf Club Management Agreement-Audit Status Update.

CC
Eric Levitt, City Manager
Packet Page. 1115
Resolution No. 2026-170
Resolution No. 2026
October 7, 2026

Page 1 of 4 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-170

RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA,

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, OR DESIGNEE TO
APPROPRIATE FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000.00

FOR THE SHANDIN HILLS GOLF CLUB TO COVER

PAYROLL AND OPERATIONAL DEFICIT COSTS DURING

THE INTERIM PERIOD WHILE THE AUDIT IS BEING
FINALIZED; AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF

FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES, OR
DESIGNEE, TO AMEND THE FY 26/27 OPERATING
BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000.00 FROM THE

GENERAL FUND FOR THE SHANDIN HILLS GOLF CLUB,

AND INCREASING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT’S REAL PROPERTY DIVISION

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BUDGETS TO

REFLECT THE RECEIPT AND EXPENDITURE OF THE
FUNDS; AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF

FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES, OR

DESIGNEE, TO ISSUE A PURCHASE ORDER IN THE
AMOUNT OF $500,000.00 TO LOCAL GOLF
MANAGEMENT, LLC.

WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino (“City”) owns Shandin Hills Golf Club, which is operated by Local Golf Management, LLC (“LGM”) pursuant to a Management Agreement effective June 1, 2023, through May 31, 2028; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Management Agreement, the City is responsible for approved working capital and operating needs of Shandin Hills Golf Club, subject to City appropriation, approved Annual Plans, and supporting documentation; and WHEREAS, the City is currently working with Eadie & Payne LLP to complete agreedupon audit procedures for the period of June 1, 2023, through May 31, 2026, and the scope of the engagement was expanded following direction provided by the City Council on August 19, 2026, resulting in an extended anticipated completion timeline; and WHEREAS, while the audit remains ongoing, the Economic Development Department has advanced funds totaling $255,371.02 to address four Shandin Hills Golf Club cash calls for the management fees, payroll and operational expenses; and WHEREAS, additional funding is necessary to reimburse the Economic Development Department for the amounts previously advanced to provide interim funding for potential payroll and operational cash calls through December 31, 2026, while the audit is being finalized; and Packet Page. 1116
Resolution No. 2026-170
Resolution No. 2026
October 7, 2026

Page 2 of 4 ends

WHEREAS, the requested interim funding is intended to address the immediate cash-flow needs of Shandin Hills Golf Club and shall not constitute a determination that future cash calls are allowable or ultimately payable by the City, pending completion and reconciliation of the audit findings; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that amending the Fiscal Year 2026/2027 Operating Budget to appropriate the necessary General Fund monies and increase the Economic Development Department’s Real Property Division revenue and expenditure budgets is necessary to provide the requested interim funding for Shandin Hills Golf Club; and WHEREAS, the request action aligns with the City’s Strategic Goal No. 1, Improved Operational & Financial Capacity, by establishing appropriate funding capacity while providing the City with a documented basis for future funding decisions and any corrective actions warranted by the audit findings; and

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. Mayor and City Council hereby authorize the City Manager, or designee, to appropriate funds in the amount of $500,000.00 for the Shandin Hills Golf Club to cover payroll and operational deficit costs during the interim period while the audit is being finalized; and SECTION 3. Mayor and City Council hereby authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services, or designee, to amend the FY 2026/27 Operating Budget in the amount of $500,000 from the General Fund for the Shandin Hills Golf Club, and increasing the Economic Development Department’s Real Property Division revenues and expenditures budgets by $500,000 to reflect the receipt and expenditure of the funds; and SECTION 4. Mayor and City Council hereby authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services, or designee, to issue a purchase order in the amount of $500,000 to Local Golf Management, LLC.

SECTION 5. The authorization to execute the above referenced agreement is rescinded if the agreement is not executed and returned to the Office of the City Clerk within sixty (60) days following the effective date of this Resolution.

SECTION 6. CEQA. The Mayor and City Council finds this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty, as in this case, 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.

Packet Page. 1117
Resolution No. 2026-170
Resolution No. 2026
October 7, 2026

Page 3 of 4 ends

SECTION 7. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable.

SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.

APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 7th day of October 2026.

Helen Tran, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
Attest:

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Approved as to form:

Albert J. Maldonado, City Attorney
Packet Page. 1118
Resolution No. 2026-170
Resolution No. 2026
October 7, 2026

Page 4 of 4 ends

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
I, Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2026-170, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of October 2026 by the following vote:

Telicia Lopez, CMC, City Clerk
Packet Page. 1119
Packet Page. 1120
Packet Page. 1121
Packet Page. 1122
Packet Page. 1123
Packet Page. 1124
Packet Page. 1125
Packet Page. 1126
Packet Page. 1127
Packet Page. 1128
Packet Page. 1129
Packet Page. 1130
Packet Page. 1131
Packet Page. 1132
Packet Page. 1133
Packet Page. 1134
Packet Page. 1135
Packet Page. 1136
Packet Page. 1137
Packet Page. 1138
Packet Page. 1139
Packet Page. 1140
Packet Page. 1141
Packet Page. 1142
Packet Page. 1143
Packet Page. 1144
Packet Page. 1145
Packet Page. 1146
Packet Page. 1147
Packet Page. 1148
Packet Page. 1149
Packet Page. 1150
Packet Page. 1151
Packet Page. 1152
Packet Page. 1153

DISCUSSION
City of San Bernardino
Request for Council Action
Date: October 7, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Zuyva Ruiz, Acting Director of Finance & Management Services Department: Finance & Management Services Department
Subject: Discussion and Direction Regarding an Independent Phase One Financial Process Assessment (All Wards)
Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California:

1. Approve the proposed Phase One independent financial process assessment described in this report, subject to completion of the City’s applicable procurement process and finalization of a professional services agreement;

2. Select review period, with staff presenting the following alternatives:
a. Fiscal Years 2024 through 2026, consistent with Eadie Payne LLP’s preliminary proposal and estimated cost of $140,000 to $150,000; or b. Fiscal Years 2023 through 2026, if Council determines that an additional fiscal year is appropriate, with Eadie Payne LLP estimating approximately 900 to 950 hours and an estimated $180,000 to $190,000 for the expanded period.

3. Determine whether any specific financial process, fund, contract transaction, project, or other matter should be added to the Phase One scope, recognizing that a specific allegation or transaction requiring forensic investigation may require a separately defined scope and additional resources;

4. Direct that Community Facilities District (CFD) and Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) matters be excluded from the Phase One financial process assessment, consistent with Eadie Payne LLP's recommendation that matters involving legal questions concerning district formation, authorization, boundaries, assessments, or service obligations be evaluated through a separate engagement using appropriate specialized legal or technical expertise;

5. Provide direction regarding the public reporting and presentation of the assessment, including the preparation of a public final report to the extent Packet Page. 1154
permitted by law, with legally protected or confidential matters handled separately as appropriate;

6. Direct staff to complete the appropriate procurement process and return to the Mayor and City Council for consideration of the proposed professional services agreement, final scope, funding, and schedule.

City Manager's Comments
The City Manager requests approval by the City Council for the contract creating an extensive financial review of the City’s operation and then would bring back specific findings that could require a more extensive (specific forensic audit) review in any specific areas that irregularities are identified.

Executive Summary
On June 5, 2024, the Mayor and City Council directed the City Manager to pursue a forensic audit and assessment in response to concerns regarding the City’s budget assumptions, expenditure levels, internal controls, and the use and accounting of City funds. Following that direction, City staff consulted with the current City auditing firm, Eadie Payne LLP regarding the appropriate structure and methodology for an independent review. Based on that consultation, staff proposed a defined, independently performed Phase One Financial Process Assessment focused on the City’s principal financial processes and related internal controls. The assessment is intended to determine whether key financial processes are appropriately designed, authorized, documented, monitored, and operating as intended. The proposed engagement is not a financial statement audit and is not a forensic investigation of an unidentified allegation, individual, project, or transaction. The proposed Phase one scope would address budget and spending authority; procurement and contracting; contract administration and vendor payment controls; payroll and position control; restricted funds, grants, and other special funding sources; financial reporting and reconciliations; manual journal entries; and corrective action associated with prior audit findings. The preliminary proposal recommends a review of Fiscal Years 2024 through 2026, requiring an estimated 700 to 750 professional hours at an estimated cost of $140,000 to $150,000. The anticipated schedule is approximately 14 to 18 weeks from project kickoff through issuance of the final report and presentation to the Mayor and City Council. If Council elects to include Fiscal Year 2023, Eadie Payne estimates approximately 900 to 950 professional hours and an estimated cost of $180,000 to $190,000.

The firm also recommends that the Community Facilities District (CFD) and Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) matters be excluded from the Phase One engagement because those matters may require specialized legal, financial, engineering, or other technical analysis concerning district formation, authorization, boundaries, assessments, and service obligations. Staff recommends that any such review be considered through a separate engagement. Therefore, Council is being requested to determine the review period, confirm the proposed Phase One scope, identify any additional matters for consideration, and direct staff to complete the appropriate procurement process and return to Council with a proposed professional services agreement, final scope, funding, and schedule.

Packet Page. 1155
Background
During the June 5, 2024, budget meeting, members of the Mayor and City Council raised concerns regarding budget assumptions, expenditure levels, vacant positions, line-item changes, and whether projected spending was consistent with available revenues. Council then directed the City Manager to pursue a forensic audit and assessment. Following that direction, City staff consulted with Eadie Payne LLP, the City’s current audit firm, regarding the distinctions among a financial statement audit, a forensic investigation, and a financial-process or internal-control assessment. Those different types of engagements all serve very different purposes.

A financial statement audit is primarily designed to provide an opinion regarding the City’s financial statements. It does not ordinarily examine every financial process, contract, payment, budget actions, project, or management decision. This engagement typically takes samples and tests those samples accordingly.

A forensic investigation is generally directed toward a specifically identified allegation, transaction, activity, or other matter and is designed to follow specific evidence relating to that clearly defined allegation. If Council identifies a particular allegation, transaction, contract, project, or other matter requiring forensic investigation, a separate scope can be developed based on the exact nature of the matter and the specialized expertise required.

An internal-control or financial-process assessment instead evaluates how financial processes are designed, operated, and executed. This type of assessment may examine authorization, segregation of duties, documentation, reconciliation, monitoring, compliance with applicable requirements, and corrective-action procedures.

The proposed Phase One assessment is intended to address the City’s broader concerns regarding financial processes and internal controls while preserving the City’s ability to conduct separate forensic or specialized reviews if specific matters warrant additional examination requiring a specific forensic audit.

Discussion
Proposed Phase One Financial Process Assessment
The purpose of Phase One is to independently assess whether selected City financial processes comply with the applicable Municipal Code provisions, Council actions, adopted budgets, City policies, delegated authority, and contractual requirements, and whether those processes are supported by appropriately designed and functioning internal controls.

The assessment would also consider whether financial processes are adequately documented, consistently applied, and capable of providing management and Council with reliable and timely financial information. Where material control deficiencies are identified, the review would evaluate the condition, applicable requirement or control Packet Page. 1156
expectation, cause, effect, and associated risk and would recommend practical corrective actions. The engagement is not intended to make a predetermined finding that fraud, misconduct, or legal violations occurred. The proposed scope includes the following areas:

1. Budget Development, Monitoring, and Spending Authority The reviewer will assess controls governing development, adoption, amendment, monitoring, and reporting of the City budget. The proposed work includes:
• Review of budget documents for the selected fiscal years; • Review of budget-to-actuals information;
• Review of selected management presentations to Council; • Review of documented budgetary controls;
• Testing of selected budget actions to determine whether they were appropriately authorized and documented;
• Review of the accuracy and consistency of budget information entered into the financial system; and
• Consideration of whether budgetary actions were consistent with Council authorization.

The assessment may consider revenue and expenditure assumptions, one-time and ongoing resources, fund-level and department-level appropriations, budget amendments and transfers, reserves and restricted resources, year-end projections, and variance reporting.

2. Procurement and Contracting
The reviewer will assess the City’s financial controls over procurement and contracting. Eadie Payne proposes reviewing the City’s contract listings for the selected fiscal years and selecting 15 contracts for each fiscal year on a risk-based basis. For the selected contracts, the review would include, as applicable:
• Procurement method;
• Competitive bidding or solicitation;
• Bid or proposal evaluation;
• Contract authority;
• Amendments and change orders;
• Supporting documentation;
• Purchase orders;
• Invoices;
• Evidence that goods or services were received;
• Payment approval;
• Contract balances;
• Contract expiration;
• Closeout; and
• Compliance with applicable procurement and contracting requirements.

The objective is to determine whether procurement and contracting controls are Packet Page. 1157
appropriately designed, documented, authorized, and followed.

3. Contract Administration and Vendor Payment Controls
The contract review will also consider whether departments and Finance appropriately verify contractual performances before vendor payments are approved.

Testing may include:
• Matching invoices to contracts and purchase orders;
• Confirming availability of funds;
• Verifying approval authority;
• Reviewing evidence that goods or services were received; • Reviewing milestones and deliverables;
• Evaluating monitoring of contract balances;
• Identifying payments made after contract authority was exhausted; and • Reviewing documentation supporting payment approval.

4. Payroll and Position Control
Because personnel expenditure represents a substantial component of the City’s budget, the reviewer will assess financial controls over authorized positions and payroll transactions. Eadie Payne proposes selecting 15 employees for each fiscal year, with departments selected on a risk basis. The review will consider:
• Authorization of positions;
• Salary and benefits;
• Segregation of duties;
• Employee status changes;
• Documentation supporting changes;
• Payroll controls;
• Reconciliation of payroll records to the adopted position schedule and budget; and
• Personnel expenditure trends.

This component is limited to financial authorization and position control. It is not a review of employee performance, discipline, hiring decisions, labor relations, or other personnel matters unless separately authorized.

5. Restricted Funds, Grants, and Special Funding Sources The reviewer should assess controls over a risk-based selection of restricted funds, grant funds, bond proceeds, and other funds subject to specific legal, contractual, or Council-imposed restrictions. For selected funds, the review may include:
• Applicable restrictions and commitments;
• Assignments and reserves;
• Grant agreements;
• Municipal Code provisions;
• Council resolutions;
• Eligibility of expenditures;
• Expenditure approval;
Packet Page. 1158
• Transfer between funds;
• Related internal and external reports;
• Reconciliations;
• Grant reporting and closeout; and
• Subrecipient monitoring, where applicable.

The specific funds and programs selected for testing should be based on materiality, risk, prior findings, transaction volume, and Council direction.

6. Financial Reporting, Reconciliations, Journal Entries, and Corrective Action The reviewer will assess selected financial reporting and reconciliation processes. The proposed work includes review of selected:
• Bank reconciliations;
• Investment reconciliations;
• Interfund balances and transfers;
• Accounts receivable reconciliations;
• Accounts payable reconciliations;
• Capital asset and project records;
• Other account reconciliations; and
• Documentation of management review and resolution of discrepancies.

Eadie Payne also proposed obtaining all manual journal entries for the selected fiscal years and selecting a risk-based sample for examination of supporting documentation and authorization. The reviewer will also examine applicable audit findings and corrective action plans and assess the status of identified corrective actions.

7. Review Methodology and Independence
The selected firm should:
• Review applicable Municipal Code provisions, Council actions, policies, administrative directives, procedures, contracts, financial-system records, and other relevant documentation;
• Document the expected process and control structure for each area reviewed; • Conduct interviews with appropriate City personnel and designated elected officials as determined by the firm’s methodology;
• Develop and document a risk-based testing methodology; • Select transactions, contracts, employees, funds, journal entries, reconciliations, and other items for testing based on risk, materiality, transaction volume, unusual activity, prior findings, and other relevant factors; • Independently perform the testing and determine whether identified exceptions represent isolated issues or broader control weaknesses; • Identify the condition, applicable requirement or control expectation, cause, effect, and risk associated with each material finding; • Recommend practical corrective actions and, where appropriate, identify responsible parties and target implementation dates;
• Provide designated City representatives with an opportunity to review factual Packet Page. 1159
accuracy before issuance of the final report but management does not approve or direct the firm’s professional conclusions;
• Disclose any actual or potential independence issue;
• Any additional advisory services that could affect the firm’s independence must be disclosed before being undertaken; and
• Maintain responsibility for the firm’s professional conclusions and findings independent of City management.

Scope Limitations
The Phase One engagement is not intended to:
• Provide a financial statement audit or opinion;
• Conduct a forensic investigation of unidentified allegations; • Determine whether fraud occurred;
• Evaluate individual employee performance;
• Provide legal opinions;
• Conduct a citywide organization or operational assessment; • Evaluate land-use or entitlement processes;
• Conduct detailed engineering or technical reviews of capital projects; • Review every City contract or financial transactions; or • Replace the City’s annual financial statement audit or Single Audit.

Testing will be risk-based and will not constitute a review of every transaction or activity. The absence of an identified exception should not be interpreted as establishing that no other exceptions, control deficiencies, or misconduct exist. Any specific allegations, transaction, project, contract, or other matter identified by Council that requires forensic investigation or specialized expertise may require a separate scope, procurement process, cost, and schedule.

CFD and LMD Matters
Eadie Payne LLP recommends excluding Community Facilities District and Landscape Maintenance District matters from Phase One. The recommendation is based on the potential for the requested reviews to involve specialized legal analysis concerning district establishment and authorization, district boundaries, assessments, and service obligations. Staff recommends that those matters be addressed separately if Council wishes to pursue them. A separate engagement could identify the appropriate legal, financial, engineering, or other specialized expertise; scope; procurement method; estimated cost; and schedule. Excluding CFD/LMD matters from Phase One does not prevent Council from directing a subsequent review.

Review Period and Deliverables
Eadie Payne LLP recommends a three-fiscal-year review covering:
• Fiscal Year 2024
• Fiscal Year 2025
• Fiscal Year 2026
For this three-year scope, the firm estimates 700 to 750 professional hours, a cost of Packet Page. 1160
$140,000 to $150,000 and a schedule of approximately 14 to 18 weeks from project kickoff through the final report and Council presentation. The firm has further advised that inclusion of Fiscal Year 2023 would increase the estimated effort to approximately 900 to 950 hours and increase the estimated cost to $180,000 to $190,000.

Council may therefore determine whether the additional fiscal year provides sufficient value to justify the additional estimated cost and time. Before execution of any agreement, the selected firm should confirm the final scope, review period, independence, staffing, testing methodology, estimated hours, cost, and schedule.

Deliverables
The engagement should produce, at minimum:
• A written work plan identifying final scope; review period; documents requested; interview plan; testing methodology; project schedule; City staff support requirements; and applicable professional or control framework. • Interim communications such as periodic communications regarding significant observations, missing records, scope limitations, or matters requiring immediate attention.
• Draft report that identifies objective and scope; review period; procedures performed; limitations; findings; supporting facts; applicable requirements or control expectations; cause and effect; risk classification; recommendations; and management responses.
• Final public report that is suitable for presentation to the Mayor and City Council and public release to the extent permitted by law.
• Corrective action matrix identifying recommendations, responsible department or officials, target completion dates, and follow-up status. • Council presentation that summarizes the work performed, principal findings, recommendations, management responses, and recommended next steps.

Reporting, Confidentiality, and Procurement
The City’s objective is to provide Council and the public with a clear and useful final report. The final report should be prepared as a public document to the extent permitted by law. Information that is legally exempt from disclosure, confidential by statue, protected by applicable privilege, or otherwise required to be handled confidentially should be addressed separately as determined by the City Attorney.

The engagement should not state or imply that the entire assessment, the auditor’s working papers, or the final report is protected by attorney-client privilege or attorney work-product protection. Whether particular communications or records are protected depends on the circumstances and applicable law. The professional services agreement should address:
• The contracting party and client;
• Direction and oversight of the engagement;
• Access to City records;
• Treatment of confidential and legally protected information; • Working papers;
Packet Page. 1161
• Document retention;
• Document preservation;
• Draft and final reports;
• Factual review by City management;
• Management responses; and
• Public presentation of the final report.

The City Attorney should advise staff regarding the appropriate treatment of particular matters that may involve pending claims, litigation, personnel matters, contract disputes, procurement challenges, or other legal issues.

Procurement Selection
Eadie Payne LLP provided the preliminary proposal attached to this report at the City’s request. The preliminary proposal is not an award of a professional services agreement and does not constitute authorization to begin the engagement.

The Purchasing Division and City Attorney should determine the appropriate procurement method and whether the proposed engagement requires a competitive process or additional Council authorization. Any procurement should be structured to ensure that all qualified firms are evaluated under consistent requirements and that the City’s selection process addresses professional qualifications, relevant government experience, independence, methodology, staffing, cost, schedule, and ability to complete the engagement.

If Eadie Payne LLP participates in any subsequent procurement, the City should ensure that its prior involvement in discussing the preliminary scope does not create an actual or perceived procurement or independence concern. The final agreement should be presented to Council for approval if required by applicable City purchasing authority as well as the necessary budgetary action needed.

Strategic Goals and Priorities
This item aligns with Key Target No. 1: Improved Operational & Financial Capacity.

Fiscal Impact
Council discussion and direction on the item has no immediate fiscal impact. The final cost will depend on the scope approved by Council, procurement process, final testing methodology, record availability, staff availability, and any additional matters added to the engagement. Any agreement exceeding existing administrative authority or available appropriation will be returned to Council with an identified funding source and any required budget amendment.

Conclusion
It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California:

Packet Page. 1162

5. Provide direction regarding the public reporting and presentation of the assessment, including the preparation of a public final report to the extent permitted by law, with legally protected or confidential matters handled separately as appropriate;

Attachments
Attachment 1: Eadie Payne LLP Preliminary Scope Comments, Cost Estimate, and Schedule
Ward:

All Wards
Synopsis of Previous Council Actions:

June 26, 2024 The Mayor and City Council directed the City manager to conduct a forensic audit and assessment.

CC
Eric Levitt, City Manager
Packet Page. 1163
City of San Bernardino
Proposal for Phase One Financial Process Assessment
AUGUST 13, 2026

PREPARED BY
EadiePayne
3880 Lemon St., Suite 300
Riverside, CA 92501

CONTACT PERSON
Eden C. Casareno
Office: 951.241.7805
[email protected]
WWW.EADIEPAYNELLP.COM Packet Page. 1164

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Letter of Transmittal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Cost Estimate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Proposed Schedule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Proposed Staffing and Hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Scope and Independence Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Breakdown of Tasks and Hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 PAGE
Packet Page. 1165
3880 Lemon St., Ste. 300
Riverside, CA 92501
P.O. Box 1529
Riverside, CA 92502-1529
951-241-7800
www.eadiepaynellp.com
August 13, 2026
Tarik Rahmani, CFO
City of San Bernardino
290 North D Street
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Dear Mr. Rahmani,
EadiePayne LLP is pleased to submit this preliminary proposal for a Phase One Financial Process Assessment for the City of San Bernardino. This document presents our understanding of the engagement and outlines a cost estimate, proposed schedule, staffing plan, scope considerations, and a detailed breakdown of tasks and hours to support your evaluation of our approach.

Our estimated cost for Phase One ranges from $140,000 to $150,000, with an anticipated schedule of 14 to 18 weeks from kickoff to final report and Council presentation. The engagement will be staffed by an experienced team led by an Engagement Partner, an Audit Manager, and two Audit Associates, and will focus on budget development and monitoring, procurement and contracting, payroll and position control, restricted funds and grants, and financial reporting and reconciliation processes, as detailed further in this proposal.

We recommend limiting the scope of the engagement to three years in order to manage costs effectively.

We believe a three-year timeframe is adequate for identifying and assessing relevant trends. We also recommend to exclude the review of Community Facilities Districts and Landscape Maintenance Districts as the City’s objectives in this area will necessitate legal analyses more appropriately conducted by law firms with specialized expertise in CFDs and LMDs.

This is a preliminary proposal and the scope, schedule, staffing, and cost estimate outlined herein may be revised based on further guidance and direction from City management and the City Council. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this proposal in greater detail and to refine our approach based on your feedback.

We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal and look forward to the possibility of serving the City of San Bernardino.

Sincerely,
EadiePayne LLP

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
Packet Page. 1166
2 This proposal outlines an independent, risk-based assessment of the City’s core financial processes, with a cost estimate of $140,000–$150,000, a 14–18 week schedule, and a dedicated project team.

We are committed to transparency, practical recommendations, and ongoing communication with City representatives and Council. Please let us know if there are any questions or requests for clarification regarding this proposal.

Based on the described engagement scope, the estimated cost for Phase One ranges from $140,000 to $150,000. This estimate covers project planning, document review, interviews, transaction testing, draft and final report preparation, Council presentation, and follow-up deliverables. The range reflects variables such as the volume of records, number of departments involved, and extent of risk-based testing. A more precise estimate can be provided after an initial scoping meeting and access to sample data.

The engagement is projected to span approximately 14 to 18 weeks from project kickoff to final report and Council presentation, assuming timely access to documentation and staff. A proposed timeline is as follows:

The schedule may be adjusted based on the City’s availability, data readiness, and any emergent issues requiring expanded review.

The project team will be led by an Engagement Partner, supported by an Audit Manager and two Audit Associates. Estimated total hours are 700–750 distributed as follows:

The team’s size and composition may be adjusted based on final scope and risk assessment.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

COST ESTIMATE

PROPOSED SCHEDULE

PROPOSED STAFFING AND HOURS
Weeks 1–2 Project initiation, work plan development, and document request.

Weeks 3–6 Document review, process mapping, and staff interviews.

Weeks 7–11 Transaction testing and interim observations.

Weeks 12–13 Draft report preparation and management review.

Weeks 14–16 Final report, corrective action matrix, and Council presentation.

Position Estimated Hours Primary Responsibilities
Engagement Partner 130–150 hours Oversight, reporting, presentations Audit Manager 180–200 hours Planning, supervision, fieldwork, testing Audit Associates 390-400 hours Document review, sampling, data analysis Packet Page. 1167
3 The engagement scope is comprehensive but does not include forensic investigation, legal review, or assessment of individual performance unless specifically expanded by Council. Any request to investigate specific allegations or transactions outside the defined scope would require a separate engagement and resources.

The consulting team will maintain independence and objectivity throughout the review, following professional standards. Should the City request advisory assistance in implementing corrective actions, this may impact independence for any subsequent attestation or audit services and will be disclosed in advance.

We recommend that the review of Community Facilities Districts and Landscape Maintenance Districts be segregated into its own engagement. The City requests an engagement that involves a legal evaluation of the establishment and authorization of the CFD/LMD, district boundaries, and service obligations that we believe are better served by law firms that specialize in CFD/LMDs.

Finally, we recommend to limit the scope for this engagement to three years (FY 2024, 2025 and 2026) in order to keep the cost at a more reasonable amount. We believe examining data from three years is sufficient to determine whether findings are one-time occurrences or recurring issues. However, if the City decides to include FY 2023, the total estimated hours should be adjusted to 900 - 950 hours and the cost will increase to a range of $180,000 to $190,000.

Other potential scope limitations include incomplete records, lack of access to key personnel, or evolving City priorities. Any such limitations will be flagged promptly, and significant issues requiring immediate attention will be reported as interim observations.

Budget development, monitoring and spending authority

SCOPE AND INDEPENDENCE CONSIDERATIONS
Tasks Hours
Interview budget/finance department personnel, city management, and city council members (5-6 individuals) 6
Review budget document for FY 2024, 2025 and 2026 12
Review detailed budget to actual comparison for FY 2024, 2025, and 2026 12 Review selected presentations by management to City Council during FY 2024, 2025, and 2026 12 Review of documentation of budgetary controls and determine compliance by City personnel on a test basis to determine whether budget actions were approved at the proper level, supported by documentation, accurately entered into the financial system, and reported consistency with Council authorization.
24 BREAKDOWN OF TASKS AND HOURS
Packet Page. 1168
4 Procurement and Contracting/Contract Administration and Vendor Payment Controls Payroll and Position Control

BREAKDOWN OF TASKS AND HOURS
Tasks Hours
Interview purchasing/finance department personnel, other department personnel, city management, and city council members (5-6 individuals) 6 Review listing of contracts for FY 2024, 2025, and 2026. 6 Review payment records by vendor/contract for FY 2024, 2025, and 2026 6 Review of documentation of procurement & contracting controls and determine compliance by City personnel on a test basis. Select a sample 15 contracts for each of FY 2024, 2025, and 2026 and examine contracts, bids, bid evaluation, contract approval, amendments/change orders, and other supporting documentation. Also examine invoices, POs, evidence that services or goods were received, approval for payment, and other supporting documentation for vendor payments and monitoring of contract balances, expiration and close-out. 150
Tasks Hours
Interview payroll/HR personnel, other department personnel, city management, and city council members (5-6 individuals) 6
Review of documentation of payroll and position controls, identify key controls, and determine compliance by City personnel. For each of FY 2024, 2025 and 2026, a sample of 15 employees will be selected from a number of departments selected on a risk basis. Controls to be tested should include authorization of positions, salary and benefits, segregation of duties, and documentation of any changes.
150
Obtain payroll records for the FY 2024, 2025, and 2026 and reconcile to adopted position schedule and budget. 10
Evaluate trends of personnel expenditures over FY 2024, 2025, and 2026. 8 Packet Page. 1169
5 Restricted Funds, Grants and Special Funding Sources
Financial Reporting, Reconciliation, and Corrective Action

BREAKDOWN OF TASKS AND HOURS
Tasks Hours
Interview accounting/finance personnel, other department personnel, city management, and city council members (5-6 individuals) 6
Perform an analytical review of all restricted funds, grant funds, debt service funds and other funds subject to Council-imposed restrictions using the fund financial statements for FY 2024, 2025 and 2026.
24 For a select number of funds, review supporting documentation of specific restrictions/ commitments/ assignments/ reserves. Documentation may include grant agreements, municipal code provisions, and City Council resolutions.
12 From selected funds above, verify that transactions were made only for eligible uses, expenditures went through an approval process, and transfers between funds were appropriate. 75 Obtain a sample of related internal and external reports and any relevant reconciliations to the City’s accounting records. 24
Review documentation of subrecipient monitoring. 8
Tasks Hours
Interview accounting/finance personnel, city management, and city council members (5-6 individuals) 6
Review a selection of bank and investment reconciliations, interfund balances and transfers, accounts receivable and account payable reconciliations, capital asset and project records and other account reconciliations during FY 2024, 2025, and 2026, and verify whether the reconciliations went through appropriate review and approval. Determine how discrepancies were resolved.
75 Obtain all manual journal entries for FY 2024, 2025, and 2026, obtain a risk-based sample, and examine supporting documentation. 60
Review any audit findings and relevant corrective action plan for FY 2024, 2025 and 2026.

Determine the status of corrective action plan. 18
Packet Page. 1170

DISCUSSION
City of San Bernardino
Request for Council Action
Date: October 7, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Zuyva Ruiz, Deputy Director of Finance & Management Services Department: Finance & Management Services Department
Subject: Potential Revenue Generating Initiatives - Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility
Study - Direction to Proceed (All Wards)
Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California:

1. Discuss and provide direction regarding whether the City should proceed with an independent fiscal, economic, and revenue feasibility study concerning warehouse, logistics, industrial storage, truck parking, and related commercial and industrial activities;

2. Direct the Finance & Management Services Department to release a formal competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) for an Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study;

3. Direct the City Attorney’s Office to complete a parallel review of the City’s existing taxing, regulatory, permitting, development, and cost-recovery authority, including whether potential revenue mechanisms would constitute a tax, regulatory fee, development-related charge, or other charge, and whether voter approval or other governmental authorizations would be required;

4. Direct the Finance & Management Services Department, in coordination with appropriate City departments, to begin an internal reconciliation of the City’s existing warehouse, logistics, storage, truck parking, industrial-property, business-registration, permitting, and revenue information; and

5. Direct staff to return to the Mayor and City Council with the recommended consultant, final scope of work, contract amount, and identified funding source, or necessary budget amendment, before the full study begins.

City Manager's Comments
The City Council is seeking to diversify the City’s revenue base. The proposed study would evaluate several options in diversifying the City’s revenue base. The areas Packet Page. 1171
outlined came from evaluating other cities in the region. The City Manager requests City Council consideration in developing an RFP as outlined in the report.

Executive Summary
The City of San Bernardino has a substantial concentration of warehouse, logistics, industrial, storage, distribution, and related commercial activity. These activities generate business activity and employment, while also creating demands for transportation infrastructure, permitting, inspection, code enforcement, public services, and other municipal functions. The City therefore has an opportunity to evaluate its overall fiscal position with respect to this sector rather than examining a single potential warehouse tax in isolation. A 2022 regional warehouse inventory (Attachment 3) identified 76 large warehouse sites within the City totaling approximately 27.5 million square feet. That figure provides a useful starting point for a preliminary screening but is not a current City inventory and should not be treated as the City’s current taxable or chargeable base. Using the 27.5 million square feet solely as an initial screening base, staff modeled preliminary warehouse scenarios at different hypothetical and qualifying shares. The resulting gross annual figures range from approximately $267,000 to $2.4 million, with a middle screening case of approximately $1.4 million.

These figures are not revenue forecasts. The proposed study would establish a current factual baseline and answer four principal questions: 1) What revenue is the City already authorized to collect, and is it being fully captured?; 2) Do existing business-tax classification adequately reflect today’s warehouse, logistics, storage, and related activities?; 3) What additional taxes, fees, charges, cost-recovery mechanisms, or other revenue opportunities may be legally and economically feasible?; 4) What are the net fiscal, economic, administrative, and implementation consequences of each material opportunity? The study would focus primarily on existing revenue, revenue leakage, business-tax modernization, potential new revenue mechanisms, cost recovery, and the fiscal implication of current and reasonably foreseeable industrial and logistics activity. Limited analysis of future development and City-owned property may also be included where those opportunities have a direct and material relationship to the study’s core purpose. The final product would include a Revenue Opportunity Matrix comparing material opportunities based on estimated gross and net revenue, recurring versus one-time revenue, implementation costs, legal pathway, implementation timing, economic considerations, and confidence in the estimate. No new revenue is assumed in the City’s budget as a result of this action.

Background
The concept of evaluating additional revenue associated with warehouse and logistics activity was raised during the City’s spring 2026 budget discussions. Finance subsequently received comparative information regarding warehouse activity and the City’s existing business-tax and business-registration structures. The preliminary information estimated approximately 15 to 20 million square feet of warehouse space in San Bernardino. Finance does not recommend using that estimate for City planning purposes.

A separate 2022 regional warehouse inventory (Attachment 3) identified 76 large warehouse sites within San Bernardino totaling 27.5 million square feet. While that Packet Page. 1172
provides a stronger independent starting point, it has limitations. The information predates development occurring after 2022, may not capture every smaller warehouse or logistics properties, and does not distinguish between gross building area and the space that could legally and practically be included within any future tax base or fee structure.

The City therefore still needs an updated and reconciled inventory. San Bernardino already regulates and taxes businesses through Chapter 5.04 of the Municipal Code.

Section 5.04.525 addresses, among other classifications, wholesale businesses, manufacturers and wholesalers, and persons leasing commercial and industrial property, expressly including freight-forwarding storehouses and warehouses.

Business registration charges applicable to these businesses are established under the City’s existing structure. Sections 5.04.055 and 5.04.070 also provide the City with reporting and examination authority where registration charges depend upon gross receipts or other reported measures The feasibility analysis should not begin with the assumption that a new tax is necessary. The first question should instead be whether the City is fully capturing revenue that is already authorized under existing law.

Discussion
The proposed study intends to establish a factual basis for future Council decisions concerning the City’s industrial and logistics revenue base. The study should determine:

1. Whether existing revenue authorized under current law is being fully captured by the City;

2. Whether existing business-tax classifications appropriately capture modern industrial and logistics activities;

3. Whether material revenue leakage exists;

4. Whether legally permissible new or modified revenue mechanisms could generate meaningful net new revenue;

5. Whether identifiable municipal costs associated with these activities can appropriately be recovered; and

6. What fiscal, economic, administrative, legal, and implementation consequences would result from each material option.

The consultant should provide independent fiscal and economic analysis and should not advocate for a predetermined revenue mechanism.

Existing Revenue and Revenue Leakage
Before considering a new tax or fee, the City should clearly establish its existing revenue baseline to then appropriately be able to model scenarios. The proposed study will reconcile available property, business registration, permitting, land use, and revenue information to identify businesses and facilities associated with warehouse, logistics, storage, truck parking, and related industrial activity. The analysis should determine whether:
• Businesses subject to existing requirements are properly registered; Packet Page. 1173
• Businesses are correctly classified;
• Applicable tax bases are being accurately reported;
• Changes in ownership, operators, or use are reflected in City records; and • Material gaps exist between revenue potentially authorized under existing law and revenue currently collected.

Any revenue that can reasonably be recovered under existing law should be reported separately from revenue that would require a new tax, fee, charge, or other governmental action. This distinction is essential throughout the study. The consultant will begin with the inventory and reconciliation prepared by City staff and will validate and complete it.

Warehouse, Logistics, Storage, and Truck Parking Revenue The consultant should evaluate the main revenue opportunities associated with warehouse, logistics, storage, and truck parking activities. The study should not assume that all activities are treated identically as different operating models may warrant different revenue bases or structures. Potential approaches may include modernization of existing business tax classifications, square footage measures, gross-receipts measures, tiered structures, per-space measure, or other legally permissible approaches. For each material alternative, the consultant should identify:
• The applicable activity or taxpayer;
• The potential revenue base;
• Estimated gross revenue;
• Existing revenue affected or replaced;
• Estimated net new revenue;
• Administrative and compliance costs;
• Economic implications;
• Implementation requirements; and
• Applicable legal or approval considerations.

The purpose is to determine which opportunities, if there are any, are financially meaningful and practically feasible within the City, rather than to establish a particular tax or fee in advance.

Staff prepared a model to test the potential scale of a warehouse-related revenue opportunity. This model tested the estimated gross annual revenue related to a per square-foot tax rate for warehousing. The preliminary screening model produced estimated revenue ranges from $267,000 to $2.4 million gross annually. The detailed explanation of the model is outlined in Attachment 2.

Cost Recovery and Development-Related Revenue
The study should evaluate whether the City is appropriately recovering allowable costs associated with industrial and logistics activity. This may include permitting, plan review, inspection, business registration, code enforcement, transportation-related services, infrastructure, stormwater, and other identifiable governmental functions.

Packet Page. 1174
The consultant should distinguish cost recovery mechanisms from taxes and other revenue measures and should base any fee analysis on documented municipal costs.

The study could also evaluate development related revenue associated with industrial, warehouse, logistics, storage, and truck-parking development, including applicable development, permitting, infrastructure, and transportation-related charges. Future development revenue should be presented separately from existing recurring revenue and should not be treated as current-year revenue. The cost-recovery analysis will be a screening-level review of existing fees against available City cost information. It will identify where a separate cost of service or fee nexus study may be warranted but will not include such a study.

Economic and Administrative Feasibility
Another core focus of this study should be the concept that fiscal opportunity must be considered together with economic and administrative feasibility. The consultant should evaluate the likely effects of material revenue options on business costs, investment within the City, development within the City, leasing, employment, industrial competitiveness, land values, and truck parking availability. The analysis should also consider comparable jurisdictions and the relative magnitude of potential City revenue mechanisms. Administrative feasibility should include the cost and requirements associated with registration, reporting, data maintenance, verification, collection, auditing, appeals, enforcement, staffing, technology, and ongoing administration. The purpose of this is to identify the net fiscal opportunity, rather than simply focusing on the gross revenue it produces.

Future Development and Public-Property Opportunities
The study should separately consider likely future industrial and logistics development, to a reasonable degree, where it could materially affect the City’s fiscal position. The consultant should distinguish existing operating facilities from approved, entitled, permitted, under construction and foreseeable future projects. A limited screening of City-owned properties may also identify whether existing public assets could support compatible revenue generating uses such as truck parking, storage, or other industrial related activities. These tasks are intended to identify opportunities directly relevant to the study and are not intended to become a separate comprehensive economicdevelopment, asset management, or land-development study. Those studies could be developed separately by the appropriate departments, in coordination with the City Manager’s Office.

Revenue Opportunity Matrix
The principal Council-facing deliverable should be a Revenue Opportunity Matrix. The matrix should allow the Mayor and City Council to compare material opportunities on a consistent basis, including Opportunity, Gross Revenue, Net New Revenue, Recurring (Yes or No), Cost, Legal Path, Implementation, Economic Considerations, and Confidence. The matrix should distinguish between existing revenue recovery, net new recurring revenue, one-time revenue, cost avoidance or recovery, and future revenue. It should also identify the level of confidence in each estimate so that preliminary or assumption-dependent opportunities are not presented as established revenue.

Packet Page. 1175
Legal Review
The City Attorney’s Office should conduct a parallel legal review. The legal review should determine the City’s authority under existing law and identify the applicable legal classification and approval requirements for material revenue mechanisms. This should include consideration of whether an option presented by the consultant constitutes a tax, regulatory fee, development-related charge, or another form of governmental charge and whether Municipal Code amendments, resolutions, fee schedules, voter approval, or other governmental authorization may be required. The consultant will provide fiscal and economic analysis but will not provide the City’s legal determination, that guidance strictly lies with the City Attorney’s Office.

Proposed Consultant Scope
The detailed consultant scope will be included in Attachment 1- Request for Proposals - Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study. At a minimum, the consultant’s work should include:

1. Current property and business inventory;

2. Existing revenue and compliance analysis;

3. Revenue leakage analysis;

4. Warehouse, logistics, storage, and truck-parking revenue analysis;

5. Cost-recovery and development-related revenue analysis;

6. Economic and administrative feasibility analysis;

7. Future revenue analysis;

8. Limited public-property opportunity screening;

9. Implementation analysis; and

10.Final Revenue Opportunity Matrix and Council presentation.

The RFP should require the consultant to identify assumptions, data sources, methodology, confidence levels, and limitations for all material revenue estimates. To remain within the planning budget, the RFP structures the work in two phases. The first phase establishes the baseline and screens potential opportunities. Staff will then select a limited number of material opportunities for detailed modeling and economic and administrative analysis.

Procurement Guideline
SBMC Chapter 3.04 requires formal competitive bidding or competitive selection for purchases above $40,000. At the proposed $100,000 planning level, the ultimate professional services agreement (PSA) would fall within the City Manager’s approval.

Staff nevertheless recommends returning the proposed selection to the Mayor and City Council to provide transparency concerning the scope, cost, and purpose of the work, as well as a budget appropriation tied to the contract amount. Polling, campaign strategy, public advocacy, and election consulting should not be included in this study.

Work Plan and Schedule
Packet Page. 1176
The proposed schedule assumes Council direction on October 7, 2026. Procurement dates may be adjusted in consultation with Purchasing and the City Clerk without changing the overall objective of returning with the completed analysis in spring 2027.

Target Date Action
October 7, 2026 Mayor and City Council discussion and direction on whether to proceed October 8 – November
1, 2026
Finance begins reconciliation of business-registration accounts and current revenue; Planning/GIS begins warehouse-property reconciliation; City Attorney begins review of existing tax authority and election requirements
October 12, 2026 Target release of formal competitive RFP November 9, 2026 Target proposal deadline
November 10-17, 2026 Proposal evaluation, reference review and clarification November 18-20, 2026 Consultant interviews and scope/price clarification, if necessary December 2026 Return to Mayor and City Council with recommended consultant, final scope, contract amount and funding source
Late December
2026/January 2027
Consultant kickoff
January-April 2027 Data reconciliation, revenue modeling, economic analysis and implementation work
April 2027 Draft consultant report, staff factual review and City Attorney legal analysis May 2027 Return to Mayor and City Council with final study, legal framework and staff recommendation
Remainder of 2027 Additional policy, administrative and stakeholder work only if directed by Council
2028 If subsequently directed, prepare any proposed tax ordinance, updated revenue analysis, voter research if authorized, election documents and implementation plan
November 28 Current ordinary planning horizon for a potential Council-sponsored general tax measure requiring voter approval
Any subsequent policy, ordinance, fee, tax, ballot, or implementation action would require separate Council considerations and applicable legal and governmental approvals. No new tax, fee, charge, ballot measure, or other revenue mechanism is proposed or authorized by this action.

Strategic Goals and Priorities
This item is aligned with Strategic Goal #1: Fiscal Sustainability as it evaluates potential revenue opportunities within the City.

Fiscal Impact
There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with this action. If the Mayor and City Council direct staff to proceed, staff will return to the Mayor and City Council to present the selection and request the necessary budget amendment within the General Fund prior to any work beginning.

Conclusion
It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, Packet Page. 1177
California:

2. Direct the Finance & Management Services Department to release a formal competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) for an Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study;

Attachments

1. Attachment 1: Request for Proposals - Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study

2. Attachment 2: Preliminary Warehouse Screening Model

3. Attachment 3: 2022 Regional Warehouse Inventory
Ward:

All Wards
Synopsis of Previous Council Actions:

N/A
CC
Eric Levitt, City Manager
Packet Page. 1178

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
[***INSERT RFP NUMBER***]
Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study Published:

October 12, 2026

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Vanir Tower
290 North D Street
San Bernardino, California 92401
Packet Page. 1179

Page 2 of 45 ends

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................2 NOTICE INVITING PROPOSALS .................................................................................................3 I. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION ................................................................................5 II. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ..............................................................................................6 A. Scope of Services...............................................................................................................6 B. City Contact for this RFP ....................................................................................................6 C. Requests for Clarification................................................................................................6 D. Pre-Proposal Meeting .....................................................................................................7 E. Content and Format of Proposal ........................................................................................7 F. No Deviations from the RFP.............................................................................................10 G. Selection Process .........................................................................................................11 H. Protests.........................................................................................................................12 I. Proposal Schedule ...........................................................................................................13 J. Submittal Requirements ...................................................................................................13 K. General Conditions...........................................................................................................15 PROPOSAL CHECKLIST ...........................................................................................................24 CERTIFICATION OF PROPOSAL ..............................................................................................25 VENDOR QUOTE FORM............................................................................................................26 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS....................................................27 EXHIBIT B ...................................................................................................................................28 Packet Page. 1180

Page 3 of 45 ends

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

NOTICE INVITING PROPOSALS
RFP NO. [***INSERT REFERENCE NO.***]
Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that proposals will be received by the City of San Bernardino (“City”) electronically through the City’s online bid management provider (“Planetbids”) before 3:00 PM, Monday, November 9, 2026. Proposals may NOT be submitted by fax, email, telephone, mail, hand delivery, or other means; any Proposals received through any means other than Planetbids will be returned to the Vendor unopened.

The City is requesting proposals to provide:

An independent Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study. The study covers warehouse, logistics, distribution, industrial storage, truck parking, and related commercial and industrial activities with the City.

The study will proceed in two phases. Phase 1 will:
- Validate and complete a current inventory of relevant properties and businesses; - Establish the City’s existing revenue baseline;
- Identify potential revenue leakage under existing law; - Evaluate whether existing business-tax classifications reflect current activities; and - Screen potential new revenue, cost-recovery, development-related, and limited public-property opportunities.

In Phase 2, the consultant will perform detailed revenue modeling, economic, and administrative feasibility analysis on a limited number of opportunities selected by the City.

The principal deliverable is a Revenue Opportunity Matrix comparing opportunities by gross and net revenue, cost, legal pathway, implementation, economic considerations, and confidence. The consultant will provide independent fiscal and economic analysis only. It will not provide legal determination, advocacy, or election-related services.

The award of this contract is subject to available budget adequate to carry out the provisions of the proposed agreement including the identified scope of work. The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals determined not to be in the best interest of the City.

Certain labor categories under this project may be subject to prevailing wages as identified in the State of California Labor Code commencing at sections 1720 et seq. and 1770 et seq. If applicable, employees working in these categories at the site must be paid not less than the basic hourly rates of pay and fringe benefits established by the California Department of Industrial Relations. Copies of the State of California wage schedules are available for review at www.dir.ca.gov/dlsr/. In addition, a copy of the prevailing rate of per diem wages will be made available at the City’s Finance Department upon request. The successful bidder shall post a copy of the prevailing wage rates at each job site. It shall be mandatory upon the Bidder to whom the Contract is awarded, and upon any subcontractors, to comply with all Labor Code provisions, Packet Page. 1181

Page 4 of 45 ends

which include but are not limited to the payment of not less than the said specified prevailing wage rates to all workers employed by them in the execution of the Contract, employment of apprentices, hours of labor and debarment of contractors and subcontractors. If the total compensation under the contract will exceed $25,000 and pursuant to Labor Code sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, all contractors and subcontractors that wish to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, or enter into a contract to perform public work must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). No bid shall be accepted, nor any contract entered into without proof of the contractor’s and subcontractors’ current registration with the DIR to perform public work. If awarded a contract, the bidder and its subcontractors, of any tier, shall maintain active registration with the DIR for the duration of the project. The contract awarded pursuant to this proposal may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations.

Interested proposers may download copies of the Request for Proposals (“RFP”) by visiting the City’s web site, https://www.sbcity.org. All addenda will be published on the City’s website.

For more information regarding the RFP, please contact:

City of San Bernardino, Purchasing Division
[email protected]
[END OF NOTICE OF INVITING PROPOSALS]
Packet Page. 1182

Page 5 of 45 ends

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study I. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
The City of San Bernardino (“City”) is requesting proposals from qualified firms (“Proposers”) for Industrial and Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study services (“Services”).

Incorporated in 1854, the City of San Bernardino serves as the county seat of San Bernardino County and as a major governmental, commercial, and economic center within Southern California’s Inland Empire. With a population of more than 222,000 residents and thousand of businesses, the City operates under a Council-Manager form of government and provides a broad range of municipal services to its residents, businesses, and visitors.

San Bernardino has a substantial concentration of warehouse, logistics, distribution, industrial storage, and related commercial and industrial uses. These activities contribute significantly to the City’s employment base and economic activity while also creating increased demands on public infrastructure and municipal operations. In particular, the City’s commercial and industrial activity requires ongoing transportation infrastructure management, permitting and development services, inspections, code enforcement, and other regulatory, administrative, and public services. Given the scale and diversity of activity within the City, effective management of municipal resources, service delivery, regulatory functions, and infrastructure needs is an important component of maintaining efficient and responsive City operations.

To serve and promote the welfare of its residents, the City intends to procure the Services, as described below.

The City regulates and taxes businesses through Chapter 5.04 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code, which includes classifications for wholesale businesses, manufacturers, and persons leasing commercial and industrial property, including freight-forwarding storehouses and warehouses. A 2022 regional warehouse inventory identified 76 large warehouse sites within the City totaling approximately 27.5 million square feet. That inventory predates more recent development and may not capture smaller facilities. It also does not distinguish gross building area from space that could be included in any tax or fee base.

On October 7, 2026 the Mayor and City Council directed staff to release this RFP. The study is intended to give the Mayor and City Council an objective factual basis for future decisions about the City’s industrial and logistics revenue base. It will begin with a threshold question: whether the City is fully capturing revenue already authorized under existing law. Only after that will it evaluate whether new or modified revenue mechanisms, cost recovery, or other opportunities are legally and economically feasible.

The City Attorney’s Office is conducting a parallel legal review. City staff have begun an internal reconciliation of business-registration, property, and revenue information, which will be provided to the selected consultant.

Packet Page. 1183

Page 6 of 45 ends

II. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
A. Scope of Services
The Services sought under this Request for Proposals (“RFP”) are set forth in more detail in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

Notwithstanding the inclusion of such Services in Exhibit “A”, the final scope of Services negotiated between City and the successful Proposer shall be set forth in the Professional Services Agreement (“Agreement”) executed by and between City and the successful Proposer. A copy of the Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by this reference.

1. Public Works Prevailing Wage and Contractor Registration (if applicable) Certain labor categories under this project may be subject to prevailing wages as identified in the State of California Labor Code commencing at sections 1720 et seq. and 1770 et seq. If applicable, employees working in these categories at the site must be paid not less than the basic hourly rates of pay and fringe benefits established by the California Department of Industrial Relations. Copies of the State of California wage schedules are available for review at www.dir.ca.gov/dlsr/. In addition, a copy of the prevailing rate of per diem wages will be made available at the City’s Finance Department upon request. The successful bidder shall post a copy of the prevailing wage rates at each job site. It shall be mandatory upon the Bidder to whom the Contract is awarded, and upon any subcontractors, to comply with all Labor Code provisions, which include but are not limited to the payment of not less than the said specified prevailing wage rates to all workers employed by them in the execution of the Contract, employment of apprentices, hours of labor and debarment of contractors and subcontractors. If the total compensation under the contract will exceed $25,000 and pursuant to Labor Code sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, all contractors and subcontractors that wish to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, or enter into a contract to perform public work must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). No bid shall be accepted, nor any contract entered into without proof of the contractor’s and subcontractors’ current registration with the DIR to perform public work. If awarded a contract, the bidder and its subcontractors, of any tier, shall maintain active registration with the DIR for the duration of the Project.

The contract awarded pursuant to this proposal may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations.

B. City Contact for this RFP
The principal contact for the City regarding this RFP will be the Purchasing Division, [email protected] or a designated representative, who will coordinate the assistance to be provided by the City to the Proposer.

C. Requests for Clarification
Packet Page. 1184

Page 7 of 45 ends

All questions, requests for interpretations or clarifications, either administrative or technical, must be requested in writing and submitted exclusively through the PlanetBids system. Questions submitted by any other method, including email or phone, will not be accepted or considered. Questions must be submitted via the PlanetBids portal.

All written questions, if answered, will be issued to all prospective proposers via notification through PlanetBids. Oral statements regarding this RFP by any person should be considered unverified information unless confirmed in writing. To ensure a response, questions must be submitted through PlanetBids before 3:00 PM local time on the date identified in the Proposal Schedule. Each Proposer is responsible for ensuring that it has received all addenda, clarifications, supplemental information, and responses to questions prior to submitting a proposal.

D. Pre-Proposal Meeting – N/A
E. Content and Format of Proposal
Proposals shall be concise, well organized and demonstrate qualifications and applicable experience. Proposals shall include one (1) electronic proposal submitted to Planetbids. Proposals shall be organized, tabbed, and numbered in the order presented below. Proposals must include page numbers for all pages in the proposal.

Proposals shall be in the following order and shall include:

1. Executive Summary: Summarize the content of your proposal in a clear and concise manner.

2. Table of Contents

3. Identification of Proposer
a. Legal name and address of the company.
b. Legal form of company (partnership, corporation).
c. If company is a wholly owned subsidiary of a “parent company,” identify the “parent company.”
d. Name, title, address and telephone number of the proposed representative to contact concerning the Proposal Submittal. e. California Business License Number

4. Staffing Resources
a. Firm Staffing and Key Personnel
(i) Provide the number of staff to be assigned to perform the Services and the names/discipline/job title of each as well as your firm’s capacity to provide additional personnel as needed.
(ii) Identify three (3) persons that shall be principally responsible for working with the City. Indicate the role and responsibility of each individual. If the Proposer is chosen Packet Page. 1185

Page 8 of 45 ends

as a finalist, these principal individuals must attend the interview and in-person presentation.
(iii) Describe proposed team organization, including
identification and responsibilities of key personnel. Please include one-page resumes.
(iv) Provide brief biographies of individuals that shall be working directly with the City.
b. Subcontractors
(i) The Proposer shall identify functions that are likely to be subcontracted and identify the subcontractor(s) that is anticipated to perform each function, if known at this time.

5. Fiscal Stability:
a. The Proposer should provide evidence of corporate stability including:
(i) A current report from any commercial credit rating service such as Dunn and Bradstreet or Experian; or
(ii) A letter from a financial institution stating a current line of credit; and
(iii) Latest audited financial statement and/or annual report that has been certified by a CPA. This information will remain confidential and is not subject to public disclosure.

6. Experience and Technical Competence:
a. Experience
(i) The Proposer shall provide a description of how the Proposer’s experience, technical and professional skills will meet the goals and fulfill the general functions identified in this RFP.
(ii) Describe the past experience of the staff to be assigned to perform the Services in performing similar services.
(iii) The Proposer shall state the number of years the firm has conducted business. Proposer must have at least four (4) years’ experience in providing the required scope of
Services for public clients.
(iv) Provide three (3) references regarding the Proposer’s experience and performance performing similar services.

Include the following information: (1) Organization/City, contact name, phone number, e-mail address; and (2)
project size and description, if applicable, and description of services.
(v) Describe the Proposer’s local experience and knowledge of City.
b. Project Specific Experience
Packet Page. 1186

Page 9 of 45 ends

(i) The Proposer shall provide a description of the three most relevant service contracts held within the last five years, one page per project, to include:
(a) Role of the firm
(b) Dollar value of the services
(c) Dollar value of the fee
(d) Description of services
(e) Staffing
(f) Duration of providing services
(g) Relationship to client
(h) Contact name, position, entity name, telephone
number, fax number and e-mail address for each
project.
(ii) If any of the following has occurred, please describe in detail:
(a) Failure to enter into a contract or professional
services agreement once selected.
(b) Withdrawal of a proposal as a result of an error.
(c) Termination or failure to complete a contract.
(d) Debarment by any municipal, county, state, federal
or local agency.
(e) Involvement in litigation, arbitration or mediation.

Conviction of the firm or its principals for violating a state or federal antitrust law by bid or proposal
rigging, collusion, or restrictive competition between
bidders or proposers, or conviction of violating any
other federal or state law related to bidding or
professional services performance. Knowing
concealment of any deficiency in the performance of
a prior contract.
(f) Falsification of information or submission of
deceptive or fraudulent statements in connection
with a contract.
(g) Willful disregard for applicable rules, laws or
regulations.

Information regarding any of the above may, at the
sole discretion of the City, be deemed to indicate an
unsatisfactory record of performance.
c. Technical Competence
(i) Description of in-house resources (i.e., computer
capabilities, software applications, modem protocol,
modeling programs, etc.)
(ii) Ability to draw upon multi-disciplinary staff to address the Services requested in this RFP.

7. Proposed Method to Accomplish the Work: Describe the technical and management approach to providing the Services to the City. Proposer should take into account the scope of the Services, goals of the City, and Packet Page. 1187

Page 10 of 45 ends

general functions required. Include a draft first year schedule of tasks, milestones, and deliverables that will provide for timely provision of the Services. In reviewing the scope of Services and goals described in Exhibit “A”, the Proposer may identify additional necessary tasks and is invited to bring these to the City’s attention within the discussion of its proposed method to accomplish the work.

8. Fee Proposal: Please provide a fee proposal for the scope of Services.

The fee proposal shall include hourly rates for all personnel for “Additional Work” (as such term is defined in the proposed Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit “B”).

9. Insurance: See the Agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, for a description of the insurance requirements
.

10. Litigation: Provide litigation history for any claims filed by your firm or against your firm related to the provision of Services in the last five (5) years.

11. Other Information: This section shall contain all other pertinent information regarding the following:
a. Demonstration of record of staffing tasks efficiently and completing projects on time and within the allocated budget.
b. Description of community involvement.
c. Description of any previous involvement with the City. d. A statement that the Proposer has not conflicts of interest in connection with providing the Services.

12. Certification of Proposal: This section shall state:
“The undersigned hereby submits its proposal and, by doing so, agrees to furnish services to the City in accordance with the Request for Proposal (RFP), and to be bound by the terms and conditions of the RFP.”

13. Appendices
F. No Deviations from the RFP
In submitting a proposal in response to this RFP, Proposer is certifying that it takes no exceptions to this RFP including, but not limited to, the Agreement. If any exceptions are taken, such exceptions must be clearly noted in the proposal and may be reason for rejection of the proposal. As such, Proposer is directed to carefully review the proposed Agreement and, in particular, the insurance and indemnification provisions therein.
[CONTINUES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
Packet Page. 1188

Page 11 of 45 ends

G. Selection Process

1. The City will evaluate proposals based on the following criteria:

CRITERIA WEIGHT (%)
a. The Proposer is properly licensed to practice in the State of California. (Pass/Fail) Pass/Fail
b. The Proposer has no conflict of interest with regard to any other work performed by the firm for the City. (Pass/Fail) Pass/Fail c. Clarity and conformance of proposal to the RFP.
10 %
d. Content of the proposal.
_25_ %
e. Proposer’s experience and performance.
20 %
f. Team members’ experience and performance.
15 %
g. Fee proposal.
25 %
h. Comments by references.
_5_ %
i. Exceptions/Deviations to RFP/Agreement Template
(Pass/Fail) Pass/Fail
j. History of litigation within the past 5 years. (Pass/Fail) Pass/Fail
TOTAL 100 %
NOTE: A ‘fail’ designation in any Pass/Fail criterion will result in disqualification of the proposal.

2. During the evaluation process, the City reserves the right, where it may serve the City's best interest, to request additional information or clarifications from Proposers, or to allow corrections of errors or omissions.

3. It is the City’s intent to select a Proposer best evidencing demonstrated competence and professional qualification to perform the Services. The City reserves the right to reject all proposals, select by proposal review only or interview as needed. Certain Proposers may be selected to make a brief presentation and oral interview after which a final selection will be made.

The successful Proposer will be selected on the basis of information provided in the RFP, in-person presentations, and the results of the City’s research and investigation. Upon selection of a Proposer, the City will endeavor to negotiate a mutually agreeable Agreement with the selected Proposer. In the event that the City is unable to reach agreement, the City will proceed, at its sole discretion, to negotiate with the next Proposer selected by the City. The City reserves the right to contract for services in the manner that most benefits the City including awarding more than one contract if desired.

4. After negotiating a proposed Agreement that is fair and reasonable, City staff will make the final recommendation to the City Council concerning the Packet Page. 1189

Page 12 of 45 ends

proposed Agreement. The City Council has the final authority to approve or reject the Agreement.

H. Protests

1. Protest Contents: Protests based on the content of the RFP shall be submitted to the City no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the scheduled proposal submittal deadline. If necessary, the proposal submittal deadline may be extended pending a resolution of the protest.

Proposer may protest a contract award if the Proposer believes that the award was inconsistent with City policy or this RFP is not in compliance with law. A protest must be filed in writing with the City (email is not acceptable) within five (5) business days after receipt of notification of the contract award. Any protest submitted after 5 p.m. of the fifth business day after notification of the contract award will be rejected by the City as invalid and the Proposer’s failure to timely file a protest shall waive the Proposer’s right to protest the contract award. The Proposer’s protest must include supporting documentation, legal authorities in support of the grounds for the protest and the name, address and telephone number of the person representing the Proposer for purposes of the protest. Any matters not set forth in the protest shall be deemed waived.

2. City Review: The City will review and evaluate the basis of the protest, provided that the protest is filed in strict conformity with the foregoing. The City shall provide the Proposer submitting the protest with a written statement concurring with or denying the protest. Action by the City relative to the protest will be final and not subject to appeal or reconsideration. The procedure and time limits set forth in this section are mandatory and are the Proposer’s sole and exclusive remedy in the event of protest. Failure to comply with these procedures shall constitute a waiver of any right to further pursue the protest, including filing a Government Code claim or legal proceedings.
[CONTINUES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
Packet Page. 1190

Page 13 of 45 ends

I. Proposal Schedule
The tentative schedule is as follows:

EVENT DATE
Release of Request for Proposal October 12, 2026
Last Day to Submit Questions for Clarification
received by the City before 3:00 PM
October 26, 2026
Clarifications Issued by City by the end of the day October 27, 2026 Deadline for Receipt of Proposals
submitted before 3:00 PM
November 9, 2026
Evaluations of Proposals Completed November 17, 2026
Interview of Finalist(s) November 18-20, 2026
Vendor Selection November 23, 2026
City Council Approval (if needed) December 16, 2026
Vendor Award (Agreement through DocuSign)
Note: Award notification is pending Council approval,
when applicable.

December 17, 2026
Purchase Order Issuance December 21, 2026
The above scheduled dates are tentative, and City retains the sole discretion to adjust the above schedule. Nothing set forth herein shall be deemed to bind City to award a contract for the above-described professional Services and City retains the sole discretion to cancel or modify any part of or all of this RFP at any time.

J. Submittal Requirements

1. General: It is strongly recommended that the Proposer submit proposals in the format identified in this RFP to allow the City to fully evaluate and compare the proposal. All requirements and questions in the RFP should be addressed and all requested data shall be supplied. The City reserves the right to request additional information which, in the City’s opinion, is necessary to assure that the Proposer’s competence, number of qualified employees, business organization, and financial resources are adequate to perform according to the Agreement.

2. Preparation: Proposals should be prepared in such a way as to provide a straightforward, concise delineation of capabilities to satisfy the requirements of this RFP. Responses should emphasize the Proposer’s demonstrated capability to perform the Services. Expensive bindings and Packet Page. 1191

Page 14 of 45 ends

promotional materials, etc., are not necessary or desired. However, technical literature that supports the approach to providing the Services and work plan should be forwarded as part of the proposal. Emphasis should be concentrated on completeness, approach to the work and clarity of proposal.

3. Site Examination: Proposers may visit the City and its physical facilities to determine the local conditions which may in any way affect the performance of the work; familiarize themselves with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and codes affecting the performance of the work; make such investigations, as it may deem necessary for performance of the Services at its proposal price within the terms of the Agreement; and correlate its observations, investigations, and determinations with the requirements of the Agreement.

4. Authorization: The proposal shall be signed by an individual, partner, officer or officers authorized to execute legal documents on behalf of the Proposer.

5. Confidentiality of Proposal: Pursuant to Michaelis, Montanari, & Johnson v. Superior Court (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1065, proposals submitted in response to this RFP shall be held confidential by City and shall not be subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (Cal. Government Code section 6250 et seq.) until after either City and the successful Proposer have completed negotiations and entered into an Agreement or City has rejected all proposals. All correspondence with the City including responses to this RFP shall become the exclusive property of the City and shall become public records under the California Public Records Act.

Furthermore, the City shall have no liability to the Proposer or other party as a result of any public disclosure of any proposal or the Agreement.

If a Proposer desires to exclude a portion of its proposal from disclosure under the California Public Records Act, the Proposer must mark it as such and state the specific provision in the California Public Records Act which provides the exemption as well as the factual basis for claiming the exemption. For example, if a Proposer submits trade secret information, the Proposer must plainly mark the information as “Trade Secret” and refer to the appropriate section of the California Public Records Act which provides the exemption as well as the factual basis for claiming the exemption. Although the California Public Records Act recognizes that certain confidential trade secret information may be protected from disclosure, the City may not be in a position to establish that the information that a Proposer submits is a trade secret. If a request is made for information marked “Confidential”, “Trade Secret” or “Proprietary” (“Proprietary Information”), the City will provide Proposers who submitted the information with reasonable notice to seek protection from disclosure by a court of competent jurisdiction. Proposer shall have five (5) working days after receipt of such notice to give City written notice of Proposer's objection to the City's release of Proprietary Information. Proposer shall Packet Page. 1192

Page 15 of 45 ends

indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, and its officers, directors, employees, and agents from and against all liability, loss, cost or expense (including attorney's fees) arising out of a legal action brought to compel the release of Proprietary Information.

Proposals which indiscriminately identify all or most of the proposal as exempt from disclosure without justification may be deemed unresponsive and disqualified from further participation in this procurement.

6. Submittal Instructions: Electronic PDF file format via Planetbids. Please allow time for system to process your proposal. The proposal must be received before 3:00pm local time, on or before November 9, 2026. The City shall not be responsible for proposals that are not received on time.

The City will not be responsible for and will not accept late bids due to slow internet connections, or incomplete transmissions.

K. General Conditions

1. Federal Requirements: If the Services are funded through a federal funding source, the successful Proposer and its subcontractors shall be required to take cognizance of and comply with all requirements set forth in the Federal Requirements, attached hereto as Exhibit “C”, and incorporated herein by this reference.

2. Amendments to RFP: The City reserves the right to amend the RFP and issue to all Proposers an addendum.

3. Amendments to Proposals: Unless specifically requested by the City, no amendment, addendum or modification shall be accepted after a proposal has been submitted to City. If a change to a proposal that has been submitted is desired, the submitted proposal must be withdrawn and the replacement proposal submitted prior to the deadline stated herein for receiving proposals.

4. Non-Responsive Proposals: A proposal may be considered nonresponsive if conditional, incomplete, or if it contains alterations of form, additions not called for, or other irregularities that may constitute a material change to the proposal.

5. Costs for Preparing: The City shall not compensate any Proposer for the cost of preparing any proposal, and all materials submitted with a proposal shall become the property of the City. The City will retain all proposals submitted and may use any idea in a proposal regardless of whether that proposal is selected.

6. Cancellation of RFP: City reserves the right to cancel this RFP at any time prior to contract award without obligation in any manner for proposal preparation, interview, fee negotiation or other marketing costs associated with this RFP.

7. Price Validity: Prices provided by Proposers in response to this RFP are valid for 180 days from the proposal due date. The City intends to award Packet Page. 1193

Page 16 of 45 ends

the contract within this time but may request an extension from the Proposers to hold pricing, until negotiations are complete, and the contract is awarded.

8. No Commitment to Award: Issuance of this RFP and receipt of proposals does not commit the City to award a contract. City expressly reserves the right to postpone the proposal for its own convenience, to accept or reject any or all proposals received in response to this RFP, to negotiate with more than one Proposer concurrently, or to cancel all or part of this RFP.

9. Right to Negotiate and/or Reject Proposals: City reserves the right to negotiate any price or provision, task order or service, accept any part or all of any proposals, waive any irregularities, and to reject any and all, or parts of any and all proposals, whenever, in the sole opinion of City, such action shall serve its best interests and those of the tax-paying public. The Proposers are encouraged to submit their best prices in their proposals, and City intends to negotiate only with the Proposer(s) whose proposal most closely meets City’s requirements at the lowest estimated cost. The Agreement, if any is awarded, shall go to the Proposer whose proposal best meets City’s requirements.

10. Non-Discrimination: The City does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, age, ancestry, medical condition, disability or gender in consideration for an award of contract.

11. Minor Irregularities: ity reserves the right to waive any minor irregularity, informality, or non-substantive deficiency in a proposal. A minor irregularity is one that:
a. Does not affect the responsiveness of the proposal;
b. Is merely a matter of form or format;
c. Does not change the relative standing or otherwise prejudice other proposals;
d. Does not change the meaning or scope of the RFP;
e. Is trivial, negligible, or immaterial in nature;
f. Does not reflect a material change in the work; or
g. Does not constitute a substantial reservation against a requirement or provision.

In such cases, the Proposer may be notified of the deficiency and provided an opportunity to correct the irregularity, defect, or variation, or the City may elect to waive the deficiency and accept the proposal. The decision to waive a deficiency shall not modify or compromise the overall intent of the RFP or excuse the Proposer from full compliance with all material requirements if awarded a contract.

Publication Date of RFP: October 12, 2026
[END OF SECTION]
Packet Page. 1194

Page 17 of 45 ends

EXHIBIT A

PROPOSED SCOPE OF SERVICES/SCHEDULE OF CHARGES
Phase 1 – Baseline and Screening
Task 1: Property & Business Inventory
The City will provide its preliminary inventory and reconciliation. The Consultant must validate, supplement, and complete it for properties and businesses materially associated with:
▪ Warehousing, logistics, distribution, and freight forwarding; ▪ Industrial and commercial storage, including outdoor, container, trailer, and equipment storage;
▪ Truck parking; and
▪ Related wholesales commercial, and industrial activities directly associated with the categories above.

To the extent practicable, the inventory must identify, for each property or business:
▪ Address and APN;
▪ Property owner and business operator;
▪ Building square footage and relevant site acreage;
▪ Business-registration account and existing classification; ▪ Reported tax base and current business-tax amount paid; ▪ Applicable permits and zoning/land-use classification; ▪ Operating status and primary versus accessory use; and ▪ Truck parking spaces, where applicable.

Consultant should identify material data limitations and must distinguish verified information from estimates.

Task 2: Existing Revenue & Compliance Analysis
The Consultant must analyze existing City revenue associated with Task 1 activities. This includes:
▪ Business-tax and business-registration revenue;
▪ Applicable classifications under SMBC Chapter 5.04;
▪ Reported tax bases, amounts paid, exemptions, and account status; and ▪ Permitting, regulatory, and other materially relevant revenue.

In coordination with Finance & Management Services and other City departments, the Consultant must determine whether identified businesses appear to be:
▪ Properly registered and properly classified;
▪ Reporting the appropriate tax base;
▪ Current in payments; and
▪ Accurately reflected in City records.

The Consultant should also identify data gaps that prevent reliable conclusions.

Task 3: Revenue Leakage Analysis
Packet Page. 1195

Page 18 of 45 ends

The Consultant must identify and, where reasonably practicable, quantify potential revenue leakage under existing law, including:
▪ Unregistered or misclassified businesses;
▪ Reported tax bases warranting review;
▪ Ownership or operational changes not reflected in City records; ▪ Inactive accounts; and
▪ Discrepancies among property, registration, permitting, and land-use records.

The Consultant must distinguish (1) existing-law recovery opportunities from (2) revenue requiring new or modified governmental action. A data discrepancy must not be treated as collectible revenue without sufficient factual support.

Task 4: Business-Tax Classification Review
The Consultant must evaluate whether existing business-tax classifications appropriately reflect current warehouse, logistics, storage, distribution, freight-forwarding, and related activities. The review must address:
▪ Classification structure;
▪ Treatment of multi-tenant and mixed-use facilities; and ▪ Exemptions and exclusions.

For any material modification, the Consultant must identify existing revenue, revenue affected or credited, gross additional revenue, and estimated net new revenue. The Consultant must not assume that modernization produces additional revenue.

Task 5: Revenue Opportunity Screening
The Consultant must screen potential revenue opportunities in three categories. Each category must be evaluated separately where operating characteristics differ materially. ▪ Warehouse and Logistics: structures such as square-footage, gross-receipts, threshold, tiered, hybrid, or activity-based measures, and modernization of existing classifications. ▪ Storage: whether storage activities are adequately captured under existing classifications, and potential bases such as gross receipts, square footage, units, or outdoor spaces. ▪ Truck Parking: identification of existing facilities, spaces, operators, registration status, and existing revenue. Potential structures include per-space, gross-receipts, permit, or regulatory measures. Screening must consider effects on truck parking supply, cost, and availability of legal truck parking. The Consultant must not assume a truck-parking charge should be imposed.

For each opportunity screened, the Consultant must provide:
▪ The applicable payer;
▪ The potential base;
▪ An order-of-magnitude gross revenue range;
▪ Principal economic, administrative, and legal considerations; and ▪ A recommendation on whether the opportunity is material enough to warrant Phase 2 analysis.

Task 6: Cost-Recovery Screening
Packet Page. 1196

Page 19 of 45 ends

The Consultant must conduct a screening-level review of whether the City appropriately recovers allowable costs associated with industrial and logistics activities. Functions in scope are:
▪ Business registration, planning and entitlement, building permits, plan review, and inspections;
▪ Code enforcement and transportation-related services; and ▪ Infrastructure and stormwater.

The review must compare existing fees to available City cost information, including the most recent fee study or cost allocation plan where available. The Consultant must distinguish costrecovery mechanisms from taxes and must identify functions where a separate cost-of-service or fee nexus study may be warranted. Preparation of such studies is excluded from this Scope.

Task 7: Development-Related & Future Revenue
The Consultant may evaluate development-related revenue and the fiscal implications of reasonably foreseeable industrial and logistics development where it could materially affect the City's fiscal position. The analysis must distinguish, to the extent information is available:
▪ Existing operating facilities;
▪ Approved, entitled, and permitted projects;
▪ Projects under construction; and
▪ Other reasonably foreseeable projects.

One-time and future revenue must be reported separately from existing recurring revenue. This Task is not a comprehensive economic-development or land-use forecast.

Task 8: Limited Public-Property Screening
The Consultant may conduct a limited screening of known City-owned properties for compatible revenue-generating uses such as truck or trailer parking, equipment storage, or commercial storage. For any relevant property, the Consultant may identify:
▪ General compatibility;
▪ Preliminary revenue potential;
▪ Major constraints; and
▪ Whether a separate property-specific study may be warranted.

The screening is preliminary and is not a comprehensive asset-management or land-development study.

The results of Tasks 1 through 8 must be documented in the Baseline and Screening Report.

After reviewing that report, the City will select up to five (5) opportunities for detailed analysis in Phase 2. Only those opportunities will be fully modeled and analyzed. All others will be summarized at the screening level in the Final Study.

Phase 2 – Decision Point & Detailed Analysis of Selected Opportunities Task 9: Revenue Modeling & Scenario Analysis
For each selected opportunity, the Consultant must develop a transparent model identifying:
▪ The starting inventory and the taxable or chargeable base; ▪ Qualification, rate, and collection assumptions;
Packet Page. 1197

Page 20 of 45 ends

▪ Existing revenue and any replacement or credit;
▪ One-time and ongoing costs; and
▪ Gross revenue, net new revenue, and confidence level.

Where appropriate, the Consultant must present low, baseline, and upper scenarios. A scenario must not be presented as a forecast unless the data and assumptions support one.

Task 10: Economic Impact & Competitiveness
For each selected opportunity, the Consultant must evaluate reasonably foreseeable effects on:
▪ Business operating and occupancy costs;
▪ Investment, development, and leasing;
▪ Employment and industrial land values;
▪ Industrial competitiveness; and
▪ Truck parking availability.

The Consultant must compare the City to up to six (6) relevant jurisdictions, accounting for material differences in tax bases, rates, exemptions, classifications, and market conditions.

Analysis must be qualitative and semi-quantitative; regional input-output modeling is not required.

Task 11: Administrative Feasibility & Implementation
For each selected opportunity, the Consultant must evaluate the requirements and costs of:
▪ Registration and taxpayer/facility identification;
▪ Square-footage or space verification and annual reporting; ▪ Data maintenance, collection, auditing, appeals, and enforcement; and ▪ Staffing, technology, and third-party data.

The Consultant must also estimate the implementation timeline and distinguish requirements for existing-law recovery, tax modernization, new taxes, cost-recovery fees, and developmentrelated charges.

Task 12: Revenue Opportunity Matrix
The Consultant must prepare a Revenue Opportunity Matrix using a consistent methodology.

Required Field Content
Opportunity Description
Gross Revenue Estimated annual or one-time amount
Net New Revenue After offsets and costs
Recurring Yes/No/Variable
Cost One-time and ongoing
Legal Path Preliminary assumption used for modeling, based on professional experience. Not a formal legal opinion.

Implementation Principal requirements and timing
Economic Considerations Principal effects
Confidence High/Medium/Low, with defined criteria
Supporting detail, where available, must include revenue type, existing revenue impact, and key assumptions. The Matrix must distinguish among:
▪ Existing revenue recovery;
▪ Net-new recurring revenue;
Packet Page. 1198

Page 21 of 45 ends

▪ One-time revenue;
▪ Cost avoidance or recovery; and
▪ Future revenue.

The results of Tasks 9 through 12 must be documented in the Draft Study and Final Study.

Ongoing Tasks
Task 13: Legal Coordination
For each opportunity in the Revenue Opportunity Matrix, the Consultant must identify the assumed legal pathway used in its analysis, such as the general type of mechanism and any anticipated approval requirements. Assumed legal pathways are modeling assumptions based on the Consultant’s professional experience, are not legal opinions, and must be labeled as such.

The City Attorney’s Office will confirm, revise, or supplement each assumed pathway. Where the City Attorney’s determination differs from the Consultant’s assumptions, the Final Study must reflect the City Attorney’s determination, and the Consultant must revise affected estimates accordingly.

Task 14: Data Sources & Methodology
For all material estimates, the Consultant must identify:
▪ The data source, date, and coverage;
▪ Known limitations and reconciliation methodology;
▪ Assumptions; and
▪ Confidence level.

The Consultant must distinguish verified, estimated, and modeled data.

Task 15: Project Management and Meetings
The Consultant must attend:
▪ One kickoff meeting;
▪ Biweekly progress calls;
▪ One Phase 2 selection meeting; and
▪ One presentation to the Mayor and City Council.

City Responsibilities
The City will:
▪ Designate a Project Manager;
▪ Provide its preliminary inventory and reconciliation; ▪ Provide business-registration and revenue extracts, relevant permit, planning, and GIS records, and the current fee schedule and most recent fee study, as available; and ▪ Respond to data requests within ten (10) business days.

Deliverables Due From Consultant

1. Project Work Plan: methodology, schedule, staffing, data requirements, and assumptions;
Packet Page. 1199

Page 22 of 45 ends

2. Baseline and Screening Report: results of Tasks 1-8, including the Consultant’s recommendations for Phase 2.

3. Draft Study: results of all tasks, including the draft Revenue Opportunity Matrix.

4. Final Study: the draft study revised with City Attorney corrections, with executive summary, final matrix, methodology, data sources, limitations, and editable models to City staff.

5. Council Presentation: one presentation to the Mayor and City Council.

Activity Schedule
Target Period Activity
December 2026/January 2027 Kickoff; Work Plan
March 2027 Baseline and Screening Report; City selects
Phase 2 opportunities
April 2027 Draft Study; City factual and legal review
May 2027 Final Study; Council presentation
All service by Consultant must be completed by June 30, 2027.

Excluded Services from Scope
▪ Campaign strategy, election or campaign management, political consulting, and voter persuasion;
▪ Polling and campaign communications;
▪ Advocacy for or against tax, fee, or ballot measure;
▪ Legal determinations; and
▪ Preparation of cost-of-service or fee nexus studies.

Confidentiality and Data Use
Business-tax and registration data furnished by the City is confidential. It must be used solely for this study and must not be disclosed except as authorized by the City.

Work Product
All reports, models, databases, and schedules developed under this Agreement must be provided to the City. Financial models must be delivered in editable format with documentation and training sufficient for the City to reproduce material calculations.

Independence
The Consultant must disclose any actual or potential conflict involving warehouse or logistics operators, developers, property owners, trade or advocacy organizations, or other parties that could benefit from the study’s outcome.

Final Standard for the Study
The Final Study must enable the Mayor and City Council to answer, based on the best reasonably available information:
▪ what revenue the City receives from this sector;
▪ what revenue is authorized but not captured;
▪ whether classifications are adequate;
▪ what new mechanisms could generate meaningful net new revenue; Packet Page. 1200

Page 23 of 45 ends

▪ what costs may be recovered;
▪ what future revenue may reasonably be anticipated;
▪ what each opportunity would cost to implement;
▪ what economic effects could result;
▪ what approvals would be required; and
▪ how confident the City should be in each estimate.

Packet Page. 1201

Page 24 of 45 ends

PROPOSAL CHECKLIST
(as detailed in Chapter II. Request for Proposals, Section E. of the RFP) # REQUIRED DOCUMENT INCLUDED IN

BID PACKAGE
1 Required - Proposal
Technical Proposal
• Executive Summary (E.1)
• Table of Contents (E.2)
• Identification of Proposer (E.3)
• Staffing Resources (e.g., Assigned Personnel experience) (E.4) • Experience and Technical Competence (E.6)
• Proposed Method to Accomplish the Work (E.7)
• Litigation History (if any) (E.10)
• Other Information (pertinent to proposal) (E.11)
➢ Completion of other similar projects;
➢ Community involvement (if any);
➢ Prior projects, agreements, involvement with the City (if any); ➢ No Conflict-of-Interest statement.
• Certification of Proposal (E.12)
➢ “The undersigned hereby submits its proposal and, by doing so, agrees to furnish services to the City in accordance with the Request for Proposal (RFP), and to be bound by the terms and conditions of the RFP.”
• Appendices (E.13)
• Statement of “No Deviations from RFP” (F.)
➢ If proposer does not take any exceptions or deviations from the terms and conditions indicated in the agreement, then the proposer must indicate this information by making a statement within the proposal documents.

Fiscal Stability (E.5)
• Current report from any Commercial Credit Rating Service (e.g. Dunn & Bradstreet);or
• Line of credit; and
• Financial Statement.
☐
2 Required - Fee Proposal (E.8) ☐
3 Required - Certificate of Insurance (E.9) ☐
4 Required - Vendor Quote Form ☐
5 Required - Acknowledgement of Insurance Requirements ☐ 6 Required - Applicable Licenses ☐
7 Optional - DBE Form ☐
Submittal Instructions: Electronic PDF file format via Planetbids on the date and time stated in the RFP.

Please allow time for system to process your proposal. The City shall not be responsible for proposals that are not received on time. The City will not be responsible for and will not accept late bids due to slow internet connection, or incomplete transmissions.

Packet Page. 1202

Page 25 of 45 ends

CERTIFICATION OF PROPOSAL
(Required Submittal)
VENDOR NAME: PHONE:

ADDRESS:
[***RFP NUM & NAME***]
The undersigned hereby submits its proposal and, by doing so, agrees to furnish services to the City in accordance with the Request for Proposal (RFP), and to be bound by the terms and conditions of the RFP.

The undersigned further certifies that they are legally authorized to submit this proposal and to bind the entity on whose behalf this proposal is submitted, and that the information contained herein is true and correct to the best of their knowledge.

This proposal shall remain valid for a period of not less than 120 calendar days from the date of submission.
☐ This proposal includes exceptions to the RFP.

If checked, please identify the page number(s) and section(s) where exceptions appear:
☐ This proposal does not include exceptions to the RFP.

SUBMITTED BY: DATE: ___________________
(Authorized Representative Signature)
PRINT NAME: TITLE: ___________________
Packet Page. 1203

Page 26 of 45 ends

VENDOR QUOTE FORM
(Required Submittal)
VENDOR NAME: PHONE:

ADDRESS:
[***RFP NUM & NAME***]
The undersigned hereby submits the following price quote in response to the above-referenced RFP. Pricing includes all labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and services necessary to perform the work described in the RFP.

ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST
TOTAL
AMOUNT

TOTAL VENDOR QUOTE
Total Number of Additional Pages:

I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided herein is true and correct.

SUBMITTED BY: DATE: ___________________
(Authorized Representative Signature)
PRINT NAME: TITLE: ___________________
LIC. NO: CLASSIFICATION: DIR REG. NO: _______________
Packet Page. 1204

Page 27 of 45 ends

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
(Required Submittal)
VENDOR NAME: PHONE:

ADDRESS:
[***RFP NUM & NAME***]
The Proposer shall demonstrate the willingness and ability to provide the required insurance coverage as set forth in the City requirements within ten (10) calendar days of notification of selection for contract award. The insurance requirements are detailed below:

COVERAGE TYPE MINIMUM POLICY LIMITS
Commercial General Liability $2,000,000 per occurrence/$4,000,000 aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage
Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage
Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence
Professional Liability $1,000,000 per claim and aggregate (errors and omissions)
By signing below, the Proposer acknowledges that they have reviewed the City’s insurance requirements and confirm their ability to meet these requirements within the specified timeframe.

SUBMITTED BY: DATE: ___________________
(Authorized Representative Signature)
PRINT NAME: TITLE: ___________________
Packet Page. 1205

Page 28 of 45 ends

EXHIBIT B

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
AND [***INSERT NAME***]
This Agreement is made and entered into as of [***INSERT MONTH***] [***INSERT DATE***], 2024 by and between the City of San Bernardino, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and operating under the laws of the State of California with its principal place of business at Vanir Tower, 290 North D Street, San Bernardino, CA 92401 (“City”), and [***INSERT NAME***], a [***INSERT TYPE OF ENTITY AND STATE - CORPORATION, PARTNERSHIP, SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP OR OTHER LEGAL ENTITY***] with its principal place of business at [***INSERT ADDRESS***] (hereinafter referred to as “Consultant”). City and Consultant are hereinafter sometimes referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
A. City is a public agency of the State of California and is in need of professional services for the following project:
[***INSERT DESCRIPTION***] (hereinafter referred to as “the Project”).

B. Consultant is duly licensed and has the necessary qualifications to provide such services.

C. The Parties desire by this Agreement to establish the terms for City to retain Consultant to provide the services described herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

AGREEMENT

1. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference.

2. Services. Consultant shall provide the City with the services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”

3. Professional Practices. All professional services to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by personnel identified in their proposal. Consultant warrants that Consultant is familiar with all laws that may affect its performance of this Agreement and shall advise City of any changes in any laws that may affect Consultant’s performance of this Agreement. Consultant further represents that no City employee will provide any services under this Agreement.

4. Compensation.

Packet Page. 1206

Page 29 of 45 ends

a. Subject to paragraph 4(b) below, the City shall pay for such services in accordance with the Schedule of Charges set forth in Exhibit “A.” [***Alternatively, the compensation schedule may be described here***]
b. In no event shall the total amount paid for services rendered by Consultant under this Agreement exceed the sum of $[***INSERT NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT***]. This amount is to cover all related costs, and the City will not pay any additional fees for printing expenses. Consultant may submit invoices to City for approval. Said invoice shall be based on the total of all Consultant’s services which have been completed to City’s sole satisfaction. City shall pay Consultant’s invoice within forty-five (45) days from the date City receives said invoice.

The invoice shall describe in detail the services performed and the associated time for completion.

Any additional services approved and performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be designated as “Additional Services” and shall identify the number of the authorized change order, where applicable, on all invoices.

5. Additional Work. If changes in the work seem merited by Consultant or the City, and informal consultations with the other party indicate that a change is warranted, it shall be processed in the following manner: a letter outlining the changes shall be forwarded to the City by Consultant with a statement of estimated changes in fee or time schedule. An amendment to this Agreement shall be prepared by the City and executed by both Parties before performance of such services, or the City will not be required to pay for the changes in the scope of work. Such amendment shall not render ineffective or invalidate unaffected portions of this Agreement. a. Adjustments. No retroactive price adjustments will be considered.

Additionally, no price increases will be permitted during the first year of this Agreement, unless agreed to by City and Consultant in writing. [***Additionally, the City may include a CPI price adjustment, delete the following language if such adjustment will not be used***] Annual increases shall not exceed the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index- All urban consumers, All Items - (Series ID# CUURS49CSA0) Riverside-San Bernardino – Ontario, CA areas for the twelve (12) month period January through January immediately preceding the adjustments and be subject to City’s sole discretion and approved (if needed) for budget funding by the City Council.

6. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and continue through the completion of services as set forth in Exhibit “A,” unless the Agreement is previously terminated as provided for herein (“Term”). [***Alternatively, the term can be spelled out in this section without reference to the Exhibit***]

7. Maintenance of Records; Audits.
a. Records of Consultant’s services relating to this Agreement shall be maintained in accordance with generally recognized accounting principles and shall be made available to City for inspection and/or audit at mutually convenient times for a period of four (4) years from the Effective Date.
b. Books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred shall be maintained by Consultant and made available at all reasonable times during the contract period and for four (4) years from the date of final payment under the contract for inspection by City.

Packet Page. 1207

Page 30 of 45 ends

8. Time of Performance. Consultant shall perform its services in a prompt and timely manner and shall commence performance upon receipt of written notice from the City to proceed.

Consultant shall complete the services required hereunder within Term.

9. Delays in Performance.
a. Neither City nor Consultant shall be considered in default of this Agreement for delays in performance caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the nonperforming Party. For purposes of this Agreement, such circumstances include a Force Majeure Event. A Force Majeure Event shall mean an event that materially affects the Consultant’s performance and is one or more of the following: (1) Acts of God or other natural disasters occurring at the project site; (2) terrorism or other acts of a public enemy; (3) orders of governmental authorities (including, without limitation, unreasonable and unforeseeable delay in the issuance of permits or approvals by governmental authorities that are required for the services); and (4) pandemics, epidemics or quarantine restrictions. For purposes of this section, “orders of governmental authorities,” includes ordinances, emergency proclamations and orders, rules to protect the public health, welfare and safety. b. Should a Force Majeure Event occur, the non-performing Party shall, within a reasonable time of being prevented from performing, give written notice to the other Party describing the circumstances preventing continued performance and the efforts being made to resume performance of this Agreement. Delays shall not entitle Consultant to any additional compensation regardless of the Party responsible for the delay. c. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City may still terminate this Agreement in accordance with the termination provisions of this Agreement.

10. Compliance with Law.
a. Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of the federal, state and local government, including Cal/OSHA requirements. b. If required, Consultant shall assist the City, as requested, in obtaining and maintaining all permits required of Consultant by federal, state and local regulatory agencies. c. If applicable, Consultant is responsible for all costs of clean up and/ or removal of hazardous and toxic substances spilled as a result of his or her services or operations performed under this Agreement.

11. Standard of Care. Consultant’s services will be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and principles and in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions. Consultant’s performance shall conform in all material respects to the requirements of the Scope of Work and meet the Key Performance Indicators, attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, and incorporated herein by this reference. [***IF NO PERFORMANCE

INDICATORS WILL BE USED DELETE THE ABOVE LANGUAGE AND ACCOMPANYING EXHIBIT B***]

12. Conflicts of Interest. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall at all times maintain a duty of loyalty and a fiduciary duty to the City and shall not accept payment from Packet Page. 1208

Page 31 of 45 ends

or employment with any person or entity which will constitute a conflict of interest with the City.

13. City Business Certificate. Consultant shall, prior to execution of this Agreement, obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement a valid business registration certificate from the City pursuant to Title 5 of the City’s Municipal Code and any and all other licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance, and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required of Consultant to practice his/her profession, skill, or business.

14. Assignment and Subconsultant. Consultant shall not assign, sublet, or transfer this Agreement or any rights under or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the City, which may be withheld for any reason. Any attempt to so assign or so transfer without such consent shall be void and without legal effect and shall constitute grounds for termination.

Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. Nothing contained herein shall prevent Consultant from employing independent associates and subconsultants as Consultant may deem appropriate to assist in the performance of services hereunder.

15. Independent Consultant. Consultant is retained as an independent contractor and is not an employee of City. No employee or agent of Consultant shall become an employee of City. The work to be performed shall be in accordance with the work described in this Agreement, subject to such directions and amendments from City as herein provided. Any personnel performing the work governed by this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant’s exclusive direction and control. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance under this Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation insurance.

16. Insurance. Consultant shall not commence work for the City until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this section. a. Additional Insured
The City of San Bernardino, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be named as additional insureds on Consultant’s and its subconsultants’ policies of commercial general liability and automobile liability insurance using the endorsements and forms specified herein or exact equivalents.
b. Commercial General Liability
(i) The Consultant shall take out and maintain, during the performance of all work under this Agreement, in amounts not less than specified herein, Commercial General Liability Insurance, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City. (ii) Coverage for Commercial General Liability insurance shall be at least as broad as the following:

Packet Page. 1209

Page 32 of 45 ends

Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (Occurrence Form CG 00 01) or exact equivalent.
(iii) Commercial General Liability Insurance must include coverage for the following:
(1) Bodily Injury and Property Damage
(2) Personal Injury/Advertising Injury
(3) Premises/Operations Liability
(4) Products/Completed Operations Liability
(5) Aggregate Limits that Apply per Project
(6) Explosion, Collapse and Underground (UCX) exclusion deleted
(7) Contractual Liability with respect to this Contract (8) Broad Form Property Damage
(9) Independent Consultants Coverage
(iv) The policy shall contain no endorsements or provisions limiting coverage for (1) contractual liability; (2) cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another; (3) products/completed operations liability; or (4) contain any other exclusion contrary to the Agreement.
(v) The policy shall give City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, and City-designated volunteers additional insured status using ISO endorsement forms CG 20 10 10 01 and 20 37 10 01, or endorsements providing the exact same coverage.
(vi) The general liability program may utilize either deductibles or provide coverage excess of a self-insured retention, subject to written approval by the City, and provided that such deductibles shall not apply to the City as an additional insured. c. Automobile Liability
(i) At all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement, the Consultant shall maintain Automobile Liability Insurance for bodily injury and property damage including coverage for owned, non-owned and hired vehicles, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City.
(ii) Coverage for automobile liability insurance shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 00 01 covering automobile liability (Coverage Symbol 1, any auto).
(iii) The policy shall give City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents and City designated volunteers additional insured status.

Packet Page. 1210

Page 33 of 45 ends

(iv) Subject to written approval by the City, the automobile liability program may utilize deductibles, provided that such deductibles shall not apply to the City as an additional insured, but not a self-insured retention.
d. Workers’ Compensation/Employer’s Liability
(i) Consultant certifies that he/she is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and he/she will comply with such provisions before commencing work under this Agreement.
(ii) To the extent Consultant has employees at any time during the term of this Agreement, at all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement, the Consultant shall maintain full compensation insurance for all persons employed directly by him/her to carry out the work contemplated under this Agreement, all in accordance with the “Workers’ Compensation and Insurance Act,” Division IV of the Labor Code of the State of California and any acts amendatory thereof, and Employer’s Liability Coverage in amounts indicated herein. Consultant shall require all subconsultants to obtain and maintain, for the period required by this Agreement, workers’ compensation coverage of the same type and limits as specified in this section.
e. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions)
At all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement the Consultant shall maintain professional liability or Errors and Omissions insurance appropriate to its profession, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City and in an amount indicated herein.

This insurance shall be endorsed to include contractual liability applicable to this Agreement and shall be written on a policy form coverage specifically designed to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant. “Covered Professional Services” as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this Agreement. The policy must “pay on behalf of” the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend. f. Privacy/Network Security (Cyber)
At all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement, the Consultant shall maintain privacy/network security insurance for: (1) privacy breaches, (2) system breaches, (3) denial or loss of service, and the (4) introduction, implantation or spread of malicious software code, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City. g. Aviation and/or Drone Liability [***INSERT “NOT APPLICABLE” IF NOT REQUIRED***]
At all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement, the Consultant shall maintain Aviation and/or Drone Liability insurance for bodily injury and property damage, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City.
h. Minimum Policy Limits Required
(i) The following insurance limits are required for the Agreement:

Combined Single Limit
Packet Page. 1211

Page 34 of 45 ends

Commercial General Liability $2,000,000 per occurrence/$4,000,000 aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury, and property
damage
Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage
Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence
Professional Liability $1,000,000 per claim and aggregate (errors and omissions)
Cyber Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence and aggregate Aviation and/or Drone Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence limit [***INSERT NOT APPLICABLE IF NOT REQUIRED***]
(ii) Defense costs shall be payable in addition to the limits. (iii) Requirements of specific coverage or limits contained in this section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits, or other requirement, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Any available coverage shall be provided to the parties required to be named as Additional Insured pursuant to this Agreement. i. Evidence Required
Prior to execution of the Agreement, the Consultant shall file with the City evidence of insurance from an insurer or insurers certifying to the coverage of all insurance required herein. Such evidence shall include original copies of the ISO CG 00 01 (or insurer’s equivalent) signed by the insurer’s representative and Certificate of Insurance (Acord Form 25-S or equivalent), together with required endorsements. All evidence of insurance shall be signed by a properly authorized officer, agent, or qualified representative of the insurer and shall certify the names of the insured, any additional insureds, where appropriate, the type and amount of the insurance, the location and operations to which the insurance applies, and the expiration date of such insurance. j. Policy Provisions Required
(i) Consultant shall provide the City at least thirty (30) days prior written notice of cancellation of any policy required by this Agreement, except that the Consultant shall provide at least ten (10) days prior written notice of cancellation of any such policy due to non-payment of the premium. If any of the required coverage is cancelled or expires during the term of this Agreement, the Consultant shall deliver renewal certificate(s) including the General Liability Additional Insured Endorsement to the City at least ten (10) days prior to the effective date of cancellation or expiration.

Packet Page. 1212

Page 35 of 45 ends

(ii) The Commercial General Liability Policy and Automobile Policy shall each contain a provision stating that Consultant’s policy is primary insurance and that any insurance, self-insurance or other coverage maintained by the City or any named insureds shall not be called upon to contribute to any loss. (iii) The retroactive date (if any) of each policy is to be no later than the effective date of this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain such coverage continuously for a period of at least three years after the completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall purchase a one (1) year extended reporting period A) if the retroactive date is advanced past the effective date of this Agreement; B) if the policy is cancelled or not renewed; or C) if the policy is replaced by another claims-made policy with a retroactive date subsequent to the effective date of this Agreement. (iv) All required insurance coverages, except for the professional liability coverage, shall contain or be endorsed to provide waiver of subrogation in favor of the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.
(v) The limits set forth herein shall apply separately to each insured against whom claims are made or suits are brought, except with respect to the limits of liability. Further the limits set forth herein shall not be construed to relieve the Consultant from liability in excess of such coverage, nor shall it limit the Consultant’s indemnification obligations to the City and shall not preclude the City from taking such other actions available to the City under other provisions of the Agreement or law. k. Qualifying Insurers
(i) All policies required shall be issued by acceptable insurance companies, as determined by the City, which satisfy the following minimum requirements:
(1) Each such policy shall be from a company or
companies with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII and admitted to transact in the business of insurance in the State of California, or otherwise allowed to place insurance through surplus line brokers under applicable provisions of the California Insurance Code or any federal law.
l Additional Insurance Provisions
(i) The foregoing requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by Consultant, and any approval of said insurance by the City, is not intended to and shall not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the provisions concerning indemnification.

Packet Page. 1213

Page 36 of 45 ends

(ii) If at any time during the life of the Agreement, any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement. (iii) The City may require the Consultant to provide complete copies of all insurance policies in effect for the duration of the Project. (iv) Neither the City nor the City Council, nor any member of the City Council, nor any of the officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall be personally responsible for any liability arising under or by virtue of this Agreement. m. Subconsultant Insurance Requirements. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractors or subconsultants to commence work on any subcontract until they have provided evidence satisfactory to the City that they have secured all insurance required under this section. Policies of commercial general liability insurance provided by such subcontractors or subconsultants shall be endorsed to name the City as an additional insured using ISO form CG 20 38 04 13 or an endorsement providing the exact same coverage. If requested by Consultant, City may approve different scopes or minimum limits of insurance for particular subcontractors or subconsultants.

17. Indemnification.
a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall defend (with counsel reasonably approved by the City), indemnify and hold the City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, and authorized volunteers free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, suits, actions, proceedings, costs, expenses, liability, judgments, awards, decrees, settlements, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, (collectively, “Claims”) in any manner arising out of, pertaining to, or incident to any alleged acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, subcontractors, consultants or agents in connection with the performance of the Consultant’s services, the Project, or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all damages, expert witness fees, attorneys’ fees and other related costs and expenses. This indemnification clause excludes Claims arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the City, the City Council, members of the City Council, its employees, or authorized volunteers. Consultant’s indemnification obligation shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.
b. If Consultant’s obligation to defend, indemnify, and/or hold harmless arises out of Consultant’s performance as a “design professional” (as that term is defined under Civil Code section 2782.8), then, and only to the extent required by Civil Code section 2782.8, which is fully incorporated herein, Consultant’s indemnification obligation shall be limited to the extent which the Claims arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant in the performance of the services or this Agreement, and, upon Consultant obtaining a final adjudication by a court of competent jurisdiction, Consultant’s liability Packet Page. 1214

Page 37 of 45 ends

for such claim, including the cost to defend, shall not exceed the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault.

18. California Labor Code Requirements. Consultant is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and 1770 et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on certain “public works” and “maintenance” projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable “public works” or “maintenance” project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, Consultant agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws, if applicable. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claims, liabilities, costs, penalties or interest arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. It shall be mandatory upon the Consultant and all subcontractors to comply with all California Labor Code provisions, which include but are not limited to prevailing wages (Labor Code Sections 1771, 1774 and 1775), employment of apprentices (Labor Code Section 1777.5), certified payroll records (Labor Code Sections 1771.4 and 1776), hours of labor (Labor Code Sections 1813 and 1815) and debarment of contractors and subcontractors (Labor Code Section 1777.1).
[***IF CITY IS AWARE THAT THE CONSULTANT WILL PERFORM WORK

SUBJECT TO PREVAILING WAGE LAW, PLEASE CONTACT LEGAL COUNSEL TO OBTAIN GUIDANCE REGARDING REVISING THE FOLLOWING PROVISION***]If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable “public works” or “maintenance” project, then pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, the Consultant and all subconsultants performing such Services must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations. Consultant shall maintain registration for the duration of the Project and require the same of any subconsultants, as applicable. This Project may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations. It shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility to comply with all applicable registration and labor compliance requirements.

19. Verification of Employment Eligibility. By executing this Agreement, Consultant verifies that it fully complies with all requirements and restrictions of state and federal law respecting the employment of undocumented aliens, including, but not limited to, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, as may be amended from time to time, and shall require all subconsultants and sub-subconsultants to comply with the same.

20. Laws and Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. If any action is brought to interpret or enforce any term of this Agreement, the action shall be brought in a state or federal court situated in the County of San Bernardino, State of California.

21. Termination or Abandonment
a. City has the right to terminate or abandon any portion or all of the work under this Agreement by giving ten (10) calendar days’ written notice to Consultant. In such event, City shall be immediately given title and possession to all original field notes, drawings and specifications, written reports and other documents produced or developed for that portion of the Packet Page. 1215

Page 38 of 45 ends

work completed and/or being abandoned. City shall pay Consultant the reasonable value of services rendered for any portion of the work completed prior to termination. If said termination occurs prior to completion of any task for the Project for which a payment request has not been received, the charge for services performed during such task shall be the reasonable value of such services, based on an amount mutually agreed to by City and Consultant of the portion of such task completed but not paid prior to said termination. City shall not be liable for any costs other than the charges or portions thereof which are specified herein. Consultant shall not be entitled to payment for unperformed services, and shall not be entitled to damages or compensation for termination of work.
b. Consultant may terminate its obligation to provide further services under this Agreement upon thirty (30) calendar days’ written notice to City only in the event of substantial failure by City to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of Consultant.

22. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event that litigation is brought by any Party in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing Party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the prevailing Party in the exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions hereof. The costs, salary, and expenses of the City Attorney’s Office in enforcing this Agreement on behalf of the City shall be considered as “attorneys’ fees” for the purposes of this Agreement.

23. Responsibility for Errors. Consultant shall be responsible for its work and results under this Agreement. Consultant, when requested, shall furnish clarification and/or explanation as may be required by the City’s representative, regarding any services rendered under this Agreement at no additional cost to City. In the event that an error or omission attributable to Consultant’s professional services occurs, Consultant shall, at no cost to City, provide all other services necessary to rectify and correct the matter to the sole satisfaction of the City and to participate in any meeting required with regard to the correction.

24. Prohibited Employment. Consultant shall not employ any current employee of City to perform the work under this Agreement while this Agreement is in effect.

25. Costs. Each Party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and in the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein.

26. Documents. Except as otherwise provided in “Termination or Abandonment,” above, all original field notes, written reports, Drawings and Specifications and other documents, produced or developed for the Project shall, upon payment in full for the services described in this Agreement, be furnished to and become the property of the City.

27. Organization. Consultant shall assign [***INSERT NAME***] as Project Manager.

The Project Manager shall not be removed from the Project or reassigned without the prior written consent of the City.

28. Limitation of Agreement. This Agreement is limited to and includes only the work included in the Project described above.

Packet Page. 1216

Page 39 of 45 ends

29. Notice. Any notice or instrument required to be given or delivered by this Agreement may be given or delivered by depositing the same in any United States Post Office, certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to the following addresses and shall be effective upon receipt thereof:

CITY:

City of San Bernardino
Vanir Tower, 290 North D Street
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Attn: [***INSERT DEPARTMENT HEAD
TITLE OR “City Manager”***]
With Copy To:

City of San Bernardino
Vanir Tower, 290 North D Street
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Attn: City Attorney
CONSULTANT:
[***INSERT NAME, ADDRESS & CONTACT
PERSON***]

30. Third Party Rights. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to give any rights or benefits to anyone other than the City and the Consultant.

31. Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and that it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, age or other interests protected by the State or Federal Constitutions. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination.

32. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including Exhibit “A,” represents the entire understanding of City and Consultant as to those matters contained herein, and supersedes and cancels any prior or contemporaneous oral or written understanding, promises or representations with respect to those matters covered hereunder. Each Party acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements have been made by any person which are not incorporated herein, and that any other agreements shall be void. This is an integrated Agreement.

33. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable for any reason, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance, and the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

34. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors in interest, executors, administrators and assigns of each Party to this Agreement. However, Consultant shall not assign or transfer by operation of law or Packet Page. 1217

Page 40 of 45 ends

otherwise any or all of its rights, burdens, duties or obligations without the prior written consent of City. Any attempted assignment without such consent shall be invalid and void.

35. Non-Waiver. The delay or failure of either Party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other Party of any of its obligations or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the Party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy with respect to any occurrence or event shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy with respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver.

36. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement.

37. Headings. Paragraphs and subparagraph headings contained in this Agreement are included solely for convenience and are not intended to modify, explain, or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

38. Amendments. Only a writing executed by all of the Parties hereto or their respective successors and assigns may amend this Agreement.

39. City’s Right to Employ Other Consultants. City reserves its right to employ other consultants, including engineers, in connection with this Project or other projects.

40. Prohibited Interests. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has neither employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. For the term of this Agreement, no official, officer or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom.

41. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one single Agreement.

42. Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the Parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said Parties and that by doing so, the Parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.

43. Electronic Signature. Each Party acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement may be executed by electronic or digital signature, which shall be considered as an original signature for all purposes and shall have the same force and effect as an original signature.

Packet Page. 1218

Page 41 of 45 ends

44. [***DELETE SECTION IF THESE PENALTIES WILL NOT BE USED***] Disciplinary Actions in Phases for Non-Performance. Failure for Consultant to perform its obligations under this Agreement or comply with the Performance Indicators may result in disciplinary action as follows:
(i) Informal Warning (Written or Verbal). Consultant is given a warning in regards to non-performance. If a verbal warning is issued, it will be confirmed with an electronic correspondence to the Consultant.
(ii) Formal Written Warning. A formal written warning is issued to Consultant pursuant to Section 29 of this Agreement. Consultant must respond within 5 to 10 days of receipt of the formal warning. Upon response from the Consultant, Consultant shall be provided a reasonable time to make corrections to their performance. This time period (iii) Formal Penalty Issued. A penalty of 15% of the Consultant’s current invoice amount or annual contract amount is deducted for non-performance after previous warnings have been issued.
(iv) Termination of Contract. If the performance has not been corrected after all warnings and previous penalties have been exhausted, City may terminate the contract pursuant to Section 21 of this Agreement.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
Packet Page. 1219

Page 42 of 45 ends

SIGNATURE PAGE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
AND [***INSERT NAME***]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
APPROVED BY:

Rochelle Clayton
Acting City Manager
ATTESTED BY:

Genoveva Rocha, CMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Best Best & Krieger LLP
City Attorney

CONSULTANT
Signature
Name
Title
Packet Page. 1220

Page 43 of 45 ends

EXHIBIT A
[***ATTACH OR INSERT: Scope of Services / Schedule of Charges and Payments / Activity Schedule***]
Packet Page. 1221

Page 44 of 45 ends

[***IF NO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS WILL BE USED INSERT “NOT APPLICABLE” IN EXHIBIT B***]

EXHIBIT B

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS OR PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS

1. Performance Expectations
• A Performance Measurement Plan (“Performance Plan”) will be developed by the City [***INSERT DEPARTMENT***], and will be reviewed on a quarterly basis. • Consultant will track and document all performance measures identified in the Performance Plan. Measures will include, but a not limited to the measures listed below:
• Consultant will develop and distribute, electronically, a monthly summary report showing the current status and 12 month trend of each performance measure • Consultant will attend quarterly meetings scheduled by the City [***INSERT DEPARTMENT***]and present and discuss performance measures • Consultant will track all cost savings for all orders requested by Waste Resources and will report their total Cost Savings on a quarterly basis

2. Performance Measures

1. Safety:
a. Definition: the condition of being protected from or unlikely to cause danger, risk, or injury
b. Safety Measures is related to PW projects when a contractor is conducting work on a county facility and/or delivery materials and services to a county facility

2. Quality:
a. Definition: the standard of something as measured against other things of a similar kind; the degree of excellence of something.
b. Quality Measure is related to final result of a product or service. Ex. was the monitor installed correctly, crooked, upside down? Were monthly/annual inspections done correctly/on time, were they incomplete.

3. Cost Savings:
a. Definition: a reduction in expenses, especially in business b. Cost Savings Measure is related savings that a vendor makes and passes on to the County.

4. On-Time Delivery:
a. Definition: On Time Delivery or OTD refers to a key performance indicator measuring the rate of finished product and deliveries made in time. This rate is expressed in a total number of units delivered within a set period defined by the customer and the supplier.
b. On-Time Delivery measure is related to service contracts, were the samples delivered on time to the lab. This can also refer to pick-up services such as with environmental contracts that deal with hazardous samples Packet Page. 1222

Page 45 of 45 ends

EXHIBIT C

FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS
[***INSERT APPLICABLE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS – REQUIREMENTS WILL CHANGE BASED ON FUNDING SOURCE***]
Packet Page. 1223
Preliminary Warehouse Screening Model
Industrial & Logistics Revenue and Economic Opportunity Feasibility Study Staff prepared this model to test the potential scale of a warehouse-related revenue opportunity. This is not a revenue forecast; it does not recommend a tax, fee, rate, or revenue mechanism; and no revenue from this model is included in the City’s budget. The feasibility study will replace these assumptions with verified City information.

I. SCREENING FORMULA
The formula in the model below was developed as follows:

Gross Annual Revenue = Gross Warehouse Square Footage x Qualifying Share x Realization Rate x Illustrative Annual Rate
II. ASSUMPTIONS
Assumption Low Baseline Upper Basis
Gross
warehouse
inventory
27,476,992
SF
27,476,992 SF 27,476,992
SF
2022 regional
warehouse
inventory
(Attachment 3)
Qualifying
share
50% 70% 85% Hypothetical share
of gross space that
could fall within a
future base
Realization
rate
97% 97% 97% Hypothetical
allowance for
closures, appeals,
delinquency, and
administrative timing
Illustrative
annual rates
$0.02,
$0.075, and
$0.105 per
SF
$0.02, $0.075,
and $0.105 per
SF
$0.02,
$0.075, and
$0.105 per
SF
Illustrative range for
testing scale
• Qualifying share: Gross warehouse space will not equal taxable or chargeable space. The three scenarios modeled for this purpose differ only in the assumption that qualifying space will range from 50-85%. Depending on any eventual structure, exclusions would likely apply to:

Packet Page. 1224
o Manufacturing space; Office space; Vacant space; Incidental storage; Mixed-use and multi-tenant properties; Government or otherwise exempt uses, etc.
• Realization rate: Not all amounts that could be billed are collected in actual practice. The rate in the model allows for business closures, appeals, delinquent, account changes, and administrative timing. It is held constant within the model because collection performance does not depend on how much space qualifies.

This percentage is an educated assumption for modeling purposes only, not a verified rate within the City.

III. SCREENING RESULTS
Gross annual amounts, rounded:

Scenario Effective
Square Feet
$0.02 per SF $0.075 per SF $0.105 per SF
Low 13.326 million $267,000 $999,000 $1,399,000
Baseline 18.657 million $373,000 $1,399,000 $1,959,000
Upper 22.655 million $453,000 $1,699,000 $2,379,000
The screening range is approximately $267,000 to $2.4 million gross annually.

IV. NOTES FOR PRODUCED MODEL
The model does not include the following:
• Existing Chapter 5.04 business-tax revenue that could be replaced or credited; • Administrative, compliance, implementation or enforcement costs; • Legal classification of any mechanism, or whether voter approval will be required; • Warehouse development occurring after 2022;
• Smaller warehouses or logistics facilities not captured in the 2022 inventory; • Storage, truck parking, or other related activities;
• Economic effects on businesses, leasing, investment, development, or employment.

V. GROSS REVENUE VS. NET NEW REVENUE
All figures in the model are gross. Net new revenue should be calculated as follows:

Net New Revenue = Gross New Revenue – Existing Revenue Replaced or Credited – Ongoing Administration and Compliance Costs – Other Required Adjustments VI. ROLE FOR THE FEASABILITY STUDY
The selected consultant will:

Packet Page. 1225
• Replace the 2022 inventory with the City’s validated and reconciled inventory; • Replace the qualifying-share and realization assumptions with documented data where available;
• Account for existing revenue and administrative costs to estimate the net new revenue;
• Present all results in the Revenue Opportunity Matrix deliverable, with a stated confidence level.

Packet Page. 1226
APPENDIX 1
Packet Page. 1227
Exhausting Our Air
Environmental and Human Costs of Diesel Trucks
September 2023
Packet Page. 1228
Cover image:

Heavy Duty Diesel Truck
Photo Credit: Economic Roundtable
Packet Page. 1229
Exhausting Our Air
Environmental and Human Costs of Diesel Trucks
September 2023
Economic Roundtable
Daniel Flaming
Patrick Burns
Community profiles by
Peoples’ Collective for Environmental Justice
Andrea Vidaurre
Ivette Torres
Underwritten by the
Sierra Club
Report available at: www.economicrt.org
Packet Page. 1230
This report has been prepared by the Economic Roundtable, which assumes all responsibility for its contents. Data, interpretations and conclusions contained in this report are not necessarily those of any other organization.

This report can be downloaded from the Economic Roundtable web site:
www.economicrt.org
Packet Page. 1231
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our gratitude to the partners in this project who carried out frontline research and provided support and insights that made this study possible.

People's Collective for Environmental Justice (PC4EJ)
The People’s Collective for Environmental Justice champions clean air and environmental and racial justice. As members of the community they carried out the frontline of research for this study. The key research partners were:

Andrea Vidaurre, Senior Policy Analyst
Ivette Torres, Research Consultant
Sierra Club
The Sierra Club is a champion for the environment. They are working to get stronger environmental and energy laws that will reduce dependence on fossil fuels, protect the oceans and fragile coastal environments, and help protect jobs. Key partners for this study were:

Katherine Garcia, Director, Clean Transportation for All Yassi Kavezade, California Field Manager
Allison Kirsch, Senior Energy Campaigns Analyst
Packet Page. 1232
Packet Page. 1233
Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary................................................................................................................................. 1

2. Warehouse Expansion............................................................................................................................ 7 Overview................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Large Warehouses................................................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Geography of Large Warehouses..................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Clusters of Large Warehouses ........................................................................................................................................................................13 Warehouse Locations and Economic Equity............................................................................................................................................... 15 Number of Warehouse Workers.....................................................................................................................................................................16 Occupations and Wages of Warehouse Workers...................................................................................................................................... 17 Community Profile: Cesar Avila, Truck Driver, and Maria Rubio, Retired...........................................................................................19

3. Truck Drivers and Trucking Companies..........................................................................................23 Overview.................................................................................................................................................................................................................24 Drayage Truck Drivers.......................................................................................................................................................................................26 Trucking Companies...........................................................................................................................................................................................29 Trucks.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................31 Emissions per Vehicle Mile..............................................................................................................................................................................33 Diesel Truck Emissions between Ports and Warehouses........................................................................................................................36 Clean Truck Mandate.........................................................................................................................................................................................37 Clean Trucks.........................................................................................................................................................................................................39 Community Profile: Ricardo Peraza, Trucking Company Owner............................................................................................................43

4. Impacts of Warehouse Trucking....................................................................................................... 49 Overview.................................................................................................................................................................................................................50 Warehouse Impacts on Air Quality................................................................................................................................................................51 Uncompensated Public Costs from Warehouse Truck Trips.................................................................................................................. 53 Unacceptable Road Conditions........................................................................................................................................................................56 Public Health Costs............................................................................................................................................................................................57 Community Profile: Ralph Sistos, Teamster................................................................................................................................................62

5. Workers and Jobs................................................................................................................................. 65 Overview.................................................................................................................................................................................................................66 Jobs Created by Electrical Infrastructure..................................................................................................................................................... 67 Job Growth in Electrical Construction and Power Generation...............................................................................................................69 Wages in Electricity Sector Industries..........................................................................................................................................................71 Occupations Employed in Electrical Construction......................................................................................................................................71 Warehouse Labor Force....................................................................................................................................................................................73 Packet Page. 1234
Change in Skill Requirements for Warehouse Jobs................................................................................................................................. 76 Wages of Frontline Warehouse Workers......................................................................................................................................................80 Community Profile: George Hauge, Environmental Advocate.................................................................................................................82

6. Impacts of Warehouses on Frontline Families..............................................................................85 Overview.................................................................................................................................................................................................................86 Incompatible Development ...............................................................................................................................................................................87 Zoning for Warehouses.....................................................................................................................................................................................89 Residents Living Near Large Warehouses...................................................................................................................................................91 Median Income....................................................................................................................................................................................................94 Families in Poverty.............................................................................................................................................................................................96 Housing Conditions.............................................................................................................................................................................................97 Community Profile: Cynthia Ayala, Amazon Air Worker, San Bernardino Airport ............................................................................99

7. Respiratory Distress...........................................................................................................................101 Overview..............................................................................................................................................................................................................102 Health Conditions Requiring In-Patient Hospitalization.........................................................................................................................103 Diesel Particulate Matter (PM) Emissions................................................................................................................................................103 Uneven Pollution Burden................................................................................................................................................................................104 PM 2.5 Spillover into Surrounding Neighborhoods................................................................................................................................105 Chronic Respiratory Disease Exacerbated by Air Pollution..................................................................................................................107 Community Profile: Henry James Vasquez, Indigenous and Mexican Elder..................................................................................110

8. Onsite Warehouse Emissions.........................................................................................................113 Overview..............................................................................................................................................................................................................114 Energy Consumption from On-Site Operations........................................................................................................................................115 How and Where Locally-Consumed Electricity is Generated..............................................................................................................116 Metric Tons of GHG Emissions from On-Site Energy Consumption..................................................................................................118 Criteria Emissions from On-Site Activities................................................................................................................................................119 On-Site Natural Gas Consumption..............................................................................................................................................................120 On-Site Water Consumption.........................................................................................................................................................................122

9. Data Appendix and Methodology...................................................................................................123

10. End Notes..........................................................................................................................................131 Packet Page. 1235
Exhausting Our Air 1

1. Executive Summary ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Photo credit:

Economic Roundtable
Packet Page. 1236
2 Exhausting Our Air
Structural Inequity
Displacement of brick-and-mortar retail stores by online retailing and sprawling warehouses is coming at the cost of climate change, bad air, low wages, and extreme disparities between neighborhoods where consumer goods are warehoused and neighborhoods that can afford to buy the goods.

In each of the past three decades, 175 million more square feet warehouse space has been built in the four Southern California counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino. Each new warehouse has increased diesel truck emissions in working class neighborhoods where frontline warehouse workers earn median annual wages of $25,154.

Petroleum waste products produced by moving consumer goods from the seaports to warehouses, and then from warehouses to affluent homes, are released into the air we all breathe. But pollutants are most heavily concentrated in the neighborhoods of low-wage warehouse workers.

Battery-electric trucks will eliminate six million tons of emissions a year and create good jobs in the electricity sector, unless California’s mandate for clean trucks is derailed by utility district delays in providing electricity.

Trucking companies and electric truck dealerships report that it takes two years or more to get electricity for recharging the trucks. This is completely out of step with the Air Resources Board’s mandate for deploying zeroemission trucks starting January 1, 2024.

Neighborhoods with Warehouses
Warehouses and the workers employed in them are located in lower income communities. The consumers that benefit most from the logistics sector are higher-income communities, far-removed from the noise and emissions caused by diesel trucks and warehouses. There is fundamental environmental and economic inequity between the neighborhoods that do the heavy lifting of the logistics system and the neighborhoods that benefit.

There are over 3,300 warehouses with 100,000 or more square feet of space in the four county region. They cover over 800 million square feet and bring in over $6 billion a year in revenue.

Recent warehouse construction is concentrated in San Bernardino County, where low land costs offset the distance from retail stores, consumer neighborhoods, and the San Pedro Bay Ports.

Drayage Trucking Companies and Drivers
Drayage companies, which make short-haul trips with heavy cargo, are concentrated near the San Pedro Bay Ports, with secondary concentrations Packet Page. 1237
Exhausting Our Air 3
in the Inland Empire. Most truck drivers live near these trucking companies. Their livelihoods expose them to the emissions and noise of diesel trucks when they are working, and often these impacts are also part of the after-work environment in their neighborhoods.

Two-thirds of trucking companies are small businesses with nine or fewer trucks. However, large corporate trucking companies dominate the industry. Companies with 125 or more trucks own 95 percent of the trucks that move cargo into and out of the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

Diesel trucks have the second highest greenhouse gas emissions per tonmile of any mode to cargo movement, exceeded only by cargo aircraft.

Their high greenhouse emissions and wide deployment make them a significant contributor to climate change.

Deploying Electric Trucks
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) and South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) have mandated a rapid transition to clean truck propulsion technology.

Beginning January 1, 2024, CARB is requiring all new drayage trucks entering seaports and intermodal railyards to be electric. Diesel trucks that that are registered with the state before the end of 2023 can remain in operation until 2035. This is the Advanced Clean Trucks Rule.

There is strong opposition to this regulation by trucking companies.

Nineteen states are seeking appellate court review in a challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency waiver granted for California’s Advanced Clean Trucks Rule.

Similarly, the California Trucking Association is challenging the AQMD rule that makes warehouses accountable for emissions from diesel trucks delivering cargo to and from warehouses in the district.

Eight heavy-duty truck manufacturers have initiated small-scale manufacturing and sales for zero-emission, battery-electric tractors. Most currently available heavy duty electric trucks are capable of meeting basic performance requirements for short-range drayage operations, roughly up to 175 miles between charges. This means that current battery-electric models are restricted to short-hauls or lighter-weight drayage tasks.

There is strong year-over-year progress in the robustness and capabilities of zero-emission trucks. The capabilities and reliability of electric trucks will continue to improve and in the coming years they will be able to perform all drayage functions currently performed by diesel trucks.

Given the current low-volume of electric truck sales, the purchase subsidies available in California are currently sufficient to reduce their cost to less Packet Page. 1238
4 Exhausting Our Air
than the cost for a diesel truck. However, there are only enough subsidy funds to cover a small fraction of the zero-emission trucks that must be put in service by 2035. As sales ramp up, there will be an interval when subsidies are scarce and the cost of electric trucks has not come down to the cost for diesel trucks.

The current subsidy programs prioritize small truck fleets, but truck dealerships report that small operators are overwhelmed by the paperwork and documentation required to obtain subsidies, and often abandon the effort to obtain a subsidy as well as to buy an electric truck.

In the interest of equity, it is important to continue prioritizing small fleets for subsidies and also to streamline the application process and provide user-friendly technical assistance for small fleet owners seeking subsidies.

Electricity for Charging Stations
Electric truck dealers and fleet operators have identified delays in obtaining electric power for charging stations as the most serious obstacle for deploying electric trucks.

The supply of electricity to recharge battery-electric trucks is lagging the timetable set by California Air Resources Board for the transition to zeroemission drayage. Utility districts will be a bottleneck unless they act proactively to build the electrical distribution infrastructure required to support clean trucking.

Impacts of Warehouse Trucking
Diesel trucks travel over 415 million miles a year to and from large warehouses in the four-county region. There are $1 billion in annual uncompensated public costs from wear and tear on roads and bridges; delays caused by traffic congestion; injuries, fatalities, and property damage from accidents; and harmful effects from exhaust. California ranks 46th among the 50 states in the share of roads that are in acceptable condition.

The 11 million annual heavy-truck trips produce almost six million tons of greenhouse gases that accelerate global warming. They also produce 1,161 tons of nitrogen oxides, which can irritate sensory organs, and cause shortness of breath with fluid build-up in the lungs. And they produce 29 tons of fine particulate matter, which causes bronchitis and asthma attacks.

The annual health costs for residents from current diesel truck emissions, and, conversely, the health benefits from having electric trucks move cargo instead of diesel trucks are an estimated $166 million a year.

Packet Page. 1239
Exhausting Our Air 5
Workers and Jobs
One job is created for every $111,512 spent on the electrical infrastructure required to recharge electric trucks. This includes jobs building electrical utility infrastructure and installing electrical wiring and equipment to charge trucks, as well as jobs in industries that provide supplies and services for electrical construction, and additional jobs that are created when workers in electrical construction and supplier industries spend their wages.

The electricity sector provides high-pay, living-wage jobs. The average hourly wage for frontline electrical construction is $35 an hour.

The introduction of new technology in warehouses and the rapid turnover of goods has increased the skill requirements for frontline warehouse jobs.

However, the wages paid to warehouse workers have decreased.

The average wage in 2022 for warehouse workers in frontline occupations was $18.95 an hour. This is less than half of a living wage.

The jobs to electrify the logistics chain that brings goods to warehouses are much better than the jobs inside warehouses. This includes jobs expanding the electrical transmission infrastructure, building recharging station for electric trucks and installing solar panels at warehouses.

Impacts of Warehouses on Frontline Families
There are just under 365,000 residential parcels located within 2,000 feet of large warehouses, across the four-county region. Three-quarters are singlefamily homes, and another quarter are multi-family properties. This housing provides homes for over 2.1 million residents.

Warehouses and the linked trucking and air cargo networks degrade the habitability of neighborhoods. Factors that diminish the desirability of housing in these neighborhoods include freeways, heavy traffic, truck-train intermodal facilities, cargo airports, truck depots, and warehouses.

Families living near large warehouses experience an elevated likelihood of poverty throughout the four-county region. In addition to economic distress, these families suffer from traffic noise and congestion, as well as long-term exposure to air pollution, that make it difficult to get the peace, quiet and cleaner air needed for a healthy life.

The median income within a 2,000-foot perimeter of large warehouses is 18 percent lower than in the rest of the four-county region, and the poverty rate is 22 percent higher than outside the perimeter.

Many families live near warehouses out of economic necessity, settling on less desirable neighborhoods where rent is lower. Even with lower rent, many families cannot afford housing that meets minimum standards of Packet Page. 1240
6 Exhausting Our Air
space and privacy for household members. They often rent a smaller unit where more than one person is crowded into each room in order to reduce the rent. The rate of overcrowded housing is 38 percent higher within the 2,000 perimeter of large warehouses than in the region a whole.

Households living within 2,000 feet of a large warehouse are 10 percent more likely to have children, 23 percent more likely to be headed by a female, and 40 percent more likely to be Latino than in the overall region.

Respiratory Distress
The direct pollutants from diesel truck trips to and from large warehouses, cause elevated rates of respiratory distress. This is compounded by the indirect pollutants attributable to the electricity and natural gas that these buildings consume onsite.

Large swaths of the Inland Empire are in the highest quintile of the pollution burden index, meaning they have the highest exposure to criteria air pollutants, including ground level ozone, carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter.

Homes near the large warehouse clusters by Ontario International Airport and San Bernardino International Airport breath air with the highest level of fine particulate matter, increasing risks of asthma and heart disease.

The rate of emergency department visits for asthma attacks reflects the location of manufacturing and logistics land uses. South Los Angeles, City of Industry, Ontario and San Bernardino have elevated rates of emergency department visits as well as the largest concentrations of logistics activity.

Recommendations

1. Equitably assess the full environmental and economic impacts of warehouses before approving any new warehouse construction or the expansion of air cargo facilities.

2. Fully enforce noise regulations for all warehouses.

3. Establish a living minimum wage for warehouse workers.

4. Protect the truck electrification timeline created by the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation and the Warehouse Indirect Source Rule.

5. Proactively upgrade the electrical networks serving trucking companies and warehouses to ensure that electricity is available to recharge trucks as soon as it is needed.

6. Enact rules requiring the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power to provide technical and financial assistance for installing commercial recharging stations.

7. Safeguard electric subsidy funds to ensure ongoing support for small trucking companies after demand grows and subsidy funds shrink.

Packet Page. 1241
Exhausting Our Air 7

2. Warehouse Expansion
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Routes from the San Pedro
Bay Ports to warehouses
Image credit: Economic
Roundtable
Packet Page. 1242
8 Exhausting Our Air
Overview
Economic Inequity
Warehouses and the workers employed in them are located in lower income communities. The consumers that primarily benefit from services of the logistics sector are higher-income communities, far-removed from the noise and emissions caused by diesel trucks and warehouses.

Growth
Over the past three decades, from 1993 through 2022, warehouse space in the four-county region has increased 42 percent, or 175 million square feet, each decade. This steep rate of growth shows no evidence of slowing.

The growth in warehouse space has been accompanied by a corresponding increase in diesel truck drayage.

Scale and Location
There are over 3,300 large warehouses with 100,000 or more square feet of space in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.

They provide over 800 million square feet of space for storing the things that we buy and bring in over $6 billion a year in revenue.

Recent warehouse construction has been concentrated in San Bernardino County, however Los Angeles County has the greatest number of large warehouses, followed by San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange Counties.

Low land costs offset the Inland Empire’s distance from retail stores, consumer neighborhoods, and the San Pedro Bay Ports. Equally important is some county and city governments’ willingness to approve the continued construction of large warehouses.

Economic Desperation
The City of Ontario is home to 278 large warehouses, by far the most warehouses of any city in the four-county region. The large number of warehouses in Ontario may be the result of economic downturns in the city’s recent past, as well as economic desperation for growth of any kind.

The city filed for bankruptcy in 2012 and remained bankrupt until 2017.

Wages
Nearly two-thirds of workers are employed in the transportation and material moving job family. These workers have median wages of $25,154 annually.

Packet Page. 1243
Exhausting Our Air 9
Large Warehouses
Large warehouses continue to be built in Southern California to satisfy growing consumer demand for retail goods. This growth generates more trips by diesel-powered trucks hauling goods between entry ports, intermodal facilities, warehouses, and retail stores.

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) approved Rule 2305, the Warehouse Indirect Source Rule, in May 2021 to regulate indirect emissions linked to warehouses.

Evidence about the environmental and human costs of moving cargo with diesel trucks as well as the economic and social justice benefits from improving air quality supports implementation of Rule 2035. The baseline information in this report about conditions in the Inland Empire serves as a guide for communities in other regions of the country that are similarly impacted by warehouse operations.

Geography of Large Warehouses
There are over 3,300 large warehouses with 100,000 or more square feet of space in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties.

They provide over 800 million square feet of space for storing the things that we buy and bring in over $6 billion a year in revenue. 1 Los Angeles County has the greatest number of large warehouses, followed by San Bernardino,
Riverside and
Orange Counties, as
shown in Figure 1.

San Bernardino
County has the most
warehouses with
one-million or more
square feet of space,
as well as warehouses
with half a million
square feet or more.

This reflects a trend
toward increasingly
large warehouses as
well as a trend
toward locating new
warehouses in San
Bernardino County.

Figure 1: Number of Large Warehouses by County
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C and other sources. 1,638
885
404 399
0 200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
Los Angeles San
Bernardino
Riverside Orange
1,000,000+ SF
500,000 to 999,999 SF
250,000 to 499,999 SF
100,000 to 250,000 SF
Packet Page. 1244
10 Exhausting Our Air
Sixty-two percent of large warehouses have less than 200,000 square feet of space, but they account for only 35 percent of total warehouse space. Nine Figure 3: Total Square Feet of Large Warehouse Space in the Four-County Region by Warehouse Size and Decade

0 100,000,000
200,000,000
300,000,000
400,000,000
500,000,000
600,000,000
700,000,000
800,000,000
900,000,000
1942 &
Earlier
1943 to
1952
1953 to
1962
1963 to
1972
1973 to
1982
1983 to
1992
1993 to
2002
2003 to
2012
2013 to
2022
Total Square Feet of Space in Large Warehouses
Decade
500,000+
SF
400,000 to
499,999 SF
300,000 to
399,999 SF
250,000 to
299,999 SF
200,000 to
249,999 SF
150,000 to
199,999 SF
100,000 to
149,999 SF
Figure 2: Number of Large Warehouses Built in Each Decade by County Source: Economic Roundtable analysis and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 0 100
200
300
400
500
600
Pre-1970s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s
San
Bernardino
Riverside
Orange
Los Angeles
Packet Page. 1245
Exhausting Our Air 11
percent of warehouses have 500,000 or more square feet, and they account for 30 percent of total warehouse space.

Recent construction of large warehouses has been concentrated in the Inland Empire – San Bernardino and Riverside Counties (Figure 2). New warehouses continue to be built, and because many of them are very large, the total square footage of warehouse space is increasing rapidly.

Over the past three decades, from 1993 through 2022, an average of over 17 million square feet of warehouse space has been built each year in the four-county region, as shown in Figure 3. This is an increase of 42 percent, or 175 million square feet, each decade. This steep rate of growth shows no evidence of slowing.

Warehouses are nodes in a logistics network that moves goods from where they are produced to where they are consumed. The growth in warehouse space in accompanied by a corresponding increase in diesel truck drayage.

The City of Ontario is home to 278 large warehouses, with over 81 mission square feet of space - by far the most of any city in the four-county Figure 4: Total Square Feet of Space in Large Warehouses by City Source: Economic Roundtable analysis and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 10,337,069
10,811,063
10,895,592
11,154,994
12,872,746
14,607,249
15,640,039
22,049,074
22,279,697
22,445,249
23,691,172
24,645,773
24,715,608
25,149,893
25,697,104
25,860,919
26,635,719
27,476,992
30,943,289
35,220,833
48,803,707
49,122,306
81,755,360
Irvine OR
Torrance LA
Long Beach LA
Corona RIV
Compton LA
Anaheim OR
Vernon LA
Jurupa Valley
Carson LA
Riverside RIV
Redlands SB
Commerce LA
Perris RIV
R. Cucamonga SB
Rialto SB
Santa Fe Springs LA
Moreno Valley SB
San Bernardino SB
Los Angeles LA
Chino SB
City of Industry LA
Fontana SB
Ontario SB
Packet Page. 1246
12 Exhausting Our Air
region, as shown in Figure 4. The large number of warehouses in Ontario may be the result of economic downturns in the city’s recent past, as well as economic desperation for growth of any kind.

Facing $296 million of unfunded liabilities, a $45 million budget shortfall, and depleted general fund reserves, San Bernardino filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy on August 1, 2012. In the years leading up to bankruptcy, San Bernardino suffered heavily as important sources of revenue fell, notably property taxes, vehicle license fees, and redevelopment funds.2 The city remained in bankruptcy until 2017.3
There are 23 cities with over 10 million square feet of space in large warehouses shown in Figure 4 are home to 75 percent of all of the space in large warehouses in the four-county region. Ontario has 81 million square feet of large warehouse space, which is 10 percent of the total space occupied by large warehouses in the four-county region.

The average year when warehouses in Ontario were built is 1997, a more recent vintage than warehouses in Los Angeles, as shown in Figure 5. The sequence of warehouse development reflects migration to more outlying Figure 5: Average Year when Warehouses Were Built by City

1971
1972
1973
1983
1983
1988
1989
1991
1991
1994
1997
1999
2000
2001
2004
2004
2008
2009
2010
2011
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Commerce
Los Angeles
Vernon
Compton
La Mirada
City of Industry
Carson
Santa Fe Springs
Jurupa Valley
R. Cucamonga
Ontario
Corona
Riverside
Chino
San Bernardino
Fontana
Redlands
Perris
Rialto
Moreno Valley
Packet Page. 1247
Exhausting Our Air 13
areas in the past three decades as land in Los Angeles and Orange became increasingly expensive.

The runner-up with the second-most warehouses is the City of Industry in Los Angeles County. The average year of construction for these warehouses was 1988 - roughly a decade earlier than Ontario. They were built when there was low-cost, greenfield real estate in the San Gabriel Valley. Vacant fields with native plants in the City of Industry were declared to be blighted and a redevelopment authority was established to eliminate blight by building industrial and warehouse facilities along the Union Pacific railroad line.

The 114 large warehouses in the City of Carson are another example of development on low-cost land close to the urban center. The average year of construction for warehouses in Carson was 1989 – similar to the City of Industry. When Carson incorporated as a city in 1968, its landscape was pockmarked with the dozens of refuse dumps, landfills and auto dismantling plants that none of the neighboring cities would allow within their boundaries.4 The up-side for Carson was that it is close to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, and is bounded by four freeways. Carson’s dumping grounds were replaced by facilities such as the Watson Industrial Center, a large warehouse and light industry complex.

If the only objective were to minimize transportation logistics, warehouses would be concentrated by the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

However, land costs closer to these public ports are high, and the need for low land costs overrides the need for low transportation costs.

In the 1970s and 1980s, warehouse development was concentrated in Los Angeles County. In the 1990s it shifted to San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. Within the Inland Empire there has been further migration toward lower cost land, shifting most recently from Ontario to Redlands, Perris, Rialto, and Moreno Valley.

The largest warehouses cover more than 20 acres, so the cost of land is an important factor in determining where warehouses are built.

Clusters of Large Warehouses
The locations of large warehouses are the result of past infrastructure investments – such as railroad lines and rail yards, seaport drayage lands and the roads for bringing cargo in and out of the ports, as well as land costs and land use zoning. The locations of the largest warehouses, across San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, with their actual building footprints, are shown in Figure 6.

Packet Page. 1248
14 Exhausting Our Air
There is a large cluster of warehouses along the rail corridor connecting Los Angeles’ Union Station north of downtown with the Union Pacific and Burlington Northern Santa Fe railyards Southeast of downtown.

Large warehouses are likewise clustered just north of the San Pedro Ports, where shipping containers arriving by sea have their contents unpacked, repalletized and put on truck chassis and railcars.

There is a crescent of large warehouses arcing along the Pomona Freeway in the City of Industry, Rowland Heights and Walnut, along the Union Pacific rail line.

The Inland Empire is where the newest clusters of large warehouses are located. The recent building boom of large warehouse is driven by lower warehouse leasing costs, access to interstate freeways and air cargo facilities at Ontario Airport, San Bernardino International Air Port and March Air Reserve Base.

Figure 6: Map of Large Warehouses subject to SCAQMD Rule 2305 Source: Economic Roundtable analysis, Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) May 7, 2021, Board Meeting Packet for Agenda Item #27,” Proposed Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program.” Data originally acquired from CoStar.

Packet Page. 1249
Exhausting Our Air 15
Low land costs offset the Inland Empire’s distance from retail stores, consumer neighborhoods, and the San Pedro Bay Ports. Equally important is some county and city governments’ willingness to approve the continued construction of large warehouses, opening the door to warehouse clusters in Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Chino, Rialto, Riverside, Redlands, Moreno Valley, and Perris.

Warehouse Locations and Economic Equity
In 2018, consumers in the four-county region purchased over $31 billion in retail goods.5 These non-food retail items account for roughly 16 percent of household expenditures.

The estimated average amount of household retail purchases in each census tract in 2018 is shown in Figure 7. These purchase levels are closely associated with household income in each tract. The darkest shade of brown shows tracts in which the average household made $16,000 or more in retail purchasers. These tracts are located in affluent coastal and foothill areas. At the low end of spending levels, tracts that spent less than $8,000 Figure 7: Estimated Average Retail Sales per Household by Census Tract Source: Derived from U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2013-2017 household income data, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Household Consumption breakout of household consumption by item and income level.

Packet Page. 1250
16 Exhausting Our Air
for retail goods are shown in yellow. These are lower-income tracts in flatland areas.

Warehouses and the workers employed in them are located in lower income communities. particularly areas south and east of downtown Los Angeles, in Ontario, and further east in San Bernardino County. These lower-income communities are also where warehouse workers live.

The communities that primarily benefit from services of the logistics sector are higher-income communities, far-removed from the noise and emissions caused by diesel trucks and warehouses.

Number of Warehouse Workers
The warehouse industry in the four-county region employs just under 93,300 people in all occupations in warehouses of all sizes (Table 1). 6 Los
Angeles County still accounts for the plurality of these workers, over 36,000, or 39 percent of the region’s total. Orange county has the lowest number of warehouse workers, just over 5,400, or six percent.

Table 1 All Warehouse Workers by County
County Employed Warehouse
Industry Workers
Percent of
all Workers
Los Angeles County 36,349 39%
Orange County 5,410 6%
Riverside County 18,973 20%
San Bernardino County 32,539 35%
Region Total 93,271 100%
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS) Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS).

From this total, we estimate that just over 67,500 workers are employed at the region’s largest warehouses – those of 100,000 square feet or more (Table 2). Almost 44,000 of these workers, or 65 percent, work in the Inland Empire. Los Angeles County has a smaller share of workers in large warehouses – 29 percent, while Riverside and San Bernardino Counties account for a greater share of workers in large warehouses. Orange County has the same share of the four-county warehouse labor force in both large warehouse all warehouses.

Table 2 Large Warehouse Workers by County
County No. of Large
Warehouses
SF of Large
Warehouses
Employment
Estimate
Percent of
Employment
Los Angeles County 1,626 314,911,990 19,686 29%
Orange County 389 74,175,185 4,071 6%
Riverside County 402 131,212,586 17,238 26%
San Bernardino County 876 283,029,002 26,570 39%
Region Total 3,293 803,328,763 67,565 100%
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS) Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS).

Packet Page. 1251
Exhausting Our Air 17
Warehouse employment changes by season and also when companies rearrange their supply chains because of changing demand in different regional markets. Our methodology accounts for the low vacancy rate in warehouse properties, since a small number sit idle at any given time.

The methodology for this employment estimate of workers in large warehouses, along with the occupational breakdown of this labor force, is described in the Data Appendix, which also includes a table of warehouse employment by city.

Occupations and Wages of Warehouse Workers
Workers in a wide range of occupations come together to operate warehouses, as shown in Table 3. The majority of the over 67,500 warehouse workers are employed in Transportation and Material Moving jobs, about 64 percent of the total. These workers include forklift operators and packers, as well as workers who control or tend to conveyor systems that move products to and from stockpiles. This job family also includes workers who move freight on and off trucks at warehouse docks, shipping machine feeders / off-bearers, who put goods into and remove them from automated packing and labelling equipment. There are about 60,000 of these workers in the four-county region, handling the stocking and filling of orders in warehouses. Their median annual pay is $25,154.

Table 3 Warehouse Worker Occupations and Median Wages
Occupation Groups
Number of
Workers
Percent of
Warehouse
Work Force
Median
Annual
Wage
11-0 Management 5,358 6% $52,169
13-1 Business Operations 1,168 1% $45,213
13-2 Financial 251 0.3% $30,432
15-0 Computer & Mathematical 348 0.4% $67,412
17-0 Architecture & Engineering 108 0.1% $30,683
23-0 Legal 102 0.1% $140,861
25-0 Education, Training, & Library 128 0.1% $85,422
27-0 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, & Media 71 <0.1% $5,434 31-0 Healthcare Support 31 <0.1% $11,571
33-0 Protective Service 459 0.5% $24,546
35-0 Food Preparation & Serving Related 123 0.1% $36,551 37-0 Building & Grounds Cleaning & Maintenance 1,000 1.1% $23,491 39-0 Personal Care & Service 14 <0.1% $46,995
41-0 Sales & Related 902 1.0% $26,108
43-0 Office & Administrative Support 14,926 16% $28,475 45-0 Farming, Fishing, & Forestry 15 <0.1% $21,355
47-0 Construction & Extraction 255 0.3% $42,711
49-0 Installation, Maintenance, & Repair 769 0.8% $40,910 51-0 Production 7,598 8.1% $24,148
53-0 Transportation & Material Moving 59,645 64% $25,154 Total 93,271 100% $26,160
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS) Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS), Occupational distribution for NAICS Industry (NAICSP) 493 (TRN-Warehouse and Storage), Employment Status Recode (ESR) is limited to “Civilian Employed, at Work” with at least $500 annual earnings.

Packet Page. 1252
18 Exhausting Our Air
The second largest job family Office and Administrative Support workers, accounting for just under 15,000 jobs in the region, or 16 percent of the industry’s labor force. This occupation group includes shipping, receiving, and inventory clerks, order clerks, weighers, measurers, checkers, recordkeeping clerks, general office clerks, production, planning, and expediting clerks, and their front-line supervisors. Their median annual pay is $28,475.

The third largest job family is Production workers, with an estimated 7,600 employed – just over 8 percent of the total industry workforce. This occupation group includes package inspectors, packaging assemblers and fabricators, packaging and filling machine operators and tenders, and their first-line supervisors. Their median pay is $24,148.

The fourth largest warehouse job family is Managers, which includes those overseeing general warehouse operations, sales, facilities maintenance, human resources and information systems. There are over 5,300 of these workers in the study region – about 6 percent of the labor warehouse force. Warehouse managers’ median annual pay is just over $52,000.

The remainder of warehouse occupations are small, adding up to just over 5,700 workers – 6 percent of the warehouse workforce.

The number of workers in large warehouses by county and rolled up into broad occupational category is shown in Figure 8. These occupational categories roll-up the detailed occupational breakout shown in Table 3.

Figure 8: Number of Workers in Large Warehouses, by Occupational Category and County
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 5-Year American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample, Occupational distribution for NAICS Industry 493 (TRN-Warehouse and Storage), Employment Status Recode (ESR) is limited to “Civilian Employed, at Work” with at least $500 annual earnings. 12,589
2,604
11,023
16,991
19,686
4,071
17,238
26,570
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Los Angeles County Orange County Riverside County San Bernardino County
Management Occupations
Other Occupsations
Production Occupations
Office and Administrative Support
Transportation and Material Moving
Packet Page. 1253
Exhausting Our Air 19
Community Profile: Cesar Avila, Truck Driver, and Maria Rubio, Retired
Cesar Avila (65) and Maria Rubio (53) and their family live two blocks away from the San Bernardino International Airport. They are immigrants from Guatemala and Mexico who have been living in the United States for over 40 years. They have lived in San Bernardino for the past 12 years but are now at risk of losing their home because of a large redevelopment led by the airport to rezone their homes to make room for future warehouse development.

Packet Page. 1254
20 Exhausting Our Air
Cesar is an interstate truck driver who sometimes spends days or weeks on the road and Maria tends to their home and children. A typical day for Cesar and Maria when they are not working is to tend to the home, go to church, visit family and rest. Since 2020 Maria and Cesar have had to deal with the stresses of Maria’s health and wellbeing. Maria constantly deals with coughing, bronchitis and pneumonia. Last year, she had to start using an oxygen machine at night to help her with her breathing. The doctor says she has to use it for life. They both know it is from living so close to a growing freight international airport. Cesar and Maria are deeply involved in organizing in their neighborhood for justice for themselves and their neighbors.

What is your relationship to the logistics industry? How does it show up in your life? Or in your neighborhood?
“We have been living in the United States for over 40 years. We have been living in San Bernardino since 2012. It has been getting harder to live here. We live in a small apartment two blocks away from the San Bernardino International Airport. It used to not bother us to live so close to the airport, but recently there have been more flights because of Amazon, Fedex and UPS operations, it is hard to ignore. - Maria There is so much pollution that comes from the airport that it gives us coughing attacks and the flu. We have proof that it comes from the airport pollution! We went to our doctors when we got pneumonia and they said it was from the pollution. We have never smoked a day in our life but our lungs are weak. We feel like we are choking in this Country by the air pollution.” - Cesar
“I have been on an oxygen machine for the last eight months. I will have to use it my whole life because the doctor does not have a better recommendation for me. I want my health to get better, because there is not a life like this. I cannot always be plugged into a machine. It is also costly to constantly use it.” - Maria
“We cannot be enemies to them, but the truth is they contaminate and they do not filter or do anything about it. They are hurting us with their contamination. It is not just the airport - warehouses are hurting us. Too many trucks drive around here because of the warehouses that are in our neighborhoods, and nobody says anything. We hear the refrigerated trucks running all night. All of this causes too much noise - all the trucks and the planes that fly right over our heads. We have seen so much traffic and road damages because of them” - Cesar
Packet Page. 1255
Exhausting Our Air 21
“Lots of undocumented people live in these areas and they do not want to get into problems and there is a fear of deportation. Even if they are sick because of the pollution, they do not want to get involved because there is a lot of fear and discrimination.” - Cesar
How does the transition of the logistics industry impact you? “I have never used a compressed natural gas truck or an electric truck but I know that it is good for the environment but that the driver might lose 5 hours because of charging. As drivers we only get 11 hours to drive and 3 to rest, shower and refuel. This is the only thing I am worried about. I am not worried about the cost because my company would get the truck. I just hope that the wages are not lowered because they had to buy the truck. Right now, I get paid enough to live and pay all my rents and bills.

One big worry that I have is that trucks are not using the exhaust filter they need to use to make their engines cleaner. The big companies I have worked for have always used the filters but I have noticed when I park at truck stops that smaller company trucks do not have them. That is fraud.

And it causes constant headaches and causes you to wake up with a cough.

But I know that some companies do it to cut costs.

I want things to get better. I want the pollution to get better and require the environmental agencies to push the big companies to do something.

I don't think the politicians are doing anything about the issues. I don’t think they care. They only care about their purse. Politicians need to do more. Even the big companies, like Amazon, Walmart, UPS and Fedex do not care. We hear their workers complaining about them all the time too.

I used to work at a warehouse, I didn't need to go to the gym because they had me running. It squeezes you out of yourself, that's why I became a truck driver because I got paid more. Driving used to be more lucrative, but now our work has gone down one-third.” - Cesar
What gives you hope about our future?
“Better representatives, things changing, more housing coming in gives me hope. Being able to buy homes, retire and use the open land for our communities instead of warehousing gives me hope. We need to get more resources. With the hand of God, we have to win! Primero Dios (first God)! We know we are not doing anything bad. These are our rights we are fighting for” – Maria
Packet Page. 1256
22 Exhausting Our Air
Packet Page. 1257
Exhausting Our Air 23

3. Truck Drivers and Trucking
Companies
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Trailer chassis with cargo containers
at Inland Empire warehouse
Photo credit: Economic Roundtable
Packet Page. 1258
24 Exhausting Our Air
Overview
Trucking Companies
Trucking companies are concentrated near the San Pedro Bay Ports, with secondary concentrations in the Inland Empire. Most truck drivers live near trucking companies. Truck drivers and warehouse workers often live in the same neighborhoods. Their livelihoods require exposure to the emissions and noise of diesel trucks when they are working, and often these impacts are also part of the after-work environment at their homes.

Two-thirds of trucking companies have nine or fewer trucks. Only eight percent of companies have 125 or more trucks. Truck companies are predominantly small businesses. However, large corporate trucking companies dominate the industry. Companies with 125 or more trucks own 95 percent of the trucks that move cargo into and out of the ports.

Trucking is a far riskier line of business for small companies than for large companies. Forty-three percent of companies with one or two trucks are inactive, but almost no companies with eight or more trucks are inactive.

Ninety-three percent (15,259) of trucks moving cargo at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are currently powered by diesel fuel. Trucks typically remain in operation for 12 years. Declining annual shares of the current diesel truck fleet are likely to remain in operation until 2035.

Diesel trucks have the second highest greenhouse gas emissions per tonmile of any mode to cargo movement, exceeded only by cargo aircraft.

Their high greenhouse emissions and wide deployment make them a significant contributor to climate change.

Deploying Electric Trucks
State and regional environmental regulations are driving a rapid transition to new truck propulsion technology. Beginning January 1, 2024, truck fleets are required to replace diesel trucks that reach the end of their duty cycle with battery-powered electric trucks.

There is strong opposition to this regulation by trucking companies.

Nineteen states are seeking appellate court review in a challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency waiver granted to California’s Advanced Clean Trucks Rule. Similarly, the California Trucking Association is challenging the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s rule that makes warehouses accountable for emissions from diesel trucks delivering cargo to warehouses.

Eight heavy-duty truck manufacturers have initiated small-scale manufacturing and sales for commercial Class 8, zero-emission, batteryelectric tractors. Most currently available electric trucks are capable of Packet Page. 1259
Exhausting Our Air 25
short-range drayage operations of roughly up to 175 miles between charges. This means that current battery-electric models are restricted to short-hauls or lighter-weight drayage tasks.

Given the current low-volume of electric truck sales, the purchase subsidies available in California are currently sufficient to reduce their cost to less than the cost for a diesel truck. However, there are only enough subsidy funds to cover a small fraction of the zero-emission trucks that must be put in service by 2035. As sales ramp up, there will be an interval when subsidies are scarce and the cost of electric trucks has not come down to the cost for diesel trucks.

Electricity Unavailable for Charging Stations
Electric truck dealers and fleet operators have identified delays in obtaining electric power for charging stations as the most serious obstacle for deploying electric trucks.

The need for electric truck charging stations is most concentrated above the ports, where many trucking companies as well as large warehouses are located, and at warehouse hubs in the City of Industry and in the Inland Empire from Ontario to the Moreno Valley. Charging stations will be needed at all of these sites.

Municipal utility districts, such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, are regulated by city councils rather than the California Energy Commission and must be locally activated to build the infrastructure required to meet electrical demand for recharging battery-electric trucks.

Packet Page. 1260
26 Exhausting Our Air
Drayage Truck Drivers
The San Pedro Bay ports are the primary gateway for the $350 billion in goods that are imported annually to satisfy enormous consumer demand in the Western United States.7 There are 2,327 active drayage trucking companies registered with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach that move goods from the ports to warehouses with a total of over 800 million square feet of space in the four-county region.

Drayage trucking companies are concentrated near the ports, with secondary concentrations in the Inland Empire, as shown in Figure 9. This is logistically practical because of proximity to the San Pedro Bay Ports.

Most truck drivers live near trucking companies. This is shown by the background colors in Figure 9, where darker colors represent higher residential density of truck drivers.

The U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey reports that there are 68,074 truck drivers employed by the truck transportation industry Figure 9: Locations of Trucking Companies and Homes of Truck Drivers Sources: Location of trucking companies is from the Port of Los Angeles truck registry. The residential density of truck drivers is from the American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample for 2016-2020. The red dots indicate trucking companies. The background colors indicate residential density of truck drivers.

Number of truck drivers
residing in community
Packet Page. 1261
Exhausting Our Air 27
within the four-county study area. Over half live in Los Angeles County, one quarter live in San Bernardino County, and roughly one-tenth live in each Riverside and Orange Counties, as shown in Figure 10.

Three-quarters of truck drivers report that they are employed by a private, for-profit business, as shown in Figure 11. Almost one-quarter (24 percent) Figure 10: Share of Truck Drivers Residing in Each County Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Public Use Microdata Sample for 2016-2020, for Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. 57%, Los Angeles
25%, San
Bernardino
10%, Riverside
8%, Orange
Figure 11: Types of Establishments that Employ Truck Drivers Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Public Use Microdata Sample for 2016-2020, for Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Public sector employment is excluded.

Private
for-profit
75%
Self-employed
in own
unincorporated
business
17% Self-employed in own
incorporated business
7%
Nonprofit
1%
Packet Page. 1262
28 Exhausting Our Air
are self-employed in their own business, either unincorporated or incorporated, and one-percent work for a nonprofit group. This breakout excludes a small number of truckers employed by government agencies.

The type of employer impacts the amount of pay that truck drivers receive, as shown in Figure 12. The typical (median) truck driver earns $46,024 a year; this is also the typical pay for truckers working for private, for profit companies, which dominate the industry. Earnings are higher, $51,138, for self-employed truckers who own an incorporated business, and even higher, $60,369, for the small number of truckers employed by nonprofit groups.

Truck drivers and warehouse workers often live in the same neighborhoods. Both groups of workers are predominantly Latino. And both groups have very similar levels of educational attainment, with almost three-quarters having no college education, as can be seen in Figure 13.

Truck drivers and warehouse workers differ in gender and age. Both groups of workers are predominantly male, but truck drivers are almost exclusively male (97 percent vs 68 percent of warehouse workers).

Truck drivers tend to be older than warehouse workers. Sixty percent are 45 years of age or older, while 73 percent of warehouse workers are less than 45 years old.

Figure 12: Median Annual Earnings of Truck Drivers by Type of Employer Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS Public Use Microdata Sample for 2016-2020, for Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Earnings in 2020 dollars are for employed truck drivers in truck transportation industry. $46,024 $46,024 $51,138 $60,369 $46,024 $0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
Private
for-profit
Self-employed
in own
unincorporated
business
Self-employed
in own
incorporated
business
Nonprofit ALL TRUCKERS
Median Annual Earnings in 2020 $
Packet Page. 1263
Exhausting Our Air 29
Trucking Companies
The registry of 2,997 drayage trucking companies authorized to transport cargo containers to and from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach includes companies with as few as one truck and as many as 24,000 trucks.

The ports are the primary entry point for consumer goods coming into the region, so this registry provides a reliable profile of the trucking companies trucks that deliver cargo to warehouses in the four-county region.8 Two-thirds of drayage trucking companies have nine or fewer trucks, as shown in Figure 14. Only eight percent of companies have 125 or more trucks. Truck companies in the region are predominantly small businesses.

Figure 13: Profile of Warehouse Workers and Truck Drivers in the 4-County Study Area Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Public Use Microdata Sample for 2016-2020, for Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. 10%
18%
21%
31%
21%
3%
23%
45%
29%
2%
3%
8%
6%
81%
32%
68%
26%
34%
23%
17%
2%
6%
22%
40%
32%
2%
8%
7%
16%
68%
3%
97%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
55 +
45 - 54
35 - 44
25 - 34
18 - 24
AGE
B.A. Degree+
Some College
High School Diploma
No High School Diploma

EDUCATION
Other
Asian Am or Pac Islander
African American
European American
Latino

ETHNICITY
Female
Male
GENDER
Truck Driver
Frontline
Warehouse
Worker
Packet Page. 1264
30 Exhausting Our Air
However, large corporate trucking companies dominate the industry.

Companies with 125 or more trucks own 95 percent of the trucks that move cargo into and out of the ports, as shown in Figure 15.

Figure 14: Distribution of Trucking Companies Serving the San Pedro Bay Ports by Number of Trucks Owned
Source: Random sample of 304 trucking companies registered with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, and data for each company from the U.S. Department of Transportation FMCSA Safety and Fitness Electronic Records System. 26%
22%
18% 17%
9% 8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1 Truck
2-4
Trucks
5-9
Trucks
10-28
Trucks
29-124
Trucks
125+
Trucks
Percent of Trucking Companies
Size of Company Based on Number of Trucks Owned
Figure 15: Share of All Trucks Owned by Companies in Each Size Category Source: Random sample of 304 trucking companies registered with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, and data for each company from the U.S. Department of Transportation FMCSA Safety and Fitness Electronic Records System.

0.1% 0.3% 1% 2% 3%
95%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 Truck
2-4
Trucks
5-9
Trucks
10-28
Trucks
29-124
Trucks
125+
Trucks
Percent of All Trucks Owned
Size of Company Based on Number of Trucks Owned
Packet Page. 1265
Exhausting Our Air 31
Large companies serving the ports include J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., headquartered in Arizona with 24,040 trucks and Swift Transportation Company, headquartered in Arizona with 15,907 trucks
Twenty-nine percent of trucking companies registered with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have gone out of business. Nearly all of the companies that close have only one or two trucks. In the sample of 304 trucking companies analyzed, 43 percent of companies with one or two trucks are inactive, but no companies with eight or more trucks have gone out of business, as shown in Figure 16. Trucking is a far riskier line of business for small companies than for large companies.

Trucks
Ninety-three percent (15,259) of trucks moving cargo at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are currently powered by diesel fuel, six percent (872) use natural gas in compressed (CNG) or liquid (LNG) form, and 0.3 percent (81) are electric, as shown in Figure 17. This is a total of 16,232 trucks serving the ports.9
The shift from diesel fuel to electricity that has been mandated by the California Air Resources Board is a massive technological transition.10 Figure 16: Business Closure Rate for Trucking Companies Based on Size Source: Random sample of 304 trucking companies registered with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, and data for each company from the U.S. Department of Transportation FMCSA Safety and Fitness Electronic Records System. 57%
84%
98% 100%
43%
16%
2% 0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1-2 Trucks 3-5 Trucks 6-18 Trucks 19+ Trucks
In Business Out of Business
Packet Page. 1266
32 Exhausting Our Air
Detailed records for truck trips at the San Pedro Bay Ports are available for November 2022, a month when there were 305,234 trips. Over half of the Figure 17: Fuel Type of Trucks Transporting Containers in the San Pedro Bay Ports Source: Port of Los Angeles Clean Truck Program, Gate Move Analysis (includes the Port of Long Beach), November 2022.

Diesel, 93%
CNG, 4%
LNG, 2%
Electric, 0.3%
Figure 18: Truck Trips at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach by Engine Year Source: Port of Los Angeles Clean Truck Program, Gate Move Analysis (includes the Port of Long Beach), November 2022. 5%
6%
4%
5%
6%
4%
8%
13%
16%
8%
5%
4%
4%
3%
4%
4%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Packet Page. 1267
Exhausting Our Air 33
trips (52 percent) were by trucks with engines built before 2015, as shown in Figure 18.

Trucks typically remain in operation for 12 years, although 20 percent of the trips shown in Figure 18 were by trucks with engines that were older than this – older trucks with engines manufactured from 2007 to 2010.

Nevertheless, the 12-year life cycle is a benchmark for projecting emissions produced by the current fleet of diesel trucks transporting cargo containers to warehouses, and the rate at which electric trucks will replace this fleet.

Declining annual shares of the current diesel truck fleet are likely to remain in operation until 2035.

Emissions per Cargo Mile
Cargo is moved by trains and planes, as well as diesel trucks, with the prospect of an increasing share being moved by electric truck. The most common choice is whether to move cargo containers by truck or train.

Different modes of transportation have significantly different environmental impacts.

Cargo aircraft produce 50 times more greenhouse gas emissions per ton-mile of cargo movement than trains, as shown in Figure 19.

Figure 19: Grams of Greenhouse Gas Emissions per Ton-Mile of Cargo Movement Source: Congressional Budget Office and Economic Roundtable analysis of electric trucks based on utility emissions. 1,166
181
44 23
0 200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
Cargo Planes Diesel Trucks Electric Trucks Trains
Packet Page. 1268
34 Exhausting Our Air
The energy required to lift cargo aircraft off of the ground and move rapidly through the air produces 1,166 grams of carbon dioxide and related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per ton-mile of flight.

Diesel trucks have the next highest GHG emissions, producing 181 grams per ton-mile.

Electric trucks produce 44 grams of GHG per ton-mile based on the greenhouse gas emission from generating electricity for the electricity grid.11
The large volume of cargo moved by a single train requires a small amount of fuel compared to the overall weight of the cargo, with only 23 grams of GHG produced per ton-mile.

The quantity of criteria emissions produced by transporting cargo is about one-thirtieth the quantity of the greenhouse gas emissions. This can be seen by comparing grams of greenhouse gas emissions in Figure 19 to grams of criteria emissions in Figure 20.

Figure 20: Grams of Criteria Emissions per Ton-Mile of Cargo Movement Source: California Air Resources Board and Economic Roundtable analysis of electric trucks based on utility emissions.

Trains Cargo
Planes
Diesel
Trucks
Electric
Trucks
Sulfur dioxide (SOx) 0.1 0.03
Particulate matter (PM) 0.5 0.1 0.0005
Hydrocarbons (HC) 1.7 0.001
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 7.7 0.01
Nitrogen oxide (NOx) 19.4 3.7 0.1 0.03
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Packet Page. 1269
Exhausting Our Air 35
These emissions and their effects include:
• Nitrogen oxide (NOx), which contributes to ozone depletion in the upper atmosphere12 and damages the human respiratory system. • Carbon monoxide (CO), which can cause fatigue, headaches, confusion, and dizziness due to inadequate oxygen delivery to the brain, and also has a weak direct effect on climate by contributing to ozone formation.
13 • Particulate matter (PM), which can cause premature death in people with heart or lung disease, nonfatal heart attacks, irregular heartbeat, aggravated asthma, and decreased lung function. In addition to these health impacts, it is a main cause of reduced visibility (haze).14 • Sulfur dioxide (SOx), which can irritate the skin and mucous membranes of the eyes, nose, throat, and lungs. It can also damage vegetation, affect soils, acidify lakes and streams, and ruin memorials and building facades.
15 Trains
Trains have the lowest greenhouse gas emissions of any mode of cargo movement but produce 32 times more criteria emissions per ton mile than any other mode of cargo transportation. This is because many of the locomotives are old and have old engine technology with little if any emission controls.

Over one-third of locomotives (37 percent) were manufactured from 1973 to 1992, and are fuel guzzlers. These old locomotives produce 15.7 grams of criteria emissions for each brake-horsepower-hour of operation.

Over another third (39 percent) of locomotives were manufactured from 1993 to 2011 and also are energy-intensive, producing 10.4 grams of emissions per brake-horsepower-hour of operation.
16 Cargo Airplanes
Cargo airplanes have the highest greenhouse gas emissions of any mode of cargo movement – six times more per ton-mile than diesel trucks. They also produce the second greatest quantity of criteria emissions - 42 times more per ton-mile than diesel trucks.

Transporting cargo by plane gets goods into the hands of consumers quickly but is not friendly to the environment.

Diesel Trucks
Diesel trucks have the second highest greenhouse gas emissions per ton-mile and the second lowest criteria emissions per ton-mile of any mode of cargo Packet Page. 1270
36 Exhausting Our Air
movement. Their high GHG emissions make them a significant contributor to climate change, while their more recent engine technology and stricter air quality controls yield lower criteria emissions.

Electric Trucks
Electric trucks have very low greenhouse gas emissions, created upstream from generating utility electricity used to recharge truck batteries. GHG emissions from electric trucks are slightly greater than from trains.

Criteria emissions from generating power for electric trucks are infinitesimal – by far the lowest of any mode of cargo movement. This is because the power generation facilities that produce electricity for utilities have low emissions, using air quality controls at scale and at centralized locations.

Electric trucks stand out as the cleanest mode of cargo movement.

Diesel Truck Emissions between Ports and Warehouses
Criteria Emissions
Warehouses in the four-county region are an average of 55 miles from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. In 2022, the two ports recorded Figure 21: Estimated Annual Tons of Criteria Emissions in 2022 by Diesel Truck Trips at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach
Source: Port of Los Angeles Clean Truck Program Gate Move Analysis and CARB emissions inventory. 594
62 15 13 1
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
1 Annual Tons of Emissions
NOx
(Nitrogen
Oxides)
N2O
(Nitrous
Oxide)
PM2.5 (Fine
Particulate
Matter)
ROG
(Reactive
Organic Gas)
CH4
(Methane)
Packet Page. 1271
Exhausting Our Air 37
over four million truck trips at the ports, representing over 212 million miles traveled to large warehouses by diesel trucks.17 This is only part of total drayage activity moving consumer goods in the four-county region, but the detailed port records make it possible to calculate the criteria emissions produced by these truck trips, which are shown in Figure 21.

Diesel truck trips from the ports to warehouses produced an estimated total of 685 tons of criteria emissions in 2022. Nitrogen oxides made up most of these emissions - 87 percent. Nitrous oxide made up 9 percent of the emissions. Fine particulate matter and reactive organic gas each made up 2 percent, and methane made up 0.1 percent.18
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
California’s current diesel truck fleet produces 3.7 pounds of carbon dioxide for each mile it travels.19 The more than 212 million miles of travel to large warehouses by diesel trucks at the ports in 2022 produced an estimated 390,459 tons of carbon dioxide that was released into the air.

Uncompensated Public Costs from Diesel Trucks
Because trucks share the road with many other types of vehicles, they have less accountability for their impacts on the routes they travel than trains.

Railroads must repair and maintain their rail systems, whereas trucking companies pay fuel and tire taxes that contribute to road maintenance.

The Congressional Budget Office determined that uncompensated public costs for wear and tear on roads and bridges; delays caused by traffic congestion; injuries, fatalities, and property damage from accidents; and harmful effects from exhaust emissions are eight times greater per ton-mile for goods transported by truck than for goods transported by train. 20 Clean Truck Mandate
Drayage truck regulations under the California Air Resources Board’s Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation and warehouse accountability standards under the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Indirect Source Rule 2305 create a rapid timeline for conversion to zero-emission trucks.21 California Air Resources Board
On April 28, 2023, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) passed the Advanced Clean Fleets regulation, which will require truck owners to transition their vehicles to zero-emission trucks.

Packet Page. 1272
38 Exhausting Our Air
Trucks must register with CARB in order to obtain a California vehicle license. Beginning January 1, 2024, all new drayage trucks registering in the CARB Online System must be zero-emission. Existing internal combustion engine vehicles can remain in the Drayage Truck Registry until 2035. After that, no internal combustion engine vehicles will be allowed in the registry.

Drayage trucks are heavy-duty (Class 8) trucks that transport containers and bulk freight between ports and intermodal rail facilities or warehouses.

There are also requirements for high priority fleets, which are fleets with 50 or more trucks or annual revenue of $50 million or more. High priority fleets can only purchase zero-emission trucks starting in January 2024 and must take trucks with internal combustion engines out of their fleets by the start of 2025. There are different annual milestones for the share of the fleet that must be zero-emission based on whether the vehicles are day-cab tractors or sleeper-cab tractors.

Government fleets must have 50 percent zero-emission truck purchases starting in 2024 and 100 percent zero-emission purchases by 2027. A fleet of fewer than 10 vehicles can wait until 2027 before being required to buy only zero-emission vehicles.

This regulation will result in nearly half of heavy-duty trucks becoming zero-emission by 2035 and about 70 percent to be zero-emission by 2042.

This will reduce the harmful impacts of tailpipe emissions and disruptive noise in neighborhoods located near seaports, intermodal railyards, warehouses, and distribution centers.

There is strong opposition to this regulation by trucking companies.

Nineteen states have sought appellate court review in a challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency waiver granted to California’s Advanced Clean Trucks Rule. This includes Arizona and Nevada, which have less restrictive emission regulations and where many large trucking fleets that serve California are based. In addition, the size of California’s trucking network might well cause its zero-emission standards to become national standards, affecting truck fleets throughout the nation.22 South Coast Air Quality Management District
The South Coast Air Quality Management District adopted the Warehouse Indirect Source Rule, Rule 2305 to reduce nitrogen oxide and particulate matter emissions produced by trucks traveling to and from large warehouses. The rule regulates owners and operators of warehouses greater Packet Page. 1273
Exhausting Our Air 39
than 100,000 square feet as indirect sources of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter emissions from trucks.

The rule establishes a menu-based system of points requiring warehouse operators to earn a specified number of points annually by completing actions such as acquiring near zero emission or zero emissions on-road trucks, cargo-handling equipment, charging infrastructure, solar panels, or particulate filters for nearby sensitive land uses. Alternatively, warehouse operators can pay a mitigation fee.23
An accompanying Rule, number 316, establishes fees for the reports, notifications, applications, and mitigation fees called for by Rule 2305.

The California Trucking Association is challenging Rule 2305 in federal court, asserting that it is preempted by the federal Clean Air Act. The suit asserts that Rule 2305 is designed solely to accelerate the transition of truck fleets to zero-emission and near-zero-emission trucks.
24 Rapid Change
State and regional environmental regulations are driving a rapid transition to new truck propulsion technology. Beginning in 2024, truck fleets are required to replacing diesel trucks that reach the end of their duty cycle with battery-powered electric trucks.

Clean Trucks
Availability
Eight heavy-duty truck manufacturers have initiated small-scale manufacturing and sales for early commercial Class 8 zero-emission battery-electric tractors.
25 These are heavy-duty or semi-trucks that pull
trailers, for example, chassis loaded with cargo containers. The manufacturers and truck models are:

1. BYD, 8TT (T9/Q3M)

2. Freightliner (Daimler), eCascadia

3. Kenworth, T680(e)

4. Lion Electric, Lion 8T

5. Nikola, Tre BEV

6. Peterbilt, e579

7. Tesla, Semi

8. Volvo, VNR Electric 6x4
These trucks are available from manufactures with a typical delivery time of six months.

Packet Page. 1274
40 Exhausting Our Air
Functionality
Most currently available electric trucks are capable of meeting basic performance requirements for short-range drayage operations, roughly up to 175 miles between charges. Actual mileage is often less than the listed mileage. Some routes require climbing grades, such as over the Kellogg Pass, while hot weather increases the use of air conditioning, and the weight of loads varies. This means that current battery-electric models are largely restricted to short-haul or lighter-weight drayage tasks.

Despite these limitations, current battery electric trucks can perform a significant share of drayage functions related to moving cargo containers from the ports to warehouses, for example, warehouses in Los Angeles and Orange Counties, as well as distributing goods from warehouses to retail locations within 50 miles.

The California Air Resources Board has documented strong year-over-year progress by major manufacturers in designing, testing, improving, and commercializing Class 8 battery-electric trucks suitable for drayage. 26 This
indicates that the capabilities and reliability of electric trucks will continue to improve and that they will be able to perform all drayage functions currently performed by diesel trucks.

Cost
Truck dealerships interviewed by the Economic Roundtable cited costs of $500,000 to $550,000 for Class 8 battery electric trucks. However, subsidies that currently are available can reduce the purchase cost to less than the cost for a conventional diesel truck.

The subsidy programs include
• San Pedro Ports Clean Trucks Program, which will disburse approximately $45 million a year to accelerate the deployment of zero-emission trucks serving the ports.27
• California Hybrid and Zero-Emission Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP), which will provide an estimated $157 million in subsidies for zeroemission drayage trucks.28 • South Coast AQMD Voucher Incentive Program for On-Road HeavyDuty Vehicles, which has $100 to $150 million to subside small fleets in replacing trucks with engines manufactured in 2017 or earlier with new zero-emission vehicles.29
• Southern California Edison Charge Ready Program, which has $432 million to subsidize the costs for installing charging equipment, including helping offset the cost to design, construct, and install charging infrastructure for both cars and trucks.30
Packet Page. 1275
Exhausting Our Air 41
These subsidies add up to half a billion dollars over the next five years to support purchases of electric trucks, with additional subsidies for charging infrastructure in areas served by Southern California Edison.

The subsidies far exceed current purchases of electric trucks, which now are in the single digits in Southern California from most manufacturers.

However, there are approximately 16,232 trucks active in the San Pedro Bay Ports. Diesel trucks have a roughly 12-year life span. This means that approximately 1,353 new trucks typically enter service at the ports every year.

If the new battery electric trucks cost half a million dollars each, the cost for the typical truck replacement cycle would be $676 million a year. This would deplete the subsidies that are available in a single year.

The practical reality is that many truck companies are likely to defer purchases of new battery-electric trucks for several additional years and that costs will come down as sales volume increases. Nevertheless, there will be an interval when subsidies are scarce and the cost of battery-electric trucks has not come down to the cost for diesel trucks. This will be particularly problematic for owner-operators and owners of small fleets, who do not have the financial resources or sophistication of large fleet owners.

Infrastructure
Charging stations for battery-electric trucks represent growth for electric utilities. It is reasonable for utilities to support commercial customers with electric truck adoption by offering financial incentives and rebates for charging infrastructure, as well as hiring and training experts who can help fleets design and implement necessary facility and electrical upgrades.

The California Energy Commission adopted Rule 29, which requires utilities to provide this support. Southern California Edison (SCE) explains that:

Under Rule 29, SCE will coordinate and pay for the design and deployment of eligible electrical service extension work from SCE’s electrical distribution line facilities to the customer installed meter panel or meter pedestal on the utility side of the meter for separately metered EV charging station projects.31
Packet Page. 1276
42 Exhausting Our Air
However, electric truck dealers and fleet operators have identified delays in obtaining electric power for charging stations as the most serious obstacle for deploying electric trucks. There is a mismatch between the multi-year timeline that is typical for upgrading the utility infrastructure and the rapid deployment of electric trucks required by the California Air Resources Board. Fleet operators report that they are being told it will take two years to obtain electric power for their charging stations.

Southern California Edison has stated that they are experiencing supply chain constraints in critical equipment necessary to complete and energize electric truck charging stations. This includes utility transformers and switch gear. Edison also noted that electrical capacity is inadequate in some areas of its distribution grid.32
The need for electric truck charging stations is most concentrated above the ports, where many trucking companies as well as large warehouses are located, as shown in Figure 22. The utility districts serving this area are the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (DWP) and Southern California Edison.

In addition to overnight charging at trucking establishments, batteryelectric trucks will sometimes need to recharge after delivering cargo to warehouses. This includes warehouse hubs in the City of Industry and in the Inland Empire from Ontario to the Moreno Valley.

Figure 22: Utility Districts, Trucking Companies and Large Warehouses in the Four-County Region Source: Economic Roundtable analysis, Southern California Air Quality Management District data from CoStar, and California Energy Commission.

Packet Page. 1277
Exhausting Our Air 43
Municipal utility districts, such as DWP, are regulated by city councils rather than the California Energy Commission and must be locally activated to build the infrastructure required to meet electrical demand for recharging battery-electric trucks.

One challenge facing DWP is a low-voltage electrical distribution system, which makes it harder to move large amounts of power to new locations.

A second challenge is that its policies do not encourage on-site electrical generation, such as through photovoltaic arrays, which can supply some of the electricity needed for charging stations. A third challenge is that the City of Los Angeles has not adopted a counterpart to California’s Rule 29, requiring DWP to provide technical and financial assistance for installing commercial recharging stations.

The demand for electrical power to charge electric trucks is already known based on where truck companies and large warehouses are located.

Charging stations will be needed at all of these sites, and both trucking companies and warehouses are clustered in specific areas.

Both Southern California Edison, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and other municipal utility districts must become proactive in identifying the system requirements for providing power for electric trucks and move expeditiously to build the necessary distribution infrastructure in advance of the oncoming wave of commercial applications for electrical service upgrades.

Packet Page. 1278
44 Exhausting Our Air
Community Profile: Ricardo Peraza, Trucking Company Owner Ricardo Peraza (45) is an immigrant from Maya Quintana Roo, Mexico, who lives in San Bernardino and is the owner of a small trucking company, Rope Trucking. Ricardo has built his business from the ground up and hopes to continue growing it, even through the changes in truck regulation. He lives in the Airport Gateway Specific Plan area, a neighborhood that the San Bernardino International Airport is planning to rezone for industrial use, which would cause the displacement of thousands of families. Even though he might be one of them, Ricardo is optimistic that he will be able to fight for his rights.

How do you feel about the Airport Gateway Specific Plan? I live in that area. Some people are going to get really rich off of this project. Even those landowners! But for me, who rents, I am at risk. But I am not going to back down. I am not going to leave unless I am compensated for my move. I know sooner or later, they will try to get rid of me. This is going to impact me, my family and my money. I feel lucky I have my trucks to hold me down in case this happens. But I feel for the people who are retired or do not have those assets to move. This is just going to make more people homeless.

I see the cities widening the freeways for this project. I have a friend who had an auto body shop right in front of the San Bernardino Airport who was leasing the land and has been forced to move. I offered to help him move with my truck.

Packet Page. 1279
Exhausting Our Air 45
How do you feel about the explosion of warehouses in the Inland Empire? I don't think there is more productivity or gain because of all the warehouses that have come in. I think it is the investors who are the only ones winning here. They are buying up land, pushing out the poorest people and making money off of it. I think the situation is going to keep getting worse.

Also with so many warehouses, where are the trucks supposed to go! Some warehouses do not allow the trucks to wait outside of the warehouse.

Truckers have nowhere to go! They have to find a place to go to the bathroom off the side of the road because there are not places for trucks to go! Sometimes we cannot even find a place to eat because places do not have parking for our trucks. It can be hours before we eat or go to the bathroom because nothing is set up for us. Police and code enforcement are always on our backs.

I don't know what is going to happen with all these warehouses being built. It is so hard for us to go through neighborhoods or commercial areas because they were not built for our trucks! Many times, we have to drop off loads and go through these areas and we knock down lights and signs because the roads aren’t wide enough.

I also recognize how loud our trucks are. We need a dedicated industrial area where we can drive in and out without bothering people. However, I don’t think people understand my work. I think it is easy to complain about the noise. Sometimes, residents stay up all night partying and that is okay. But when I leave at three in the morning for work and turn on my truck, people can't see that I am just heading to work. I can’t help it.

How did you get into trucking?
I started working trucking by working for companies that would supply the truck for me and I would get paid only $300 even though the truck owner would get paid triple that.

I met a man, Don Carlos, who had a couple trucks and saw me struggling working for the trucking company. He let me borrow one of his trucks to start making trips until I made enough money to buy my own. He has had a contract for UPS moving packages for them for over twenty years. He has been able to buy multiple trucks over the years and has multiple homes paid off because of the pay. I was lucky to meet him! This is a very competitive industry and people are selfish.

Packet Page. 1280
46 Exhausting Our Air
One of the only reasons I was able to buy this new truck was because of the pandemic and how much work I received during that time. Amazon used to give me a lot of money during the pandemic to move packages for them. Now they barely offer $400 for a load. And I think because truckers accept these loads at low rates, the companies take advantage of that and look for the cheapest option.

These big trucking companies are also a big threat to us smaller trucking companies. They are the ones that negotiate year-long contracts and take all the contracts away from us. I would not work for them, because they do not pay their drivers well.

I used to be a drayage driver at the Ports of Los Angeles. I was part of the group of truckers that got into the work after the Port Truck Rule happened. I bought a new enough truck to be able to go in. But I know many people who lost their jobs because their truck wasn’t allowed in the Port of Los Angeles anymore.

What are your thoughts on the diesel fuel that your truck uses? Any truck has little gaps or leaks so we are exposed to diesel throughout the day. I have noticed on days that I work 10 hours or more that my shirt gets covered in diesel. I leave my truck smelling like a mechanic who has been working all day. On hot days, I have to keep my truck engine running, because it is hot. I know I am getting covered in emissions and am breathing it. I do not smoke, but I have chronic allergies. I think sooner or later it is going to make us sick. There is a huge risk of fires and overheating. There are trucks that combust because of the heat. But this is the cheapest system that we can use in this business.

They are forcing us to buy electric trucks, but we will not be able to afford them, even if the government tries to give us money for them. There are so many costs that are not accounted for like repairs, part replacement and fueling. Right now, I repair my truck by myself because I know how too.

I wouldn’t know how to repair an electric truck! And it probably would be so costly since there aren’t many electric truck mechanics. I think the young people should start focusing on that industry.

I think I am also really scared of overheating and fires in an electric truck.

If it overheats and a fire starts, the battery would cause an explosion. With diesel, it takes time for the truck to burn. With electric and natural gas, we are talking about an explosion.

But really, it comes to who is going to be able to pay for it. I do not trust hydrogen and natural gas. I see them on the side of the road broken down.

Packet Page. 1281
Exhausting Our Air 47
I am part of the old school, and this is what we prefer. I worry too that these new trucks are all coming out automatic, and you need a manual to help reduce the speed or go up a hill.

If you could pilot or try using an electric truck, would you? Depending on the programs that the government has to help us keep up with the business and maintenance of the truck. It is not just about giving us money to buy it and then us having to figure it out after. We need support throughout the life of the truck.

There are so many permits that my truck needs! I need a permit to drive the truck for the fuel I use, for crossing into other states, plus insurance and plates. These are all costs that are never accounted for that are part of the business. Depending if I enter into an airport - the insurance cost goes higher. I have to pay for background checks and fingerprints every year.

I support change but we have to make sure it works for us. I have never been spoken too about the transition the government requires. Amazon sometimes sends me emails about conferences I can go to about this, but I know it is probably for their benefit and not mine. This is a big risk! If I could get my truck traded in for a new electric truck with 50 percent covered for 5 years, I would do it. But right now, that cannot come out of my pocket - it will hurt me. I need to have a safety net. I know California has to do it. They have a lot of money, especially money that comes from us paying for permits and licenses. The government isn’t going to lose.

How do you feel about the new truck regulations that the State of California has passed?
I think it is too short of time! I think in ten years I want to retire so these truck regulations are not going to impact me. I am trying to avoid it.

I would tell the younger people that the golden era of trucking is over.

There is always going to be an option to work for the big companies and keep making them rich. Having your own company is better but it is a lot of work and investment. I would tell them to study the electric trucks, circuitry and data systems for the trucks - I think that's what the future is.

I have a granddaughter, and I know the future is not going to be okay for her because of climate change. I think it is important to fight these things. I know that we are going to run out of water, that we are going to need to buy our clean air and that we are going to keep hurting the land. I think whatever we can do to delay the climate crisis, we need to do.

Packet Page. 1282
48 Exhausting Our Air

Packet Page. 1283
Exhausting Our Air 49

4. Impacts of Warehouse
Trucking ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Photo credit:

Freightliner Cascadia
Packet Page. 1284
50 Exhausting Our Air
Overview
Truck Mileage and Uncompensated costs
Trucks travel over 415 million miles a year to and from large warehouses in the four-county region.

The destinations of trip trips include:
• The San Pedro Ports account for one-third of truck trips. • Freight rail intermodal yards account for over one-quarter of trips. • Other warehouses account for over one-fifth of trips. • Local retail stores account for 14 percent of trips.
• Cargo airports account for three percent of trips.

There are an estimated $1.07 billion in annual uncompensated public costs from warehouse diesel trips caused by wear and tear on roads and bridges; delays from traffic congestion; injuries, fatalities, and property damage from accidents; and harmful effects from exhaust. Almost 6 million tons of CO2, the primary greenhouse gas, are produced. California ranks 46th among the
50 states in the share of its roads that are in acceptable condition.

Health Impacts
The 11.5 million annual heavy-truck trips produce:
• 29 tons of fine particulate matter associated with increased bronchitis and asthma attacks.
• 7 tons of sulfur dioxide, a highly reactive gas that severely irritates breathing passages, eyes, and skin.
• 1,161 tons of nitric oxides and dioxides, which can irritate sensory organs, and cause shortness of breath and fluid build-up in the lungs.
• 100 tons of ammonia, which can irritate and burn the skin, mouth, throat, lungs, and eyes.
• 26 tons of volatile organic compounds, which can cause damage to the liver, kidney, or central nervous system.

The annual health costs for residents of the four-county region from current diesel truck emissions, and, conversely, the health benefits from having electric trucks move cargo instead of diesel trucks, range from $65 million up to $146 million, based on different epidemiological studies.

Emissions produced in the South Coast Air Basin spill over into other parts of California and have additional adverse health impacts outside of the four-county region. The statewide public health costs for different medical conditions caused by diesel emissions range from $74 million to $166 million. This is 13 percent more than costs in just the four-county region.

Packet Page. 1285
Exhausting Our Air 51
Warehouse Impacts on Air Quality
Large warehouses in Southern California are hubs in moving goods from cargo ships and aircraft to distribution centers, businesses and households.

Heavy-duty diesel trucks are the dominant method of goods movement, often in tandem with oceangoing container ships and sometimes freight trains and cargo aircraft.

Truck Mileage
Trucks travel over 415 million
miles a year to and from of
large warehouses in the fourcounty region, as shown in Table 4.
33 Over two-thirds of
these truck trip miles are for
bringing goods in and out of
warehouses in San Bernardino
and Riverside Counties, as
shown in Figure 23.

Riverside and San Bernardino
Counties also stand out for
having the most truck mileage
per warehouse. Both have
over twice as many annual
truck trip miles per warehouse
as warehouses in Los Angeles
and Orange Counties.

Table 4: Truck Mileage to and from Large Warehouses in the Four-County Region County
Annual Truck Trip
Miles Percent
Number of
Large
Warehouses
Average Truck
Miles per
Warehouse
Los Angeles 100,801,918 24% 1,626 61,994
Orange 28,811,511 7% 388 74,256
Riverside 92,231,705 22% 402 229,432
San Bernardino 193,671,306 47% 875 221,339
Region Total 415,516,440 100% 3,291 126,258
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator; U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. TIGER/Line Shapefiles; and other sources.

These trip mile estimates are calculated based on roundtrips from the origins and to the destinations of warehoused goods: port facilities, other warehouses, intermodal facilities, airports, and retail stores.

Figure 23: Percent of Truck Mileage by County
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet,
Appendix C; Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator; and U.S.

Census Bureau. 2019. TIGER/Line Shapefiles.

Los
Angeles,
24%
Orange,
7%
Riverside,
22%
San
Benrardino,
47%
Packet Page. 1286
52 Exhausting Our Air
The types of origins and destinations of the truck trip generated by large warehouses are broken out in Figure 24. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach account for one-third (34 percent) of truck trips Freight rail intermodal yards account for over one-quarter (27 percent) of trips.34 Other warehouses account for over one-fifth (22 percent) of trips.

Local retail stores account for 14 percent of trips, and cargo airports35 account for three percent of trips.
36 Ton-miles of Truck Travel
The impact of trucks on roads and the environment can be measured by converting trip mileage to ton-miles. Ton-miles are calculated by multiplying the weight of a truck in tons by the distance it travels. For example, a 40,000-pound truck traveling one mile represents 20 ton-miles.

We estimated the ton-weight per truck using the following factors:
• Cargo weight per 40' container 13.15 tons37
• Empty 40' container 4.13 tons
38 • Tractor truck 17 tons39
• Empty trailer chassis 3.3 tons40
Figure 24: Distribution of Truck Trips between Warehouses and Other Logistics Nodes Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District. Economic Roundtable design; images from openclipart.org, under the Creative Commons Zero 1.0 License.

Packet Page. 1287
Exhausting Our Air 53
Diesel truck trips in our analysis are divided equally between empty and full trips. This assumption that flows of goods are always one-way, singlestop drop offs produces conservative ton-mileage estimates. Averaging the loaded and empty weights below we get an average trip weight of 31 tons. • Loaded: Tractor + Chassis + Container + Cargo = 37.6 tons • Empty: Tractor + Chassis + Container = 24.4 tons
The greater number of ton-miles is linked to large warehouses in San Bernardino and Los Angeles Counites, while the average truck ton-miles per large warehouse is highest in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, as shown in Table 5.

Table 5: Truck Ton-Miles to and from Large Warehouses in the Four-County Region County Annual Truck TonMilesPercent Number of
Large
Warehouses
Average Ton-Miles
per Warehouse
Los Angeles 6,251,549,358 24% 1,626 3,844,741
Orange 1,786,836,889 7% 388 4,605,250
Riverside 5,720,040,528 22% 402 14,228,957
San Bernardino 12,011,137,814 47% 875 13,727,015
Region Total 25,769,564,589 100% 3,291 7,830,314
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; 2022 SCAQMD Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; SCAG Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator; U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. TIGER/Line Shapefiles; and other sources.

The scale of diesel truck ton-mileage attributable to each warehouse is shown in Figure 25. Bigger circles in the map represent more ton-mileage.

The largest clusters of large circles are in the Inland Empire, along with the crescent-shaped cluster along the Union Pacific rail lines that runs through the City of Industry.

Uncompensated Public Costs from Warehouse Truck Trips
Moving goods by truck creates uncompensated public costs that include wear and tear on roads and bridges; delays caused by traffic congestion; injuries, fatalities, and property damage from accidents; and harmful effects from exhaust emissions. These costs are proportionate to the diesel truck mileage attributable to warehouses:
• 36,065 truck trips daily
• 11,495,607 truck trips annually
• 415,516,440 truck trip miles traveled annually
• 25,769,564,589 ton-miles of truck travel annually
• 5,993,583 tons of CO2, the primary greenhouse gas component Packet Page. 1288
54 Exhausting Our Air
The uncompensated costs to the public per ton-mile that are not covered by taxes or fees that trucks pay have been estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to be:41
• Pavement Damage $0.0096
• Traffic Congestion $0.0066
• Accident Risk $0.0156
• Particulate Matter and Nitrogen Oxide Emissions $0.0069 • Greenhouse Gas Emissions $0.0022
• Noise (cost per mile) $0.0304
Based on these cost factors, large warehouses’ trucking operations in the four-county region in 2023 are creating an estimated $1.07 billion in uncompensated public costs, as shown in Figure 26.

Figure 25: Truck Ton-Miles Generated by Large Warehouses, Annually, by Warehouse Location Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; 2022 SCAQMD Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; SCAG Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator; U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. TIGER/Line Shapefiles; and other sources.

Packet Page. 1289
Exhausting Our Air 55
The $1.07 billion in uncompensated public costs from warehouse diesel trips includes:
• $402 million in injuries, fatalities and property damage from accidents.
• $247 million from wear and tear on roads and bridges. • $178 million in harmful effects from exhaust emissions of particulate matter and nitrogen oxides.
• $170 million in delays caused by traffic congestion
• $57 million in climate impacts from CO2 greenhouse gas emissions • $13 million in loss of value caused by truck-related noise for adjacent properties.

These uncompensated costs are shouldered by residents of the four counties in the form of higher taxes for infrastructure repairs, impaired road conditions because of damaged and unrepaired infrastructure, as well as harmful health effects from diesel emissions.

Figure 26: Uncompensated Public Costs from Diesel Trips to and from Large Warehouses in the Four-County Region (in millions)
Source: Economic Roundtable Analysis; 2022 SCAQMD Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; SCAG Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator; U.S.

Census Bureau. 2019. TIGER/Line Shapefiles; and other sources. U.S. Congressional Budget estimates of uncompensated public costs per mile traveled. $13
$57
$170
$178
$247
$402
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
$450
Noise GHG
Emissions
Traffic
Congestion
PM & NOx
Emissions
Pavement
Damage
Accident Risk
Millions of Dollars
Packet Page. 1290
56 Exhausting Our Air
Unacceptable Road Conditions
The U.S. Highway Trust Fund continues to spend more on designated highway improvements and maintenance nationally each year than it collects. In 2022, the national fund received $41.9 billion from fuel and Figure 27: Acceptable Road Conditions, by State
Source: Economic Roundtable Analysis; U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 2023. State Transportation Statistics: Road Condition.
52%
55%
60%
66%
67%
67%
69%
72%
72%
72%
73%
74%
74%
75%
76%
77%
78%
78%
78%
79%
79%
80%
80%
81%
81%
81%
82%
82%
84%
84%
86%
86%
87%
87%
88%
89%
89%
90%
90%
91%
91%
91%
92%
92%
93%
93%
93%
94%
94%
94%
95%
50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Rhode Island
New Jersey
Hawaii
New Mexico
California
Connecticut
West Virginia
Washington
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New York
Wisconsin
Missouri
Louisiana
Arizona
Texas
Colorado
Michigan
Maine
Utah
Illinois
Vermont
Alaska

UNITED STATES
Indiana
New Hampshire
Delaware
Ohio
Nevada
South Dakota
Virginia
Montana
Florida
Kansas
Oregon
North Carolina
Idaho
Minnesota
Alabama
Iowa
South Carolina
Arkansas
Kentucky
Georgia
Nebraska
Oklahoma
North Dakota
Wyoming
Tennessee
Percent of Roads in Acceptable Condition
Packet Page. 1291
Exhausting Our Air 57
vehicle taxes but had highway maintenance outlays of $46.4 billion, a $4.5 billion shortfall for taxpayers to cover.
42 At the state level, California has been much less successful than other states at maintaining roads in acceptable condition. California ranks 46thamong the 50 states in the share of its roads that are in acceptable condition, as shown in Figure 27.

The uncompensated wear and tear of heavy trucks on California roads – the ton-miles of which are rising each year – increases the state’s road maintenance deficit and increases the likelihood that it will remain fifth from the bottom in the nation in terms of the quality of its roads. 43 Public Health Costs
To measure the potential for electric trucks to reduce air pollution in the South Coast Basin, and in doing so improve public health and wellbeing, we calculated emissions generated by the current diesel-powered, heavy trucks travelling to and from just under 3,300 large warehouses. The 11.5 million annual heavy-truck trips produce an estimated:
• 29 tons of PM2.5, fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less, which is associated with increased bronchitis and asthma attacks. • 7 tons of SO2, sulfur dioxide, a highly reactive gas that severely irritates breathing passages, eyes, and skin.
• 1,161 tons of NOx, nitric oxides and dioxides, which can irritate sensory organs, cause shortness of breath, and fluid build-up in the lungs.
• 100 tons of NH3, ammonia, high levels of which can irritate and burn the skin, mouth, throat, lungs, and eyes.
• 26 tons of VOCs, volatile organic compounds, which can cause damage to the liver, kidney, or central nervous system.

These diesel truck emissions are calculated using the most recent California Air Resources Board fleet factors database and applying these factors to the number of miles travelled for trips to and from large warehouses in the four-county region.
44 The tons of heavy truck emissions appear in Figure 28, broken out by county. San Bernardino County stands out due to its large number of warehouses, their large square footage and the distance from the seaports.

This is estimated to result in 617 tons of five health-impacting emissions, including 541 tons of Nitrous Oxides (NOX).

Los Angeles and Riverside Counties make up the next largest shares, 321 and 294 tons respectively, which includes 282 and 258 tons of nitrous oxides, respectively. This parity stands out given that Riverside County Packet Page. 1292
58 Exhausting Our Air
only has a quarter as many large warehouses as Los Angeles County has, and only 42 percent of the latter’s square footage. They have similar quantities of criteria emissions because trucks travel a greater distance to and from warehouses in Riverside County.

Orange County, with its smaller number of large warehouses, their smaller square footage, and shorter trip distances to the seaports, have the lowest volume of criteria emissions, 92 tons, including 81 tons of nitrous oxides.

The local health impacts on residents from current diesel truck emissions, and, conversely, the health benefits from having electric trucks move cargo instead of diesel trucks, are shown in Table 6. Health costs for different health conditions range from $74 million up to $166 million.45 Potential health benefits from electric trucks include reductions of: 6 to 13 deaths annually, 10 acute bronchitis diagnoses, 187 upper and 131 lowerFigure 28: Tons of Diesel Truck Emissions by County Source: Economic Roundtable Analysis; California Air Resources Board. 2021. EMFAC2021 v1.0.2 CA ARB Emission Factors (EMFAC) model; 2022 SCAQMD Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; SCAG Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator; and other sources. Total tons of criteria emissions in each county are shown above each column in the chart. 282
81 258
541
321
92 294
617
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino
VOC
NH3
NOx
SO2
PM2.5
Packet Page. 1293
Exhausting Our Air 59
respiratory disorders, 194 asthma attacks, and 983 lost workdays – all tied to current diesel emissions.

Table 6: Local Residents’ Health Impacts from Diesel Truck Trips to and from Large Warehouses in the Four-County Region
Incidence
(annual cases)
Monetary Value
(annual dollars)
Low High Low High
Mortality * 5.867 13.279 $64,201,139 $145,310,590
Nonfatal Heart Attacks * 0.235 2.180 $35,320 $328,165
Infant Mortality 0.029 0.029 $356,900 $356,900
Hospital Admits, All Respiratory 1.338 1.338 $52,465 $52,465 Hospital Admits, Cardiovascular ** 1.120 1.120 $57,080 $57,080 Acute Bronchitis 10.327 10.327 $6,373 $6,373
Upper Respiratory Symptoms 187.053 187.053 $7,992 $7,992 Lower Respiratory Symptoms 131.377 131.377 $3,548 $3,548 Emergency Room Visits, Asthma 2.379 2.379 $1,341 $1,341 Asthma Exacerbation 194.84 194.84 $14,458 $14,458
Minor Restricted Activity Days 5,783.90 5,783.90 $507,045 $507,045 Work Loss Days 982.83 982.83 $196,749 $196,749
Total Health Effects $65,440,408 $146,842,704
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2023. CO-Benefits Risk Assessment Health Impacts Screening and Mapping Tool (COBRA); 2022 SCAQMD Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; SCAG Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator; California Air Resources Board. 2021. EMFAC2021 v1.0.2 CARB Emission Factors (EMFAC) model; and other sources. Notes: * indicates that the Low and High values represent differences in the methods used to estimate some of the health impacts in COBRA. For example, high and low results for avoided premature mortality are based on two different epidemiological studies of the impacts of PM2.5 on mortality in the United States. ** indicates that heart attacks are excluded from the data for cardiovascular hospital admissions.

Emissions produced in the South Coast Air Basin spill over into other parts of California and have additional adverse health impacts outside of the four-county region. The statewide health impacts of current emissions of diesel truck trips linked to warehouses in the four-county region are shown in Table 7.

The statewide public health costs for different medical conditions range from $74 million to $166 million. This is 13 percent more than costs in just the four-county region.

Statewide health benefits from converting warehouse-linked diesel trucks to electric trucks include reductions of: 7 to 15 deaths annually, 12 acute bronchitis diagnoses, 211 upper and 148 lower-respiratory disorders, 220 asthma attacks, and over 1,103 lost workdays – all attributed to diesel emissions.

Packet Page. 1294
60 Exhausting Our Air
Table 7: California Residents’ Statewide Health Impacts from Diesel Truck Trips to and from Large Warehouses in the Four-County Region
Change in Incidence
(annual cases)
Change in Monetary Value
(annual dollars)
Low High Low High
Mortality * 6.639 15.028 $72,652,573 $164,446,723
Nonfatal Heart Attacks * 0.329 3.059 $50,204 $466,453
Infant Mortality 0.033 0.033 $408,554 $408,554
Hospital Admits, All Respiratory 1.528 1.528 $59,573 $59,573 Hospital Admits, Cardiovascular ** 1.328 1.328 $67,756 $67,756 Acute Bronchitis 11.661 11.661 $7,195 $7,195
Upper Respiratory Symptoms 211.15 211.15 $9,021 $9,021
Lower Respiratory Symptoms 148.32 148.32 $4,005 $4,005
Emergency Room Visits, Asthma 2.861 2.861 $1,612 $1,612 Asthma Exacerbation 219.99 219.99 $16,325 $16,325
Minor Restricted Activity Days 6,490.54 6,490.54 $568,992 $568,992 Work Loss Days 1,103.35 1,103.35 $220,877 $220,877
Total Health Effects $74,066,687 $166,277,086
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis and sources shown for Table 6.

The public health costs of current diesel truck emissions by county appear in Figure 29, highlighting the uneven burden put on the residents of less populous San Bernardino and Riverside Counties.

Figure 29: Public Health Costs of Diesel Truck Emissions by County Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2023. CO-Benefits Risk Assessment Health Impacts Screening and Mapping Tool (COBRA);
Los Angeles
$40,337,872
Orange
$11,529,494
Riverside
$36,908,333
San Bernardino
$77,501,387
Packet Page. 1295
Exhausting Our Air 61
An important caveat is that this data is based on the location of large warehouses, however thee truck trips to and from these warehouses pass through many communities. The health impacts from diesel truck drayage are really a shared regional burden.

These public health impacts represent opportunities for public health improvements and cost savings as the South Coast AQMD implements and enforces Rule 2305, the Warehouse Indirect Source Rule. In the absence of enforcement, the pollutants emitted in Southern California communities will increase, because the region continues to build more warehouses and, by extension, experiences a continuing increase in truck trips.

Packet Page. 1296
62 Exhausting Our Air
Community Profile: Ralph Sistos, Teamster
Ralph Sistos (60) is a longtime resident of the Inland Empire, whose Mexican family has lived in this region for generations before it was even considered the United States. He currently lives in Redlands with his wife and daughters.

Ralph is a lifelong labor movement leader and truck driver who held a shop steward position for over 20 years with the Teamsters. Ralph retired some years ago from working at Sysco but still works at Costco as a truck driver. Ralph has dedicated his career to improving the workplace conditions at different companies for himself and his coworkers.

Ralph started working at a young age at Budweiser and was successful in organizing his coworkers to vote down a contract proposal because he Packet Page. 1297
Exhausting Our Air 63
knew they could win a better contract. He then moved to work at Sysco Los Angeles where he was a shop steward for over ten years, helping secure contract language for route autonomy, wages, and safety conditions. At Sysco Riverside, where he ended his career, Ralph helped strengthen the contract language and worked every position he could at the company.

I’ve always said that respect allows you to go a long way. And that's what happened at my job at Sysco. As a worker, I had the right to make my point and call out when there were grievances. Management didn’t always like the grievances we brought up, but they respected us enough to fix it. I was a shop steward for more than 25 years. I always tell our members - we are a union house, we fought for it and you are entitled to these rights.

You have to learn to fight for yourself. When you win, you get respect. It was my job to look out for my coworkers and communicate to the union and the company. My sole focus has always been our members. However, I have always thought that the big picture is the labor movement and not just my house.”
What is your relationship to the logistics industry? How does it show up in your life? Or in your neighborhood?
My parents live in Highland, so when the growth at the San Bernardino International Airport happened, I got involved with the local Teamsters because of how it was going to impact my family. I feel I have an obligation as a Teamster to help and participate in these fights in our community. I try to push people to get involved. It is a part of me that I was born with.

I grew up in Beaumont. The property value was low, and there was a lot of vacant land. So it was a perfect location for our family. But in the past ten years, Beaumont has exploded with warehouses. It has taken all the beautiful scenery that we had. And we know who did it - the council people! They are allowing this to happen! It all goes back to the people in power. These people have allowed the destruction of their own community. All you see is these eye-sores.

Also the air! Who knows the particles in the air that we are breathing in? I drive a diesel truck now at Costco but I used to drive a liquefied natural gas (LNG) truck at Sysco. The problem with the LNG truck was that it couldn’t go very far because we didn’t have enough reliable fueling stations. Perhaps in the inner city it would be fine, but not for long distances. I was pulling 53-foot container and the truck had the same power as the diesel.

Packet Page. 1298
64 Exhausting Our Air
What can be done differently?
I think the truck routes are very important for us to focus on. From the 60 Freeway to Redlands, there is a road along the mountain called San Mateo that is used by cyclists, commuters and people running. This is a curvy road that you often see trucks driving on. This is dangerous! Drivers can be reckless.

Some places like Riverside have put restrictions on truck routes. I think this makes it safer for drivers and community members. It also should be the responsibility of the companies to ensure that the trucks do not go on these routes!
I also think air purifiers and air filters are important! There should be rebates and tax reimbursements for these things! Better window panes too! If you live close to any polluting industry, the companies should be obligated to provide them, whether it is a home, school or business. I think that city council members should not sell out their neighbors! Do you think electric warehouses and electric trucks could be a solution? I think eventually it will be the solution but we still have to work out the kinks and bugs such as charging all of these vehicles. I am afraid of the charging. How will we charge these trucks? Sometimes we have to make trips to San Luis Obispo or San Francisco. We would have to get a hotel room and spend the night if we had to wait more than six hours to charge.

We need more training too, so we can operate the equipment correctly.

We cannot stop progress. It is inevitable and technology is always going to change. About two years ago, Sysco ordered 30 electric trucks and built out the solar panels and charging stations for them.
“I think that technology is always getting better. I am grateful for the advocates who care about the future for others and get us involved.

What is our biggest strength in this fight?
I believe that we need regulation and accountability from warehouses and trucking companies. Residents should be given the ability to protect their own health and hold companies accountable to the community. These companies should be contributing to a community. And this needs to happen now and not get lost in legislation.

I think the biggest strength in our fight is that we have lots of people on our side. The problem is that most people don't see what's going on and need to hear the right messages.

Packet Page. 1299
Exhausting Our Air 65

5. Workers and Jobs ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Electrical construction,
Photo credit: IBEW Local 6
Packet Page. 1300
66 Exhausting Our Air
Overview
Jobs in the Electricity Sector
One job is created for every $111,512 spent annually on electrical infrastructure. Some of the jobs are from direct employment in electrical construction, other indirect jobs are industries that provide supplies and services for electrical construction, and additional induced jobs are created when workers in construction and supplier industries spend their wages.

Employment in the four counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino in industries that build electrical utility infrastructure and install electrical wiring and equipment in commercial buildings has grown by 749 jobs a year since 2004. This growth will accelerate with the conversion to electric trucks and the electrification of logistics infrastructure.

The electricity sector provides high-pay, living-wage jobs. The average hourly wage for all frontline electrical construction workers is $35 an hour.

Jobs in Warehouses
The introduction of new technology in warehouses and the rapid movement of goods passing through them has made warehouse jobs more complex. However, the wages paid to warehouse workers in the fourcounty region decreased an average of $13 dollars each year from 2001 to 2022, when adjusted for inflation.

The average wage in 2022 for warehouse workers in the five largest frontline occupations was $18.95 an hour. This is less than half of a living wage.

Conclusions
The jobs to electrify the logistics chain that brings goods to warehouses are much better than the jobs inside warehouses. This includes jobs expanding the electrical transmission infrastructure, building recharging station for electric trucks and installing solar panels at warehouses.

Electrical construction jobs are growing and have strong multiplier impacts in the supplier chain as well as the consumer sector. Every 10 jobs in electrical construction create 7 additional jobs in other industries.

Skill requirements for jobs in warehouses have increased over the past 20 years, but pay in real dollars has decreased. Consumer costs are lower and warehouse corporation profits are higher at the expense of under-paying warehouse workers.

Packet Page. 1301
Exhausting Our Air 67
Jobs Created Building Electrical Infrastructure
Jobs will be created by building charging stations and electrical infrastructure for zero-emission electric trucks, as well as by cleaning up the emissions footprint of warehouses through installation of on-site solar panels.

One job is created for every $111,512 spent annually on building electrical infrastructure.46 Some of the jobs are from direct employment in electrical construction, other indirect jobs are in industries that provide supplies and services for electrical construction, and additional induced jobs are created when workers in electrical construction and supplier industries spend their wages. The jobs created by $1 billion in revenue for electrical construction are shown in Figure 30.

Over half of the jobs (59 percent) are in the electrical construction industry, 14 percent are in supplier industries, and one-quarter (27 percent) are in the communities where these employees spend their wages.

Supplier Industries for Electrical Construction
The supplier industries for electrical construction provide more services than goods, as shown in Figure 31. Architects and engineers are the leading Figure 30: Jobs Created by $1 Billion in Revenue for Electrical Construction Source: IMPLAN 2019 model for construction of new power and communication structures in California with dollars adjusted to 2023 values.
5,289
1,236
2,443
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
1 Induced jobs from
employees
spending their
wages
Indirect jobs in
supplier industries
Direct electrical
construction jobs
8,968 Total Jobs
Packet Page. 1302
68 Exhausting Our Air
supplier, followed by building material companies, temporary employment agencies, wholesalers, and real estate services.

Figure 31: Indirect Jobs in Supplier Industries for Electrical Construction Source: IMPLAN 2019 model for construction of new power and communication structures in California. Smaller supplier industries that account for 43 percent of goods and services purchased for electrical construction are not shown in this chart. 2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
4%
4%
5%
5%
6%
8%
10%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%
Accounting services
Screws, nuts & bolts
Ready-mix concrete
Vehicle maintenance
Legal services
Equipment repair
Services to buildings
Holding companies
Truck transportation
Equipment leasing
Real estate
Durable goods wholesale
Temp agencies
Building materials
Architecture & engineering
Figure 32: Induced Jobs from Employees Spending their Wages Source: IMPLAN 2019 model for construction of new power and communication structures in California. Smaller supplier industries that account for 57 percent of goods and services purchased by workers are not shown in this chart. 2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
4%
4%
5%
5%
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6%
Passenger transportation
Nonstore retailers
Nursing care facilities
Automotive repair
Financial investments
Personal care services
Employment services
Department stores
Grocery stores
Other food & drinking places
Offices of physicians
Real estate
Hospitals
Social services
Limited-service restaurants
Full-service restaurants
Packet Page. 1303
Exhausting Our Air 69
Industries that Meet the Consumer Needs of Workers
Every industry that helps fulfill consumer needs receives a share of the wages spent by workers in electrical construction and its supplier industries, as shown in Figure 32. Restaurants are the largest beneficiaries, followed by social services, health care, real estate, and retail stores. As shown earlier, these consumer industries create 27 percent of the jobs that result from investments in building electrical infrastructure.

Job Growth in Electrical Construction and Power Generation Employment in industries that build electrical utility infrastructure and install electrical wiring and equipment in commercial buildings in the fourcounty region has grown by 749 jobs a year since 2004, as be seen in Figure

33. These construction jobs accounted for almost three-quarters (72 percent) of all jobs in the electricity sector in 2022. This sector includes building electrical infrastructure, generating electricity, distributing electric Figure 33: Electrical Construction and Power Generation Jobs in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties
Source: California Employment Development Department, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, 2004 to 2022. 0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
55,000
Electric Power
Distribution
Electric Bulk Power
Transmission
Fossil Fuel Electric
Power Generation
Hydroelectric Power
Generation
Solar Electric Power
Generation
Power/Communication
System Construction
Nonresidential Electrical
Contractors
Packet Page. 1304
70 Exhausting Our Air
power, and installing electrical wiring and equipment in nonresidential buildings.

Generating electricity is the most essential component of the electricity sector, but in 2022, it accounted for only six percent of jobs in the electricity sector in the four counties. Solar electric and hydroelectric power generation each accounted for two percent of jobs.

Figure 34: Weekly Wages in 2022 in Electricity Sector Industries Source: California Employment Development Department, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages. Wages are a weighted average of weekly earnings in 2022 in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. $1,695
$1,725
$2,156
$2,330
$2,358
$2,530
$2,827
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000
Hydroelectric Power Generation
Nonresidential Electrical Contractors
Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation
Electric Bulk Power Transmission
Power/Communication Sys. Const.

Electric Power Distribution
Solar Electric Power Generation
Figure 35: Largest Occupations Employed for Building Electric Utility Infrastructure Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics occupational matrix for NAICS 237130, the power and communication system construction industry. Smaller occupations that account for 21 percent of employment are not shown in the chart. 1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
2%
2%
2%
3%
4%
6%
7%
7%
7%
16%
18%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Plumbers & pipefitters
Accounting clerks
Wind turbine technicians
Heavy truck drivers
Secretaries & admin. assistants
Project management specialists
Office clerks
Operations managers
Construction managers
Electricians
First-line supervisors of mechanics
Telecommunications equip. installers
First-line construction supervisors
Construction equip. operators
Construction laborers
Electrical power-line installers
Percent of Industry Workforce
Packet Page. 1305
Exhausting Our Air 71
The number of jobs in the four counties in electric power distribution surged in 2022, growing to account for 22 percent of employment in the electricity sector. This industry operates the lines, poles, meters, and wiring that transfer electricity to consumers. Most of the growth was in Los Angeles County, where Southern California Edison and the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power are the largest electric utilities.

Wages in Electricity Sector Industries
The solar electric power generation industry is deploying the newest technology in the electricity sector and pays the highest wages, as shown earlier in Figure 34. However, the entire electricity sector provides highpaying jobs.

These wages are the average of all occupations employed in an industry, ranging from managers and professional specialists to frontline workers.

They are an indication of job quality. If workers are employed full-time and year-round, average annual wages range from $88,120 in hydroelectric power generation to $147,030 in solar electric power generation.

Occupations Employed in Electrical Construction
The occupations of workers who build electric power lines, towers and generating facilities are shown in Figure 35. And the occupations of Figure 36: Largest Occupations of Electric Wiring and Equipment Installation Workers Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics occupational matrix for NAICS 238210, the electrical contractor industry. Smaller occupations that account for 16 percent of employment are not shown in the chart. 1%
1%
1%
1%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
3%
3%
6%
7%
49%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Solar photovoltaic installers
Sales representatives
Accounting clerks
Cost estimators
Telecommunications installers
Secretaries & admin. assistants
Security & alarm systems installers
Construction managers
Construction laborers
Project management specialists
Telecommunications equip. installers
General and operations managers
Office clerks, general
First-line construction supervisors
Helpers--electricians
Electricians
Percent of Industry Workforce
Packet Page. 1306
72 Exhausting Our Air
workers employed to install electrical wire and equipment in buildings are shown in Figure 36.

Workers who build the electric utility infrastructure are largely employed to build the distribution systems. This includes electrical power line installers (18 percent), construction laborers (16 percent), and construction equipment operators (seven percent).

Workers who install wiring and electrical equipment in buildings are largely electricians (49 percent), and electrician helpers who assist them (seven percent).

Wages in Electrical Construction Occupations
Frontline electrical construction occupations pay living wages. All of the eight largest frontline occupations pay over $20 an hour, including the lessskilled helper and laborer occupations. Higher skilled occupations pay from $33 to $50 an hour, as shown in Figure 37.

The highest-paid occupation – and the largest occupation for building electrical infrastructure – is electrical power-line installer, which pays from $47 to $50 an hour, depending on the county where the job is located.

The average hourly wage for all frontline electrical construction workers employed in Los Angeles County is $35.60 an hour. In Orange County, it is $35.26, and in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, it is $33.64.

Figure 37: Average Hourly Wage of Frontline Electrical Construction Workers in 2022 Source: California Employment Development Department, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) Survey. $20.49
$24.63
$33.95
$34.74
$37.51
$39.80
$39.63
$47.31
$20.40
$26.04
$34.94
$35.74
$40.33
$43.48
$41.27
$45.39
$21.98
$25.17
$34.69
$36.08
$38.36
$42.41
$43.13
$50.89
$0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60
Helpers--electricians
Construction laborers
Telecommunications equip. installers
Electricians
Construction equip. operators
First-line construction supervisors
First-line supervisors of mechanics
Electrical power-line installers
Average Hourly Wage in 2022
Los Angeles
County
Orange
County
Riverside &
San
Bernardino
Counties
Packet Page. 1307
Exhausting Our Air 73
Warehouse Labor Force
In 1970, 82 percent of warehouse workers in the four-county region lived in Los Angeles County, as shown in Figure 38. Ten percent lived in Figure 39: Employment in Five Largest Frontline Warehouse Occupations 1970-2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Census Public Use Microdata records for 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020. 0 10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Shipping &
receiving
clerks
Stockers &
order fillers
Forklift
operators
Hand
packers
Stock
movers
Figure 38: Residential Distribution of Warehouse Workers by County 1970-2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Census Public Use Microdata records for 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020. 0 10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
San Bernardino
Riverside
Orange
Los Angeles
Packet Page. 1308
74 Exhausting Our Air
Orange County, two percent in Riverside County and six percent in San Bernardino County.

After modest growth from 1970 to 2000, the number of warehouse workers grew 81 percent from 2000 to 2010, and then increased even more rapidly from 2010 to 2020, with 168 percent growth.

Altogether, the number of warehouse workers in the four-county region increased by 665 percent from 1970 to 2020, with explosive growth in the Inland Empire. The number of warehouse workers increased 4,548 percent in San Bernardino County and 6,224 percent in Riverside County.

Figure 41: Growth in Five Largest Frontline Warehouse Occupations from 2000 to 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 and 2016 to 2020 Public Use Microdata Sample for Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties.
1857%
473% 467% 392% 321%
0%
200%
400%
600%
800%
1000%
1200%
1400%
1600%
1800%
2000%
Hand
packers
Stock
movers
Stockers &
order fillers
Forklift
operators
Shipping &
receiving clerks
Figure 40: Employment in Five Largest Frontline Warehouse Occupations in 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 to 2020 Public Use Microdata Sample for Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties.
20,891
15,816
11,451
7,717 6,131
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Stock
movers
Hand
packers
Forklift
operators
Stockers &
order fillers
Shipping &
receiving clerks
Packet Page. 1309
Exhausting Our Air 75
Occupations of Frontline Warehouse Workers
The largest frontline warehouse occupation since 2000 has been stock movers, as shown in Figure 39.
47 In the preceding 30 years, from 1970
through 1990, forklift operators were the largest occupation. Simpler moving equipment, such as pallet jacks, as well as the development of semiautomated conveyor systems, have reduced reliance on larger and more powerful forklifts that are hazardous in the hands of unskilled operators.

There are 20,891 stock movers working in warehouses in the four-county region, as shown in Figure 40. The second largest occupation is hand packers, with 15,816 workers.

The greatest growth over the past 20 years has been among hand packers, who have increased by 1,857 percent, as shown in Figure 41. These workers, for example, pick up, move, sort and pack the goods for an Amazon order, mark and label the package, and seal it.

The least growth has been among shipping and receiving clerks, who verify and maintain inventory records for incoming and outgoing shipments. Bar code reading equipment has automated their work.

Figure 42: Job De-Skilling for Shipping and Receiving Clerks from 2001 to 2022 Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, O*NET versions 1.0 and 28.0, SOC 43-5071. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Operations Monitoring
Mathematics
Negotiation
Active Learning
Instructing
Service Orientation
Writing
Persuasion
Social Perceptiveness
Complex Problem Solving
Coordination
Judgment & Decision Making
Time Management
Monitoring
Critical Thinking
Reading Comprehension
Active Listening
Speaking
Percent of Employers Identifying Skill as Important
2022
Importance
2001
Importance
Packet Page. 1310
76 Exhausting Our Air
Change in Skill Requirements for Warehouse Jobs
The skills, knowledge and abilities that workers need to perform their job can change over time, as technological innovation changes their tools and tasks. This simplifies some jobs and makes other jobs more complex.

Shipping, Receiving and Inventory Clerks – De-Skilled
The work of shipping and receiving clerks has been de-skilled by bar code readers, as can be seen in Figure 42.
48 In 2001, 88 percent of employers said
that mathematical skills were important for this job. Twenty-one years later, in 2022, only 31 percent of employers say that this skill is important.

Of the 18 skills shown for shipping and receiving clerks in Figure 42, only two have become more important – persuasion and instructing. These are social rather than intellectual tasks. The intellectual tasks have been automated.

The average importance of the skills for shipping and receiving clerks shown in Figure 42 decreased from 61 percent in 2001 to 44 percent in 2022.

Figure 43: Job Up-Skilling for Hand Packers and Packagers from 2001 to 2022 Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, O*NET versions 1.0 and 28.0, SOC 53-7064. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Writing
Mathematics
Learning Strategies
Complex Problem Solving
Operation and Control
Active Learning
Social Perceptiveness
Service Orientation
Operations Monitoring
Quality Control Analysis
Judgment & Decision Making
Time Management
Reading Comprehension
Speaking
Coordination
Active Listening
Critical Thinking
Monitoring
Percent of Employers Identifying Skill as Important
2022
Importance
2001
Importance
Packet Page. 1311
Exhausting Our Air 77
Hand Packers and Packagers – Up-Skilled
In contrast, the skill requirements for hand packers have increased over the past two decades, as shown in Figure 43. Even though employers give less importance to the skills of hand packers than the skills of shipping and receiving clerks (i.e., fewer employers identify their skills as being important), the average importance of the skills shown in Figure 43 increased from 23 percent in 2001 to 33 percent in 2022.

For example, in 2001, only 10 percent of employers said that critical thinking and active listening were important. By 2022, the share of employers saying that these skills are important had increased to 44 percent.

Mental engagement, collaboration and communication have become more important for doing this job.

Hand Laborers and Freight, Stock and Material Movers – Up-Skilled The importance of critical thinking, coordination with other workers, speaking, monitoring operations, judgement and decision making, social perceptiveness, troubleshooting, instructing and active learning for stock movers has more than doubled over the past 21 years, as shown in Figure 44.

Figure 44: Job Up-Skilling for Hand Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers from 2001 to 2022
Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, O*NET versions 1.0 and 28.0, SOC 53-7062. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Active Learning
Instructing
Repairing
Equipment Maintenance
Service Orientation
Troubleshooting
Complex Problem Solving
Social Perceptiveness
Writing
Judgment & Decision Making
Time Management
Monitoring
Active Listening
Operations Monitoring
Reading Comprehension
Speaking
Coordination
Critical Thinking
Operation and Control
Percent of Employers Identifying Skill as Important
2022
Importance
2001
Importance
Packet Page. 1312
78 Exhausting Our Air
These workers move stock manually in warehouses. They have to identify and categorize the goods, recognize differences or similarities, and detecting changes in the work environment.

The introduction of new technology in warehouses and the rapid turnover of goods has made their job more complex. The average importance of skills shown in Figure 44 for material movers increased from 20 percent in 2001 to 35 percent in 2022.

Industrial Truck and Tractor (Forklift) Operators – Up-Skilled The importance of social perceptiveness, time management, reading comprehension, judgment and decision-making, service orientation, and systems evaluation for forklift operators has more than doubled over the past 21 years, as shown in Figure 45.

These workers operate lifting devices, such as forklifts, to load, unload, transport, or stack material. Increasingly, they use electronic software to inspect loads for accuracy and safely move loads around the warehouse to ensure timely and complete delivery.

Figure 45: Job Up-Skilling for Industrial Truck and Tractor (Forklift) Operators from 2001 to 2022
Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, O*NET versions 1.0 and 28.0, SOC 53-7051. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Service Orientation
Systems Evaluation
Learning Strategies
Active Learning
Mathematics
Complex Problem Solving
Repairing
Writing
Social Perceptiveness
Judgment & Decision Making
Critical Thinking
Monitoring
Speaking
Reading Comprehension
Active Listening
Time Management
Troubleshooting
Coordination
Equipment Maintenance
Operations Monitoring
Operation and Control
Percent of Employers Identifying Skill as Important
2022
Importance
2001
Importance
Packet Page. 1313
Exhausting Our Air 79
The introduction of new technology in warehouses and the rapid turnover of goods has made their job more complex. The average importance of skills shown in Figure 45 for forklift operators increased from 31 percent in 2001 to 42 percent in 2022.

Stock Clerks - Stockers and Order Fillers – Up-Skilled
The importance of personnel management, time management, monitoring, social perceptiveness, persuasion, and instructing for stock clerks has doubled, or nearly doubled, from 2001 to 2022, as shown in Figure 46.

These workers answer questions about merchandise, transfer the goods for an order to coworkers who complete the next step for shipping the order, read orders to ascertain catalog numbers, sizes, colors, and quantities of goods keep records of out-going orders, attach labels to goods, and organize new goods.

The introduction of new technology in warehouses and the rapid turnover of goods has made their job more complex. The average importance of Figure 46: Job Up-Skilling for Stockers and Order Fillers – Stock Clerks from 2001 to 2022
Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, O*NET versions 1.0 and 28.0, SOC 53-7065. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Service Orientation
Systems Evaluation
Learning Strategies
Active Learning
Mathematics
Complex Problem Solving
Repairing
Writing
Social Perceptiveness
Judgment & Decision Making
Critical Thinking
Monitoring
Speaking
Reading Comprehension
Active Listening
Time Management
Troubleshooting
Coordination
Equipment Maintenance
Operations Monitoring
Operation and Control
Percent of Employers Identifying Skill as Important
2022
Importance
2001
Importance
Packet Page. 1314
80 Exhausting Our Air
skills shown in Figure 46 for stock clerks increased from 33 percent in 2001 to 39 percent in 2022.

Wages of Frontline Warehouse Workers
Workers’ pay determines their economic well-being and reveals economic inequities within industries. Despite providing the energy and effort that produces large profits in a growing industry, warehouse workers do not receive a living wage, as shown in Figure 47.

The average wage in 2022 for warehouse workers in the five largest frontline occupations was $18.95 an hour. This is less than half of a living wage.

A living wage for workers in households with two working adults and two children is $45.22 in Los Angeles County, $47.78 in Orange County, $41.77 in both Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.49 Wages range from $17.04 an hour for hand packers to $20.13 an hour for shipping and receiving clerks.

These low wages do not compensate for increased skill requirements, or corresponding increases in worker productivity, for frontline warehouse workers. There have been large increases in skill requirements for four of the five frontline occupations.

Warehouses bring in $106,709 in revenue each year for every worker. Six percent of this revenue is profit. This means that there is $6,005 in annual corporate profit for each worker.50
Figure 47: Average Hourly Wage for Frontline Warehouse Workers in the 4-County Region in 2022
Source: California Employment Development Department, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. $18.95
$20.13
$18.75
$18.53
$17.88
$17.04
$15 $16 $16 $17 $17 $18 $18 $19 $19 $20 $20 $21
ALL 5 FRONTLINE

OCCUPATIONS
Shipping &
Receiving Clerks
Stock Movers
Stock Clerks
Forklift Operators
Hand Packers
Packet Page. 1315
Exhausting Our Air 81
The wages paid to warehouse workers in the four-county decreased an average of $13 dollars each year from 2001 to 2022, when adjusted to constant dollars, as shown in Figure 48. Workers’ pay was 18 percent less in 2022 than it was in 2001.Workers who are increasingly skilled and productive are being paid less and less.

The warehouse industry pays bottom-feeder wages to warehouse workers who assemble, package and send out goods that often have high value to consumers throughout Southern California who are preponderantly affluent. This is an uncompensated transfer of wealth from under-paid workers to corporate warehouses and affluent consumers.

Figure 48: Average Weekly Pay for All Warehouse Workers in the 4-County Region, 2001 to 2022
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Wages are adjusted to 2022 dollars based on the CPI for the Los Angeles region. $0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022 Packet Page. 1316
82 Exhausting Our Air
Community Profile: George Hauge, Environmental Advocate George Hauge grew up in the Pacific Northwest but has spent the majority of his life in the Inland Empire. In 1976 George moved to Moreno Valley to be a school teacher. During that time the population was around 25,000 and Ironwood Ave was not developed.

People would tend sheep up and down the road. Moreno Valley was extremely rural, a different landscape from what you find today with the influx of housing and warehouses.

George mentions that the shift from rural to town happened in the early 1980s to 90s, when elected officials’ motto was: “build the housing and we’ll guarantee you’ll have the jobs.”
It wasn’t until 2005 when George saw the first multi-million square foot warehouse approved and began to challenge these projects more seriously in the following years.

George mentions the multi-million Skechers warehouse that was approved in 2008. It was one of the first to cause relocation. The school district had already purchased the site and had been approved by the city for a new Packet Page. 1317
Exhausting Our Air 83
High School, but the school was not built to make room for the warehouse project. They never found another site for the high school.

Battles to stop these multi-million hubs became the normal, voluntary way that George spends his days. To this day, George’s schedule involves litigation calls four to five times a week. George mentions that the hardest part about fighting these logistic projects in a pro-warehouse city is not that you can’t stop them or remove a warehouse, but the litigation cases.

If it’s a CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) lawsuit, the most one can do is mitigate and the developers usually claim to do that. They show mitigations for the CEQA requirements, go back to the city council and get their million square foot warehouses approved.

George says that in some cases developers are willing to improve their plans, but the planning commission and planning staff aren’t requiring anything at all. Then, mitigation of adverse impacts is eventually added after litigation. That means for a project, that could have solar included as a mitigation requirement by the planning commissions, this improvement is not even brought up until the litigation is settled. The city and developers leave it to volunteers like George to sue for improvements like solar panels that are essential for the environment.

George is currently working on four law suits. In one, a warehouse shares the backyard of a home. In the second, a warehouse is 19 feet away from homes. In the third, a warehouse is across the street from homes. And in the fourth, another warehouse is across the street from homes.

He says that Moreno Valley just keeps approving warehouse projects. “We might get some change but don’t know yet.” The developer is offering an 18 acre furnished and landscaped sports park, a million dollars in improvements and pavement that have nothing to do with the project, and funds for the city council.

George says that many of these projects are not making it better for those who live nearby, but making it a “nice package for the city council.” George explains how one project, the Moreno Valley Trade Center, was in planning as the same time that the city approved its general plan in June of 2021. The proposed location of the project site was shown in the general plan that was approved as being zoned for residential land use.

The developer of the project bought residential land cheaply, then put forward the project forward and asked the city to amend the general plan and rezone the land the as industrial.

Packet Page. 1318
84 Exhausting Our Air
George explains that the developer has been in hearings for 17 months trying to get project approved and has been told what changes are needed to mitigate the adverse impacts of the project.

The developer claims that these components of the project cannot get changed and the project must be approved based on overriding considerations about the benefits it will provide. Three of the four negative impacts of the project that the developer wants to override are air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and aesthetics.

George mentions his personal relationship with logistics are air quality and traffic impacts, they impact his life because he is continuing to fight while others are traveling, he doesn’t mind actively fighting. It has given him relationships with good attorneys. “Fortunately, we have a couple of lawyers who care.”
“We are up against pollution, traffic impacts, truck lanes, and low-paying warehouse jobs. Open space that should be set aside is being consumed for job producing lands that produce very few jobs per square foot. Now with automation and robotics, there will be less jobs per square foot than there are now."
Every warehouse they build means looking for employment outside since warehousing will rely on automation and robotics. George recommends that warehouses should only build on industrial lands, ideally 500 meters or more from sensitive community or open-space sites.

Logistics needs to move away from fossil fuels as much as possible. We need to get HVAC systems installed throughout the community and allelectric buildings There should be auxiliary power units for truckers so that they don’t have to leave their engines running and a cooling center for truckers. And solar panels should be installed on warehouses to reduce their environmental footprint.

Packet Page. 1319
Exhausting Our Air 85
‘

6. Impacts of Warehouses
on Frontline Families ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Photo credit:

Economic Roundtable
Packet Page. 1320
86 Exhausting Our Air
Overview
Homes
There are just under 365,000 residential parcels located within 2,000 feet of large warehouses, across the four-county region. Three-quarters are singlefamily homes, and almost another quarter are multi-family properties.

Single-family homes usually hold multiple family members and apartment buildings hold multiple families. There are over 2.1 million residents within 2,000 feet of a large warehouse.

Warehouses and the logistics networks that they support degrade the habitability of neighborhoods. Factors that diminish the desirability and cost of housing in these neighborhoods include freeways, heavy traffic, truck-train intermodal facilities, cargo airports, truck depots, and warehouses.

Poverty
Many families live near warehouses out of economic necessity, settling on less desirable neighborhoods and inadequate housing within those neighborhoods because rents are lower. Data on families living near large warehouses shows an elevated likelihood of poverty throughout the fourcounty region. In addition to economic distress, these families have longterm exposure to air pollution, as well as traffic noise and congestion that make it difficult to get the peace and quiet needed for a healthy life.

The median income within a 2,000-foot perimeter of large warehouses is 18 percent lower than in the four-county region, and the poverty rate is 22 percent higher than outside the perimeter.

When families cannot afford to rent an apartment that meets minimum standards of space and privacy for household members, they often rent a smaller unit where more than one person is crowded into each room in order to reduce their rent. The rate of overcrowded housing is 38 percent higher within the 2,000 perimeter of large warehouses than in the region as a whole.

Households living within 2,000 feet of a large warehouse are 10 percent more likely to have children, 23 percent more likely to be a female-headed household, and 40 percent more likely to be Latino than in the overall four-county region.

Packet Page. 1321
Exhausting Our Air 87
Incompatible Development
Large warehouses of 100,000 square feet or more, and sometime more than one-million square feet, are being developed in existing neighborhoods, sometimes just across the street from people’s homes. The impacts of cargo handling spillover onto resident who live in close proximity to large warehouses and the diesel trucks that come and go create emissions, noise, congestion and traffic risks.

Homes Near Warehouses
Large warehouses are important logistics nodes for transporting goods from manufacturers to end consumers. In the four-county region, the presence of this global flow of goods includes truck – and sometimes train – trips between large warehouses, the Los Angeles and Long Beach Ports, cargo airports, intermodal truck-train yards, other warehouses, and retail stores.

The impacts of large warehouse on their neighborhoods are directly measurable. There are just under 365,000 residential parcels located within 2,000 feet of a large warehouse. Almost two-thirds (64 percent) are located in Los Angeles County, followed by Orange, then San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, as shown in Figure 49.

Photo credit: Economic Roundtable
Packet Page. 1322
88 Exhausting Our Air
Nineteen thousand parcels are next door, or almost next door to warehouses. In San Bernardino and Los Angeles Counties, 0.5 percent of all residential parcels are located within 300 feet of large warehouses, while Riverside County has 0.4 percent and Orange County 0.2 percent are within 300 feet, as shown in Figure 50.

Figure 49: Number of Housing Parcels Near Large Warehouses Figure 50: Cumulative Percent of Housing Parcels Near Large Warehouses Sources: Economic Roundtable GIS analysis; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator; U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. TIGER/Line Shapefiles; and other sources. 232,180
55,990 52,388 24,243
66,924
15,126 15,757
5,927
12,417
2,421 3,061
1,086
0 50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino Riverside
300 Feet or Less
301 to 1,000 Feet
1,001 to 2,000 Feet

0.6% 0.4% 0.2%

0.6% 0.5%
4%
3%
1%
3% 3%
11%
9%
4%
9% 9%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Total
300' or Less 1,000' of Less 2,000' or Less
Packet Page. 1323
Exhausting Our Air 89
Single family homes are the type of residential unit that is most often close to a large warehouse, as shown in Figure 51. Apartment buildings are near warehouses almost as often as single family homes in Los Angeles County, but not in the other three counties. Mobile home parks are more frequent neighbors of warehouses in Riverside County.

Across the four-county region, 75 percent of properties within 2,000 feet large warehouses are single family homes, another 23 percent are multifamily properties, and two percent are mobile home parks, with a smattering of other types of dwellings.

Zoning for Warehouses
Large warehouses in Southern California are predominately zoned as industrial, industrial / commercial or specific plan/project as shown in Figure 52.

In Riverside County, six percent of large warehouses are zoned residential and two percent agricultural, indicating that zoning changes after land uses materialize, rather than providing a framework for authorizing land uses.

Large warehouses are often constructed on land that was previously zoned for housing or agriculture, especially in Inland Empire communities.

Figure 51: Types of Housing Units within 2,000 Feet of Large Warehouses Sources: Economic Roundtable GIS analysis; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator; U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. TIGER/Line Shapefiles; and other sources. 158,953
40,961 50,399
21,972
71,927
6,883
4,159
2,766
1,300
4,544 97
840
0 50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
Los Angeles San Bernardino Riverside Orange
Mixed Use, Mobile Home, Other
Multi-Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Packet Page. 1324
90 Exhausting Our Air
Although the most common land use designation for large warehouses is industrial, some warehouse parcens are classified as vacant or commercial and services, as shown in Figure 53. A small number of warehouses in each county are on parcels classified as transportation, communications and utilities uses.

Figure 52: Municipal Zoning of Existing Large Warehouses, by Square Footage Sources: Economic Roundtable GIS analysis; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator. 87%
72%
58%
46%
66%
2%
5%
13%
1%
4%
8%
15% 21%
46%
24%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Total
Transportation
Specific Plan/Special Project
Residential
Public Facilities
Parking
Office
Mixed-Use
Industrial / Commercial
Industrial
Commercial
Agriculture
Agricultural / Residential
Figure 53: County Land Use Classifications of Large Warehouses, by Square Footage Sources: Economic Roundtable GIS analysis; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C; Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Data Platform and Parcel Locator. 3%
10%
3% 1% 3%
92%
87%
79%
90% 89%
11%
5% 4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Los Angeles Orange Riverside San
Bernardino
Total
Water
Vacant With Limited Improvements
Vacant Undifferentiated
Vacant
Dairy, Intensive Livestock
Orchards and Vineyards
Cropland
Agriculture
Urban Vacant
Open Space and Recreation
Under Construction
Mixed Residential and Commercial
Transp., Communications, Utilities
Industrial
Commercial and Services
Residential
Packet Page. 1325
Exhausting Our Air 91
Residents Living Near Large Warehouse
Within the housing units just described, there are almost 110,000 people living on residential blocks within 300 feet of large warehouses across the four counties, just over 730,000 living within 1,000 feet, and over 2.1 million residents within 2,000 feet, as shown in Table 8. 51 Table 8 Population Living Near Large Warehouses
County Population
County Total
Population
Within 300’
Population
Within 1,000’
Population
Within 2,000’
Los Angeles 10,013,759 69,453 471,277 1,375,776
Orange 3,186,941 15,994 114,826 351,509
Riverside 2,418,119 6,974 46,219 142,014
San Bernardino 2,181,580 17,520 97,903 266,630
Region Total 17,800,399 109,941 730,226 2,135,930
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census National Redistricting Data (P.L. 94-171) Summary File, Table P1. Released 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, TIGER/Line Shapefiles. Block-level decennial data.

Housing Characteristics
It is more common for apartment buildings to be near warehouses in Los Angeles and Orange Counties than in the Inland Empire, where singlefamily homes and mobile homes are more common, as shown in Figure 54.

Figure 54: Number of Households by Type of Building and Proximity to Warehouses Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey 5-Year, Tables: B11011 61%
61%
60%
53%
58%
59%
57%
68%
72%
73%
74%
77%
67%
67%
67%
78%
63%
63%
62%
62%
36%
37%
37%
45%
39%
38%
40%
30%
20%
19%
19%
15%
27%
27%
27%
17%
33%
34%
35%
35%
3%
3%
2%
1%
3%
3%
3%
2%
8%
8%
7%
8%
6%
6%
6%
5%
4%
4%
3%
3%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Within 300'
Between 301' and 1,000'
Between 1,001' and 2,000'
Beyond 2,000'
Within 300'
Between 301' and 1,000'
Between 1,001' and 2,000'
Beyond 2,000'
Within 300'
Between 301' and 1,000'
Between 1,001' and 2,000'
Beyond 2,000'
Within 300'
Between 301' and 1,000'
Between 1,001' and 2,000'
Beyond 2,000'
Within 300'
Between 301' and 1,000'
Between 1,001' and 2,000'
Beyond 2,000'
Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Regional Total 1-unit structures 2-or-more-unit structures Mobile homes / all other Packet Page. 1326
92 Exhausting Our Air
Household Structure
Family households52 are more common close to large warehouses than in household located more than 2,000 feet from a large warehouse. This is particularly true in Los Angeles and Riverside Counties, as shown in Figure

55. Across the region, family households make up 74 percent of those living within 2,000 feet of warehouses, and 67 percent beyond 2,000 feet.

Figure 55: Percent of Households with Families, by Proximity to Large Warehouses Figure 56: Percent of Female-Headed Households, by Proximity to Large Warehouses Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey 5-Year, Detailed Tables:

B11011 Household Type by Units in Structure. Released December 2022. Census Tracts. 73%
73%
75%
78%
74%
73%
72%
76%
78%
74%
72%
71%
77%
78%
73%
63%
71%
73%
76%
67%
50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80%
Los Angeles
Orange
Riverside
San Bernardino
Regional Total
300 Feet or Less Between 301-1,000 Feet
Between 1,001 to 2,000 Feet Balance of Communities
18%
14%
15%
17%
16%
18%
14%
15%
18%
16%
17%
13%
15%
17%
16%
13%
10%
12%
16%
13%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Los Angeles
Orange
Riverside
San Bernardino
Regional Total
300 Feet or Less Between 301-1,000 Feet
Between 1,001 to 2,000 Feet Balance of Communities
Packet Page. 1327
Exhausting Our Air 93
Female-headed families53 are also more common closer to large warehouses than outside the 2,000-foot perimeter, as shown in Figure 56. Households headed by women make up 16 percent of households within 2,000 feet of large warehouses, compared 13 percent of households outside of the 2,000- foot perimeter.54 This reflects the reality that households headed by women often have low incomes and fewer housing choices.

Ethnicity
People living near large warehouses are more likely to be Latino and less likely to be European American than in the rest of the four-county region, as shown in Figure 57.

Figure 57: Race/Ethnicity by Proximity to Large Warehouses, by County Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census National Redistricting Data (P.L. 94-171 block-level) Summary File, Table P4 (Age 18+). Released 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, TIGER/Line Shapefiles. 8%
11%
9%
9%
2%
3%
2%
2%
6%
7%
8%
7%
8%
11%
10%
9%
6%
9%
8%
8%
16%
12%
12%
13%
23%
24%
22%
22%
8%
8%
8%
8%
9%
9%
10%
10%
15%
13%
13%
14%
45%
63%
64%
62%
31%
41%
42%
42%
46%
61%
60%
61%
50%
61%
61%
62%
43%
59%
60%
59%
28%
12%
12%
14%
41%
29%
30%
30%
37%
20%
21%
21%
29%
16%
16%
16%
32%
16%
16%
17%
3%
3%
3%
3%
4%
4%
4%
3%
4%
4%
3%
3%
4%
3%
3%
3%
4%
3%
3%
3%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
All County Residents
300' or Less
Between 301' - 1,000'
Between 1,001' - 2,000'
All County Residents
300' or Less
Between 301' - 1,000'
Between 1,001' - 2,000'
All County Residents
300' or Less
Between 301' - 1,000'
Between 1,001' - 2,000'
All County Residents
300' or Less
Between 301' - 1,000'
Between 1,001' - 2,000'
All County Residents
300' or Less
Between 301' - 1,000'
Between 1,001' - 2,000'
Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Total
African American Asian American, PI Latino European American Other Ethnicity Packet Page. 1328
94 Exhausting Our Air
Latinos make up 59 percent of residents living within 2,000 feet of a warehouse, but only 43 percent of the total population in the four-county region. This reflects economic inequity in the four-county region and the unfair reality that many Latino workers are paid wages that are insufficient to pay for rent in neighborhoods that are not impacted by trucking and warehouses.

Median Income
Incomes are lower and poverty rates are higher among people living near warehouses. Median annual household incomes55 within 2,000 feet of large warehouses are $86,000, compared to $105,000 in the balance of the 4- county region, as shown in Figure 58.

Figure 58: Median Income of Households Near Warehouses, by Ethnicity Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey 5-Year, Detailed Tables:

S1903 Median Income Past 12 Months (In 2021 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) Released December 2022. Census Tracts. $75,656
$80,980
$83,318
$90,094
$99,601
$85,611
$76,199
$81,514
$84,200
$89,976
$96,908
$86,014
$76,960
$80,234
$84,877
$90,555
$97,541
$86,355
$87,700
$84,279
$94,580
$102,190
$101,521
$105,498
$50,000 $70,000 $90,000 $110,000
Latino
African
American
Other Ethnicities
European
American
Asian American,
PI
ALL

HOUSEHOLDS
300 Feet or Less
Between 301-1,000 Feet
Between 1,001 to 2,000 Feet
Balance of Communities
Packet Page. 1329
Exhausting Our Air 95
Incomes vary based on ethnicity among households with homes near warehouses. Incomes are lowest for Latinos, who make up a majority of households near warehouses and have median incomes of $76,000.

African American households near warehouses are next lowest, with median annual incomes of $80,000.

Households near warehouses that are grouped under “other ethnicities,” who are primarily individuals identifying with two or more ethnicities, have median annual incomes of $84,000.

European American household near warehouses have the second highest median income, $90,000 a year.

Asian American and Pacific Islander households living near warehouses have the highest median income, $97,000 a year.

Across all four counties, neighborhoods closest to large warehouses have lower median incomes, as can be seen in the map in Figure 59. Factors that diminish the desirability of these neighborhoods, and therefore the cost of housing, include freeways, heavy traffic, seaports, rail intermodal facilities. cargo airports, truck depots, and warehouses.

Figure 59: Median Income of Households, with Proximity to Large Warehouses Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey 5-Year, Detailed Tables: S1903 Median Income Past 12 Months (In 2021 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) Released December 2022. Census Tracts.

Packet Page. 1330
96 Exhausting Our Air
Examples of neighborhoods near warehouse clusters where incomes are low include the East Highlands, Northwest Redlands, North Norton and Riverview neighborhoods surrounding the San Bernardino International Airport. Other examples include the Ontario and Upland neighborhoods northwest of Ontario International Airport; the Los Angeles East Yard, Vermont Square, South Park, Huntington Park and Maywood; the South Los Angeles communities of Compton, Carson, Willowbrook, West Athens, and Rancho Dominguez.

Families in Poverty
The median income of households in an area is one measure of socioeconomic wellbeing, but it reports the income of just the “middle” household in that area. The percent of families living below the annuallyadjusted poverty threshold reveals the degree of acute economic distress in a community.56 Eleven percent of families living close to large warehouses are living in poverty compared to nine percent of families in the entire four-county region, as shown in Figure 60.

The poverty rate for families living near warehouses who have children under 18 years of age is even higher – 16 percent. In comparison, families with children in the balance of the region have a poverty rate of 12 percent.

The poverty rate among families is mapped in Figure 61. Neighborhoods in Riverside County that are near large warehouses and have high family poverty rates include the Home Gardens, Eastside (City of Riverside), and Mead Valley.

Figure 60: Families Below the Poverty Threshold, by Proximity to Large Warehouses Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey 5-Year, Detailed Tables:

S1702 Poverty Status Past 12 Months of Families. Released December 2022. Census Tracts. 12%
16%
11%
16%
11%
15%
9%
12%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
All Families
Families with
Children Under 18
300 Feet or Less
Between 301-1,000 Feet
Between 1,001 to 2,000 Feet
Balance of Communities
Packet Page. 1331
Exhausting Our Air 97
San Bernardino County neighborhoods that are near warehouses and have high family poverty rates include Perris Hills, Delman / Mt. Vernon, and eastern Upland.

Orange County neighborhoods that are near warehouses and have high family poverty rates include Rustic Lane, Midway City (City of Westminster) and Pico-Lowell / Wilshire Square (City of Santa Ana).

Families living near large warehouses have an elevated risk of poverty throughout the four-county region. In addition to economic distress, these families have long-term exposure to air pollution, as well as traffic noise and congestion that make it difficult to get the peace and quiet needed for a healthy life.

Housing Conditions
Living in overcrowded housing is detrimental to human wellbeing.57 Overcrowding is the result of economic desperation. Families cannot afford to rent an apartment that meets minimum standards of space and privacy Figure 61: Families Below the Poverty Threshold, with Proximity to Large Warehouses Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey 5-Year, Detailed Tables: S1903 Median Income Past 12 Months (In 2021 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) Released December 2022. Census Tracts.

Packet Page. 1332
98 Exhausting Our Air
for household members, so they rent a smaller unit where more than one person is crowded into each room in order to reduce their rent.58 Renter households situated closest to Southern California’s large warehouses have a higher percentage of residents living in overcrowded housing – 18 percent, compared to 13 percent in the balance of the fourcounty region, as shown in Figure 62.

Figure 62: Rental Household Overcrowding, by Proximity to Large Warehouses Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey 5-Year, Detailed Tables:

B25014 Tenure by Occupants per Room. Released December 2022. Universe: Occupied Housing Units. Census Tracts. 82%
82%
82%
87%
11%
11%
11%
7%
7%
7%
7%
6%
50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
300 Feet or Less
Between 301-1,000 Feet
Between 1,001 to 2,000 Feet
Balance of Communities
Not Overcrowded Overcrowded Severely Overcrowded
Photo credit:

Economic
Roundtable
Packet Page. 1333
Exhausting Our Air 99
Community Profile: Cynthia Ayala, Amazon Air Worker, San Bernardino Airport
Cynthia Ayala is an Amazon Air worker at the San Bernardino Airport and has been living in the Inland Empire for the past two and a half years.

Cynthia has experienced logistics directly as a worker at the Amazon Air in San Bernardino, as an organizer with her peers, and as a resident of two cities that are huge warehouse hubs: Moreno Valley and Fontana.

For Cynthia, warehouse was a word she knew early on, as her Dad was a warehouse manager for an online clothing store in Commerce, California.

Yet her experience working in logistics and her father’s are completely different. The warehouse her father worked in was not the 100 million square feet hubs we see in the Inland Empire but a smaller scale online store.

Cynthia started working at the Amazon Air Hub over two years ago. She had no idea that she would be dealing with jet fuel impacts daily, as she Packet Page. 1334
100 Exhausting Our Air
now works directly with airplanes. She is outside all day. Whether it is raining or more than 100 degrees, she is loading and unloading, dealing with migraines, back pain, and brain fog coming from direct exposure to the jet fuel.

Workers like Cynthia argue that the effects of jet fuel have to be studied more carefully. She has noticed symptoms of brain fog and migraines beginning and increasing during with her time at Amazon.

Many workers are punished for making mistakes with machinery they were not trained on but just assumed to know how to handle. Some have been fired instead of being provided with correct training.

A management culture of negligence and favoritism is part of the safety problem. Older workers, for example, cannot get reasonable accommodation for handling heavy items or machinery unless they have a medical note. This is unjust because many Amazon workers do not have access to health insurance or medical doctors.

Cynthia has seen warehouses impact people in their neighborhoods as well as at work. Cynthia met a family whose home was displaced so that a warehouse could be built. Only one home in that neighborhood was saved.

Warehouses create infrastructure issues from potholes to congestion of traffic. She and many others must take surface streets to get home because the freeways are too congested.

Cynthia says she can feel a drastic difference in her health and breathing when she visits the coast compared to the constant air quality issues in the Inland Empire. She urges elected officials to get involved in preventing pollution from getting worse, and trying to reverse the decline.

Cynthia knows there are ways to alleviate the harmful impacts of warehouses. She mentions zero-emissions trucks, eliminating Amazon Air and warehouses from the area, creating more parks and green areas, and building warehouses in Beverly Hills or areas most dependent on Amazon.

She says there should be bypass routes that keep heavy-duty trucks away from people’s homes. And they need to stop building warehouses in the Inland Empire. Enough is enough. Warehouses need to focus on lowering air pollution and being good neighbors. This means lowering the noise volume at the facilities. Logistic hubs need to pay livable wages so workers can afford health care.

Packet Page. 1335
Exhausting Our Air 101

7. Respiratory Distress ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Looking at Riverside from
Mount Rubidoux
Photo credit:

John Ko on Upsplash
Packet Page. 1336
102 Exhausting Our Air
Overview
Criteria Emissions
The direct pollutants from diesel truck trips to and from large warehouses, as well as the indirect pollutants attributable to the electricity and natural gas these buildings consume onsite, affect public health. Residents of the four-county region have elevated rates of respiratory disease.

Diesel trucks driving to and from large warehouses release criteria emissions each mile, including elemental carbon, which is the primary component of PM 2.5 fine particulates. These pollutants are unhealthy even when low levels are in the air.

High Pollution Burden
Many single- and multi-family homes near the large warehouse cluster abutting Ontario International Airport experience the highest concentrations of elemental carbon in their air, extending far beyond just the residential blocks adjacent and across the street.

Similarly, people living near San Bernardino International Airport, and the adjacent cluster of large warehouses, are exposed to the highest levels of elemental carbon concentrations.

Residents near the cluster of large warehouses growing around March Air Reserve Base in Riverside, and extending up to the junction of the US 215 and CA 60 freeways, are breathing air with moderate or higher levels of elemental carbon.

As developers continue building large warehouses across the Inland Empire, the associated diesel truck trip emissions will add further pollutants to the already unhealthy air.

Asthma Attacks
The rate of emergency department visits for asthma attacks reflects the location of manufacturing and logistics land uses. South Los Angeles, City of Industry, Ontario and San Bernardino have elevated rates of emergency department visits as well as the largest concentrations of logistics activity.

Packet Page. 1337
Exhausting Our Air 103
Health Conditions Requiring In-Patient Hospitalization
The direct pollutants from diesel truck trips to and from large warehouses, as well as the indirect pollutants attributable to the electricity and natural gas these buildings consume onsite, affect public health. Residents of the region reflect this in their rates of respiratory disease. 59 Pollution together
with socioeconomic factors such as limited income and overcrowded housing make frontline families living near warehouses vulnerable to health risks from pollution caused by warehouses.

Diesel Particulate Matter (PM) Emissions
Freight trucks are an important source of diesel particulate matter. Diesel particulate matter is most concentrated near hubs of trucking activity, as shown in Figure 63. This includes the San Pedro Bay Ports, airports, rail yards and warehouses.

The transformation of the Inland Empire from small communities dominated by agriculture into a warehouse logistics hub for goods consumed by residents of Southern California and beyond is particularly notable. Few neighborhoods in the Inland Empire are untouched by diesel Figure 63: Diesel Particulate Matter and Large Warehouses Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), CalEnviroScreen 4.0: Diesel PM. Released:

November 2021; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C and other sources. Note: Includes diesel particulate matter (PM) from on-road and non-road sources. https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen. Percentile ranking is for the State of California.

Packet Page. 1338
104 Exhausting Our Air
particulate matter. Residents’ and workers’ continued exposure to this pollutant has numerous adverse health effects including irritation to the eyes, throat and nose, cardiovascular and pulmonary disease, and lung cancer.
60 Uneven Pollution Burden
Diesel particulate matter combines with other pollutants to create a cumulative impact on residents and workers that is more harmful than any single component. A pollution burden index showing the combined harmful exposures to toxic chemicals and the environmental effects of pollution in each community in the four-county region is shown in Figure

64. 61
Large swaths of the Inland Empire are in the highest quintile of the pollution burden index, meaning they have the highest exposure to criteria air pollutants, including ground level ozone, carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and different varieties of particulate matter.

While it is expected that large warehouses are built on land zoned for industrial uses such as factories and utility facilities, the enormous size of Figure 64: Pollution Burden and Large Warehouses
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), CalEnviroScreen 4.0: Pollution Burden.

Released: November 2021; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C and other sources. Note:

Includes diesel particulate matter (PM) from on-road and non-road sources. https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen. Percentile ranking is for the state of California.

Packet Page. 1339
Exhausting Our Air 105
large warehouses increases the pollution burden for nearby communities, where homes, schools, parks, churches and shopping centers are sometimes immediately next to warehouses.

PM 2.5 Spillover into Surrounding Neighborhoods
Poor air quality from industrial land uses has a spillover effect into surrounding neighborhoods, beyond what was previously known. Diesel trucks driving to and from large warehouses release criteria emissions each mile, including fine particulates (PM 2.5), which are unhealthy even when the level in the air is low.

The predicted extent of elemental carbon, a principal component of PM

2.5 and mainly emitted from truck traffic, at 50-meter resolution is shown for different communities in Figures 65, 66, and 67.
62 Many single- and multi-family homes near the large warehouse cluster abutting Ontario International Airport experience the highest concentrations Figure 65: Elemental Carbon Concentrations around Ontario Warehouse Cluster Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; Amini, H. at al. 2023. Annual Mean PM2.5 Components (EC, NH4, NO3, OC, SO4) 50m Urban and 1km NonUrban Area Grids for Contiguous U.S., 2000-2019 v1. Palisades, New York: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). https://doi.org/10.7927/7wj3-en73. Accessed March 7, 2023.; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, Appendix C and other sources.

Packet Page. 1340
106 Exhausting Our Air
of elemental carbon in their air, extending far beyond just the adjacent residential blocks, as shown in Figure 65.

Figure 66: Elemental Carbon Concentrations around San Bernardino Airport Warehouse Cluster Figure 67: Elemental Carbon Concentrations around March ARB Warehouse Cluster Source: Amini, H. at al. 2023. Annual Mean PM2.5 Components (EC, NH4, NO3, OC, SO4) 50m Urban and 1km Non-Urban Area Grids for Contiguous U.S., 2000-2019 v1. Palisades, New York: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center.

Packet Page. 1341
Exhausting Our Air 107
When residents breath in unhealthy levels of PM 2.5 components daily over many years, it can increase their risk of heart disease, asthma, and low birth weight, among other health problems. People living near San Bernardino International Airport, and the adjacent cluster of large warehouses, are exposed to the highest levels of elemental carbon concentrations, as shown in Figure 66.

As developers continue building large warehouses across the Inland Empire, the associated diesel truck trip emissions will add further pollutants to the already unhealthy air.

Chronic Respiratory Disease Exacerbated by Air Pollution In addition to air pollution directly causing new health problems among nearby residents, those with existing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) – a family of diseases that cause breathing-related problems and blockages, such as asthma, emphysema and chronic bronchitis – are also negatively affected.63
People with asthma are generally considered to be sensitive to the effects of air pollution. Across California, just under 2.7 million adults currently have Figure 68: Number of Asthma Emergency Department Visits by County Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; California Department of Public Health. 2022. Asthma Emergency Department Visit Rates, 2019. https://data.ca.gov/dataset/asthma-emergency-department-visit-rates 17,076
4,010 3,496 3,124
29,817
7,701 6,247 5,359
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
Los Angeles San Bernardino Riverside Orange
Age 0 to 17 Age 18+
Packet Page. 1342
108 Exhausting Our Air
asthma, many more have had it at some point in their lives, and it is the leading cause of over 350 annual deaths in California.
64 Children, the
elderly and low-income Californians suffer disproportionately from asthma.65
Exposure to air pollutants, including criteria emissions associated with large warehouses’ diesel truck trips and indirect onsite energy consumption, can trigger episodic asthma attacks of breathlessness, wheezing, coughing, and chest tightness.
66 Such attacks can be a life-threatening and require
emergency department visits, which number in the tens of thousands in the four-county region, as shown in Figure 68.

Los Angeles County, with its much larger population and expansive industrial economy has the highest number of asthma emergency department visits –just under 30,000 by adults and just over 17,000 for children under age 18.

San Bernardino County, with just a quarter of Los Angeles County’s population, had 7,701 adult visits to emergency departments for asthma and 4,010 visits by children.

The rate of asthma emergency department visits per 10,000 residents reveals greater parity among counties. Los Angeles has the highest rate of visits to emergency rooms by children with asthma attacks, followed closely by San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange, as shown in Figure 69.

San Bernardino has the highest rate of emergency department visits for adult asthma attacks, followed by Los Angeles, Riverside and Orange.

Figure 69: Asthma Emergency Department Visits per 10,000 Residents, 2019 Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; California Department of Public Health. 2022. Asthma Emergency Department Visit Rates, 2019. https://data.ca.gov/dataset/asthma-emergency-department-visit-rates Note: Age Adjusted Rate = (Cases in Age Group x Total Population in Age Group) * 10,000. 83 73
59 47
37 47
34 21
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
Los Angeles San Bernardino Riverside Orange
Age 0 to 17 Age 18+
Packet Page. 1343
Exhausting Our Air 109
Poor air quality creates costs for patients, the care provider, medical insurers, and tax payers, even when it is not the direct cause of chronic conditions such as asthma.

Figure 70: Asthma Emergency Department Visits per 10,000 Residents, 2019 Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; California Department of Public Health. 2022. Asthma Emergency Department Visit Rates, 2019. https://data.ca.gov/dataset/asthma-emergency-department-visit-rates; 2022 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 2305 Packet, App. C and other sources. Notes: Age Adjusted Rate = (Cases in Age Group x Total Population in Age Group) * 10,000. Data by ZCTA ZIP Code.

Packet Page. 1344
110 Exhausting Our Air
Community Profile: Henry James Vasquez, Indigenous and Mexican Elder Henry James Vasquez (73) is an Indigenous/Mexican elder in the Colton and greater San Bernardino community. He has lived in the Inland Empire for over 50 years. Henry grew up in San Bernardino but has generations of relatives that have lived in the Colton community, where he now resides.

He is a retired school teacher who spends most of his time uplifting and supporting the cultural and historical preservation of native history as the Chair of the Native American Community Council of San Bernardino and Riverside. He is also on the Board of the Future Leaders Program which supports Latinx youth as they navigate school and early adulthood; and is part of the Old Spanish Trail Association that has been fighting to preserve the Agua Mansa Settlement which has been a target for warehouse development for the past two decades. Henry is an active member of his Packet Page. 1345
Exhausting Our Air 111
community, fighting for the rights of mother nature, native sovereignty and environmental justice.

What is your relationship to the logistics industry?
The Agua Mansa Settlement is almost covered in warehouses now. It was one of the first settlements that Mexican people made in this region.

Protecting Agua Mansa is important to me because my cousins are from a family that lived in the original settlement. The idea of paving over the area is insulting. It is also right across the street from the Agua Mansa Cemetery.

When I was a child we could see open land from there to the Santa Ana River. The Santa Ana River is important to us and it is a Native American legacy of the Inland Empire. It is criminal to be covering everything up with warehouses.

I fight against these warehouses because I am fighting for the respect we should have, as people living here and for the families that have lived in South Colton for decades. It’s all about making money and it’s incredibly disrespectful.

I have been in opposition to the warehousing and trucking industry for a long time. I have worked with people in Colton, Riverside, San Bernardino and other cities to show up at different commission meetings and planning meetings to oppose these developments. In the City of Colton, we have been able to win a moratorium against warehouses for almost two years, but it is not enough. We need a real solution to all the warehouse proposals.

Is there any way the warehousing industry could be better neighbors? It would be best if they stayed away from us. I am disgusted by the idea they pick lower income neighborhoods to put their stuff in and disrespect us. They could use smaller trucks and electric vehicles that don’t put out as much pollution. That would be some accommodation. But even with those accommodations, they are still taking away all of the beauty and taking up all the land. Seeing open land is not ugly, it is nature, it is beautiful. A developer sees it as ‘aha this is a place we can put a warehouse or trucking – cha-ching making money.’
All these warehouses impact our health. This area used to have us breathing in an old cement plant and that was hurting us. But now it is replaced with diesel trucks and rail yards which are even more toxic and cause even more noise and traffic than we had before.

Packet Page. 1346
112 Exhausting Our Air
I remember going on a field trip with a botany professor in the 60s and he told us as he picked up some earth, this is the most fertile earth of all of this region.

We love the land, we love the landscape, we love the trees, we love the mountains, the river but everything is being torn up for people that don't live here to make money and it just hurts.

How do you think politicians deal with this?
Generally speaking, if you go back to the 1940s and 1950s when Colton was controlled by the Anglo politicians, they gave lip service to caring about South Colton, but they always voted in favor of North Colton.

When Chicano politicians started getting involved in politics, for the first few years they fought for the rights of the people. But now it’s almost like the Anglo politicians are back even though they are Chicano members. they vote against our favor and vote in favor of the industry. Some of the current politicians are even related to our families but they still vote for destroying our heritage. I know some politicians are pushing back, but it is not the majority right now.

What will happen if development continues the way it is? I think people will be forced to move out. I think the warehouse industry will make people offers and buy up their lands. We are already seeing it in places like Bloomington. People are getting pushed away by the warehousing industry and housing prices continue to go up. We are being left with astronomically high priced housing.

What gives you hope about our future?
Networking with others likeminded people, the Native American community and other community groups are what help me feel hopeful.

We are all fighting for justice. When we work together, we give each other hope. There are people that are always going to fight us - always.

What is our biggest strength in this fight?
That we are fighting together. It encourages me to see people proud of their history and their lifestyle. We are teaching bird singing, our languages, our histories, we are reviving mariachi music. We might not be professional yet but our cultural is not dying and people are proud of their identity.

Packet Page. 1347
Exhausting Our Air 113

8. Onsite Warehouse Emissions ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Photo credit:

Pickawood on Unsplash
Packet Page. 1348
114 ERt-SC Warehouse Equity 2023
Overview
Warehouses are the most common type of commercial building in the United States. On-site warehouse operations have environmental impacts from upstream emissions that result from consumption of electricity, and water, and from on-site combustion of natural gas.

Large warehouses in the four-county region consume 15.5 terajoules of electricity onsite annually.

Electricity consumed by large warehouses in the four-county region is accountable for upstream releases of over one-million metric tons of greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide) into the atmosphere annually.

Natural gas provides 34 percent of the energy that warehouses consume.

Natural gas combustion at large warehouses produces 1.6 billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions annually.

A total of 101,603 pounds of very fine-sized particulate matter is estimated to be released annually into the region’s air by natural gas combustion at large warehouses.

Large warehouses in Southern California consume an estimated 2.7 billion gallons of water annually.

Packet Page. 1349
Exhausting Our Air 115
Energy Consumption from On-Site Operations
Warehouses are the most common type of commercial building in the United States.
67 Activities inside each warehouse have environmental
impacts from upstream emissions that result from consumption of electricity and water, and from on-site combustion of natural gas.

Large warehouses in the four-county region consume significant amounts of electricity onsite, approximately 15.5 terajoules annually (Table 9).

Warehouses in Los Angeles County use the most electricity, just over 6 terajoules per year, while the growing warehouse inventory in San Bernardino County is close behind, consuming 5.7 terajoules Warehouses use electricity to operate heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, water heating, lighting, security systems, employee monitoring systems, refrigeration, and material moving equipment such as conveyors for bins and containers, automated and semi-automated packaging equipment, and forklifts and pallet movers.

Table 9 Annual Electricity Consumption of Large Warehouses County
Large Warehouse
Square Feet
Electricity
Consumption
(kWh)
Electricity
Consumption
(Terajoules)
Los Angeles 315,772,032 1,670,280,021 6,013
Orange 75,633,453 394,489,145 1,420
Riverside 131,212,586 695,426,705 2,504
San Bernardino 283,677,944 1,591,637,075 5,730
Region Total 806,296,015 4,351,832,946 15,667
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Energy Information Administration. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) Table C22. “Electricity consumption totals and conditional intensities by building activity subcategories, 2018.” Release date: December 2022: https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/reports/2012/water/ Electricity is the primary source of energy for warehouses in the fourcounty region. 68 This is true for commercial buildings in general in
Southern California, which draw 87 percent of their energy from electricity.69
Warehouses use over twice as much electricity to meet their energy needs as the next largest source, natural gas. Natural gas provides 34 percent of the energy that warehouses consume, as shown in Figure 71.

Other forms of gas, including bottled gas, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and propane provide just over eight percent of the energy used by warehouses.

Packet Page. 1350
116 ERt-SC Warehouse Equity 2023
Less than one percent of the on-site energy used by warehouses comes in the form of petroleum products such as fuel oil, diesel or kerosene.

How and Where Locally-Consumed Electricity is Generated California generates three-quarters (78 percent) electricity of the electricity it uses within the state. We purchase 18 percent our electricity from other Figure 71: Energy Mix for Warehouses by U.S. Region (multiple types per warehouse) Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Energy Information Administration. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey Public Use Microdata, 2018, for non-refrigerated warehouses. Buildings use multiple types of energy. 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Percent Using Each Type of Energy
Electricity Natural gas Fuel oil/diesel/kerosene Bottled gas/propane Figure 72: Location where Electricity Consumed in California is Generated Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Energy Information Administration. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) Public Use Microdata, 2018.
0 50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
2009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Gigawatts of Electricity
Southwest
Northwest
California
Packet Page. 1351
Exhausting Our Air 117
states in the Southwest region. The remaining 12 percent is imported from Northwest states.70
This balance among California’s sources of electricity has held relatively steady for over a decade, as shown in Figure 72. Roughly two-thirds of the environmental impacts of electricity generation are within California and one-third in adjacent states.

California’s mix of energy sources used to generate electricity includes natural gas and other fossil fuels, as shown in Figure 73. Fossil fuel combustion releases planet-warming greenhouse gases and criteria emissions that cause life-harming respiratory illness.

Electricity production was the source of 25 percent the United States’ greenhouse gas emissions in 2021.71
Figure 73: Energy Sources for Generating Electricity in California and the United States Sources: Economic Roundtable 2021 data from the Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID) released January 30, 2023. https://www.epa.gov/egrid/power-profiler#/CAMX 38 48
22 4
19 8
3 19
6 7
9 8
1 3
4 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
United States California
Unknown
Geothermal
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Solar
Nuclear
Other Fossil
Fuel
Oil
Coal
Gas
California
renewable
energy
40%
California
fossil fuel
52%
Packet Page. 1352
118 ERt-SC Warehouse Equity 2023
California uses renewable energy to generates twice as much of its electricity as the nation as a whole – 40 percent versus 20 percent. This supports a cleaner environmental footprint for electricity generated within the state than for energy imported from other states.

This is largely because California uses solar energy to generate more of its electricity than other states – 19 percent versus 3 percent.

However, 52 percent of the electricity generated within California is generated using fossil fuels. This is smaller than the 61 percent share of electricity from other states that is generated using fossil fuels, but it still has large environmental impacts.

California generates less of its electricity using nuclear power than other states - 8 percent compared to 19 percent.

Reducing the amount of electricity that warehouses draw from the utility grid and increasing the amount that is generated from renewable sources, such as on-site solar panel arrays, will help shrink the environmental footprint of warehouses.

Metric Tons of GHG Emissions from On-Site Energy Consumption Carbon dioxide (CO2) makes up the vast majority of greenhouse gas emissions from electricity production nationwide, but smaller amounts of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) are also emitted.72 Photo credit:

Cole Patrick on Unsplash
Packet Page. 1353
Exhausting Our Air 119
Electricity consumed by large warehouses in the four-county region is accountable for releasing over one-million metric tons of greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide) into the atmosphere annually, as shown in in Table 10.

Table 10 Metric Tons of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Electricity Consumed by Large Warehouses
County
Large
Warehouse
Square Feet
Carbon Dioxide
CO2 Emissions
(MT)
Methane CH4
Emissions (MT)
Nitrous Oxide
N2O Emissions
(MT)
Los Angeles 315,772,032 403,676 23.5 3.0
Orange 75,633,453 95,341 5.6 0.7
Riverside 131,212,586 168,072 9.8 1.3
San Bernardino 283,677,944 384,670 22.4 2.9
Region Total 806,296,015 1,051,759 61.3 7.9
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Corporate Climate Leadership. 2023 “Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID) - Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories.

Table 6. Electricity. https://www.epa.gov/egrid/download-data Warehouses in Los Angeles County are responsible for 38 percent of these greenhouse gas emissions and those in San Bernardino County are responsible for 37 percent.

Warehouses in Riverside and Orange Counties are responsible for 16 percent and 9 percent, respectively, of upstream emissions from generating electricity.

The four counties share the same distribution of responsibility for the 61 metric tons of methane (CH4) and the 8 metric tons of nitrous oxide (N2O) that are released annual because of electricity consumed by large warehouses.

Criteria Emissions from On-Site Activities
Air pollution harms people’s health and is also harmful for pets, vegetation and buildings. National ambient air quality standards for the most common air pollutants – known as “criteria pollutants” – include nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide.

Criterion emissions attributable to electricity consumption by large warehouses in the four-county region add up to 1,028 metric tons of nitrogen dioxide and 75 metric tons of sulfur dioxide annually, as shown in Table 11. The highest levels of criteria emissions are attributable to large warehouses in Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties.

Emissions linked to large warehouses will change as diesel trucks are replaced by electric trucks for warehouse drayage. There will be an overall Packet Page. 1354
120 ERt-SC Warehouse Equity 2023
reduction in emissions, but some increase in upstream emissions because of electricity consumed by charging stations.

Table 11 Metric Tons of GHG Emissions from Electricity Consumption of Large Warehouses
County
Large
Warehouse
Square Feet
CO2e Emissions
(MT)
NOX
Emissions (MT)
SO2
Emissions (MT)
Los Angeles 315,772,032 405,119 394.8 28.9
Orange 75,633,453 95,682 93.2 6.8
Riverside 131,212,586 168,673 164.4 12.0
San Bernardino 283,677,944 386,044 376.2 27.5
Region Total 806,296,015 1,055,517 1,028.6 75.2
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Corporate Climate Leadership. 2023 “Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID) - Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories.

Table 6. Electricity. https://www.epa.gov/egrid/download-data Warehouses may add more solar electric panels to their roofs to increase the amount of renewable energy in their power fuel mix. This will provide credits under the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rule 2305 – the Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program.

On-Site Natural Gas Consumption
Warehouses use natural gas for space heating.73 The environmental impact report for a large warehouse in San Bernardino County identifies the annual amounts of natural gas consumer per square foot, as shown in Table

12. Table 12 Large Warehouses Natural Gas Consumption per Square Foot Warehouse Type
Natural Gas
Btu Consumed per Cubic Square Foot per Year
Non-Refrigerated 19,063
Refrigerated 27,580
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; Urban Crossroads. 2022 Nevada Street Warehouse, Appendix F: Energy Analysis, County of San Bernardino, pages 9, 37; Southern California Gas Company. 2017. SoCalGas Natural Gas Quality Standards 1-Sheet. Natural gas standard heating values are in British thermal units (Btu) per Standard Cubic Foot (SCF).

The global warming and air pollution effects of onsite space heating in large warehouse are shown in Tables 13. In natural gas combustion, 99.9 percent of the fuel is converted to carbon dioxide.
74 This produces 1.6
billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions annually.

Packet Page. 1355
Exhausting Our Air 121
Criteria emissions are also shown in Table 13, including particulate matter, which causes adverse health effects among children, people with asthma and older adults with chronic cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases.75 Table 13 Annual Emissions from Onsite Natural Gas Combustion at Large Warehouses Los Angeles Orange Riverside San
Bernardino Total
Large Warehouse SF: 315,772,032 75,633,453 131,212,586 283,677,944 806,296,015 Emissions:

CO2 626,890,307 148,059,857 261,007,888 568,299,372 1,604,257,424 NH4 12,015 2,838 5,003 10,892 30,748
N2O* 11,493 2,714 4,785 10,419 29,411
N2O** 3,343 790 1,392 3,031 8,556
SO2 3,134 740 1,305 2,841 8,021
PM (Total) 39,703 9,377 16,530 35,992 101,603
PM (Condensable) 29,777 7,033 12,398 26,994 76,202
PM (Filterable) 9,926 2,344 4,133 8,998 25,401
Lead 2.612 0.617 1.088 2.368 6.684
Volatile OCs 28,732 6,786 11,963 26,047 73,528
Total OCs 57,465 13,572 23,926 52,094 147,057
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; Urban Crossroads. 2022 Nevada Street Warehouse, Appendix F: Energy Analysis, County of San Bernardino, pages 9, 37; Southern California Gas Company. 2017. SoCalGas Natural Gas Quality Standards 1-Sheet; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. AP 42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors:

Table 1.4-2. Emission Factors for Criteria Pollutants and Greenhouse Gases from Natural Gas Combustion.

Notes: Nitrous oxide (N20) is split into Uncontrolled (*) and Controlled-low-NOX burner (**).

Particulate matter from natural gas combustion is estimated to be smaller than one micron. The volume of particulate matter that is emitted increases if there are improper fuel-to-air mixing ratios because, for example, of poor maintenance of heating systems.
76 Photo credit:

Martin Martz on Unsplash
Packet Page. 1356
122 ERt-SC Warehouse Equity 2023
A total of 101,603 pounds of this very fine-sized particulate matter is estimated to be released annually into the region’s air by large warehouses.

On-Site Water Consumption
Large warehouses have relatively low water usage, compared to other large commercial buildings.77 However, new California regulations, amidst historic drought and emerging climate change, aim to curb water use at commercial properties across the state as urban residents and rural farmers are already mandated to cut their water use.
78 Large warehouses in the four-county region consume an estimated 2.7 billion gallons of water annually, or 7.4 million gallons per day (Table 14).

Warehouses in Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties consume the most water, 1.07 billion and 0.97 billion gallons annually.

Table 14 On-Site Water Consumption of Large Warehouses
County
Large
Warehouse
Square Feet
On-Site Water
Consumption,
Annual (Gallons)
On-Site Water
Consumption, Daily
(Gallons)
Los Angeles 315,772,032 1,071,500,391 2,930,869
Orange 75,633,453 253,068,508 692,217
Riverside 131,212,586 446,122,792 1,220,277
San Bernardino 283,677,944 965,989,480 2,642,265
Region Total 806,296,015 2,736,681,171 7,485,628
Source: Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2017. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS). Table W1. Water consumption in large commercial buildings, 2012. https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/reports/2012/water/ Photo by Martin Martz on
Unsplash
Packet Page. 1357
Exhausting Our Air 123

9. Data Appendix and
Methodology
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Photo credit:

Economic Roundtable
Packet Page. 1358
124 Exhausting Our Air
List of Large Warehouses by City
San Bernardino County
City or CDP Warehouse Sites Square Feet Employment
Bloomington ....................................... 16 6,093,244 571 Chino ................................................ 117 35,220,833 3,308 Chino Hills ............................................ 3 382,180 36 Colton ................................................. 22 6,516,848 611 Eastvale .................................................. 1 171,112 16 Fontana .............................................. 140 49,122,306 4,612 Grand Terrace ....................................... 1 130,695 12 Mentone ................................................ 2 431,466 40 Montclair ............................................... 3 389,247 36 Ontario .............................................. 289 81,755,360 7,616 Rancho Cucamonga .......................... 107 25,149,893 2,367 Redlands .............................................. 56 23,691,172 2,220 Rialto .................................................. 47 25,697,104 2,404 Riverside ............................................... 2 1,130,721 106 San Bernardino .................................... 76 27,476,992 2,583 Upland .................................................. 3 318,773 30 County Total................................... 885 283,677,944 26,570 Riverside County
City or CDP Warehouse Sites Square Feet Employment
Banning ................................................. 1 173,101 23 Beaumont .............................................. 7 3,013,628 396 Coachella ............................................... 3 448,476 59 Corona ................................................ 65 11,154,994 1,467 Desert Hot Springs ................................. 1 77,662 10 Eastvale ................................................ 22 9,201,729 1,208 Hemet ................................................... 1 126,611 17 Indio ...................................................... 2 209,161 27 Jurupa Valley ....................................... 80 22,049,074 2,896 March Air Reserve Base....................... 13 5,642,754 741 Mira Loma ............................................. 3 1,213,565 159 Moreno Valley ..................................... 48 26,635,719 3,497 Murrieta ................................................ 3 307,852 40 Norco .................................................... 2 284,664 37 Nuevo ................................................... 1 105,833 14 Palm Springs .......................................... 1 116,497 15 Perris ................................................... 45 24,715,608 3,251 Riverside ............................................. 80 21,314,528 2,798 San Jacinto ............................................. 1 72,308 10 Temecula ............................................. 23 4,108,079 541 Packet Page. 1359
Exhausting Our Air 125
Thermal ................................................. 2 240,742 32 Grand Total ..................................... 404 131,212,586 17,238 Los Angeles County
City or CDP Warehouse Sites Square Feet Employment
Alhambra ................................................ 4 411,713 30 Arcadia ................................................... 4 1,046,486 56 Azusa .................................................... 13 1,708,497 124 Baldwin Park .......................................... 4 472,983 42 Bell ...................................................... 15 3,107,155 179 Bell Gardens ........................................... 2 698,629 36 Burbank ................................................. 5 737,700 40 Calabasas ................................................ 1 111,945 10 Canoga Park ........................................... 7 938,764 72 Carson ................................................ 119 22,173,745 1,357 Cerritos ................................................ 33 5,177,116 349 Chatsworth ........................................... 20 3,479,363 230 City of Industry .................................. 197 48,803,707 2,788 Commerce ......................................... 121 24,645,773 1,484 Compton.............................................. 80 12,872,746 873 Cudahy .................................................. 1 88,966 10 Diamond Bar .......................................... 1 104,780 10 Downey ................................................. 9 2,139,819 109 Duarte .................................................... 3 312,601 30 El Monte .............................................. 11 2,551,025 151 El Segundo ............................................. 6 2,041,733 110 Gardena ................................................ 30 3,967,840 303 Glendora ................................................ 1 119,875 10 Hacienda Heights ................................... 4 568,537 40 Hawthorne ........................................... 14 4,275,451 228 Huntington Park .................................... 4 431,679 40 Inglewood .............................................. 4 568,013 40 Irwindale .............................................. 20 5,585,245 318 La Mirada ............................................. 40 9,039,564 528 La Puente ............................................... 3 423,135 30 La Verne ................................................ 1 113,070 10 Long Beach .......................................... 50 10,895,592 678 Los Angeles ........................................ 165 30,943,289 1,980 Lynwood .............................................. 10 2,360,065 126 Monrovia ............................................... 1 290,914 15 Montebello ........................................... 24 4,098,538 278 North Hills ............................................. 3 396,640 30 North Hollywood .................................. 8 1,299,374 87 Northridge ............................................. 3 527,201 27 Norwalk ................................................. 7 787,295 70 Packet Page. 1360
126 Exhausting Our Air
Pacoima ................................................. 9 1,056,289 84 Panorama City ....................................... 6 1,033,418 70 Paramount ............................................. 8 1,820,676 105 Pasadena ................................................ 1 106,000 10 Pico Rivera.......................................... 27 4,860,155 285 Pomona ............................................... 41 7,874,276 462 Rancho Dominguez ............................ 35 5,355,937 363 Redondo Beach ..................................... 7 1,322,758 74 Rowland Heights ................................... 1 112,536 10 San Dimas .............................................. 3 396,830 30 San Fernando ......................................... 5 752,606 50 San Pedro .............................................. 5 1,987,882 102 Santa Clarita........................................... 5 2,134,685 117 Santa Fe Springs ................................. 126 25,731,687 1,578 Santa Monica ......................................... 1 150,212 10 Signal Hill .............................................. 2 420,807 26 South El Monte ..................................... 3 394,082 30 South Gate ........................................... 27 3,449,912 279 Sun Valley ........................................... 11 1,499,734 110 Sunland .................................................. 1 79,907 10 Sylmar ................................................. 22 2,992,894 227 Torrance .............................................. 61 10,811,063 681 Valencia ............................................... 40 5,380,176 404 Van Nuys ............................................ 12 3,435,490 201 Vernon ................................................ 96 15,640,039 1,034 Walnut ................................................ 17 3,281,456 202 West Covina .......................................... 1 147,530 10 Whittier ................................................. 8 1,337,124 84 Wilmington ........................................... 7 1,006,218 71 Woodland Hills ...................................... 2 647,906 35 Grand Total ................................... 1,638 315,536,848 19,686 Orange County
City or CDP Warehouse Sites Square Feet Employment
Aliso Viejo ............................................. 1 307,425 10 Anaheim .............................................. 75 14,456,068 767 Brea ..................................................... 22 3,577,177 222 Buena Park .......................................... 37 7,149,647 378 Costa Mesa ............................................ 5 1,036,786 51 Cypress ................................................ 16 2,950,770 165 Foothill Ranch .................................... 12 2,364,811 110 Fountain Valley ...................................... 4 561,912 40 Fullerton .............................................. 51 9,821,033 519 Garden Grove ...................................... 16 2,834,824 160 Huntington Beach ............................... 18 3,436,316 180 Packet Page. 1361
Exhausting Our Air 127
Irvine ................................................... 47 10,231,521 497 La Habra ................................................ 3 1,340,437 42 La Palma ................................................. 6 1,400,941 65 Lake Forest ............................................. 5 946,746 50 Los Alamitos ........................................... 3 349,135 30 Orange ................................................. 12 2,048,008 120 Placentia ................................................. 3 478,145 30 Rancho Santa Margarita ......................... 4 651,943 40 San Juan Capistrano ................................ 2 397,526 20 Santa Ana ............................................. 42 6,718,461 419 Seal Beach .............................................. 3 376,871 30 Stanton ................................................... 1 118,059 10 Tustin ..................................................... 8 1,351,219 86 Westminster ........................................... 2 360,706 20 Yorba Linda ........................................... 1 110,238 10 Grand Total ..................................... 399 75,376,724 4,071 Note: CDP stands for Census Designated Place. These are established unincorporated communities for which the U.S. Census Bureau provides statistics about population and housing.

Packet Page. 1362
128 Exhausting Our Air
Methodology for Building Database of Large Warehouses
The methodology used in this report for estimating employment in large warehouses shown in Chapter 2, is as follows: 1) Employment for ALL warehouse industry workers is estimated from the U.S. Census’ 5-Year American Community Survey 2020 PUMS data. Data were filtered by:
• NAICS Industry (NAICSP) 493 (TRN-Warehouse and Storage) • Employment Status Recode (ESR) is limited to “Civilian Employed, at Work” • Total person's earnings (PERNP, adj. to 2020 dollars) at least $500 annually • Class of worker (COW) = Employee of a private for-profit business ('1') County
Employed Warehouse
Industry Workers, ALL
Warehouses (A)
Percent of Warehouse
Workers (ACS PUMS)
(B)
Los Angeles County 36,349 39%
Orange County 5,410 6%
Riverside County 18,973 20%
San Bernardino County 32,539 35%
Region Total 93,271 100%
Dataset: US Census. American Community survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS), 2016-2020.

These county-level employment estimate for ALL warehouse industry workers is used as the denominator for creating county-level ratios of square feet of warehouse per warehouse-industry employee. 2) Square footage of ALL Warehouses by county comes from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2018 report "Industrial Warehousing in the SCAG Region," Table 2.1 from the "Inventory" section of the report. These data were updated to 2023 by using a warehouse square feet growth factor of 23.96%, calculated from the increase in large warehouse properties the Economic Roundtable analyzed in databases for this study:

County
Total Occupied
Space (SF), ALL
Warehouses (2014)
(C)
Total Occupied
Space (SF), ALL
Warehouses in
2023 (D)
Square Feet of
Warehouse per
Employee Ratio
(E=D/A)
Los Angeles County 568,958,384 705,284,271 19,403
Orange County 134,440,969 166,653,842 30,805
Riverside County 116,588,283 144,523,544 7,617
San Bernardino County 280,317,848 347,483,708 10,679
Region Total 1,100,305,484 1,363,945,366 14,623
Dataset: Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2018 report "Industrial Warehousing in the SCAG Region," Table 2.1 from the "Inventory" section of the report.

The ratio derived from data about ALL warehouses (column E) is then applied to the data about LARGE warehouses:

Packet Page. 1363
Exhausting Our Air 129
County
No. of Large
Warehouses
(2023) (F)
SF of Large
Warehouses
(G)
Employment
Estimate
(H)
Percent of
Employment
(I)
Los Angeles County 1,626 314,911,990 19,686 29%
Orange County 389 74,175,185 4,071 6%
Riverside County 402 131,212,586 17,238 26%
San Bernardino County 876 283,029,002 26,570 39%
Region Total 3,293 803,328,763 67,565 100%
Our employment estimate (column H) adds up to 67,565 warehouse industry workers employed in properties of 100,000 square feet or more, spread across various occupations discussed in Chapter 2, “Occupations and Wages of Warehouse Workers,” and in Chapter 5, “Occupations of Frontline Warehouse Workers.”
Methodology for Calculating Annual Truck Trips and Mileage In Chapter 4, we estimate the number of trucks trips bringing goods to and from each large warehouse in the four-county region – trips to and from seaports, intermodal facilities, cargo airports, other warehouses, and retail stores – based upon the based upon the square footage of each warehouse.

We then adjust our estimates using the 2021-22 Gate Move Analysis data from the Port of Los Angeles’ and Long Beach’s Clean Truck Program, to account for the portion of the trips between large warehouses and these seaports.

This portion of truck trips, adding up to 4,579,934 over 12 months, accounts for 34 percent of the total truck trips to and from large warehouses. (See Figure 24: Distribution of Truck Trips between Warehouses and Other Logistics Nodes, and endnote 33, referencing the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) warehouse survey.) We use the Seaports’ Gate Move Analysis data in proportion to the overall distribution of warehouses’ truck trip origin and destinations, as follows:

Percent Trips
Seaports Combined..................34%.......................................4,579,934 Port of Long Beach ..............17%.......................................2,321,687 Port of Los Angeles...............17%.......................................2,258,248 SoCal Cargo Airports.................3%..........................................408,938 Rail Intermodal Yards..............27%.......................................3,654,122 Other Warehouses...................22%.......................................2,967,689 Retail Stores (4-Co) .................14%.......................................1,929,900 Local Total ............................ 100%..................................... 13,540,583 Based on this estimation method, 13,540,583 annual truck trips to and from all warehouses in four-county region occur annuals. The portion of these trips to and from the region’s large warehouses is 84.90 percent of those total – based upon our earlier comparison of total to large warehouse occupied square footage and employment. This yields an estimated Packet Page. 1364
130 Exhausting Our Air
11,495,607 annual truck trips to and from large warehouses in four-county region.

Packet Page. 1365
Exhausting Our Air 131

10. Endnotes ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Packet Page. 1366
132 Exhausting Our Air
1 The Economic Roundtable used the list published by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for rule 2305this list as a starting point for creating an inventory of all large warehouses that fall under the rule’s jurisdiction. Warehouse property data sources used in this study include:

South Coast AQMD address list of the largest 3,321 warehouse buildings that are over 100,000 square feet in size and likely subject to Rule 2305 (Appendix C pages 144-171) across the four-county SCAQMD region. SCAQMD staff confirmed these data came from CoStar. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/GoverningBoard/2021/2021-May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10 Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) 2019 Annual Land Use Dataset which includes buildings’ square footage of improvements. SCAG data is assembled from county-level assessor databases, and from municipal planning agencies.

These data are part of SCAG’s Regional Data Platform: https://scag.ca.gov/regional-dataplatform Microsoft’s open source JSON file of building footprints from all 50 U.S. states to identify *all* individual buildings greater than 100,000 SF, alongside other data sources. These data come from LandSat imagery. https://www.microsoft.com/enus/maps/building-footprints 2 Rose Institute, “San Bernardino: Two Years into Bankruptcy,” (December 1, 2014), https://roseinstitute.org/san-bernardino-two-years-bankruptcy/. 3 Paloma Esquivel, “After five long years, San Bernardino is officially out of bankruptcy.

What’s next?” Los Angeles Times, (June 22, 2017), https://www.latimes.com/local/lame-ln-san-bernardino-bankruptcy-end-20170621-htmlstory.html 4 City of Carson, General Plan (October 11, 2004),
https://ci.carson.ca.us/content/files/pdfs/planning/cityofcarsongeneralplan.pdf. 5 This estimate was derived from the Consumer Expenditure Survey, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, September, 2018, Table 1203, “Income before taxes: Annual expenditure means, shares, standard errors, and coefficients of variation.” This table breaks households out into nine income groups and provides expenditure amounts for a detailed list of items purchased by households in each income group. Retail items in this list were flagged and totaled for each income group. These expenditures by income group were then applied to census-tract-level breakouts of household income, and then adjusted proportionately for each census tract so that the total for all four counties equaled the estimated total of $31,045,901,815 in retail sales in the region. 6 U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS) Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS). Filtering includes NAICS Industry (NAICSP) 493 (TRNWarehouse and Storage), Employment Status Recode (ESR) is limited to “Civilian Employed, at Work” with at least $500 annual earnings.
7 Daniel Flaming and Patrick Burns, Economic Roundtable, Someone Else’s Ocean:

Dockworkers, Foreign Shippers and Economic Outcomes, (2022), p. 29, https://economicrt.org/publication/someone-elses-ocean/. 8 The profile of trucking companies is derived from a random sample of 304 trucking companies registered with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Data about number of drivers and annual mileage is from the U.S. Department of Transportation FMCSA Safety and Fitness Electronic Records System, with data extracted for each of the 304 companies: https://safer.fmcsa.dot.gov/saferhelp.aspx#General.

Packet Page. 1367
Exhausting Our Air 133
9 Port of Los Angeles, “Clean Truck Program Gate Move Analysis, (June 2023), https://kentico.portoflosangeles.org/getmedia/452bad8c-4e16-490f-bab6- 155b061866bb/POLA-Monthly-Gate-Move-Analysis.
10 A. R. Ravishankara, John S. Daniel, and Robert W. Portmann, Chemical Sciences Division, Earth System Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “Nitrous Oxide (N2O): The Dominant Ozone-Depleting Substance Emitted in the 21st Century,” (August 2009),
https://www.science.org/cms/asset/48f20a35-fe6d-4d0d-8bc4-fc605aea13b7/pap.pdf 11 Emissions from electric trucks were calculated based on kilowatts of electricity consumed per ton-mile of movement by heavy-duty trucks, and then identifying the emissions produced by generating a kilowatt of electricity.

Heavy-duty trucks consume 2.07 kilowatts of electricity per mile, according to the California Air Resources Board, EMFAC2021 Volume III Technical Document, (March 31, 2021), https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021- 03/emfac2021_volume_3_technical_document.pdf).

Given that the average load of trucks moving cargo from the ports is 19 tons, 0.11 kilowatts of electricity are consumed per ton-mile.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration identified the following pounds of emissions per kilowatt of electricity generated by electric utilities:

Sulfur dioxide 0.0006
Nitrogen oxide 0.0007
Carbon dioxide 0.8856
Annual Electric Generator Report, (2021),
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/unitedstates/state_tables.php 12 Center for Disease Control, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, (April 2002), https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tfacts175.pdf. 13 California Air Resources Board, Carbon Monoxide and Health, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/carbon-monoxide-and-health. 14 United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter (PM),” https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and-environmentaleffects-particulate-matter-pm. 15 National Park Service, Sulfur Dioxide Effects on Health, (February 27, 2023), https://www.nps.gov/subjects/air/humanhealth-sulfur.htm. 16 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, “Railroad Energy Intensity and Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions,” (October 2018), https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/18212/Railroad%20Energy%20Inte nsity%20and%20Criteria%20Pollutant%20Emissions.pdf.
17 Port of Los Angeles, “Clean Truck Program (CTP) Gate Move Analysis,” (November 2022), https://kentico.portoflosangeles.org/getmedia/452bad8c-4e16-490f-bab6- 155b061866bb/POLA-Monthly-Gate-Move-Analysis. Only 84.9 percent of truck trips at the ports are estimated to linked to large warehouses; other trips include small warehouses. This estimate of trip origins and destinations is based on the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s “Warehouse Truck Trip Origin and Destination Data,” (2014), https://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysishandbook/high-cube-warehouse. 18 TransportPolicy.net, "US Heavy-duty Emissions Transport Policy,” https://www.transportpolicy.net/standard/us-heavy-duty-emissions/.

Packet Page. 1368
134 Exhausting Our Air
19 California Air Resources Board, Emissions Inventory, South Coast AQMD (2023), https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/28ffaed607e86fec45648960f1f041ede7baa441. 20 David Austin, Congressional Budget Office, Pricing Freight Transport to Account for External Costs, (March 2015), https://www.cbo.gov/publication/50049. 21 California Air Resources Board, “Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation Summary,” https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/advanced-clean-fleets-regulation-summary. 22 John Kingston, “19 states target EPA waiver for California’s Advanced Clean Trucks rule,” Freight Waves, (June 8, 2023), https://www.freightwaves.com/news/19-statestarget-epa-waiver-for-californias-advanced-clean-trucks-rule. 23 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Agenda Item 27, Board Meeting May 7, 2021, http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/Governing-Board/2021/2021- May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10.
24 Latham & Watkins LLP, “US Warehouse Regulation Lawsuit Reaches Critical Stage,” (April 21, 2023) https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/us-warehouse-regulation-lawsuitreaches-3820942/#. 25 The availability of these trucks was documented through site visits by the Economic Roundtable to truck dealerships and also by: Gladstein, Neandross & Associates, 2021 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks, (February 2023), https://www.gladstein.org/research/2021-feasibility-assessment-for-drayage-trucks/. 26 California Air Resources Board, “Battery-Electric Truck and Bus Energy Efficiency Compared to Conventional Diesel Vehicles,” (May 2018),
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/battery-electric-truck-and-bus-energyefficiency-compared-conventional-diesel. 27 Port of Los Angeles, “Port of Los Angeles Awards $6 Million to Fund 22 ZeroEmission Trucks,” (December 20, 2022), https://www.portoflosangeles.org/references/2022-newsreleases/news_122022_ze_truck_grants. 28 California Air Resources Board, Proposed Fiscal Year 2022-23 Funding Plan for Clean Transportation Incentives, (October 12, 2022),
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-
10/proposed_fy2022_23_funding_plan_final.pdf.
29 South Coast Air Quality Management District, “Incentives,” https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/facilitybased-mobile-source-measures/incentives. 30 Evconnect, “SCE Ready Charge Program,” https://www.evconnect.com/charge-ready2. 31 Southern California Edison, “Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Rule 29,” https://www.sce.com/sites/default/files/2022-
07/EV%20Rule%2029%20Fact%20Sheet%200622_WCAG%20(V2).pdf. 32 Southern California Edison, “Southern California Edison Comments on California Energy Commission Interconnection Workshops,” (May 23, 2023), https://www.energy.ca.gov/event/workshop/2023-05/commissioner-workshop-cleanenergy-interconnection-electric-distribution Packet Page. 1369
Exhausting Our Air 135
33 Method for estimating truck trip miles is drawn from the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s “High Cube Warehouse Trip Rate Study for Air Quality Analysis” survey project, carried out 2012-14. The truck trips to and from a sample of high cube warehouses in SCAQMD region were identified by their origin/destination:

Local Origin Destination O-D Avg. Local Share
Sea Ports (POLA/POLB) 52% 5% 29% 34%
Port of Long Beach 27% 3% 15% 17%
Port of Los Angeles 26% 3% 14% 17%
SoCal Cargo Airports 0% 5% 3% 3%
Rail Intermodal Yards 9% 37% 23% 27%
Other Warehouses 27% 10% 19% 22%
Local Stores (SoCal) 2% 22% 12% 14%
Local Total 100%
Non-local
Out of state 10% 13% 11%
Non-local stores (non-SoCal) 0% 8% 4%
Port of San Diego 0% 0% 0%
Port of Hueneme 0% 0% 0%
Local + Non-Local Total 100%
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2014. High Cube Warehouse Trip Rate Study for Air Quality Analysis https://www.aqmd.gov/home/rulescompliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/high-cube-warehouse 34 The distance from large warehouses to their nearest intermodal freight rail facility was calculated, to / from the following:
• Intermodal Container Transfer Facility (ICTF), Long Beach, CA 90810 • LA Transportation Center – Union Pacific, Los Angeles, CA 90031 • East LA Intermodal Facility – Union Pacific, City of Commerce, CA 90023 • Hobart Yard – Burlington Northern Santa Fe, Los Angeles, CA 90023 • Pacific Harbor Line (PHL) On-Dock Intermodal Facility, Wilmington, CA 90744
• City of Industry Intermodal Terminal – Union Pacific, Industry, CA 91748 • San Bernadino Intermodal Facility – Burlington Northern Santa Fe, San Bernardino, CA 92411
35 The distance from large warehouses to their nearest cargo airport was calculated, to / from the following:
• John Wayne Airport (SNA), Santa Ana, CA 92707
• Long Beach Airport Daugherty Field (LGB), Long Beach, CA 90806 • Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), Los Angeles, CA 90045 • Ontario International Airport (ONT) , Ontario, CA 91761 • San Bernardino International Airport (SBD), San Bernardino, CA 92408 • Hollywood Burbank Airport (BUR), Burbank, CA 91505
• March Air Reserve Base (RIV), Riverside, CA 92518
36 Non-local destinations, such as retail stores outside of Southern California and outside of the state, are also among the destinations of truck from large warehouses, but are omitted in this analysis because the length of those trips are unknown and most of their diesel emission impacts are non-local.
37 The average contents weight of a loaded 40-foot container is 13.15083383 tons, based upon the U.S. DoT Maritime Administration’s data on waterborne containers by U.S.

Customs Port. For the pre-pandemic year 2017, our estimate converts TEU’s to 40-foot Packet Page. 1370
136 Exhausting Our Air
container equivalents, and Metric Tons to US Tons, in order to get an average import tons per 40-foot container. We blend the average weight of 40-foot containers entering the ports of Long Beach (13.79593112) and Los Angeles (12.61791991) to get the weight of containers’ contents driven to and from large warehouses in the 4- county region.

Imports in
Twenty-Foot
Equivalent
Units (TEUs),
2017
Imports in 40'
Container Units
(TEUs/2), 2017
Imports
(in Metric
Tons) 2017
Imports
(in US
Tons) 2017
Import
Tons per
40'
Container
2017
Port of LB, CA 3,792,165 1,896,083 23,730,349 26,158,224 13.8 Port of LA, CA 4,590,451 2,295,226 26,272,961 28,960,974 12.6 Sum / Average 8,382,617 4,191,308 50,003,310 55,119,198 13.2 Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 2000 - 2017 U.S.

Waterborne Container Trade by U.S. Customs Port, columns 1 and 3. (Columns 2, 4 and 5 calculated by the Economic Roundtable.) https://www.maritime.dot.gov/datareports/data-statistics/us-waterborne-foreign-container-trade-us-customs-ports-2000- %E2%80%93-2017
38 The weight of an empty 40-foot container is 4.1336625 tons in our estimates, converted from the metric weight 3,750 kg using a 1 Kilogram = 0.00110231 US tons conversion rate. "A 40-foot container’s empty weight is 3,750 kg (4.1336625 tons, using a 1 Kilogram = 0.00110231 US tons) and can be loaded to a maximum overall weight of 29 tons (26,300kg). But the amount of cargo you can load would depend in large on possible restrictions and/or limitations of the shipping line, the nature of the cargo and specific details of the shipment. Use our cubic meter calculator and discover the exact volume of your cargo." Source: https://www.icontainers.com/help/40-foot-container/ 39 The weight of a semi-tractor cab, in which the engine sits and is separate from the trailer chassis or enclosed trailer usually attached to it, can have a range of weights. In this research, we use the weight 34,000 pounds, or 17 tons. 40 The weight of a tractor truck chassis, the base frame that holds a 40-foot container (or two 20-foot containers) and is connected to – and pulled by – the semi-tractor cab, has a tare (empty) weight of 6,600 pounds, or 3.3 tons. Source:
http://www.chassisking.com/products/40-foot-container-chassis/40-foot-straight-framecontainer-chassis/ 41 Uncompensated public costs from truck travel are costs that exceed the revenue collected from heavy-vehicle use tax, tax on tires, fuel tax, and vehicle registration fees for trucks and trailers. Austin, David (March 2015), Congressional Budget Office, “Pricing Freight Transportation to Account for External Costs,” Working Paper 2015-03, https://www.cbo.gov/publication/50049. Uncompensated public costs from truck noise are from U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, (May 2000) “Addendum to the 1997 Federal Highway Cost Allocation Study Final Report,” https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/hcas/addendum.cfm
42 U.S. Congressional Budget Office (May 2023) Baseline Projections: Highway Trust Fund Accounts, page 1: “The fund records inflows from revenues collected through excise taxes on the sale of motor fuels, trucks and trailers, and truck tires; taxes on the use of certain kinds of vehicles; and interest credited to the fund.” https://www.cbo.gov/system/files?file=2023-05/51300-2023-05-highwaytrustfund.pdf 43 U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 2023. State Transportation Statistics: Road Condition. Accessed April 2023:
https://www.bts.gov/road-condition
Packet Page. 1371
Exhausting Our Air 137
44 California Air Resources Board. 2021. EMFAC2021 v1.0.2 CA ARB Emission Factors (EMFAC) model. Notes: ARB’s Fleet Database provides data generated from the 2021 vehicle registrations. For our research, we used ARD’s Air District; Region: South Coast AQMD dataset for calendar year 2023 (Annual), and used emissions factors for EMFAC202x Categories “T7 … Class 8” trucks, a weighted average by VMT. Source:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/28ffaed607e86fec45648960f1f041ede7baa441 45 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2023. CO-Benefits Risk Assessment Health Impacts Screening and Mapping Tool (COBRA). https://cobra.epa.gov/ Economic Roundtable estimated truck trips, ton miles were used to calculate annual tons of diesel truck emissions (PM2.5, SO2, NOx, NH3 and VOCs), using the California Air Resources Board. 2021. EMFAC2021 v1.0.2 CA ARB Emission Factors (EMFAC) model, which are the inputs to the COBRA model. The COBRA sectors selected are Highway Vehicles > Diesel Fuel > Heavy Duty trucks.
46 Employment impacts are from the 2019 IMPLAN model for California, sector 52, construction of new power and communication structures. Dollars have been adjusted to 2022 values. Based on the IMPLAN crosswalk to Census Bureau industry classifications (https://www.census.gov/construction/c30/definitions.html) sector 52 includes:
• Electric power facilities including plants, dry-waste generation, thermal, wind and solar energy facilities.
• Electrical distribution facilities including electric distribution systems, electrical substations, switch houses, transformers, and transmission lines. • Communication facilities including telephone, television, and radio, distribution and maintenance buildings and structures.
47 Share of total U.S. warehouse employment in the five largest frontline occupations:

SOC Code Title of Occupation Percent
43-5071 Shipping, Receiving, and Inventory Clerks 5%
53-7051 Industrial Truck and Tractor (Forklift) Operators 16% 53-7062 Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers, Hand 25% 53-7064 Packers and Packagers, Hand 5%
53-7065 Stock Clerks - Stockers and Order Fillers 15%
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor, Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) Survey, (May 2019), www.bls.gov/oes.
48 Skill requirement information is from the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, O*NET, which is a database of detailed job descriptions, including measurements of required levels of skills and knowledge. The first O*NET database, version 1.0, was released in 2001. Skill requirements identified in that database are compared to requirements in the most recent database, version 28.0. O*NET information can be accessed at: https://www.onetonline.org/. 49 MIT Living Wage Calculator, Counties and Metropolitan Statistical Areas in California, (accessed July 23, 2023), https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/06/locations. 50 Industry revenue and profit are from the 2019 IMPLAN model for California, sector 422, warehousing and storage. Dollars have been adjusted to 2022 values. 51 Economic Roundtable analysis; U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census National Redistricting Data (P.L. 94-171) Summary File, Table P1. Released 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, TIGER/Line Shapefiles. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennialcensus/about/rdo/summary-files.html 52 Definitions of a family and non-family households, from the U.S. Census Bureau’ s “American Community Survey and Puerto Rico Community Survey 2021 Subject Packet Page. 1372
138 Exhausting Our Air
Definitions “ https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/technicaldocumentation/code-lists.html • “Household – A household includes all the people who occupy a housing unit. (People not living in households are classified as living in group quarters.) … The occupants may be a single family, one person living alone, two or more families living together, or any other group of related or unrelated people who share living arrangements.” Page 80.
• “Family Households – A family consists of a householder (sometimes referred to as the “head of household”) and one or more other people living in the same household who are related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption.

All people in a household who are related to the householder are regarded as members of his or her family.” Page 82
• “Nonfamily Household – A householder living alone or with nonrelatives only.

Unmarried couples households, whether opposite-sex or same-sex, with no relatives of the householder present are tabulated in nonfamily households.”

Page 84 ends

Mayor and City CouncilOctober 7, 2026

Mayor and City Council
October 7, 2026