Agenda packet — San Juan Bautista City Council, November 14, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

City of San Juan Bautista
The “City of History”
www.san-juan-bautista.ca.us

CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL MEETING
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2023, 5:00 P.M.

HYBRID MEETING
City Hall, Council Chambers
311 Second Street, San Juan Bautista, California
AGENDA

ZOOM WEBINAR PARTICIPATION
The meeting can also be accessed by the public in the following methods: Through Zoom (https://zoom.us/join) per the instruction stated below, and on Facebook.

Please note: If all Council Members are present in person, public participation by Zoom or viewing on Facebook is for convenience only and is not required by law. If the Zoom or Facebook feed is lost for any reason the meeting may be paused while a fix is attempted but the meeting may continue at the discretion of the presiding officer.

JOIN ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88373320235

To participate telephonically:
call 1 (669) 900-6833
Webinar ID: 883 7332 0235

PUBLIC COMMENT - ADVISEMENT
Public comments are limited to items on this special meeting agenda pursuant to California Government Code section § 54954.3(b). Public comments are generally limited to three (3) minutes per speaker; the Mayor may further limit the time for public comments depending on the agenda schedule.

If you wish to make a public comment and are attending in person, please fill out a speaker card and wait for the item to be called. If you are attending via Zoom, join the Zoom Webinar, and use the "Raise Hand" or if joining by telephone, press *9 on your telephone keypad icon.

Written comments may be submitted via mail to the Deputy City Clerk at City Hall (P.O. Box 1420, San Juan Bautista, CA 95045), or emailed to [email protected] no later than 3:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting.

Written comments will be read into the record provided that the reading does not exceed three (3) minutes.

1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
Page | 2 City Council November 14, 2023

2. CLOSED SESSION – 5:00 P.M. – 6:00 P.M.

Receive public communications from the audience on Closed session items. The City Council will recess to closed session pursuant to:
a. Public Employee Performance Evaluation – (California Government Code section §54957(b)(1)) – the City Manager.

3. CONSENT
All matters listed under the San Juan Bautista City Council Consent Agenda may be enacted by one motion unless a member of the City Council or the public requests discussion or a separate vote.

A. Approve the Affidavit of Posting Agenda.

B. Waive the Reading of Ordinances and Resolutions on the Agenda Beyond the Title.

C. Approve a RESOLUTION Authorizing a Street Closure for Special Events.

D. Approve a RESOLUTION Extending Ridgeline Agreements for the Force Main project.

E. Approve a RESOLUTION Awarding Landscaping Contract in Three Special Districts to Smith and Enright.

F. Approve a RESOLUTION Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract with Paperless Solutions (CPS) for the Purchase of Laserfiche Cloud Municipality Site License for Records Management System.

G. Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 19, 2023.

H. Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 17, 2023.

4. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS
A. Treasurer’s Report and Monthly Financial Statements
Receive Report from City Treasurer Michelle Sabathia
B. Reports from City Council Representatives to Regional Organizations and Committees C. City Council Announcements
This is an opportunity for the Council and staff to share the community calendar and announce upcoming dates of interest to the general public.

D. City Manager’s Report
a. Fire Department Update
b. Sheriff Department Update

5. ACTION ITEMS
The “Recommendation” indicates the staff recommendation at the time the agenda was prepared. That recommendation does not limit the City Council’s alternative actions on any matter before it.

A. Draft Parklet Resolution Extending Existing Food and Beverage Parklets to June 2026 Consistent with State Law AB 1217 Signed October 8, 2023 Recommendation: Consider a RESOLUTION Extending the Existing Food and Beverage Parklets to June 2026, Consistent with State Law AB 1217
Page | 3 City Council November 14, 2023
B. Notice of Intention to Amend the General Plan by Accepting Urban Growth Boundary Ad Hoc Committee Recommended Sphere of Influence, Urban Growth Boundary, and Planning Area (Continued from October 17, 2023)
Recommendation: Approve a RESOLUTION Accepting the Urban Growth Boundary/Sphere of Influence Committee’s Recommendation; State the Intention to Amend the 2035 General Plan; and Direct the Urban Growth Boundary Ad Hoc Committee to work with San Benito County to establish a Planning Area and related Memorandum of Agreement/Understanding.

C. Fill a Vacancy on the Planning Commission / Historic Resources Board Recommendation: Receive the information provided by the Ad Hoc Committee, and direct the City Council to vote on the candidate application that was received by Staff in order to fill one (1) vacancy on the Planning Commission / Historic Resources Board.

D. Approve a Resolution Seeking from Cal Trans, County, and CHP Increased Safety Measures on Hwy 156 during Construction
Recommendation: Approve a RESOLUTION requesting the State, County, and CHP to implement increased traffic safety measures on State Highway 156 as soon as possible.

E. Discussion and Direction To Staff: San Juan Bautista Economic Development Program Recommendation: Discuss and provide direction to staff regarding the overall purpose, organization and staff support for San Juan Bautista economic development.

6. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. First Steps in Considering and Establishing a Golf Cart/Neighborhood Fleet Vehicle (NEV) Transportation Plan in San Juan Bautista
B. City Council Rules of Civility and Decorum for Conduct of City Officials, Employees, and Members of the Public during Public Meetings
C. Consider Workshop on “Wedge Issues” with Special Speaker from California Intergovernmental Risk Authority (CIRA)

7. ADJOURNMENT

AGENDA MATERIAL / ADDENDUM
Any addendums will be posted not later than 72-hours before regular meetings or 24-hours of special meetings, unless otherwise allowed under the Brown Act. City Council reports may be viewed at the City of San Juan Bautista City Hall at 311 Second Street San Juan Bautista, and are posted on the City website www.san-juan-bautista.ca.ussubject to Staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting, or by emailing Deputy City Clerk Elizabeth Soto at [email protected] or calling (831) 623-4661 during normal business hours.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Govt. Code 54953(a), the City will make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Deputy City Clerk, a minimum of 48 hours prior to the meeting at (831) 623-4661.

If you challenge any planning or land use decision made at this meeting in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing held at this meeting, or in written correspondence delivered Page | 4 City Council November 14, 2023
to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Please take notice that the time within which to seek judicial review of any final administrative determination reached at this meeting is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

A Closed Session may be called during this meeting pursuant to Government Code §54956.9 (d)(2) if a point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the City on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City.

PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURES
If you wish to make a general public comment and are attending in person, please fill out a speaker card. If you are attending via Zoom, join the Zoom Webinar, and use the "Raise Hand" or if joining by telephone, press *9 on your telephone keypad icon.

SUBMISSION OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
Written comments may be submitted via mail to the Deputy City Clerk at City Hall (P.O. Box 1420, San Juan Bautista, CA 95045), or emailed to [email protected] no later than 3:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting.

Written comments will be read into the record provided that the reading does not exceed three (3) minutes.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
This agenda was posted on Thursday, November 9, 2023, on the bulletin board at City Hall, 311 Second Street, the bulletin board at the City Library, 801 Second Street, the bulletin board at the entrance to the United States Post Office, 301 The Alameda, and the City’s website. Meetings are streamed live at https://www.facebook.com/cityofsanjuanbautista/.

Item: #
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023

AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Elizabeth Soto, Do Now Declare, Under the Penalties of Perjury That I Am the Deputy City Clerk / Administrative Services Manager in the City of San Juan Bautista and That I Posted Three (3) True Copies of the attached City Council Agenda. I Further Declare That I Posted Said Agenda on the 9th day of November 2023, and in the Following Locations in said City of San Juan Bautista, County of San Benito, California.

1. On The Bulletin Board at City Hall, 311 Second Street.

2. On The Bulletin Board at The City Library, 801 Second Street.

3. On The Bulletin Board at The Entrance to The United States Post Office, 301 The Alameda
Signed at San Juan Bautista, County of San Benito, California, on the 9th day of November 2023.
____________________________________________
Elizabeth Soto
Deputy City Clerk / Administrative Services Manager
Item #:

City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023

WAIVER OF READING OF ORDINANCES
State law requires that an ordinance be read in its entirety prior to adoption unless the City Council waives reading beyond the title. Reading an entire ordinance at the meeting is extremely time-consuming; reading of the title alone usually gives the audience sufficient understanding of what the Council is considering.

To ensure that this waiver is consistently approved by the Council, Council should make the waiver at each meeting, thus, you should do it at this point on the Consent Agenda. The Council then does not have to worry about making this motion when each ordinance comes up on the agenda.

GC § 36934
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN

BAUTISTA AUTHORIZING CLOSURE OF STREETS FOR CERTAIN
SPECIAL EVENTS IN 2023 and 2024:

WHEREAS; the City has received the following applications for Special Events in 2023 and 2024 and authorization for Street Closure are a prerequisite for issuance of such permits for the following events:

Day of Lights Parade:

Closure of The Alameda and Third Street from Franklin St. to Muckelemi (Exhibit A) December 2, 2023 from 4:00 PM until 8 PM
Annual Rotary Mission 10 Race:

Closure of Second Street from Washington St. to Monterey St., Monterey St. Between Second St. and First St.
to the City Limit (remainder to be on Roads outside the City) (Exhibit B) January 27, 2024 from 6:30 AM to 1:00 PM:

Arts and Crafts Festival:

Closure of Third Street from Franklin to Muckelemi and Cross Streets:

Washington, Mariposa, and Polk Streets between Second and Fourth Streets (Exhibit C) March 23 , 2023 from 12AM to March 26, 2024 at 9PM
AND
Closure of Mariposa Street between March 22 – March 26, 2024 Great Rib Cook Off: Closure of Third Street from Franklin St. to Muckelemi St., Cross Streets Washington, Mariposa, and Polk Streets Between Second and Fourth Streets (Exhibit D)
April 26, 2024 at 12AM to April 28, 2024 at 9PM
BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby authorize the above referenced entities to close streets on the dates and times referenced herein subject to the following requirements;

1. All conditions and requirements of agencies, including the Fire Marshall, San Benito County Sheriff, Building Official, Public Works Director, San Benito County Health Dept., San Benito County Integrated Waste Management, Community Development Director shall be met prior to, during, and after the event in the manner deemed necessary by the City Manager.

2. Prior to each event, Sponsors shall submit an agreement to reimburse the City in accordance with an invoice duly issued by the City to cover City expenses as deemed necessary by the City Manager to support administrative, material and City staff time associated with the Street Closure.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14tth day of November 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________
Leslie Q. Jordan, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Elizabeth Soto, Acting Deputy City Clerk
Item xx
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 1

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2023
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION
FROM: DON REYNOLDS, CITY MANAGER
BY:

TITLE: AGREEMENTS WITH RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STRATEGIES,

LLC FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RELATED TO

FINANCING THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM

COMPLIANCE PROJECTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):

It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached Resolutions authorizing the City Manager to execute professional services agreements with Ridgeline Municipal Strategies, LLC to:
• Continue providing financial consulting services and preparing financial feasibility studies for the City’s Wastewater and Water Systems’ compliance projects, as required by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) – extension of an expiring agreement; • Provide municipal advisory and financial consulting services for the continuing development and implementation of the financing strategy for the City’s Wastewater and Water Systems’ compliance projects – new agreement; and • Provide financial reporting for the 2015 San Juan Bautista Public Financing Authority Enterprise Revenue Bonds and the City’s 2023 Bond Anticipation Notes (the First Foundation Bank Line of Credit) – new agreement.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

Over the last four years the City has been working with the EPA and the California State Water Resources Control Board to address the wastewater discharge quality requirement violations. On August 18, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-42, and the City and the EPA executed an Administrative Order on Consent, (“AOC”) agreeing that the City will bring its water systems into Permit compliance by December 31, 2023.

Since then, the City has completed the following tasks related to the Wastewater System’s Compliance Project (the “Wastewater Project”):

Item xx
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 2
• Completed Wastewater Project design;
• Obtained all necessary environmental permits for the Wastewater Project; • Adopted new sewer rates to be able to pay for the Wastewater Project; • Applied and was approved for four grants totaling approximately $10.5 million; • Applied and was approved for the USDA low-interest loan of approximately $10.3 million; • Obtained interim Wastewater Project financing, as required by the USDA; • Bid out the Wastewater Project; and
• Commenced Wastewater Project construction.

The City is currently working with the San Benito County Water District on the design for the Water System’s Compliance Project (the “Water Project”).

The City staff has determined that municipal advisory and financial consulting support is necessary for the Water and Wastewater Projects (the “Projects”).

DISCUSSION:

Ridgeline Municipal Strategies, LLC (“Ridgeline”) has been assisting the City as the municipal advisor and financial consultant in the development of the financing strategy for the Projects, providing input during the preparation of the Preliminary Engineering Report for the Wastewater Project and the Water and Sewer rate studies, and assisting with negotiations with the City of Hollister and the San Benito County Water District. Ridgeline also has been instrumental in securing the EPA, State of California, and USDA funding for the Wastewater Project, the inclusion of the Wastewater Project on the fundable list for the State Revolving Fund financing, and helped the City obtain the interim financing for the Wastewater Project.

The City has previously entered into four agreements with Ridgeline. • On November 16, 2021, the City entered into an agreement with Ridgeline for consulting services to prepare the financial feasibility analysis for the Projects, as required by the EPA.

The work under that agreement is on-going. The term of this agreement expires on December 31, 2023 and needs to be extended.
• On July 5, 2022, the City entered into an agreement with Ridgeline for municipal advisory and financial consulting services to assist the City with the Water Project financing and with the financing strategy development and implementation for the Projects. The work under that agreement is on-going. The Water Project financing has been delayed due to the project design timing. Under the financing strategy development and implementation scope of work, Ridgeline helped the City secure the $3 million grant from the State of California, $9.5 million in USDA grants, and the $10.3 million loan from the USDA. The financing strategy and implementation scope of work has been completed.

Item xx
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 3
• On December 20, 2022, the City entered into an agreement with Ridgeline for municipal advisory services to obtain the interim financing for the Wastewater Project (the $14.6 million line of credit from First Foundation Bank). The work under that agreement has been completed.
• On December 20, 2022, the City entered into an agreement with Ridgeline for financial consulting services to secure the $1 million EPA grant for the Wastewater Project. The work under that agreement is substantially completed.

The following table shows the not-to-exceed contract amounts and the amounts paid to Ridgeline under the two agreements in place through September 30, 2023.

Given Ridgeline’s in-depth understanding of the Projects and prior performance, Ridgeline is uniquely qualified as a sole source to provide professional services to the City, and it is recommended that the City retain Ridgeline for continuing on-going municipal advisory and financial consulting support on the Projects and for the financial reporting services.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no new fiscal impact related to the extension of an existing agreement with Ridgeline to prepare the financial feasibility studies for the Projects.

If approved, the agreement for the municipal advisory and financial consulting services for the continuing development and implementation of the financing strategy for the Projects includes a not-to-exceed amount of $50,000, payable on a time-and-materials basis. This cost will be paid by the various grants, USDA loan, and Sewer and Water Enterprise Funds.

If approved, the agreement for the financial reporting services for the 2015 San Juan Bautista Public Financing Authority Enterprise Revenue Bonds and the City’s 2023 Bond Anticipation Notes (the First Foundation Bank Line of Credit) includes a flat fee amount of $2,525 per year, payable upon submittal of the financial reports. The City has been utilizing another consultant for Wastewater Water Total Wastewater Water Total Wastewater Water Total 1 EPA Feasibility $21,200.00 $16,430.00 $37,630.00 $14,707.50 $5,782.50 $20,490.00 $6,492.50 $10,647.50 $17,140.00 2a Water USDA/SRF Financing [1] $0.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 2b Fin Strategy Implementation $25,075.00 $22,125.00 $47,200.00 $41,286.76 $5,913.24 $47,200.00 -$16,211.76 $16,211.76 $0.00 3 Wastewater Line of Credit $27,500.00 $0.00 $27,500.00 $27,500.00 $0.00 $27,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 4 EPA STAG Grant $19,175.00 $0.00 $19,175.00 $6,563.75 $0.00 $6,563.75 $12,611.25 $0.00 $12,611.25 Total $92,950.00 $83,555.00 $176,505.00 $90,058.01 $11,695.74 $101,753.75 $2,891.99 $71,859.26 $74,751.25 [1] Portions of compensation under this agreement are contingent upon successful completion of financing.

City of San Juan Bautista
Ridgeline Municipal Strategies Contracts Summary
Agreement
Number Description Budget Billed Thru 09/30/2023 Budget Remaining Item xx
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 4
a portion of these services. Ridgeline’s agreement is estimated to save the City approximately $3,000 in lower fees. This cost will be paid by the Sewer and Water Enterprise Funds.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Proposed agreements.

RESOLUTION NO. 2023- XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA AMENDING A

CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT AND ADOPTING TWO NEW

AGREEMENTS WITH RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STRATEGIES, LLC
(“RIDGELINE”)
WHEREAS, On Augst 26, 2020, to address its on-going wastewater permit and National Pollution Discharge Elimination System infractions, the City entered into an Administrative Order on Consent (“AOC”) with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) known as EPA Docket No. CWA-309-(a)-20-007; and
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2020, the City sent its selection of a compliance project as required by the AOC to the EPA and on October 30, 2020, the EPA approved among other things, the City’s intention to send its wastewater to the Hollister treatment plant and decommission its wastewater treatment plant; and
WHEREAS, on January 22, 2021, the City retained the municipal advisory services of Cal Muni to assist with the financial feasibility analysis for the Compliance Project, as required by the EPA/AOC; and
WHEREAS; after working for six-months with Dmitry Semenov, a registered municipal advisor with Cal Muni, Mr. Semenov left Cal Muni to start his own company, and on November 16, 2021, the City adopted Resolution 2021-64, and executed an agreement with Mr. Semenov’s company “Ridgeline Municipal Strategies, LLC,” for $37,630 to complete the financial feasibility analysis required by the EPA/AOC; and
WHEREAS, since that time, as reported to and approved by the City Council on December 20, 2022 when Resolutions 2022-95 and 2022-96 were approved, the City has entered into a total of four agreements with Ridgeline, for a total amount of $176,505 for various municipal advisory and financial consulting services pertaining to the financing strategy development and implementation, assistance with the State of California, Waterboard, EPA and USDA grants and loans, and interim financing for the City’s Wastewater and/or Water System Compliance Projects; and
WHEREAS, as of September 30, 2023, the City has paid Ridgeline $101,754 for completed services, with a remaining total budget balance of approximately $74,751, mostly dedicated the completion of the financial feasibility analysis, future USDA and SRF financing for the Water System Compliance Project, and application support for the EPA grant for the Wastewater System Compliance Project; and
WHEREAS, the EPA/AOC financial feasibility analysis agreement expires on December 31, 2023, and it is recommended that the EPA/AOC work be extended without a need for budget changes (Balance of $17,140), and that a new Agreement be approved for $50,000 to continue with the fiscal planning efforts and municipal advisory support for the Water and Wastewater System Compliance Projects, with the terms of both agreements ending on December 31, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the City has certain regulatory reporting and continuing disclosure obligations related to its outstanding debt, and it proposed that a third agreement for approximately $2,525 per year (adjusted annually for inflation) be approved for Ridgeline to prepare and file the continuing disclosure and annual debt transparency reports on behalf of the City, with a 3-year term expiring on June 30, 2026.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA NOW HEREBY FINDS:

1. That the recitals in this Resolution and accompanying staff report are true and correct and are hereby made a part of this Resolution.

2. That it agrees to continue with the valuable services of Ridgeline acting as the City’s municipal and financial advisor, as cited in the Referrals above and as described in the staff’s report.

3. It authorizes the City Manager and/or delegate to extend the term of the Agreement for the “EPA Feasibility Study” for two years until December 31, 2025.

4. It authorizes the City Manager and/or delegate to execute a new municipal advisory and financial consulting services agreement with Ridgeline for both Wastewater and Water System Compliance Projects for an amount not to exceed $50,000 and term expiring December 31, 2025.

5. It authorizes the City Manager and/or delegate to execute an Agreement with Ridgeline for the annual regulatory and continuing disclosure reporting services required by the various outstanding debt obligations of the City in the amount of approximately $2,525 per year (subject to annual inflation adjustments) and term expiring June 30, 2026.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of San Juan Bautista at a special meeting held on the 14th day of November 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________
Leslie Q. Jordan, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Elizabeth Soto, Deputy City Clerk
Page | 1

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STGRATEGIES, LLC
AGREEMENT EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE NOVEMBER 16, 2021
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT APPROVED BY RESOLUTION 2021-64

FOR FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS OR UNTIL DECEMBER 31. 2025
THIS AMENDMENT AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”), made and entered into this 14th day of November 2023, by and between the City of San Juan Bautista, a California general law city, with its principal place of business at 311 2nd Street, San Juan Bautista, CA 95045 (the “Client”), and Ridgeline Municipal Strategies, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, with its principal place of business at 2213 Plaza Drive, Rocklin, CA 95765 (“Ridgeline”), collectively referred to as the “Parties,” extends the term of the Agreement for Consulting Services (the “Original Agreement”) approved by Resolution 2021-64 and entered into by the Parties on November 16, 2021.

WHEREAS, the City and Ridgeline previously entered into the Original Agreement on November 16, 2021, with an expiration date of December 31, 2023; and WHEREAS, the Parties wish to extend the term of the Original Agreement until December 31, 2025, under the terms and conditions set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, and intending to be legally bound hereby, the Client and Ridgeline agree as follows:

SECTION I. EXTENSION OF TERM
The Parties agree to extend the term of the Original Agreement, including all its terms and conditions, until December 31, 2025.

SECTION II. SERVICES AND COMPENSATION
All services provided by Ridgeline under the Original Agreement shall continue as outlined in the Original Agreement, and the compensation for these services shall remain unchanged.

SECTION III. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Amendment constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the extension of the Original Agreement. All other terms and conditions of the Original Agreement, not expressly modified herein, shall remain in full force and effect.

Page | 2
SECTION IV. APPLICABLE LAW
This Amendment shall be construed, enforced, and administered according to the laws of the State of California.

SECTION IV. NOTICES
All notices given under this Amendment shall be in writing, sent by registered United States mail, with return receipt requested, addressed to the party for whom it is intended, at the designated below. The parties designate the following as the respective places for giving notice, to wit:

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
311 2nd Street
San Juan Bautista, CA 95045
Attention: City Manager

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STRATEGIES, LLC
2213 Plaza Drive
Rocklin, CA 95765
Attention: Dmitry Semenov
SECTION XIV. EXECUTION; COUNTERPARTS
Each party to this Amendment represents and warrants that the person or persons signing this Amendment on behalf of such party is authorized and empowered to sign and deliver this Amendment for such party. This Amendment may be signed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same document.
[Signature Page to Follow on Next Page]
Page | 3
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Client and Ridgeline have executed this Amendment as of the day and year herein above written.

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
By: ______________________________________
Name: Don Reynolds
Title: City Manager

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STRATEGIES, LLC
By: ______________________________________
Name: Dmitry Semenov
Title: Principal
Page | 1

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STGRATEGIES, LLC

AGREEMENT FOR MUNICIPAL ADVISORY AND CONSULTING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”), made and entered into this 14th day of November 2023, by and between the City of San Juan Bautista, a California general law city, with its principal place of business at 311 2nd Street, San Juan Bautista, CA 95045 (the “Client”), and Ridgeline Municipal Strategies, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, with its principal place of business at 2213 Plaza Drive, Rocklin, CA 95765 (“Ridgeline”), sets forth the terms and conditions under which Ridgeline shall provide municipal advisory and consulting services to the Client.

WHEREAS, the Client wishes to obtain the services of a municipal advisor and financial consultant to assist in developing and implementing the financing strategy for the Client’s Wastewater and Water Systems’ compliance projects (the “Project”).

WHEREAS, Ridgeline is duly licensed and has the necessary qualifications, experience, and personnel necessary to properly provide the Scope of Services; WHEREAS, the Client desires to retain Ridgeline to provide the Scope of Services; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager is authorized to enter into this Agreement on behalf of the Client; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, and intending to be legally bound hereby, the Client and Ridgeline agree as follows:

SECTION I. SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. Ridgeline shall provide the services described in Exhibit A to this Agreement (hereinafter referred to interchangeably as the “Services” or “Scope of Services”). Any material changes in or additions to the Scope of Services described in Exhibit A shall be promptly reflected in a written supplement or amendment to this Agreement. Services provided by Ridgeline which are not specifically referenced in the Scope of Services shall be completed as agreed in writing in advance between the Client and Ridgeline. Upon request of the Client, Ridgeline or an affiliate of Ridgeline may agree to additional services to be provided by Ridgeline or an affiliate of Ridgeline, by a separate agreement between the Client and Ridgeline or its respective affiliate.

B. Ridgeline shall perform all such work with skill and diligence and pursuant to generally accepted standards of practice in effect at the time of performance. Ridgeline Page | 2
shall provide corrective services without charge to the Client for work which fails to meet these standards and which is reported to Ridgeline in writing within sixty (60) days of discovery.

C. The Client shall cooperate with Ridgeline and will furnish all information, data, records, and reports existing and available to the Client to enable Ridgeline to carry out work outlined in the Scope of Services. Ridgeline shall be entitled to reasonably rely on information, data, records, and reports furnished by the Client, however, the Client makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of any such information, data, records, or reports available to it and provided to Ridgeline which were furnished to the Client by a third party. Ridgeline shall have a duty to bring to the Client's attention any deficiency or error it may discover in any information provided to Ridgeline by the Client or a third party.

SECTION II. WORK SCHEDULE
The services of Ridgeline are to commence as soon as practicable after the execution of this Agreement. Ridgeline shall thereafter diligently perform the Services through to completion unless otherwise directed by the Client or unless earlier terminated.

SECTION III. REGISTERED MUNICIPAL ADVISOR; REQUIRED DISCLOSURES A. Ridgeline is a registered municipal advisor with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB”), pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rule 15Ba1-2. This Agreement designates Ridgeline as the Client’s independent registered municipal advisor (“IRMA”) with regard to the attached Scope of Services for purposes of SEC Rule 15Ba1-1(d)(3)(vi) (the “IRMA Exemption”). Ridgeline shall not be responsible for, or have any liability in connection with, verifying that Ridgeline is independent from any other party seeking to rely on the IRMA Exemption (as such independent status is required pursuant to the IRMA Exemption, as interpreted from time to time by the SEC). The Client acknowledges and agrees that any reference to Ridgeline, its personnel, and its role as IRMA, including in the written representation of the Client required under SEC Rule 15Ba1-1(d)(3)(vi)(B) shall be subject to prior approval by Ridgeline. The Client further agrees not to represent that Ridgeline is the Client’s IRMA with respect to any aspect of a municipal securities issuance or municipal financial product, outside of the attached Scope of Services or without Ridgeline’s prior written consent.

B. MSRB Rule G-42 requires that municipal advisors make written disclosures to its Clients of all material conflicts of interest and certain legal or disciplinary events.

Such disclosures are provided in Ridgeline’s Disclosure Statement delivered to the Client together with this Agreement as Exhibit C.

Page | 3

SECTION IV. COMPENSATION
A. For the Services provided under this Agreement, Ridgeline’s professional fees shall be paid as provided in Exhibit B to this Agreement. Any services which are not included in the Scope of Services set forth in Exhibit A of this Agreement will be subject to separate, mutually acceptable fee structures.

B. Invoice(s) in a format and on a schedule acceptable to the Client shall be submitted to and be reviewed and verified by the Client. The Client shall notify Ridgeline of exceptions or disputed items and their dollar value within fifteen (15) days of receipt.

Payment of the undisputed amount of the invoice will typically be made approximately thirty (30) days after the invoice is received by the Client.

C. Ridgeline will maintain clearly identifiable, complete and accurate records with respect to all costs incurred under this Agreement on an industry recognized accounting basis. Ridgeline shall make available to the representative of the Client all such books and records related to this Agreement, and the right to examine, copy and audit the same during regular business hours upon three (3) business days’ notice for a period of two (2) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement.

SECTION V. TERMS AND TERMINATION
A. Unless otherwise provided, the term of this Agreement shall begin on the date of its full execution and shall expire on December 31, 2025, unless extended by amendment or terminated earlier as provided herein.

B. The Client may suspend this Agreement and Ridgeline’s performance of the Services, wholly or in part, for such period as it deems necessary in the Client’s sole discretion. Ridgeline will be paid for satisfactory services performed through the date of suspension.

C. If Ridgeline at any time refuses or neglects to perform its Services in a timely fashion or in accordance with the schedule identified in Exhibit A, or is declared bankrupt, or commits any act of insolvency, or makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors without Client’s consent, or fails to make prompt payment to persons furnishing labor, equipment, materials or services, or fails in any respect to properly and diligently perform its Services, or otherwise fails to perform fully any and all of the Agreements herein contained, this Agreement shall be terminated.

D. If Ridgeline fails to cure the default within seven (7) days after written notice from the Client, the Client may, at its sole option, demand possession of any documents or other materials (in paper and electronic form) prepared or used by Page | 4
Ridgeline in connection with the provision of Services and (1) provide any such work, labor, materials or services as may be necessary to overcome the default and deduct the cost thereof from any money then due or thereafter to become due to Ridgeline under this Agreement; or (2) terminate this Agreement.

E. This Agreement and all Services to be rendered under it may be terminated upon fifteen (15) days written notice from either party, with or without cause. In the event Client elects to terminate this Agreement, Ridgeline shall be paid for all services rendered, unless the termination is made for cause, in which event compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in the light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in the termination. This continuing right to receive full compensation shall survive the term of this Agreement.

SECTION VI. ASSIGNMENT
Ridgeline shall not assign any interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Client.

SECTION VII. INFORMATION TO BE FURNISHED TO AND BY RIDGELINE A. All information, data, reports, and records (“Data”) in the possession of the Client or any third party agent to the Client necessary for carrying out any services to be performed under this Agreement shall be furnished to Ridgeline, and the Client shall cause its agent(s) to cooperate with Ridgeline in its conduct of reasonable due diligence in performing the services.

B. Unless otherwise provided for herein, all documents, materials, data, computer data files, basis for calculations, and reports originated and prepared by Ridgeline under this Agreement shall be and remain the property of the Client for its use in any manner it deems appropriate. Ridgeline agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in the Client and waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or intellectual property rights in favor of the Client. Ridgeline shall deliver the work product to the Client in the PDF format electronically. Ridgeline shall use all reasonable efforts to ensure that any electronic files provided to the Client will be compatible with the Client's current computer hardware and software. Ridgeline makes no representation as to long-term compatibility, usability or readability of the format resulting from the use of software application packages, operating systems or computer hardware differing from those in use by the Client at the commencement of this Agreement. Ridgeline shall be permitted to maintain copies of all such data for its files. The Client acknowledges that its use of the work product is limited to the purposes contemplated by the Scope of Services and, should the Client use these products or data in connection with additions to the work required under this Agreement or for new work without consultation with and without additional compensation to Page | 5
Ridgeline, Ridgeline makes no representation as to the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the Scope of Services and shall have no liability or responsibility whatsoever in connection with such use which shall be at the Client's sole risk. Any and all liability arising out of changes made by the Client to Ridgeline's deliverables is waived against Ridgeline unless the Client has given Ridgeline prior written notice of the changes and has received Ridgeline's written consent to such changes.

C. To the extent the Client requests that Ridgeline provide advice with regard to any recommendation made by a third party, the Client will provide to Ridgeline written direction to do so as well as any Data it has received from such third party relating to its recommendation. The Client acknowledges and agrees that while Ridgeline is relying on the Data in connection with its provision of the services under this Agreement, Ridgeline makes no representation with respect to and shall not be responsible for the accuracy or completeness of such Data.

D. In the course of performing services under this Agreement Ridgeline may obtain, receive, and review confidential or proprietary documents, information or materials that are and shall remain the exclusive property of the Client. Should Ridgeline undertake the work on behalf of other agencies, entities, firms or persons relating to the matters described in the Scope of Services, it is expressly agreed by Ridgeline that any such confidential or proprietary information or materials shall not be provided or disclosed in any manner to any of the Client’s other clients, or to any other third party, without the Client’s prior express written consent.

SECTION VIII. NOTICES
All notices given under this Agreement shall be in writing, sent by registered United States mail, with return receipt requested, addressed to the party for whom it is intended, at the designated below. The parties designate the following as the respective places for giving notice, to wit:

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
311 2nd Street
San Juan Bautista, CA 95045
Attention: City Manager

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STRATEGIES, LLC
2213 Plaza Drive
Rocklin, CA 95765
Attention: Dmitry Semenov
Page | 6
SECTION IX. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
Except to the extent caused by willful misconduct, bad faith, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of obligations or duties under this Agreement on the part of Ridgeline or any of its associated persons, neither Ridgeline nor any of its associated persons shall have liability to any person for any act or omission in connection with performance of its services hereunder, or for any error of judgment or mistake of law, or for any loss arising out of any issuance of municipal securities, any municipal financial product or any other financial product or investment, or for any financial or other damages resulting from the Client’s election to act or not to act, as the case may be, contrary to or, absent negligence on the part of Ridgeline or any of its associated persons, upon any advice or recommendation provided by Ridgeline to the Client.

SECTION X. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR; NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARY Ridgeline, its employees, officers and representatives at all times shall be independent contractors and shall not be deemed to be employees, agents, partners, servants and/or joint venturers of the Client by virtue of this Agreement or any actions or services rendered under this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement is intended or shall be construed to give any person, other than the Parties hereto, their successors and permitted assigns, any legal or equitable rights, remedy, or claim under or in respect of this Agreement or any provisions contained herein.

SECTION XI. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
A. If any dispute arises between the parties as to proper interpretation or application of this Agreement, the parties shall first meet and confer in a good faith attempt to resolve the matter between themselves. If the dispute is not resolved by meeting and conferring, the matter shall be submitted for formal mediation to a mediator selected mutually by the parties. The expenses of such mediation shall be shared equally between the parties. If the dispute is not or cannot be resolved by mediation, the parties may mutually agree (but only as to those issues of the matter not resolved by mediation) to submit their dispute to arbitration. Before commencement of the arbitration, the parties may elect to have the arbitration proceed on an informal basis; however, if the parties are unable so to agree, then the arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association. The decision of the arbitrator shall be binding, unless within thirty (30) days after issuance of the arbitrator’s written decision, any party files an action in court. Venue and jurisdiction for any such action between the parties shall lie in the Superior Court for the County of San Benito.

B. In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute relating to this Agreement, or the breach thereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party reasonable expenses, attorney's fees and costs.

Page | 7

SECTION XII. APPLICABLE LAW
This Agreement shall be construed, enforced, and administered according to the laws of the State of California. Ridgeline and the Client agree that, should a disagreement arise as to the terms or enforcement of any provision of this Agreement, each party will in good faith attempt to resolve said disagreement prior to pursuing other action.

SECTION XIII. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; SEVERABILITY
This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the Client and Ridgeline and may not be amended or modified except in writing signed by both parties. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision.

SECTION XIV. EXECUTION; COUNTERPARTS
Each party to this Agreement represents and warrants that the person or persons signing this Agreement on behalf of such party is authorized and empowered to sign and deliver this Agreement for such party. This Agreement may be signed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same document.
[Signature Page to Follow on Next Page]
Page | 8
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Client and Ridgeline have executed this Agreement as of the day and year herein above written.

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
By: ______________________________________
Name: Don Reynolds
Title: City Manager

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STRATEGIES, LLC
By: ______________________________________
Name: Dmitry Semenov
Title: Principal
Page | A-1

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES

FINANCING STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION FOR THE

WASTEWATER AND WATER SYSTEM COMPLIANCE PROJECTS
Ridgeline will assist the Client with the development and implementation of the financing strategy for the Client’s Wastewater and Water System Compliance Projects, as follows:
• Prepare financial models and calculations as necessary, if not covered by any other agreement between Ridgeline and the Client;
• Review documents prepared by third parties at the Client’s request; • Assist with the project and process management tasks related to the Project; • Assist with grant application process, if not covered by any other agreement between Ridgeline and the Client;
• Prepare documents and review documents prepared by others related to the Wastewater and Water System Compliance Projects financing; • Initiate, maintain, and manage communications with third parties, including consultants and government/public agencies, as requested by Client; • Perform other tasks, as requested by Client.

Page | B-1

EXHIBIT B

COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES
For the Services described in Exhibit A, Ridgeline will be compensated on a time and materials basis, not to exceed total budget, as shown below. The invoices will be submitted to the Client on quarterly basis.

If there are material changes to the Scope of Services, a revised budget may be negotiated by a mutual written agreement between Ridgeline and the Client.

Hours [1] Amount @
$315/hr [1]
65 $20,475
93 $29,295
$230
158 $50,000
[1] Time and cost are estimates and will vary. Billings will be done on T&M basis for actual amount of time required, not to exceed total amount shown.

Water Project
TOTAL
Direct Expenses
City of San Juan Bautista
Wastewater and Water Compliance Project
Financing Strategy Development and Implementation
Description
Wastewater Project
Page | C-1

EXHIBIT C

DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND OTHER INFORMATION

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STRATEGIES, LLC
I. Introduction
Ridgeline Municipal Strategies, LLC (hereinafter, referred to as “Ridgeline”) is a registered municipal advisor with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB”), pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rule 15Ba1-2.

The MSRB is the primary rulemaking body for the municipal securities industry in general and municipal advisors in particular. Their website can be accessed at www.msrb.org. The website includes, among other things, the municipal advisory client brochure, which describes protections that are provided by the MSRB’s rules and the process for filing complaints with appropriate regulatory authorities. The municipal advisory client brochure can be accessed at:
http://www.msrb.org/~/media/Files/Resources/MSRB-MA-Clients-Brochure.ashx?la=en.

In accordance with MSRB rules, this disclosure statement is provided by us to each client prior to the execution of our advisory agreement with written disclosures of all material conflicts of interests and legal or disciplinary events that are required to be disclosed with respect to providing financial advisory services pursuant to MSRB Rule G-42(b) and (c)(ii). Ridgeline employs a number of resources to identify and subsequently manage actual or potential conflicts of interest in addition to disclosing actual and potential conflicts of interest provided herein.

Fiduciary Duty
Ridgeline has a fiduciary duty to the Client and must provide both a Duty of Care and a Duty of Loyalty that includes the following.

Duty of Care:
• Exercise due care in performing its municipal advisory activities; • Possess the degree of knowledge and expertise needed to provide the Client with informed advice; • Make a reasonable inquiry as to the facts that are relevant to the Client’s determination as to whether to proceed with a course of action or that form the basis for any advice provided to the Client; and,
• Undertake a reasonable investigation to determine that we are not providing any recommendations on materially inaccurate or incomplete information. • We must have a reasonable basis for:
o Any advice provided to or on behalf of the Client;
o Any representations made in a certificate that we sign that will be reasonably foreseeably relied upon by the Client, any other party involved in the municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product, or investors in the Client’s securities; and, o Any information provided to the Client or other parties involved in the municipal securities transaction in connection with the preparation of an official statement.

Page | C-2
Duty of Loyalty:

We must deal honestly and with the utmost good faith with the Client and act in the Client’s best interests without regard to the financial or other interests of Ridgeline. We will eliminate or provide full and fair disclosure (included herein) to the Client about each material conflict of interest (as applicable). We will no engage in municipal advisory activities with the Client, as a municipal entity, if we cannot manage or mitigate our conflicts in a manner that permits us to act in the Client’s best interest.

How We Identify and Manage Conflicts of Interest
Code of Ethics. Ridgeline requires all of its employees to conduct all aspects of our business with the highest standards of integrity, honesty and fair dealing. All employees are required to avoid even the appearance of misconduct or impropriety and avoid actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships that would or could interfere with an employee’s independent exercise of judgment in performing the obligations and responsibilities owed to a municipal advisor and our clients.

Policies and Procedures. Ridgeline has adopted policies and procedures that include specific rules and standards for conduct. Some of these policies and procedures provide guidance and reporting requirements about matters that allow us to monitor behavior that might give rise to a conflict of interest.

These include policies concerning the making of gifts and charitable contributions, entertaining clients, and engaging in outside activities, all of which may involve relationships with clients and others that are important to our analysis of potential conflicts of interest.

Supervisory Structure. Ridgeline has both a compliance and supervisory structure in place that enables us to identify and monitor employees’ activities, both on a transaction and firm-wide basis, to ensure compliance with appropriate standards. Prior to undertaking any engagement with a new client or an additional engagement with an existing client, appropriate municipal advisory personnel will review the possible intersection of the client’s interests, the proposed engagement, our engagement personnel, experience and existing obligations to other clients and related parties. This review, together with employing the resources described above, allows us to evaluate any situations that may be an actual or potential conflict of interest.

Disclosures. Ridgeline will disclose to clients those situations that it believes would create a material conflict of interest, such as:
1) any advice, service or product that any affiliate may provide to a client that is directly related to the municipal advisory work of Ridgeline;
2) any payment made to obtain or retain a municipal advisory engagement with a client; 3) any fee-splitting arrangement with any provider of an investment or services to a client; 4) any conflict that may arise from the type of compensation arrangement we may have with a client; and 5) any other actual or potential situation that Ridgeline is or becomes aware of that might constitute a material conflict of interest that could reasonably be expected to impair our ability to provide advice to or on behalf of clients consistent with regulatory requirements.

If Ridgeline identifies such situations or circumstances, we will prepare meaningful disclosure describing the implications of the situation and how we intend to manage the situation. Ridgeline will also disclose any legal or disciplinary events that are material to a client’s evaluation or the integrity of our management or advisory personnel. Ridgeline will provide this disclosure (or a means to access this information) in writing prior to starting our proposed engagement, and will provide such additional information or clarification as the client may request. Ridgeline will also advise clients in writing of any subsequent Page | C-3
material conflict of interest that may arise, as well as the related implications, its plan to manage that situation, and any additional information such client may require.

II. General Conflict of Interest Disclosures
Disclosure of Conflicts Concerning the Firm’s Affiliates Ridgeline does not have any affiliates that provide any advice, service, or product to or on behalf of the Client that is directly or indirectly related to the municipal advisory activities to be performed by Ridgeline.

Disclosure of Conflicts Related to the Firm’s Compensation Ridgeline has not made any payments directly or indirectly to obtain or retain the Client’s municipal advisory business.

Ridgeline has not received any payments from third parties to enlist Ridgeline’s recommendation to the Client of its services, any municipal securities transaction or any municipal finance product.

Ridgeline has not engaged in any fee-splitting arrangements involving Ridgeline and any provider of investments or services to the Client.

From time to time, Ridgeline may be compensated by a municipal advisory fee that is or will be set forth in an agreement with the client to be, or that has been, negotiated and entered into in connection with a municipal advisory service. Payment of such fee may be contingent on the closing of the transaction and the amount of the fee may be based, in whole or in part, on a percentage of the principal or par amount of municipal securities or municipal financial product. While this form of compensation is customary in the municipal securities market, it may be deemed to present a conflict of interest since we may appear to have an incentive to recommend to the client a transaction that is larger in size than is necessary. Further, Ridgeline may also receive compensation in the form of a fixed fee arrangement. While this form of compensation is customary, it may also present a potential conflict of interest if the transaction ultimately requires less work than contemplated and we are perceived as recommending a more economically friendly pay arrangement. Finally, Ridgeline may contract with clients on an hourly fee basis. If Ridgeline and the client do not agree on a maximum amount of hours at the outset of the engagement, this arrangement may pose a conflict of interest as we would not have a financial incentive to recommend an alternative that would result in fewer hours. Ridgeline manages and mitigates all of these types of conflicts by disclosing the fee structure to the client, and by requiring that there be a review of the municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product to ensure that it is suitable for the client in light of various factors, after reasonable inquiry, including the client’s needs, objectives, and financial circumstances.

Disclosure Concerning Provision of Services to State and Local Government, and Non-Profit Clients Ridgeline regularly provides financial advisory services to state and local governments, their agencies, and instrumentalities, and non-profit clients. While our clients have expressed that this experience in providing services to a wide variety of clients generally provides great benefit for all of our clients, there may be or may have been clients with interests that are different from (and adverse to) other clients. If for some reason any client sees our engagement with any other particular client as a conflict, we will mitigate this conflict by engaging in a broad range of conduct, if and as applicable. Such conduct may include one or any combination of the following: 1) disclosing the conflict to the client; 2) requiring that there be a review of the municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product to ensure that it is suitable for the client in light of various factors, including the client’s needs, objectives and financial circumstances; 3) implementing procedures that establishes a “firewall” that creates physical, technological and procedural barriers and/or separations to ensure that non-public information is isolated to particular area such that certain governmental transaction team members and supporting functions operate separately during the Page | C-4
course of work performed; and 4) in the rare event that a conflict cannot be resolved, we will withdraw from the engagement.

Disclosure Related to Legal and Disciplinary Events
As registered municipal advisors with the SEC and the MSRB, pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rule 15Ba1-2, our legal, disciplinary and judicial events are required to be disclosed on our forms MA and MA-I filed with the SEC, in ‘Item 9 Disclosure Information’ of form MA, ‘Item 6 Disclosure Information’ of form MA-I, and if applicable, the corresponding disclosure reporting page(s). To review the foregoing disclosure items and material change(s) or amendment(s), if any, clients may electronically access Ridgeline filed forms MA and MA-I on the SEC’s Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system, listed by date of filing starting with the most recently filed at www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html.

Ridgeline does not have any legal or disciplinary events or disciplinary history on its Form MA and Form(s) MA-I, which includes information about any criminal actions, regulatory actions, investigations, terminations, judgements, liens, civil judicial actions, customer complaints, arbitrations, and civil litigation.

There have been no material changes to a legal or disciplinary event disclosure on any form MA or Form MA-I filed with the SEC.

Disclosure Related to Recommendations
If Ridgeline makes a recommendation of a municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product or it the review of a recommendation of another party is requested in writing by the Client and is within the scope of the engagement, Ridgeline will determine, based on the information obtained through reasonable diligence of Ridgeline whether a municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product is suitable for the Client. In addition, Ridgeline will inform the Client of:
• the evaluation of the material risks, potential benefits, structure, and other characteristics of the recommendation;
• the basis upon which Ridgeline reasonably believes that the recommended municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product is, or is not, suitable for the Client; and, • whether Ridgeline has investigated or considered other reasonably feasible alternatives to the recommendation that might also or alternatively serve the Client’s objectives.

If the Client elects a course of action that is independent of or contrary to the advice provided by Ridgeline, Ridgeline is not required on that basis to disengage from providing services to the Client.

Disclosure Related to Record Retention
Pursuant to the SEC record retention regulations, Ridgeline is required to maintain in writing, all communications and created documents between Ridgeline and the Client for five (5) years.

III. Specific Conflicts of Interest Disclosures – Client To our knowledge, following reasonable inquiry, as of the commencement of the Scope of Services, we are not aware of any actual or potential conflict of interest that could reasonably be anticipated to impair our ability to provide advice to or on behalf of the Client in accordance with applicable standards of conduct of MSRB Rule G-42. If we become aware of any potential conflict of interest that arises after this disclosure, we will disclose the detailed information in writing to the Client in a timely manner.

Ridgeline does not act as principal in any of the transactions related to its role / work on the Scope of Services.

Page | C-5
Ridgeline does not have any other engagements or relationships that might impair Ridgeline’s ability to either render unbiased and competent advice to or on behalf of the Client, or to fulfill our fiduciary duty to the Client, as applicable.

Page | 1

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STGRATEGIES, LLC

AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”), made and entered into this 14th day of November 2023, by and between the City of San Juan Bautista, a California general law city, with its principal place of business at 311 2nd Street, San Juan Bautista, CA 95045 (the “Client”), and Ridgeline Municipal Strategies, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, with its principal place of business at 2213 Plaza Drive, Rocklin, CA 95765 (“Ridgeline”), sets forth the terms and conditions under which Ridgeline shall provide municipal advisory and consulting services to the Client.

WHEREAS, the Client wishes to obtain the services of a financial consultant to assist with financial reporting for the 2015 San Juan Bautista Public Financing Authority Enterprise Revenue Bonds (the “Bonds”) and the Client’s 2023 Bond Anticipation Notes (the “Notes”) (the “Project”).

Page | 2
B. Ridgeline shall perform all such work with skill and diligence and pursuant to generally accepted standards of practice in effect at the time of performance. Ridgeline shall provide corrective services without charge to the Client for work which fails to meet these standards and which is reported to Ridgeline in writing within sixty (60) days of discovery.

B. MSRB Rule G-42 requires that municipal advisors make written disclosures to its Clients of all material conflicts of interest and certain legal or disciplinary events.

Page | 3
Such disclosures are provided in Ridgeline’s Disclosure Statement delivered to the Client together with this Agreement as Exhibit C.

Payment of the undisputed amount of the invoice will typically be made approximately thirty (30) days after the invoice is received by the Client.

SECTION V. TERMS AND TERMINATION
A. Unless otherwise provided, the term of this Agreement shall begin on the date of its full execution and shall expire on June 30, 2026, unless extended by amendment or terminated earlier as provided herein.

Page | 4
D. If Ridgeline fails to cure the default within seven (7) days after written notice from the Client, the Client may, at its sole option, demand possession of any documents or other materials (in paper and electronic form) prepared or used by Ridgeline in connection with the provision of Services and (1) provide any such work, labor, materials or services as may be necessary to overcome the default and deduct the cost thereof from any money then due or thereafter to become due to Ridgeline under this Agreement; or (2) terminate this Agreement.

SECTION VI. ASSIGNMENT
Ridgeline shall not assign any interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Client.

B. Unless otherwise provided for herein, all documents, materials, data, computer data files, basis for calculations, and reports originated and prepared by Ridgeline under this Agreement shall be and remain the property of the Client for its use in any manner it deems appropriate. Ridgeline agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in the Client and waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or intellectual property rights in favor of the Client. Ridgeline shall deliver the work product to the Client in the PDF format electronically. Ridgeline shall use all reasonable efforts to ensure that any electronic files provided to the Client will be compatible with the Client's current computer hardware and software. Ridgeline makes no representation as to long-term compatibility, usability or readability of the format resulting from the use of software application packages, operating systems or computer hardware differing from those in use by the Client at the commencement of this Agreement. Ridgeline shall be permitted to maintain copies of all such data for its files. The Client acknowledges that its use of the work product is limited Page | 5
to the purposes contemplated by the Scope of Services and, should the Client use these products or data in connection with additions to the work required under this Agreement or for new work without consultation with and without additional compensation to Ridgeline, Ridgeline makes no representation as to the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the Scope of Services and shall have no liability or responsibility whatsoever in connection with such use which shall be at the Client's sole risk. Any and all liability arising out of changes made by the Client to Ridgeline's deliverables is waived against Ridgeline unless the Client has given Ridgeline prior written notice of the changes and has received Ridgeline's written consent to such changes.

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
311 2nd Street
San Juan Bautista, CA 95045
Attention: City Manager
Page | 6

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STRATEGIES, LLC
2213 Plaza Drive
Rocklin, CA 95765
Attention: Dmitry Semenov
SECTION IX. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
Except to the extent caused by willful misconduct, bad faith, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of obligations or duties under this Agreement on the part of Ridgeline or any of its associated persons, neither Ridgeline nor any of its associated persons shall have liability to any person for any act or omission in connection with performance of its services hereunder, or for any error of judgment or mistake of law, or for any loss arising out of any issuance of municipal securities, any municipal financial product or any other financial product or investment, or for any financial or other damages resulting from the Client’s election to act or not to act, as the case may be, contrary to or, absent negligence on the part of Ridgeline or any of its associated persons, upon any advice or recommendation provided by Ridgeline to the Client.

SECTION XI. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
A. If any dispute arises between the parties as to proper interpretation or application of this Agreement, the parties shall first meet and confer in a good faith attempt to resolve the matter between themselves. If the dispute is not resolved by meeting and conferring, the matter shall be submitted for formal mediation to a mediator selected mutually by the parties. The expenses of such mediation shall be shared equally between the parties. If the dispute is not or cannot be resolved by mediation, the parties may mutually agree (but only as to those issues of the matter not resolved by mediation) to submit their dispute to arbitration. Before commencement of the arbitration, the parties may elect to have the arbitration proceed on an informal basis; however, if the parties are unable so to agree, then the arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association. The decision of the arbitrator shall be binding, unless within thirty (30) days after issuance of the arbitrator’s written decision, Page | 7
any party files an action in court. Venue and jurisdiction for any such action between the parties shall lie in the Superior Court for the County of San Benito.

SECTION XII. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE
As a part of the documentation package for the Bonds, the Client executed a Continuing Disclosure Certificate (“Certificate”), a copy of which is included in Exhibit D to this Agreement. All requirements and provisions of the Certificate are incorporated into this Agreement by reference.

SECTION XIII. DISSEMINATION AGENT DESIGNATION
In accordance with the requirements of the Certificate, the Client designates Ridgeline as the successor Dissemination Agent for the Bonds and Ridgeline accepts such designation.

SECTION XIV. APPLICABLE LAW
This Agreement shall be construed, enforced, and administered according to the laws of the State of California. Ridgeline and the Client agree that, should a disagreement arise as to the terms or enforcement of any provision of this Agreement, each party will in good faith attempt to resolve said disagreement prior to pursuing other action.

SECTION XV. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; SEVERABILITY
This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the Client and Ridgeline and may not be amended or modified except in writing signed by both parties. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision.

SECTION XVI. EXECUTION; COUNTERPARTS
Each party to this Agreement represents and warrants that the person or persons signing this Agreement on behalf of such party is authorized and empowered to sign and deliver this Agreement for such party. This Agreement may be signed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same document.
[Signature Page to Follow on Next Page]
Page | 8
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Client and Ridgeline have executed this Agreement as of the day and year herein above written.

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
By: ______________________________________
Name: Don Reynolds
Title: City Manager

RIDGELINE MUNICIPAL STRATEGIES, LLC
By: ______________________________________
Name: Dmitry Semenov
Title: Principal
Page | A-1

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Client has two reporting requirements for the Project, which are described below.

Task 1: The CDIAC Annual Debt Transparency Report (SB 1029) All California state and local issuers of public debt are required to submit an annual debt transparency report to the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission (“CDIAC”). The report is due no later than January 31 of each year for any debt outstanding at any point during the prior fiscal year. The Client is required to provide this report for the Notes annually, starting with the reporting period ending June 30, 2023.

The report needs to contain the following information:
• Debt authorized during the fiscal year, including:
o Debt authorized at the beginning of the fiscal year;
o Debt authorized and incurred during the fiscal year;
o Debt authorized but not incurred at the end of the fiscal year; o Authorized debt that lapsed during the fiscal year.
• Debt outstanding during the fiscal year, including:
o Outstanding principal balance at the beginning of the fiscal year; o Principal amount paid off during the fiscal year;
o Outstanding principal balance at the end of the fiscal year. • Information on the use of debt proceeds during the fiscal year, including:
o Available unspent debt proceeds amount at the beginning of the fiscal year; o Debt proceeds amount spent during the fiscal year and the purposes for which it was spent;
o Unspent debt proceeds amount remaining at the end of the fiscal year.

Task 2: The MSRB Annual Continuing Disclosure Reporting (Rule 15c2-12) Publicly offered bond transactions require annual continuing disclosure reporting with the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board on the Electronic Municipal Market Access (“EMMA”) system. The Client’s annual report for the Bonds needs to be filed no later than March 31 of each year, starting with the reporting period ending June 30, 2023.

The Client’s annual reporting requirements for the Bonds are as follows:
• Audited financial statements;
• For each Water and Wastewater Enterprises of the Client:
o Annual water service structure and pricing, together with adopted rates in a formal comparable to Tables 5 and 10, respectively, of the Official Statement for the prior Fiscal Year;
Page | A-2
o Largest ten users of the enterprise, based on annual billing for the prior calendar year; o Any additional indebtedness incurred during the prior Fiscal Year which is payable from revenues of the enterprise on a parity with the Bonds;
o An update of the information contained in Tables 3 and 4, respectively, of the Official Statement (Debt Service Coverage Projections).

Additionally, the Client is required to post a notice of the following events as they occur in a timely manner, but not more than ten (10) business days after occurrence:

1. principal and interest payment delinquencies;

2. non-payment related defaults, if material;

3. unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties;

4. unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties;

5. substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform;

6. adverse tax opinions or the issuance by the Internal Revenue Service of proposed or final determinations of taxability, Notices of Proposed Issue (IRS Form 5701-TEB) or other material notices or determinations with respect to the tax status of the security, or other material events affecting the tax status of the security;

7. modifications to rights of security holders, if material;

8. optional, contingent or unscheduled bond calls, if material;

9. defeasances;

10. release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the Bonds, if material;

11. rating changes;

12. bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or similar event of the Client;

13. the consummation of a merger, consolidation, or acquisition involving the Client or the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the Client, other than in the ordinary course of business, the entry into a definitive agreement to undertake such an action or the termination of a definitive agreement relating to any such actions, other than pursuant to its terms; and,

14. appointment of a successor or additional trustee or the change of name of a trustee.

Scope of Services
Ridgeline shall perform the following services:
• Prepare the Annual Reports;
• Supervise and direct the Client on issues related to its disclosure obligations; • Notify the Client of pending due dates;
• Prepare Significant Events notices, as necessary;
• File Annual Reports, notices, and other required documentation to EMMA and to CDIAC; • File a report with the Client certifying that each Annual Report has been provided pursuant to the Continuing Disclosure Certificate;
• Provide ongoing support to the Client staff as questions arise regarding its continuing disclosure obligations.

Page | A-3
Ridgeline will make its best efforts to monitor rating changes for the Client, as well as the other Significant Events listed above. To best meet this objective, open lines of communication between the Client and Ridgeline are vital.

The Client must notify Ridgeline immediately upon the occurrence of any significant event listed above.

Page | B-1

EXHIBIT B

COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES
For services associated with Task 1 (The CDIAC Annual Debt Transparency Reporting), Ridgeline will be paid a fixed annual fee of $525, payable upon successful submission of the reports.

For services associated with Task 2 (preparation and filing of the Annual Continuing Disclosure Report), Ridgeline will be paid a fixed annual fee of $2,000 per report, payable upon successful submission of the report.

In the event that the Client’s audited financial statements are not available prior to the reporting due date, Ridgeline may be required to file both unaudited and audited reports. A $500 refiling fee may be assessed for each occurrence of a second filing.

For the preparation of the event filings and any other services not related to the preparation and filing of the annual reports, Ridgeline will be compensated at the following hourly rates:

Title Rate
Principal $315
Associate $200
All expenses will be billed directly to the Client. Expenses will be limited to those necessary for completion of the Project, as described in the Continuing Disclosure Certificate for the Bonds (Exhibit D).

The compensation amounts and hourly rates stated above shall be in effect through June 30, 2024. Starting with July 1, 2024, the compensation amounts and hourly rates will be adjusted annually using the Consumer Price Index, West – Size Class B/C, for the most recent full calendar year, as published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Page | C-1

EXHIBIT C

DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND OTHER INFORMATION

Fiduciary Duty
Ridgeline has a fiduciary duty to the Client and must provide both a Duty of Care and a Duty of Loyalty that includes the following.

Page | C-2
Duty of Loyalty:

Disclosure of Conflicts Related to the Firm’s Compensation Ridgeline has not made any payments directly or indirectly to obtain or retain the Client’s municipal advisory business.

Ridgeline has not received any payments from third parties to enlist Ridgeline’s recommendation to the Client of its services, any municipal securities transaction or any municipal finance product.

Ridgeline has not engaged in any fee-splitting arrangements involving Ridgeline and any provider of investments or services to the Client.

There have been no material changes to a legal or disciplinary event disclosure on any form MA or Form MA-I filed with the SEC.

Ridgeline does not act as principal in any of the transactions related to its role / work on the Scope of Services.

EXHIBIT D

CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE
Item # 3.E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 1

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

STAFF REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2023
FROM: JERRY SANGUINETTI, CITY ENGINEER
BY: DON REYNOLDS, CITY MANAGER
TITLE: AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE

SERVICES FOR THE MELLO-ROOS SPECIAL TAX ASSESMENT

DISTRICTS OF COPPERLEAF, VALLE VISTA, & RANCHO VISTA
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):

That the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached resolution awarding the contract for the Landscape Maintenance Special Assessment District c to Smith & Enright Landscaping Inc, the low bidder, for an amount of $87,680

2. Approve total budget of $87,680 for landscape maintenance services and management for the Mello-Roos special tax assessment districts of Copperleaf, Valle Vista, & Rancho Vista

3. Authorize the City Manager to approve potential contract change orders and other construction contingencies within said fund.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

In Spring 2023, Don Reynolds, City Manager conducted community town hall meetings with the three special tax assessment districts of Copperleaf, Valle Vista, & Rancho Vista. Although the topics of discussion ranged greatly and were specific to each assessment district, the main topic of discussion revolved around a presentation outlining the current funding balances of each assessment district and recommendations for proposed budgetary increases (see below) for each district.

Item # 3.E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 2
District: Rancho Vista
Meeting Date: May 18, 2023
Proposed Increase: 3.3% increase ($768.50 -$793.86)
Community Concerns: Truck Traffic, Animal Control, flooding and repairs, emergency preparedness

District: Valle Vista (Creek Bridge)
Meeting Date: May 24, 2023
Proposed Increase: 10% Increase ($603.36 to $663.56)
Community Concerns: Reduce the need for a landscape contractor, drought tolerant plants, water conservation
District: Copperleaf
Meeting Date: May 31, 2023
Proposed Increase: 5% increase ($487.68 to $514.78)
Community Concerns: Flooding, Cal Trans 156 project, plans for industrial properties.

DISCUSSION:

Project Description
The City of San Juan Bautista (SJB) intends to retain a Professional Landscape Services Contractor with experience in the State of California to perform maintenance services for the three MelloRoos special tax assessment districts of Copperleaf, Rancho Vista, & Valle Vista Landscape & Lighting.

The initial term of this agreement will be for thirteen (1) months commencing November 27, 2023 through November 29, 2024, with four (4), one (1) year renewal options, starting November 1st of each subsequent year. The initial month (November 6th – 30th, 2023) of this agreement will overlap with the City’s current service provider to provide for an uninterrupted and smooth transition.

Item # 3.E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 3
Advertising-Bid Process and Results
Bid documents and estimates were prepared by staff and a Notice to Bidders was published twice in the Hollister Free Lance. Staff sent the Notice to Bidders to the Central Coast Builders Exchanges, covering Alameda County, Santa Clara County, Contra Costa County, the Peninsula area, and the San Francisco Bay Area.

Two (2) bids were received and opened on October 6, 2023. The lowest qualified and responsive bidder is Smith & Enright Landscaping, Inc. ($87,680) with a corporate office in Salinas, California. Smith & Enright specializes in landscape maintenance management and their total bid amount is lower than New Image Landscape Company, the next most qualified and responsive bidder. ($137,411)
New Image Landscape $137,411
Smith & Enright $ 87,680
Delta < $49,731>
Recommendations
Staff recommends that the City Council accept the bid received, and award the contract to Smith & Enright Landscaping Inc. (See below)
Item # 3.E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 4
New Image Landscape Company Bid
Valle Vista
Maintenance (2X per week)
$
22,360.00
Irrigation (Monthly)
$
1,900.00
Fertilizer (5X per Year)
$
1,200.00
Extras (Backflow Testing, Tree
Pruning, Irrigation Repairs,
Open Space Maintenance)
$
14,960.00
Total Price per Year
$
40,420.00
Copperleaf
Maintenance (2X per week)
$
22,360.00
Irrigation (Monthly)
$
1,900.00
Fertilizer (5X per Year)
$
1,200.00
Extras (Backflow Testing, Tree
Pruning, Irrigation Repairs,
Open Space Maintenance)
$
18,245.00
Total Price per Year
$
43,705.00
Rancho
Vista
Maintenance (2X per week)
$
35,776.00
Irrigation (Monthly)
$
3,040.00
Fertilizer (5X per Year)
$
1,200.00
Extras (Backflow Testing, Tree
Pruning, Irrigation Repairs,
Open Space Maintenance)
$
13,270.00
Total Price per Year
$
53,286.00
$
137,411.00
Item # 3.E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 5

SCHEDULE
The following is the tentative schedule for this contract.

Award Contract November 16, 2023
Notice to Proceed November 27, 2023
Contract Term November 27, 2023 – November 29, 2024

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution and Contract
Page | 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH

SMITH&ENRIGHT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE

MELLO-ROOS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS OF COPPERLEAF, RANCO

VISTA & VALLE VISTA LANDSCAPE & LIGHTING
WHEREAS, the City of San Juan Bautista (SJB) intends to retain a Professional Landscape Services Contractor with experience in the State of California to perform maintenance services for the three Mello-Roos special tax assessment districts of Copperleaf, Rancho Vista, & Valle Vista Landscape & Lighting; and
WHEREAS, in Spring 2023, Don Reynolds, City Manager conducted community town hall meetings with the three special tax assessment districts of Copperleaf, Rancho Vista, & Valle Vista Landscape & Lighting to discuss current funding balances of each assessment district and recommendations for proposed budgetary increases; and WHEREAS, a formal RFP bid process was prepared by staff and a Notice to Bidders was published twice in the Hollister Free Lance as well as, the Central Coast Builders Exchanges, covering Alameda County, Santa Clara County, Contra Costa County, the Peninsula area, and the San Francisco Bay Area; and
WHEREAS, two (2) bids were received and opened on October 6, 2023; and WHEREAS, the lowest qualified and responsive bidder being Smith & Enright Landscaping, Inc. ($87,680) with a corporate office in Salinas, California; and WHEREAS, Smith & Enright specializes in landscape maintenance management and their total bid amount is lower than New Image Landscape Company, the next most qualified and responsive bidder ($137,411).

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of San Juan Bautista Does hereby resolve as follows:

1. Adopt the attached resolution awarding the contract for the Landscape Maintenance Special Assessment District to Smith & Enright Landscaping Inc, the low bidder, in the amount of $87,680

2. Approve total budget of $87,680 for landscape maintenance services and management for the Mello-Roos special tax assessment districts of Copperleaf, Valle Vista, & Rancho Vista

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with Smith & Enright Landscaping Inc. in a form approved by the City Attorney and City Manager.).

Page | 2
PASSED AND APPROVED this 14th day of November 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
_________________________
Leslie Q. Jordan, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Elizabeth Soto, Deputy City Clerk
Item: 3.F
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 1

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2023
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION
FROM: DON REYNOLDS, CITY MANAGER
BY: ELIZABETH SOTO, DEPUTY CITY CLERK / ADMINISTRATIVE

SERVICES MANAGER
TITLE: PURCHASE OF LASERFICHE CLOUD MUNICIPALITY SITE

LICENSE
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

Approve a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with Complete Paperless Solutions (CPS) for the Purchase of Laserfiche Cloud Municipality Site License.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Waive a formal RFP process and award a contract to CPS for an amount not to exceed $16,095.00 for a Cloud Municipality Site License for Laserfiche Document Management System Software, Implementation Services which includes VIP support; Professional Services for implementation, installation, configuration, consulting, and training; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with CPS in a form approved by the City Attorney and City Manager.).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Laserfiche is a complete paperless solution to manage, secure, and share information developed by Compulink Management Center, Inc., dba the award-winning Laserfiche enterprise content management solutions. It utilizes an integrated architecture that allows services such as document imaging, document management and records management to be layered transparently and exposed through personalized interfaces. Laserfiche recognizes the need for a cloud-based solution and introduced their very own fully managed SaaS option Laserfiche Cloud. Running on Amazon Web Services (AWS).

Using Laserfiche Cloud adds to its value by eliminating the need for IT infrastructure and staffing required to support the overhead of a local installation. This shifts resources towards improving agency business processes, lowering expense per resident (cities and counties).

Page | 2
Laserfiche manages the storage, search, and retrieval of millions of documents allowing users to access files in seconds. It allows access to documents on a smartphone or tablet and backs up files and records to make unstructured data (e.g., documents, emails, photographs, etc. accessible, searchable, available, and relevant).

Laserfiche cannot be purchased through the developer Compulink Management Systems and must be purchased through an authorized vendor. CPS (Complete Paperless Solutions) is an authorized vendor for Laserfiche and offers VIP support that includes a dedicated engineer that will handle deployment and support, unlimited training, and unlimited support, two preventative maintenance check-ups each year; and discounts on hourly rates for future projects for customizations and/or backfile scanning.

Laserfiche was awarded a national cooperative purchasing alliance for document and records management in 2022 and therefore is deemed to be the only provider of goods and services that serves the community’s interest, a formal bidding procedure is not required, and the purchase can be considered a sole source.

BACKGROUND:

The City’s only method of archiving records currently is to scan documents and save them as a PDF on the City’s computer. As a result, the City Clerk’s office spends hours each week researching and responding to public records requests since currently, it is not possible to put all records on the City’s website for public viewing. With Laserfiche, however, all documents can be retrieved through a website portal by members of the public, thereby reducing the number of hours staff spends searching for, retrieving, and producing records for the public, city council and staff. It efficiently provides transparency and reduces the workload not only for the City Clerk but for all departments who are required to search for documents.

In addition, the city currently has historical records that have not been imaged and are being kept in areas that are not conducive for the proper storage of documents. These records can be imported into Laserfiche and most, but not all, can then be destroyed, freeing up space for those documents that cannot be destroyed to be kept in a safe and secure environment.

A document management system provides the necessary solution for an agency to store its archived records. Furthermore. A document management system offers new enhanced features such as public access to certain documents. It provides a powerful search tool to quickly, easily, and accurately search the archived data. There are many systems available for consideration; however, the most widely used system by municipalities is Laserfiche.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact is a one-time cost of $16,095.00 which includes Laserfiche installation, configuration, implementation, consulting, training, and VIP support. The ongoing cost is $9,200 for the yearly subscription and VIP support.

Item: 3.F
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 3
ATTACHMENTS:

A. Laserfiche Cloud Municipality Site License Proposal
B. Resolution
C. NCPA National Award of RFP to Compulink Management dba Laserfiche Page | 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH

COMPLETE PAPERLESS SOLUTIONS (CPS) FOR THE PURCHASE OF
LASERFICHE CLOUD MUNICIPALITY SITE LICENSE.

WHEREAS, the City’s only method of archiving records currently is to scan documents and save them as a PDF on the City’s computer; and
WHEREAS, these records can be imported into Laserfiche and most, but not all, can then be destroyed, freeing up space for those documents that cannot be destroyed to be kept in a safe and secure environment; and
WHEREAS, Laserfiche is a Cloud based Documents Management Program that will convert all documents to the Laserfiche Cloud enabling access to those records and removing them from the server; and
WHEREAS, Laserfiche was awarded a national cooperative purchasing alliance for document and records management in 2022 and therefore is deemed to be the only provider of goods and services that serves the community’s interest, a formal bidding procedure is not required, and the purchase can be considered a sole source.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of San Juan Bautista Does hereby resolve as follows:

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with CPS in a form approved by the City Attorney and City Manager.).

PASSED AND APPROVED this 14th day of November 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Page | 2
APPROVED:
_________________________
Leslie Q. Jordan, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Elizabeth Soto, Deputy City Clerk
Laserfiche Document Management Municipal Site License Proposal BY: Complete Paperless Solutions (CPS)
10/18/2023

Page 2 of 9 ends

City of San Juan Bautista

CONTENTS
Introduction Letter............................................................................................................................................ 3 Organization Chart and Schedule...................................................................................................................... 4 Training.............................................................................................................................................................. 5 Software Pricing................................................................................................................................................. 7 Cloud Municipal Site License......................................................................................................................... 7 Optional Modules for Consideration............................................................................................................. 7 Cloud Database Specifications .......................................................................................................................... 6 Ongoing Maintenance and Support .................................................................................................................. 8 866-661-2425

Page 3 of 9 ends

City of San Juan Bautista
[email protected]
www.cps247.com

INTRODUCTION LETTER
October 18th, 2023
Liz,
Complete Paperless Solutions, LLC (CPS), is located in Anaheim, CA and is a Platinum Certified Solution Provider (SP) of the award-winning Laserfiche™ Enterprise Content Management solution as well as a respected systems integrator and consultancy. The CPS staff focuses its business on helping California Municipalities meet the challenge of providing a great public service to your citizens while working in a high-demand, electronic records-intensive environment. Our customer-centric business model promotes long-term relationships stemming from excellent service, fair pricing and good old-fashioned know how.

CPS has the highest ratio of support engineers per customer in California compared to all other Laserfiche resellers. CPS is also a proud sponsor of MISAC, CCUG, CLEARS, CLETS and CCAC.

Our Corporate Office is located in Anaheim, CA, with 2 satellite offices located in Vista, CA and Temecula, CA. These offices are led by our CFO, Claude Schott, and me, as the VP of Sales. With the proximity of our offices, CPS is confident that it is well-suited to aid the City of Chula Vista with our support and professional services team that has been representing Laserfiche ™ since 1996. CPS’s business model is based on the deployment, customization, and support of Laserfiche rather than the “deploy and depart” model of some resellers.

CPS is an Employee-Owned Company, so we all have the highest level of interest to make sure you are thrilled with your experience from the very beginning and each day after. Every single one of our technical staff members have minimally 20+ years of direct Laserfiche experience dealing with organizations of your caliber. We are proud of our Customer Choice Award which is given out to only one Laserfiche Reseller in the world that has the highest retention of clients and with highest customer satisfaction ratings as well.

Lastly, we are also recognized as a Laserfiche Premier Partner by continuing rigorous testing on the product and by submitting proof of client service excellence.

We would be pleased to discuss any aspect of this proposal and to provide additional information related to our proposed solution or ability to deliver. We look forward to your positive review of this proposal and to answering any questions that may arise.

Sincerely,
Jamie Dunn
Vice President of Sales
Cell: 760-419-3446
Email: [email protected]

Page 4 of 9 ends

City of San Juan Bautista

ORGANIZATION CHART AND SCHEDULE
CPS’s Professional Services team lead by Joseph Mempin will assist City of San Juan Bautista.

Joe Mempin: Manager of Professional Services Group (PSG) – Certified Laserfiche Professional Over fifteen (15) years of software programming and Laserfiche experience, including integrations and customizations of client software systems, legacy programs, and Laserfiche. Mr. Mempin has been managing the CPS team for the past ten (10) years. Previously he spent five (5) years developing application systems for Allgeier Computer (previous Laserfiche VAR).

CPS’s Development team lead by Arsene Hanssens will assist City of San Juan Bautista.

Arsene Hanssens: Chief Technical Officer – Certified Laserfiche Professional Arsene and his team are responsible for integrations, customizations, and software development. Arsene joined the CPS team in 2006 but has been working with CPS since 2001. Arsene has Electronic Content Management System (ECMS) programming experience since 1980. Arsene worked with the development of one of the very first document page scanners “Copiscan” which was then purchased by Bell & Howell in 1985.

Our projects are managed with a focus on over preparation. Our implementations always start with a project plan and a preview of the implementation. We provide a pre-Statement of Work step which will accomplish the following:

Tom Ziencina
Chief Executive Officer
Arsene Hanssens
C.T.O – Programmer –
Laserfiche Support
Engineer
Greg Heim
V.P. – Sales –
Laserfiche Support
Engineer
Joe Mempin
V.P. Professional
Services Group –
Programmer –
Laserfiche Support
Engineer
Roland Acton
Programmer
Claude Schott
Chief Financial Officer
Danene Schott
Office Manager
Nina Escolada
Laserfiche Support
Engineer
Joseph Uyan
Laserfiche Support
Engineer
Terrence Srey
Laserfiche Support
Engineer
Jamie Dunn
V.P. – Sales –

Page 5 of 9 ends

City of San Juan Bautista

1. Provide documentation on how we intend to implement the system. This will give stakeholders and end users a starting point conceptually and visually.

2. Provide a training preview. Seeing the system in action makes for better decisions.

3. Part of the project plan is a breakdown of the folder structure and naming convention of existing shared drives. This will provide insight to see if any information can be used for metadata when documents are converted into Laserfiche.

The outcome of steps 1 through 3 are the building blocks for our true Statement of Work. All modified and contended items use the following rules:
• CPS Project Manager will document the issue as soon as a change which impacts project scope, schedule, staffing, or spending is identified.
• The CPS Project Manager will review the change and determine the associated impact to the project and will forward the issue, along with recommendation, to all interested parties for review and discussion.
• If required due to lack of consensus, the Project Sponsor shall review the issue(s) and render a final decision on the approval or denial of a change. • Following an approval or denial, the CPS Project Manager will notify the original requestor of the action taken.

Finally, after some discussion regarding steps 1 through 3, we provide a Statement of Work. Our Statements of Work always come with a Warranty Period. During this warranty period we provide free modifications (which are considered in scope for the Statement of Work), break-fixes, and minor requests (out of scope). The warranty period also guarantees response times for issues encountered during the warranty period. Response times are usually 1 hour for business days and 4 hours for non-business days.

TRAINING
CPS has a reputation for meeting you where YOU are when it comes to training. Beginner, we got you, Expert, we can help you deepen your skillset. We’ll record the training to document it so that you can refer back. And we don’t just train the IT staff, we’ll all staff are well-versed in Laserfiche. While we’re happy to build workflows and forms for you, we can train you to do that also.

Training will be done prior, during and after implementation. You will see in our chart below that taking advantage of our VIP Support option allows for unlimited training, which many of our clients greatly enjoy.

CPS also has an entire webpage dedicating to training resources which is available online 24/7 and can be found at https://www.cps247.com/bpm. We are constantly updating and refining our training materials on this page as new features and requests come in.

Page 6 of 9 ends

City of San Juan Bautista

CLOUD DATABASE SPECIFICATIONS
With the Laserfiche cloud solution, you will not be restricted to any hardware requirements. Even with document scanners, from smart devices to multifunctional copy devices, we can get your images into Laserfiche.

Below is a diagram of the general layout of the Laserfiche AWS architecture.

Page 7 of 9 ends

City of San Juan Bautista

SOFTWARE PRICING
Cloud Municipal Site License
Description Quantity Public Price
Laserfiche Site License Promo 1 $9,995.00
Total Cloud

$9,995.00*
*Pricing based on OMNIA Partner Co-Op Contract # 01-158 Included in subscription pricing are the following features:
o 100 users
o Workflow
o OCR
o Indexing
o e-forms
o 10 Quick Fields Complete with Agent
o 10TB storage
o Import Agent
o Laserfiche Scanning
o Office Plug-in
o Laserfiche Mobile
o Snapshot
o Connector
o API
o Advanced Audit Trail
o Unlimited Public Portal
o Unlimited Forms Portal
o Records Management with Records Retention Workflow Setup/Design o VIP Support w/ Unlimited Remote Training 1st Year
o All Project Management, System Setup, and Security
Optional Modules for Consideration
Description Quantity Public Price
Laserfiche Vault* 1 $3,000.00
Total Optional Modules $3,000.00
*Strict compliance mode fulfills non-rewriteable, non-erasable requirements. True Trusted System with WORM compliance in order to legally destroy paper once setup

Page 8 of 9 ends

City of San Juan Bautista

ONGOING MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT
CPS offers 2 different levels of ongoing support and maintenance which is explained below.

Basic VIP
Laserfiche Site License (Included)
$3,100.00
+ $6,200.00
Customers will receive unlimited telephone technical support and software updates automatically with a cloud system. Technical support includes unlimited email, telephone and remote access to address problems related to system configuration or performance. While guaranteed response times are dictated by the terms of the support agreement, most support calls are taken live and resolved within a single call.

All support calls are logged in a case management system and assigned priority and severity levels that will be escalated (if necessary) to the development team and what lengths are necessary to address them such as providing hotfixes or point releases of the software. All customers are granted access to the Laserfiche Support Site where an abundance of knowledgebase documents can be used to support your internal IT team and Laserfiche users.

Note: Ninety-five (95) percent of support issues taken by our team have “First Call” resolution and are usually resolved within one hour.
i. Support Contact Information
o Support services are provided directly by CPS
o Our toll-free support number: 866-661-2425
o Non-emergency support calls can be directed to ([email protected]) or via our website (http://www.cps247.com/Support/SubmitTicket.aspx) ii. Basic Support Level
o Monday to Friday during normal business hours from 8:00AM to 5:00PM PST o Next business day guaranteed response time
o Unlimited Access to CPS Webinars
o Quarterly Newsletter
iii. CPS VIP Support Level
To create the least amount of burden on the IT staff, and to optimize the benefits of your Laserfiche software, we recommend our VIP support package. Our VIP program offers the following:
• Monday to Friday during normal business hours from 7:00AM to 6:00PM PST.
• 2 hours guaranteed response time

Page 9 of 9 ends

City of San Juan Bautista
• Free onsite upgrades
• A dedicated support engineer will serve as the primary contact for Laserfiche
• support through a direct telephone line.
• Unlimited onsite training
• Next day onsite support guaranteed if remote issue non-resolved • Unlimited onsite support
• Preventive Maintenance: 2 remote sessions per year to ensure optimum system functionality
• Preferred pricing on specific integration and development projects • Free enrollment to the Laserfiche Conference (unlimited access) • No travel cost
Development Work (configuration and customization)
Description Basic Support/Hr. VIP Support/Hr
Workflow/eForm Design $225.00 $175.00
Development – Conversion $275.00 $225.00
Any other professional services $225.00 $125.00
Customer Training
Description Basic Support VIP Support
Training $200.00 Free - unlimited
Total Turnkey Solution
Description Upfront Cost Yr. 1 Ongoing Software & Support Laserfiche Software w/ Services $9,995.00 $3,100.00
Optional Laserfiche Vault $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Optional VIP Support $3,100.00 $3,100.00
Total $16,095.00 $9,200.00
No other Workflow or Forms Development included.

Page | 1 City Council Meeting Minutes (September 19, 2023)

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

CITY COUNCIL

UNOFFICIAL MEETING MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 19, 2023

1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Jordan called the regular meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Second Street, San Juan Bautista California.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Morris-Lopez led the pledge of allegiance.

ROLL CALL Present:

Councilmember Scott Freels
Mayor Pro Tem John Freeman
Councilmember Jackie Morris-Lopez
Councilmember EJ Sabathia
Mayor Leslie Q. Jordan

Absent:

Staff Present:

Don Reynolds, City Manager
Jon R Giffen, City Attorney
Brian Foucht, Assistant CM/Community Development Director Elizabeth Soto, Deputy City Clerk

2. PROCLAMATION
The City of San Juan Bautista proclaimed:

Childhood Cancer Awareness Month, September 2023 – Honoring Jacob’s Heart Children’s Cancer Support Services. Council Member Morris Lopez made the presentation to Allyssa GilOjeda and Jenna Vasquez.

Feeding America - Hunger Action Month, September 2023 (Community Food Bank of San Benito County). Council Member Sabathia presented a proclamation to Executive Director Sarah Nordwick and Food Bank Volunteers who work tirelessly to distribute food to the hungry in San Benito County.

Mayor Jordan asked council for permission to read a certificate from Assemblymember Robert Rivas of the California State Legislature renaming the Business District. The certificate was presented to local members of the San Juan Business Association.

3. PRESENTATION
A. San Benito Arts Council Update
Page | 2 City Council Meeting Minutes (September 19, 2023) Jennifer Laine, Executive Director, San Benito County Arts Council, provided an update on the Washington Street overpass mural, and the Library mural.

The following members of the public commented on the report:

Rochelle Eagen, Library Lead Tech, provided written comments stating the dimensions of the Library mural are 7 ½ feet by 8 feet tall, and has issue with the mural size and location at the Library.

4. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Received comments from the following members of the public:

Ida Pisano
Celeste Toledo Bocanegra
Laurie Tankersley
Heliena Walton

5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
A. Treasurer’s Report and Monthly Financial Statements
City Treasurer Michelle Sabathia provided an overview of the financial statement for July 2023.

No public comment received.

6. CONSENT
A. Approve the Affidavit of Posting Agenda.

B. Waive the Reading of Ordinances and Resolutions on the Agenda Beyond the Title.

C. Approve a RESOLUTION Authorizing a Street Closure for a Special Event on Second Street between Washington and Mariposa Street.

D. Approve a Retention of Firm and Assignment of Attorneys Agreement between the City and Kennedy, Archer & Giffen (KAG), a Professional Corporation.

E. Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 15, 2023.

MOTION:

Upon motion by Councilmember Freels, second by Mayor Pro Tem Freeman, Consent Agenda, items A-E, was approved.

AYES: Councilmembers: Freels, Freeman, Morris-Lopez, Sabathia, and Mayor Jordan; NOES:

None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None

7. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element of the General Plan
Brian Foucht, Community Development Director, provided an update to the process and advised that the goal is to submit the approved Housing Element before the end of the year. He then introduced Isaac George with Realty Planning Group. Mr. George provided the updated Draft Page | 3 City Council Meeting Minutes (September 19, 2023) 2023-2031 Housing Element of the General Plan and the next steps necessary before submitting the Housing Element for HCD (Housing and Community Development) review. He explained the new requirement for cities, the Fair Housing Analysis, which involves outreach, an assessment of fair housing in the community, whether the city has enough sites for growth, and the contributing factors, goals and actions that will need to be taken. He found that the city does not have any racially concentrated areas of influence, but does have a high median income for a city of its size.

The Housing Element and the Fair Housing Analysis, together with any recommended changes, need to be submitted to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for review and approval.

Mayor Jordan asked for comments from the City Council.

Councilmember Freels commented he doesn’t want the state telling us what to do and does not want the city to become suburbia.

Mayor Pro Tem Freeman stated we have a good plan and recommends approving it.

Councilmember Morris-Lopez does not agree with the State of California with their “one size fits all” approach, and she is concerned that the sphere of influence (SOI) presented in the Housing Element does not represent the SOI currently being developed by the community. Additionally, she commented that the small turnout at the meeting held for community input on the Housing Element, represents lack of transparency with the process.

Councilmember Sabathia stated the SOI map in the HE presented tonight is the approved map from years past, and it’s important that the HE gets submitted to HCD so we can get the conversation started. He also commented on lack of affordable housing in the city; stating there are families that are hurting, and business owners as well. It would be nice to have some options for them.

Mayor Jordan commented, we need to start talking about this part to make revisions if warranted before it is adopted, and it is disconcerting that public meetings are held and not many show up to receive the information and provide input, and infill seems to be reasonable.

Mayor Jordan asked staff if the SOI map in the HE was ever approved by Council or approved by LAFCO. City Manager Reynolds responded that the 2016 Sphere of Influence map was not approved by LAFCO.

There was further discussion about the SOI and the southside component and the SOI/UGB ad hoc committee.

Mayor Jordan asked staff, what happens if we don’t go with RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Assessment) numbers, or if we choose not to go with the state’s decisions. Community Development Director Foucht responded, then HCD will not certify the Housing Element.

Councilmember Sabathia commented he was concerned that the Ad Hoc committee was not diverse.

Page | 4 City Council Meeting Minutes (September 19, 2023) Mayor Jordan asked for clarification on the CEQA Common Sense Exemption on page 34 of the slide presentation. Mr. George responded, the Housing Element document carries the CEQA Common Sense Exemption, however, a construction project may or may not be exempt from CEQA.

The following members of the public commented on the report:

Cara Vonk
Aida Pisano
Mayor Jordan closed the public hearing.

Mayor Pro Tem Freeman stated, in regard to development, a percentage of housing for low income needs to be built into each project.

Councilmember Morris-Lopez commented that the RHNA number is a big disservice because the bulk of the building goes to moderately high-income earners and not low-income earners.

Councilmember Sabathia stated he would support dedicating 100% allocation to medium density, low-income housing being built in the city.

Mayor Jordan commented this is a generational community dating back to the beginning, but residents under 40 are moving because they can’t afford to live here.

MOTION:

Upon motion by Councilmember Sabathia, second by Mayor Pro Tem Freeman, RESOLUTION Accepting the Draft 2023-2031 General Plan Housing Element and Fair Housing Analysis; and Authorize Staff to forward the Housing Element and the Fair Housing Analysis to the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for Review and Approval, was approved.

AYES: Councilmembers: Freels, Freeman, Morris-Lopez, Sabathia, and Mayor Jordan; NOES:

None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None.

Mayor Jordan recessed to a break at 8:22 p.m. and reconvened at 8:28 p.m.

8. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS
A. Reports from City Council Representatives to Regional Organizations and Committees The City Council reported on the meetings they attended.

Councilmember Freels reported on upcoming COG events; a town hall meeting with CalTrans Commission at Paine’s Restaurant in Hollister, followed by a reception at Jardines de San Juan, tomorrow, Wednesday, September 20th.

Mayor Pro Tem Freeman reported on 3CE budget passed at a recent meeting which supports community savings for energy, and AMBAG where they passed the methodology for RHNA numbers.

Page | 5 City Council Meeting Minutes (September 19, 2023) Councilmember Morris-Lopez attended the Intergovernmental Committee meeting where they discussed traffic calming on city streets and proposed no left hand turns on Hwy 156 on account of recent accidents. She also attended a COG meeting where they went into closed session but she was not able to participate because she was attending as the City’s alternate member.

Councilmember Sabathia had nothing to report.

Mayor Jordan reported she attended Community Vision for San Benito County put on by Benitolink and announced future sessions. She also attended the LAFCo meeting where they hired an executive director, whom by coincidence also performs our MSR (Municipal Service Review) and attended Senior’s meetings supporting county as well as our city seniors. Mayor Jordan stated she has also been involved with getting funding for the mission and reported the Old Mission San Juan Bautista together with the State Park received $3 million in grants.

B. City Council Announcements
Councilmember Freels asked to move City Announcements back up to the beginning of the agenda and asked to add a low-speed vehicle presentation to a future agenda with a proclamation for encouraging low speed vehicles in the city. Councilmember Freels expressed his condolences to the Vaccarezza family for the loss of long time San Juan Bautista resident Ken Vaccarezza who passed away today at the age of 99 years old.

Mayor Pro Tem Freeman commented that our Public Works team is doing a good job striping at intersections in residential areas of the city.

Councilmember Morris-Lopez will be attending the League of California Cities Annual Conference tomorrow and will provide a report at the next meeting. She also reported that although it is too late for this year, she would like to have a Proclamation next year for National Physician Assistant Week, the first week of October 2024.

Mayor Jordan mentioned again and thanked those involved with obtaining grant funds for the Old Mission San Juan Bautista from Save America’s Treasurers.

C. City Manager’s Report
City Manager Don Reynolds provided an overview of what is happening in the different departments and projects, including completing personnel evaluations, interviewing for Recreation Assistant; plans for a Harvest Festival; water project ground breaking, ongoing meetings, website development; sale and removal of the pellet plant; moving ahead with permanent Microvi water treatment plant; anticipated 26 unit construction by Elite Development behind the sewer treatment plant; and Citygate’s AUD Pod on the city website that provides a twenty-minute narrative of their Organizational Study.

The following members of the public commented on the report:

Cara Vonk
Page | 6 City Council Meeting Minutes (September 19, 2023) a. Fire Department Update
Nothing to report.
b. Sheriff Department Update
Lieutenant Yerena reported on the incidents, calls and arrests made during the month of August as well as an update on changes within the department that have resulted in a staff shortage.

9. ACTION ITEMS
A. Regional Early Action Planning 2.0 (REAP 2.0) Local Suballocation Grant Program (LSGP)
Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Brian Foucht reported the City received REAP funding in the amount of $85,000 for the Third Street Master Plan. He then responded to questions from the Council.

No public comment received.

MOTION:

Upon motion by Councilmember Sabathia, second by Mayor Pro Tem Freeman, RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to execute an MOU with AMBAG authorizing the use of REAP 2.0 Grant funds for the Third Street Master Plan project, was approved.

AYES: Councilmembers: Freels, Freeman, Morris-Lopez, Sabathia, and Mayor Jordan; NOES:

None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None.

B. Reimbursement Agreement Between the City and County of San Benito Regarding the Sanitary Sewer Force Main to Hollister Project
City Manager Don Reynolds provided the report. The current conditions of the County roads for the Project route need repair, and the opportunity to expand the City’s pavement of a 3-foot-wide trench to include the entire street-width, is good planning if it can be done. Last fiscal year, the County was able to identify a funding source for this extra work. It has successfully set-aside $4 million in its Capital Improvement Plan for this Fiscal Year. The proposed Reimbursement Agreement formalizes this arrangement.

No public comment received.

MOTION:

Upon motion by Councilmember Sabathia, second by Councilmember Freels, RESOLUTION and Reimbursement Agreement between the City of San Juan Bautista and the County of San Benito whereby as part of its Project, the City will construct street improvements beyond that work which is related to it, on County roads, and the County will reimburse the City for an amount does not exceed $4 million, was approved.

AYES: Councilmembers: Freels, Freeman, Morris-Lopez, Sabathia, and Mayor Jordan; NOES:

None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None.

Page | 7 City Council Meeting Minutes (September 19, 2023) C. Approve Public Safety Coordinator and Community Services Officer Job Description
City Manager Don Reynolds provided the report and then clarified the intent and savings to the city by using non contracted personnel for public safety in the city. The two positions would eliminate the current Code Enforcement position and private security.

Mayor Jordan asked for clarification regarding the education component on the job description of the Public Safety Coordinator. In response, City Manager Reynolds stated “related field” can be someone that is retired in public safety with supervisory and management experience. It is preferred but not required.

No public comment received.

Councilmember Morris-Lopez referenced the education requirement for the Community Services Officer, and asked if it would be considered to have a two-year AA or AS degree based on the responsibilities the position has. Councilmember Freels and Sabathia disagreed. It is an entry level position. Councilmember Morris-Lopez stated that she would like to have the word “preferred” for the position of the community services officer. Mayor Pro Tem Freeman stated that it is difficult to find personnel and we should not be too restrictive and added that it is not inclusive language. Councilmember Sabathia stated that he would hate to limit the applicant.

The position is an entry level position that the applicant can grow into.

Councilmember Morris-Lopez requested to amend the Community Services Officer job description to add “preferred” AA or AS degree.

SUBSTITUTE MOTION:

Upon motion by Councilmember Morris-Lopez, second by Mayor Jordan, to approve the Public Safety Coordinator and amend the Community Services Officer Job Descriptions and initiate recruitment to fill these openings.

AYES: Councilmember Morris-Lopez and Mayor Jordan; NOES: Councilmembers: Freels, Freeman, and Sabathia. ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None.

Motion failed.

MOTION:

Upon motion by Mayor Pro Tem Freeman, second by Councilmember Sabathia, RESOLUTION adopting the Public Safety Coordinator and Community Services Officer Job Descriptions and initiate recruitment to fill these openings, was approved.

AYES: Councilmembers: Freels, Freeman, Morris-Lopez, Sabathia, and Mayor Jordan; NOES:

None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None.

D. Agreement with Flock Group, Inc. to Install and Operate a Citywide Security Camera System
Page | 8 City Council Meeting Minutes (September 19, 2023) Item was continued to the next meeting.

E. Ordinance Revising Title 13 “Violations” by Repealing and Replacing Article 4 “Noticed Nuisance Abatement Procedure” and Article 5 “Emergency Nuisance Abatement Procedure” of Chapter 1 “Enforcement” by Adoption of an Ordinance Entitled “Alternative Public Nuisance Abatement Procedures.” (Second Reading) Item was continued to the next meeting.

10. ADJOURNMENT
Motion to adjourned the meeting by Councilmember Sabathia, second by Mayor Pro Tem Freeman. All in favor.

There being no other business, Mayor Jordan adjourned the meeting at 10:09 p.m.

APPROVED:
_____________________
Leslie Q. Jordan, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Elizabeth Soto, Deputy City Clerk
City of San Juan Bautista
Revenues ~ Budget Vs. Actual
For the Three Month Period Ended September 30, 2023
Item #5E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
REVENUES FY23 FY24 Annual YTD
Fund Actuals Actuals Budget Difference 25% Notes
General Fund 810,234 549,257 2,142,500 (1,593,243) 26%
Special Revenue Funds:

Capital Projects Fund 488,949 133,374 2,836,845 (2,703,471) 5% A Community Development 43,875 11,416 404,514 (393,098) 3% B COPS 37,668 25,000 100,000 (75,000) 25%
Parking & Restroom Fd 8,803 11,731 28,000 (16,269) 42%
Gas Tax Fund 26,881 24,201 101,000 (76,799) 24%
Valle Vista LLD 6,632 5,970 23,889 (17,919) 25%
Rancho Vista CFD 16,630 18,031 67,512 (49,481) 27%
Copperleaf CFD 5,663 4,405 16,645 (12,240) 26%
Internal Service Funds:

Blg Rehab. & Replace 9,500 9,500 38,000 (28,500) 25%
Vehicle Replacement 15,000 15,000 60,000 (45,000) 25%
Enterprise Funds:

Water
Operations 319,450 440,915 1,345,000 (904,085) 33%
Sewer
Operations 390,917 446,050 1,390,000 (943,950) 32%
TOTAL Funds 2,190,823 1,694,850 8,553,905 (6,859,055) 20% A ~ The timing of the projects and the related revenue does not always align with the year-to-date percentages.

B ~ These funds are developer derived and are recognized when invoiced.

City of San Juan Bautista
Expenditures ~ Budget Vs. Actual
For the Three Month Period Ended September 30, 2023
Item #5E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
EXPENDITURES FY23 FY24 Annual YTD
Fund Actuals Actuals Budget Variance 25% Note
General Fund 465,769 419,815 2,117,980 (1,698,165) 20%
Special Revenue Funds:

Capital Projects Fund 488,949 133,374 2,836,845 (2,703,471) 5% A Community Development 148,904 184,469 674,036 (489,567) 27% COPS 25,000 25,000 100,000 (75,000) 25%
Parking & Restroom Fd - - - -
Gas Tax Fund 3,904 2,766 21,500 (18,734) 13%
Valle Vista LLD 7,803 4,334 22,692 (18,358) 19%
Rancho Vista CFD 9,819 9,884 37,166 (27,282) 27%
Copperleaf CFD 5,694 4,169 16,645 (12,476) 25%
Development Impact Fee Funds
Public/Civic Facility 675 675 2,700 (2,025) 25%
Library 1,110 1,110 4,440 (3,330) 25%
Storm Drain 858 858 3,432 (2,574) 25%
Park In-Lieu 75 75 300 (225) 25%
Public Safety 213 213 852 (639) 25%
Traffic 108 108 432 (324) 25%
Enterprise Funds:

Water:

Operations 231,382 177,976 828,749 650,773 21%
Capital 7,651 36,723 (36,723)
Sewer
Operations 208,293 187,429 1,227,618 1,040,189 15%
Capital 50,388 537,357 18,497,240 17,959,883 3% A
TOTAL Funds 1,656,595 1,726,335 26,392,627 14,561,952 7% Footnotes:

A ~ Capital fund transfers/costs are budgeted to be incurred by these funds. Since the costs/transfers occur sporadically during the year, they do not always align with the to date percentages, or prior year amounts.

Additionally, some projects have been moved to the next fiscal year. 11/5/2023
City San Juan Bautista
Warrant Listing
For the Month of October 2023
Effective Date Check Number Vendor Name Check Amount
10/24/2023 217096 4Leaf, Inc. 22,920.88
10/24/2023 217097 A Tool Shed, Inc. 6,428.80
10/24/2023 217098 ACWA Health Benefits Authority 12,887.65 10/24/2023 217099 AFLAC 1,868.88
10/24/2023 217100 All Clear Water Services 4,100.00
10/24/2023 217101 at&t 268.05
10/24/2023 217102 att.com 76.69
10/24/2023 217103 AVAYA 250.66
10/24/2023 217104 Baker Supplies and Repairs 93.07
10/24/2023 217105 Brewery Twenty Five 800.00
10/24/2023 217106 Brigantino Irrigation, Inc. 66.64
10/24/2023 217107 California Planning & Development Report 238.00 10/24/2023 217108 California Preservation Foundation 500.00 10/24/2023 217109 CALNET 719.95
10/24/2023 217110 Canon Financial Services, Inc 1,220.09 10/24/2023 217111 Carlos Figueroa. 53.68
10/24/2023 217112 Clark Pest Control 111.00
10/24/2023 217113 Abila 1,383.96
10/24/2023 217114 Cruz Esmeralda Iniguez 700.00
10/24/2023 217115 Cypress Water Services 11,377.67
10/24/2023 217116 Darlene Boyd 263.06
10/24/2023 217117 Data Ticket Inc. 800.00
10/24/2023 217118 David J. Powers & Associates, Inc. 39,347.84 10/24/2023 217119 Department of Conservation 117.63
10/24/2023 217120 Downey Brand 93.00
10/24/2023 217121 EMC Planning Group Inc. 10,771.14
10/24/2023 217122 First Alarm 493.41
10/24/2023 217123 Hamner Jewell Associates 955.75
10/24/2023 217124 Hollister Auto Parts, Inc. 319.52
10/24/2023 217125 Josefina Herrera / Victor Herrera 700.00 10/24/2023 217126 Karina Hernandez / Fernando Hernandez 700.00 10/24/2023 217127 Kennedy, Archer & Giffen 4,890.50
10/24/2023 217128 Kettle Creek Corporation 3,946.44
10/24/2023 217129 Margaret Clovis 2,025.00
10/24/2023 217130 Maria G. Zamudio 700.00
10/24/2023 217131 Midwest Tape 725.38
10/24/2023 217132 MNS Engineers, Inc. 36,585.00
10/24/2023 217133 Monterey Bay Analytical Services 4,347.00 10/24/2023 217134 MuniBilling 449.31
10/24/2023 217135 New SV Media 408.00
10/24/2023 217136 Monterey Bay Analytical Services 5,621.00 10/24/2023 217137 P G & E 12,390.65
10/24/2023 217138 Paper Direct 242.92
10/24/2023 217139 Ready Refresh 334.17
10/24/2023 217140 Regional Government Services 811.96
City San Juan Bautista
Warrant Listing
For the Month of October 2023
Effective Date Check Number Vendor Name Check Amount
10/24/2023 217141 Ridgeline Municipal Strategies, LLC 13,818.01 10/24/2023 217142 Rotary Club of San Juan Bautista 690.00 10/24/2023 217143 Rx-Tek 435.00
10/24/2023 217144 San Benito County Auditors Office 7,338.14 10/24/2023 217145 San Benito County Water District 1,709.83 10/24/2023 217146 Sentry Alarm System 342.00
10/24/2023 217147 Smith & Enright Landscaping 7,775.00
10/24/2023 217148 Sprint 452.88
10/24/2023 217149 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 13,784.50 10/24/2023 217150 State Compensation Insurance Fund 5,109.50 10/24/2023 217151 Toro Petroleum Corp. 504.27
10/24/2023 217152 True Value Hardware 112.46
10/24/2023 217153 Uline 139.65
10/24/2023 217154 Univar Solutions 366.58
10/24/2023 217155 US Bank Equipment Finance 249.61
10/24/2023 217156 Rx-Tek 2,012.90
10/24/2023 217157 USABlueBook 322.93
10/24/2023 217158 Valero Wex Bank 1,031.26
10/24/2023 217159 Van Dermyden Makus Law Corporation 11,957.46 10/24/2023 217160 Wallace Group 282.50
10/24/2023 217161 Waltz Creative 621.35
10/24/2023 217162 Wendy L. Cumming, CPA 4,578.75
Report Total 267,738.93
City Manager’s Report
Library Organizational Study underway
Working with Pacific Library Council
Recreation off to a great start
New Software
Office at the Library
Met with many stakeholders
Recruiting three positions; Admin Assistant, Public Safety Coordinator and Community Services Worker
Attended the Chamber dinner, Benito Link Town Hall, spoke at the Community Foundation reception, MBEP State of the Region, and will attend the Philanthropist of the Year Dinner Engaged County workshops for the BOS Economic Development Committee re-structuring The goal is to have all “EDC’s” aligned; marketing campaign reocmmedned City Manager’s Monthly Report
Wastewater
Pipe arrives this week (electronics 80-weeks!)
Start trenching the week of November 20 (+/- weather)
Executed agreements and gained access to State and Fed. Funds Biologist on duty- training and monitoring the project
Working closely with growers
City Manager’s Monthly Report
Water
Continue to verify data and route
Correcting Hardness is the goal
Blending ratios are critical (60/40?)
Confirming the City plans to buy enough surface water
Not just blending
Reliant on removal of water softeners
HDR Design for new route in Hwy 156 competed by October 31 Began working on two permanent agreements again
buying water and
the pipeline)
Funding Status
Renewing Ridgeline Agreements
Met with Congressman Lofgren’s DC Office
City Manager’s Monthly Report
Water Regulators
Joint meeting with City Contractor, EPA and Water Board City has 5-years to complete the project (2022-2027)
Original Completion Date was 06.30.2024
The 80 week lead times require it be pushed to early winter 2026
But trenching and pipe would be laid by June 2024
A request for schedule change has been submitted based on these facts
Quarterly Status Report is on the website, submitted on-time November 1, 2023
City Manager’s Monthly Report
FLOCK Security Camera Implementation
Legal and Risk amending the Agreement
Enforcement Policy
Coordinating with the Sheriff
Storm Preparation
Contract with Granite Rock (permissible per State of Emergency) Clear silt from storm systems both North & South
$300,000 that FEMA has yet to fully honor ($17,000)
General Fund Reserve will have to front the funds
Letter of appeal written with State OES Support
City Manager’s Monthly Report
Community Development
2 Applications before the Planning Commission; one approved Set a path forward for the Gas Station at the Alameda
Ready to approve a draft Zoning Code update for pop-ups, etc.

UGB- Council’s feedback and further research provided this Agenda EDCAC- Reconsidering the role and expectations- on this Agenda HCD- Feedback on Housing Element has been received
City Manager’s Monthly Report
Item: 5.A
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 1

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2023
DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER
FROM: DON REYNOLDS
BY: DON REYNOLDS
TITLE: CONSIDER EXTENDING CATERING PARKLETS CONSISTENT
WITH STATE LAW AB1217 TO JULY 1, 2026
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

After consideration of the facts and the new State law AB1217, determine if the City will adjust its current Parklet Policy extending the use of catering parklets selling alcohol to July 1, 2026 by adopting the attached draft resolution, take no action, or some variation of these choices.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council provide the opportunity to discuss the future of the use of parklets in the City before they expire January 1, 2024, because the State just extended the sale of alcohol on parklets until July 1, 2026. If so, consider adopting the draft Resolution attached to this report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The matter of extending catering parklets until July 1, 2023 was brought before the Council at its October 18, 2023 Council meeting as a discussion item, ten days after the state passed AB1217.

The current Parklet Policy allows both retail and catering businesses to use parklets until the deadline January 1, 2024. This was the State deadline established for the sale of alcohol on catering parklets by the previous law AB61. If the City Council wishes to modify the policy consistent with AB1217, a resolution has been drafted to make this policy change for catering businesses only. It can be further modified if the Council deems this to be appropriate. If the Council does not act, all parklets will end January 1, 2024.

BACKGROUND:

Due to the late hour, there was not time or energy for a robust conversation about the State law AB 1217, and whether the City wanted to continue to follow the State’s lead on parklet deadlines. Staff understood the Council’s direction to be that the matter should return to the City Page | 2
Council at its next regular meeting with a draft resolution. Attached is the October 2, 2023 memorandum from the City Manager with the minutes and legislative summary of AB1217 FISCAL IMPACT:

The attached resolution continues to offer business owners some reimbursement of the cost of removing a parklet.

ATTACHMENTS:

October 2 Memorandum with AB1217
Page | 1
.

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA RESCINDING RESOLUTION 2023-27 AND REESTABLISHING THE

TERM OF EXISTING CATERING PARKLET ENCROACHMENT PERMITS TO END JULY 1, 2026, AND NOT CHANGING THE END OF RETAIL PARKLETS TO END JANUARY 1, 2024
WHEREAS, in an effort to control the pandemic caused by the COVID-19 coronavirus, on March 4, 2020, under the authority provided by Government Code §8625, Governor Newsom issued a Proclamation of State of Emergency in California; and WHEREAS, the shelter in place health orders that followed the State of Emergency closed all but essential businesses; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, under the authority provided by Government Code §8630 and San Juan Bautista Municipal Code §5-33-040, by Resolution 2020-10 the City Council of the City of San Juan Bautista, upon the request of the City Manager/Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed a state of local emergency caused by the COVID-19 to have existed in the City since March 13, 2020 and in adopting subsequent resolutions periodically reviewed and confirmed the continuing existence of the local emergency; and WHEREAS, this closure of businesses was harmful to the City's economy and the City, among many other things, and on May 19, 2020, initiated the Transformation of Third Street by adopting Resolution 2020-24, allowing the use of parklets to expand retail and catering services outdoors; and
WHEREAS, the Governor lifted the COVID 19 State of Emergency on February 28, 2023, but nonetheless, the City Council is aware that COVID-19 variants represent a continuing threat to public health, safety and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, the parklet program was approved by the City Council for a period of six months ending December 31, 2020, and serially extended until March 30, 2021, February 16, 2021 September 30, 2021, March 30 2022, and May 31, 2022, and; WHEREAS, in 2021, the State adopted AB61 allowing existing catering business to serve alcohol on a parklet until January 1, 2024, then on March 21, 2023 the Council adopted Resolution 2023-21 requiring the removal of all parklets by April 28, 2023, and on April 18, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution rescinding Resolution 2023-21 and replacing it with 2023-27 extending the use for both retail and catering parklets to the current deadline of January 1, 2024; and
WHEREAS, on October 8th, 2023, the State adopted AB1217 to replace AB61, and among other things, extended the deadline for existing catering services to serve alcohol on parklets from January 1, 2024, to July 1, 2026.

Page | 2
WHEREAS, AB1217 and the details of the State’s extension of these provisions for existing catering parklets was shared at the October 17, 2023, City Council meeting.

WHEREAS, if the Council takes no all parklets will be removed from 3rd Street by January 1, 2024, but the Council has time to modify that outcome as the State modified its deadline, and as an option, staff is presenting for the Council’s consideration this new draft Resolution extending the deadline for existing catering parklets (only?) to the same deadline as AB1217, from January 21, 2023 to July 1, 2026. Of course, a third option may be to expand upon the State provisions, and include retail parklets as well as catering parklets as it did in April.

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

1. That Resolution 2023-27 continuing the restriction prohibiting new or replacement parklets, terminating the current encroachment permit authorization for all parklets, effecting the removal of all parklets and the traffic control devices installed for the protection of parklets on Third Street by January 1, 2024, is hereby rescinded and is no longer valid or of any effect.

2. The City Manager is hereby ordered to continue the restriction prohibiting new or replacement parklets.

3. The use of existing parklets associated with catering businesses licensed by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control are permitted to continue in operation subject to Section 4 below and shall be annually inspected by the City Fire Marshall and Building Inspector to ensure protection of the public health and safety.

4. All existing parklets associated with catering services currently licensed by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control shall cease operation and the encroachment permit for same shall terminate and be revoked on June 1, 2026.

5. All parklets associated with retail establishments shall cease operation and the encroachment permit for same shall terminate and be revoked January 1, 2023, and the owner or operator of the retail establishment shall affect the removal of the parklet on or before January 1, 2024.

6. The owner or operator responsible for the removal of a parklet required to be removed may be compensated from the City’s General Fund, following prior application to the City Manager or his designee for same and following the removal, for the reasonable cost of removal in an amount not to exceed $5.00 per square foot or $800.00, whichever is less.

Page | 3

PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of San Juan Bautista at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of November 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
______________________
Leslie Q. Jordan, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Elizabeth Soto, Deputy City Clerk

Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 1

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2023
DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FROM: BRIAN FOUCHT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
TITLE: NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN BY

ACCEPTING URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AD HOC

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED SPHERE OF INFLUENCE,
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY, PLANNING AREA (continued
from October 17, 2023)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution attached to the attached staff report dated November 14, 2023 with the following actions:
1) Accept the proposed Sphere of Influence (“SOI”), Urban Growth Boundary (“UGB”) and Planning Area boundaries attached as Exhibit “A” to the Resolution from the Urban Growth Boundary Committee (“Committee”), amended as referenced therein; 2) State the intention to Amend the 2035 General Plan targeting only those policies, objectives and programs affected by an amended Sphere of Influence, adoption of an Urban Growth Boundary and adoption of a Planning Area;
3) Direct the Urban Growth Boundary Ad Hoc Committee to work with San Benito County to establish a Planning Area and related Memorandum of Agreement/Understanding.

I. BACKGROUND SUMMARY:

Continued Hearing: This item was continued from the City Council meeting of October 17, 2023 to enable review of the Urban Growth Boundary recommended east of the urbanized portion of the City Limit. The amended map attached as Exhibit “A” to the resolution is the result of conversations with owners (Loayza) and review of City files for this area. Staff has confirmed that infrastructure in the 4-lot Parcel Map area is designed to accommodate all 12 lots depicted in the enlargement area depicted the map. The owners (Loayza) have been advised that a tentative subdivision map is required to “vest” entitlement to develop the Parcel “B” remainder and the other 8 lots depicted.

Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 2
In May of 2020 the City executed a contract with State Dept of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) to prepare a Specific Plan for eventual annexation and additional housing development within the proposed Sphere of Influence (SOI) area South of Highway 156.

In the spring of 2020, the City learned from San Benito County Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) that the proposed SOI depicted in General Plan Maps 2.2, 6.1, 6.2, and

6.3 had not been forwarded by the City to LAFCO for approval. The 1998 General Plan SOI remains as the City’s guide for future growth (Maps: Attachment 2).

General Plan policies and objectives also refer to an “Area of Concern” an “Urban Growth Boundary” and a “Greenbelt”; however, following adoption of the General Plan, the City had not attempted to 1) delineate an Urban Growth Boundary or a Greenbelt; 2) legislate a relationship between the proposed SOI and a UGB; or 3) reach agreement with San Benito County to inform the Area of Concern.

In June 2020 the City established an Ad-Hoc Committee to study the SOI and UGB status and recommend changes to better control growth. A mission statement was adopted by the Committee : “The mission of the Urban Growth/Sphere of Influence Ad-Hoc Committee is to establish limits to, and boundaries for, growth that will serve and protect the City of San Juan Bautista now and in the future. Councilmember Dan Devries, Mayor Mary Edge, Planning Commission Chair Scott Freels, Historic Resources Board Chair Luis Matchain and member at large Jackie Morris Lopez.

The first meeting was August 18, 2020, and by November 2020, the Committee had met 6-times.

Changes in City Council membership resulted in new appointments to the UGB Ad Hoc Committee: Council members Scott Freels and Mary Edge, and Planning Commissioners Luis Matchain, Jackie Morris – Lopez , with at large member E.J. Sabathia. This Ad-Hoc Committee met twice in November 2021 and December 2021, and reached agreement on a recommended map Sphere of Influence/Urban Growth Boundary encompassing much of the area delineated as the SOI in the General Plan (Attachment 3 ).

In early 2022 this recommendation was paired with a planning program (“South Area Specific Plan,” financed by $160,000 through a State HCD “SB2 Grant” authorized by City Council Resolutions 2019-44), due to extensive areas within the Specific Plan area located outside the City Limit which the General Plan proposed to be planned for new development. The combined recommended SOI and Specific Plan was named the San Juan Bautista Community Plan, now reframed as a “Plan” intended to amend the General Plan to accommodate both a new SOI depicting probable future City growth areas and probable and a Planning Area (Area of Concern).

Planning Commission recommended and City Council approved the Community Plan program February 15, 2022, City Council adopted Resolution 2022-13. This action was followed by community meetings and a joint Planning Commission and City Council meeting in May and June of 2022.

Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 3
The City Council thereafter redirected consideration of the Community Plan back to the UGB Committee for further deliberation of the SOI and UGB. The Ad Hoc Committee conducted a public meeting and property owner outreach October 2022 – January 2023, conducting these activities in the context of a Sphere of Influence and Greenbelt concept (Attachment 3). Staff sent more than 80 letters on two different occasions to property owners living on property whose property is adjacent to but outside the City boundaries to inform them of the proposed changes to the SOI. Staff met with approximately 20-property owners to discuss the 2021 recommended SOI.

During the first quarter of 2023, the UGB Ad Hoc Committee acquired new members: Planning Commissioners Dan Devries and David Madeiros, City Council members Scott Freels and JackieMorris – Lopez and at – large member, Chris Martorana. The UGB Ad Hoc Committee reviewed the Greenbelt model established in 2022, considered property owner input and established a draft Sphere of Influence and Greenbelt. The Committee also reviewed resource and constraints maps including soils, slopes, fire, flood and geologic hazard areas. The Committee concluded that many areas of the Sphere of Influence depicted in the General Plan are areas of prime soils, constrained by Agriculture Land Conservation Contracts or were areas of steep slopes, very high fire hazard, flood hazard, and geologic hazards.

II. RECOMMENDATION:

During the period 2021-2023 the UGB Ad Hoc Committee has diligently attempted to determine the interplay between the Sphere of Influence and Urban Growth Boundary, Greenbelt, or Planning Area (General Plan Area of Concern). The tension point in all of these discussions has been to determine how best protect the historic character of the community. This tension can best be described as follows:
• A relatively more expansive Sphere of Influence, wherein the City has legislative control and influence, enables an Urban Growth Boundary outside current City Limits that effectively influences the extent of development to protect the City’s historic open space context.
• A more restrictive Sphere Of Influence places greater importance on the role of the Area Of Concern (Planning Area) and coordination with San Benito County, to achieve this objective.

The Ad Hoc Committee in 2023 considered models from several communities to that would put the City in the best position to address future growth potential while influencing land use policy within areas considered essential for open space conservation. This careful review included examples of active interagency agreement and coordination necessary to stabilize urban growth boundaries, achieving mutually beneficial goals of protection of open space for conservation, agriculture and resource production.

Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 4
The following Sphere of Influence, Urban Growth Boundary and Planning Area descriptions are provided to define the role of each of these areas recommended by the Committee and are intended to accompany the delineation maps that the Committee recommends for City Council adoption.

Sphere of Influence
A sphere of influence is a planning boundary outside of an agency’s legal boundary (such as the city limit line) that designates the agency’s probable future boundary and service area.

Factors considered in a sphere of influence review focus on the current and future land use, the current and future need and capacity for service, and any relevant communities of interest.

The application to LAFCo to establish a SOI is first accomplished via a General Plan Amendment. Corteze/Knox Herzberg (CA Code) Section 56425(e) describes the criteria for establishing an SOI as follows :
(1) The present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open-space lands. (2) The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area. (3) The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services that the agency provides or is authorized to provide.
(4) The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the commission determines that they are relevant to the agency. (5) … the present and probable need for those public facilities and services of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the existing sphere of influence.

Spheres for all cities and special districts are reviewed every five years.

Urban Growth Boundary (UGB)
An Urban Growth Boundary is established by the General Plan. The Committee’s recommended UGB is an area that coincides with the City Limit on the North, South and West, and is within the City Limit on the East. The recommended UGB is intended to prohibit urban development and the extension of services to lands outside that boundary. The following General Plan policies would apply to this area. restrict urban development to those areas so delineated.

HO 4.1.4.1Maintain an Urban Growth Boundary to promote new growth in desirable areas and protect prime agricultural lands and viewsheds
Policy PF 1.2.3 Provide extensions of City potable water service only to properties within the designated sphere of influence. Do not extend service or sell capacity to development on agricultural or open space lands outside the City’s Urban Growth Boundary.

Planning Area
Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 5
Three key features underly the Planning Area concept: 1) Information from the County regarding policies, programs, regulations, and development within the recommended area and 2) Mutual consideration by SJB and County input; and 3) Concerted City and County action.

Implementation methods, timing and anticipated results are proposed to be determined within a MOU or MOA between SJB and the County. The Planning Area is intended to offer a similar level of assurance as the Area of Concern expressed in General Plan Policy 4.4.1, referenced below, with the effective influence of this area determined solely through agreement with the County.

III. CONSIDERATIONS
General Plan and Municipal Code Provisions related to and affected by the SOI/UGB/Planning Area Recommendation
The following are existing policies and laws from General Plan and Municipal Code that are related to the recommended SOI, UGB, and Planning Area. These laws, policies, and regulations, will need to be reviewed, reconsidered, updated and amended as part of any General Plan Amendment to incorporate a modified SOI, UGB or Planning Area (referenced below as the “Area of Concern”), such as that recommended by the Ad Hoc Committee recommendations.

A. General Plan

2.1.4 Area of Concern & Sphere of Influence: “The Area of Concern is the area covered by the General Plan. It includes the City and any land outside that relates to the City’s planning extending beyond the sphere of influence for a total of 3,842 acres. Map 2.2 identifies the proposed Area of Concern and Sphere of Influence for the City.” As proposed by the Committee this will change to 0 acres.

4.4.1 Boundaries & Limits: An Area of Concern encompasses and extends beyond the city limits and SOI and bears relation to the City’s planning. Any project in this area of the County should notify the City and receive input. Map 4.1 shows the existing City limits, while Map 4.2 shows the proposed boundaries for the City’s limits, SOI, and Area of Concern. San Juan Bautista 2035 General Plan.
“Preferred Growth Scenario: 6.2.2 Conceptual Land Uses The Preferred Scenario emphasizes infill development along key corridors connecting the main entry gateways of the City to the downtown.

Growth in these specific areas can help San Juan Bautista meet its future commercial and residential needs more efficiently. The four areas selected to accommodate future growth needs are: • North 3rd Street Extension • Muckelemi Street at Monterey Street • Historic Downtown • South of State Route 156.” As proposed by the Committee this is a significant change. How will San H=Juan Baustista meets its future needs? For housing the answer will be via infill development and perhaps higher intensity zoning (taller buildings”) “Map 6.1 shows the conceptual land uses proposed under the Preferred Scenario. Map 6.2 depicts new proposed City boundaries where land use is controlled by the City, including an expansion in Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 6
the southeast portion of the city and a slight expansion to the north. Map 6.3 depicts a proposed expanded sphere of influence (SOI), which defines the city’s ultimate service area and lands for potential future annexations. Map 6.3 also shows the proposed area of concern, which is larger than the SOI and is also related to future planning for the City.” (see attached maps) Policy PF 1.2.3 Provide extensions of City potable water service only to properties within the designated sphere of influence. Do not extend service or sell capacity to development on agricultural or open space lands outside the City’s Urban Growth Boundary. Will the City extend water services beyond its political boundaries/proposed SOI, will existing services extend beyond the boundaries be allowed to continue?
Program LU 2.1.1.4 Identify the extent to which existing utility capacity can accommodate future development. This will come from a new Municipal Services review as part of the LAFCO application.

LU 3.2.1.1 Develop urban growth boundaries to successfully limit sprawl but do not restrict development to avoid home price increases.

LU 3.2.1.3 Create a green belt zone around the city to maintain the distinct boundaries and the small town feel and to limit sprawl. A greenbelt zone is not being proposed.

HO 4.1.4.1 Maintain an Urban Growth Boundary to promote new growth in desirable areas and protect prime agricultural lands and viewsheds.

OS 4.1.2.3 Discourage subdivision of parcels in agricultural production. Minimum parcel size should be 20 acres and 40 acres for non-irrigated land. There are no 20-acre parcels within the existing City boundary being used for Ag production.

B. Municipal Code:
6-4-111 Water service outside City – Annexation.

Property outside the City limits requesting new water service connection shall be required to annex or enter into an irrevocable offer to annex the property into the City limits prior to connections to City’s water distribution system. The property will be responsible to install, construct and extend, to the City’s standards, all water mains, lines and water appurtenances to the property boundaries at the sole cost of the property owners and pay all connection fees, impact fees, water meter cost, shut off valves, water service laterals, water valves, fire hydrants and other appurtenances associated with water services to said property. The property if outside City limits, will be outside the SOI too, and cannot be annexed.
5-9-600 Outside the City – Approval required.

Except when authorized by resolution of the City Council, which resolution shall contain such terms and conditions and fix such fees as the City Council shall deem appropriate, no sewer connection permit shall be issued for, nor shall any sewer connection be made to serve, any premises or property located outside the corporate limits of the City.

Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 7
C. Future Growth Implications To Be Evaluated Through A General Plan Amendment

1. The City would be wholly dependent upon infill development for increases in property tax revenue.

2. The General Plan amendment would need to assess the infill development potential of existing residential areas and higher density zoning (height, setbacks, FAR) would be necessary to meet a modest demand for housing.

3. The City anticipates a growth rate of 1.9% per year, projected to reach just under 2,500 population in 2031, near the end of the General Plan planning horizon. This rate of growth is tied to financing for infrastructure improvements. An assessment of the growth potential in existing areas and the need for additional development to finance improvements will need to be addressed as part of a General Plan Amendment. Municipal Services Review will parallel the General Plan Amendment.

4. Municipal Code provisions referenced above would make it impossible to extend water service to customers outside the City Limit, as any property outside the City Limit would also be outside the City’s Sphere of Influence. Similarly, the recommended Urban Growth Boundary would prohibit undeveloped properties within the East portion of the City from receiving City services.

5. The feasibility of methods of attaining important infrastructure improvements, flood hazard mitigation in particular, south of Hwy 156 and in the north-west portion of town.

These areas convey flood waters from outside the City limits. An assessment is necessary to determine if with or without additional development, flood control measures can be constructed by which jurisdiction, and this will also impact the General Plan amendment.

IV NEXT STEPS
A. Resolution of Intention To Amend The General Plan; County Acceptance and LAFCO Review and Approval
Acceptance of Ad Hoc Committee recommendation would be followed by a series of activities and actions first initiated by a City Council resolution of intention to amend the General Plan. The above referenced Community Plan, currently on hiatus pending completion of the Ad Hoc Committee recommendation, is the best available vehicle to completing a “targeted” General Plan amendment that addresses only those policies affected by the recommendation. The scope of work of this plan would be reframed to address the importance of infill development the need for coordination with the County within the Planning Area.

Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 8
The amendment process would include community engagement and interagency coordination necessary to establish a SOI/UGB and the Planning Area. The City is required to meet with the County prior to submitting an application to LAFCO under GC section 56425(b). If the two parties reach agreement, then the City submits the SOI update to LAFCO and the Commission is to place “great weight” on this agreement to the extent it is consistent with Commission policies. If the Commission’s final action is consistent with the agreement, the City and County shall adopt their agreement at a noticed public hearing, and future decisions within the sphere shall be consistent with the agreement. The City will need to conduct a planning exercise at the General Plan level to conclude this overall process (see attached scope of work).

In recent discussions with LAFCO about San Juan Bautista’s MSR/SOI, the following steps have been identified.

1. City accepts the proposed SOI-UGB and Planning Area boundaries, and comes to agreement with the County regarding the impact of this change and requirement to keep the City informed of all future development concerns within the Planning Area.

2. Discuss with San Benito County a prospective boundary with text, figures and acreages for various land use designations. The map would be accompanied by prospective land use designations, calibrated for 1.9% population growth over the life of the General Plan (2035), basic employment and services assumptions;

3. The City would pre-adopt GP designations and pre-zone the map to include new text, figures and acreages for the various land use designations;

4. City will adopt a related CEQA document to address these changes. As for CEQA, the General Plan has a fairly recent EIR, so it will be necessary to prepare a supplemental or subsequent EIR to address transport VMT requirements and various housing policies that may not have been addressed earlier will need to be addressed.

5. Once adopted by the City Council, the City will apply to LAFCO with the County approved agreement seeking approval to accept the updated the SOI and accompanying MSR update with corresponding processing fees. If the City goes after additional planning grant funding, it may be advisable to include these processing costs in the application.

6. The Commission will decide the final SOI boundary and contents of the MSR which may or may not match what was requested by the City. For this reason, it is good to keep LAFCO informed during the process so important issues can be addressed before final City Council action, if possible.

Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 9
B. Municipal Service Review (MSR)
Government Code section 56430(a) states that LAFCO shall conduct a service review of the municipal services provided in the county or other appropriate area designated by the Commission in order to update a sphere of influence under Government Code section 56425. An updated MSR is required prior to adoption of a revised Sphere of Influence.

The only MSR for San Juan Bautista was completed in 2007. The MSR update relationship to the proposed SOI is to evaluate 7 factors (identified in the Government Code section) that have to do with:
• growth and population projections relying on General Plan growth projections and any related COG information;
• the location of any disadvantaged communities around the agency (and this would also include the agency “City” itself);
• the present and planned capacity of public facilities and related needs and deficiencies; • the financial ability of the agency to provide those services; • status and opportunity for shared facilities - such as the proposed sewer and water system connections and opportunities for shared fire and police services; • accountability for community service needs including government structure (which has more to do with special districts); and
• any other matter related to effective and efficient service the Commission identifies by their own policy.

Completion of the MSR is an important element of the General Plan Amendment process and may influence General Plan conclusions regarding the location, extent and density of land uses necessary to maintain services.

C. Budget Considerations
In February 2023, the City Manager reported to the City Council that over three years has budgeted $110,000 from the General Fund and spent $6,800 not including staff time. This amount has been augmented by a $160,000 Grant from HCD (SB2) and has spent $133,350. Of $270,000, $129,000 remains. Prior to requesting reimbursement from HCD to cover consultant expenses during 2021-22, the City must reframe the Scope of Work of the Community Plan referenced above and recalibrate funds needed to address the Committee recommendation. HCD has given the City flexibility to reframe the Scope of Work during the next six weeks and thereafter to complete work on the Community Plan within the first quarter of 2024. Additional funds from the General Fund may be needed in 2024 to complete the Community Plan, related CEQA documentation Sphere of Influence Proposal to LAFCO.

Item # 5.B
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 10
Attachments:

1. Resolution (includes Exhibit “A”: SOI/UGB/Planning Area recommended mapped areas, as amended)

2. General Plan Maps

3. Maps and diagrams: Urban Growth Boundary Committee deliberations Page | 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

STATING THE INTENTION TO UNDERTAKE A TARGETED AMENDMENT OF THE 2016-2035 GENERAL PLAN TO INCORPORATE, AS IT MAY BE AMENDED

THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE URBAN GROWTH

BOUNDARY AD HOC COMMITTEE REGARDING A SPHERE OF INFLUENCE,

URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AND PLANNING AREA
WHEREAS, in June of 2020 the City Council was informed by LAFCO that the proposed Sphere of Influence reference in 2016-2035 General Plan Maps 2.2, 6.1-6.3 had not been submitted by the City for LAFCO approval, resulting in an inconsistency between the adopted Sphere of Influence and the Sphere of Influence represented in the 2016-2035 General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Area of Concern referenced in General Plan Maps 2.2 and 6.3 has not been implemented and an Urban Growth Boundary referenced in the General Plan has not been delineated; and
WHEREAS, establishment of a Sphere of Influence and implementation of the Area of Concern (Planning Area) are vital to the protection of the City’s historical character and setting which underpins the City’s cultural and economic well-being and community values; and WHEREAS, in August of 2020 the City established an Urban Growth Boundary Ad Hoc Committee (“UGB Ad Hoc Committee”) to determine the optimal method of protecting the City’s historical character by protecting the open space resource values surrounding the City. The Mission of the UGB Committee is stated as follows: The mission of the Urban Growth/Sphere of Influence Ad-Hoc Committee is to establish limits to, and boundaries for growth that will serve and protect the City of San Juan Bautista now and in the future; and WHEREAS, during the period 2021-2023 the UGB Ad Hoc Committee diligently considered two competing perspectives involving the Sphere of Influence and Urban Growth Boundary, Greenbelt, or Planning Area (General Plan Area of Concern) described by the following two perspectives:
• A relatively more expansive Sphere of Influence provides the City with legislative control and influence, enabling creation of an Urban Growth Boundary outside current City Limits that effectively controls the extent of development sufficient to protect the City’s historic open space context.
• A more restrictive Sphere of Influence emphasizes the primary role of the Area Of Concern (Planning Area) within which measures agreed upon with San Benito County, to achieve open space resource protection within that delineated area.

WHEREAS, to resolve this question, the UGB Ad Hoc Committee considered a variety of factors, including property owner and community input and resource and Page | 2
development constraints to determine recommendations for Sphere of Influence, Urban Growth Boundary and Planning Area (coterminous with Area Of Concern); and WHEREAS, the UGB Ad Hoc Committee has recognized that a recommendation to change the delineation of these areas within the General Plan and which will be formally adopted by LAFCO will require amendment to certain General Plan policies, objectives and programs.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council hereby adopts the following:
1) Accept the proposed Sphere of Influence, Urban Growth Boundary and Planning Area boundaries recommended in the maps, as amended, attached as Exhibit A to the Resolution from the UGB Ad Hoc Committee;
2) State the intention to Amend the 2035 General Plan targeting only those policies, objectives and programs affected by an amended Sphere of Influence, adoption of an Urban Growth Boundary and adoption of a Planning Area;
3) Direct the UGB Ad Hoc Committee to work with San Benito County to establish a Planning Area and related Memorandum of Agreement/Understanding.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 14th day of November 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
_____________________
Leslie Q. Jordan, Mayor

ATTEST:
_____________________________
Elizabeth Soto, Deputy City Clerk
Exhibit A- two maps- 1: SOI and UGB, and 2) Planning Area

Item:5.C
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 1

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2023
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION
FROM: ELIZABETH SOTO, CMC, CPMC, DEPUTY CITY CLERK /

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MANAGER
BY:

TITLE: FILL A VACANCY ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION /

HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

Receive the information provided by the Ad Hoc Committee, and direct the City Council to vote on the candidate application that was received by Staff in order to fill one (1) vacancy on the Planning Commission / Historic Resources Board.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Ad Hoc Committee will provide the City Council the results of their interview, and make a recommendation to the City Council to fill a Vacancy, on the Planning Commission / Historic Resources Board, for an unexpired term that ends December 2026.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Brian Foucht received an email from Commissioner Newkirk-Smith advising him of her resignation. On Monday, June 26, 2023, staff posted a flyer, announcing a vacancy in the Planning Commission/Historic Resources Board, on the city website and on our three usual posting locations. Staff received one application.

BACKGROUND:

At the City Council meeting on October 17, 2023, the City Council appointed an Ad Hoc Committee to select a Planning Commissioner, in accordance with Municipal Code Section 2-3- 110. Whereupon, it was agreed that Councilmember Morris-Lopez and Council Member Sabathia would serve on the Ad Hoc Committee.

Staff has received two applications.

Page | 2
FISCAL IMPACT:

No fiscal impact to the City of San Juan Bautista.

ATTACHMENTS:

Candidate Application
Page | 1
Chapter 2-3 BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Article 1. Planning Commission
2-3-100 Creation.

There is hereby created a Planning Commission under “The Planning and Zoning Law” of the State of California. 2-3-105 Membership.

Said Planning Commission shall consist of five (5) members. 2-3-110 Qualifications – Appointment – Term.
(A) Members of the Planning Commission shall be residents and registered voters of the City of San Juan Bautista and shall not be officers or management-level employees of the City at the time of their appointment and continuously during their terms of office. A Commissioner who has moved residence from the City shall be considered to have resigned from the Commission office. (B) Planning Commission members’ terms shall be four (4) years, which terms shall be staggered. (C) Any vacancy in the Planning Commission from whatever cause arising, including expiration of term, shall be filled by appointment by the Council. Upon a vacancy occurring, leaving an unexpired portion of a term, any appointment to fill such vacancy shall be for the unexpired portion of such term. (D) When there is a vacancy to be filled on the Planning Commission, except for a successful reappointment of a Planning Commission member for a successive, consecutive term as defined in subsection (E) of this Section, the City Council shall appoint an ad hoc subcommittee of two (2) members to receive applications and/or resumes, select qualified candidates for interviews, conduct interviews and make a brief report with a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council shall consider and vote on the recommendation and shall appoint the applicant who receives a majority of votes to the Planning Commission. If an applicant does not receive a majority of votes, the ad hoc subcommittee shall select a new candidate and present that candidate to the City Council at the following meeting.
(E) The City Council may, upon expiration of a Planning Commission member’s term, reappoint the Planning Commission member for a successive, consecutive term, without requiring an ad hoc subcommittee to conduct interviews and make a recommendation. If the Planning Commissioner, whose term has expired, is not reappointed, the Council may direct the ad hoc subcommittee to review credentials and interview that Planning Commissioner, or to also consider other candidates for appointment to the Planning Commission, as set forth in subsection (D) of this Section.
2-3-115 Removal.

Any regular member of the Commission may be removed with good cause or without cause by a vote of at least three (3) members of the Council and such action shall be final and not subject to review. 2-3-120 Officers.

The Planning Commission shall elect a Chairman and a Vice Chairman from among the regular members, and shall appoint a Secretary who need not be a member of the Commission, for the terms and in the manner set forth in the by-laws of the Commission.
2-3-125 By-laws – Records.

The Planning Commission shall adopt by-laws providing for the method of electing officers, time and place of regular meetings of the Commission, which shall be held at least once a month, and such other rules as may be necessary for the transaction of the business of the Commission, and shall keep a public record of its resolutions, transactions, findings, and determinations.
2-3-130 Absences.

A Planning Commission member who is absent without excuse from two (2) official meetings of the Planning Commission in a six (6) month period shall automatically forfeit his position on the Planning Commission. The Chairman of the Planning Commission shall have the authority to determine whether or not an absence from an Page | 2
official meeting of the Commission is excused or unexcused, and all excused absences shall be reported as such in the minutes of the meeting from which the absence occurred. The standard which the chairman must use in determining whether an absence is to be excused or unexcused is whether or not the average conscientious member of the Planning Commission would probably be absent under similar condition.

When it is determined that a member of the Planning Commission has been absent without excuse from two (2) official Planning Commission meetings in a six (6) month period, the secretary of the Planning Commission shall promptly inform the City Council and the member whose position has been forfeited. 2-3-135 Meeting place.

Permission is hereby granted to the Planning Commission to use the Council Chambers in the City Hall as the place for its meetings or such other public facility within the corporate limits as deemed by the Planning Commission and the City Council to be appropriate and convenient for the conducting of such meetings, providing that such meetings shall not conflict with meetings of the City Council.
2-3-140 Quorum.

Three (3) of the members of the Planning Commission shall constitute a quorum of said Commission for the transaction of business.
2-3-145 Duties and powers.

The Planning Commission and the respective members thereof shall perform the duties and shall have all of the rights, powers and privileges specified and provided for in the Planning and Zoning Law as set forth in Title 7 of the Government Code, beginning with Section 65000.
2-3-150 No authority to incur debt.

The Planning Commission shall have no power or authority to bind or obligate the City or any officer or department thereof for any money, debt, undertaking or obligation of any kind in excess of the appropriation which the City Council may have made for the purposes of said Commission in any fiscal year. 2-3-155 Forfeiture of position.

A Planning Commission member who is absent from any special session of the Planning Commission which is scheduled by the City Council shall forfeit his position upon determination by the City Council that the absence was unexcused.

Item: ___
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 1

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2023
DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER
FROM: DON REYNOLDS
BY: DON REYNOLDS
TITLE: REQUEST TO STATE AND COUNTY TO INCREASE TRAFFIC
SAFETY MEASURES ON STATE HIGHWAY 156 DURING

CONSTRUCTION
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

Receive a motion to approve a Resolution requesting the State and County to implement increased traffic safety measures on State Highway 156 as soon as possible.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions:
1) Request the State Department of Transportation (“Caltrans”) implement increased safety measures including but not limited to prohibiting left turns from County roads onto eastbound Caltrans Highway 156 between Hollister and San Juan Bautista from 3PM to 7PM during construction as soon as possible.
2) Request that San Benito County modify traffic flows and signage on County roads leading to State Highway 156 in collaboration with Caltrans to implement increased safety measures including prohibiting left turns from County roads onto eastbound Caltrans Highway 156 between Hollister and San Juan Bautista from 3PM to 7PM during construction as soon as possible.
3) Request that the CHP increase traffic enforcement and support the safety measures requested above, as they are implemented to protect the safety of drivers using State Highway 156.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Since construction began on State Highway 156 between Hollister and San Juan Bautista transforming it a two-lane highway to a four-lane highway, several serious accidents have occurred. The worst accidents occur from drivers making left-hand turns from County roads onto eastbound Highway 156. This was also an issue on Highway 25, and measures were taken Page | 2
to prohibiting left turns during the hours of 3PM and 7PM. This was on the Agenda at the September Intergovernmental Committee meeting, then take up by COG at its October 11, 2023 meeting. Caltrans directed the County to send a request to them to include the State Highway Patrol requesting that additional safety measures be taken as soon as possible. At the November 1, 2023 Intergovernmental Committee meeting the cities were encouraged to support the County’s request to Caltrans. Attached to this report is a draft Resolution written for Caltrans, the County, and the CHP to improve safety on Highway 156 during construction of the 4-lane highway between Hollister and San Juan Baustista.

BACKGROUND:

The City does not generally have jurisdiction outside its city political boundaries over streets and highways, but remains a critical partner in the collaboration needed to provide safe traffic corridors. When it was suggested to the Intergovernmental Committee make improvements to improve safety on Highway 156, like those made to improve Highway 25 while it is under construction. This includes restricting left hand turns onto the state highway between the hours of 3PM-7PM.

State Highway 156 is different than Highway 25, in that there is no shoulder available for vehicles to use to turn-around. Vehicles will need to be warned early in their travel of the turn restrictions. It is also helpful if the State or County could inform the FIS providers of this restriction to prevent map apps from guiding vehicles this direction. The final consideration will be the effectiveness of enforcement. The CHP is understaffed, and needs to recruit additional officers to make this effective.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No fiscal impact to the City of San Juan Bautista. Expenses to send a request for improve safety on Highway 156 during construction to the State and County.

ATTACHMENTS:

Draft Resolution
Page | 1
.

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN

BAUTISTA REQUESTING IMPROVED SAFETY MEASURES ON STATE
HIGHWAY 156 DURING CONSTRUCTION
WHEREAS, The State of California Department of Transportation (aka “Caltrans”) has embarked on an amazing multi-year transformation of Highway 156 from two to four lanes between Hollister and San Juan Bautista that is anticipated to be completed in the fall of 2025; and
WHEREAS, there have been numerous serious accidents on Highway 156 between Hollister and San Juan Bautista since construction began; and WHEREAS, over the past month, the San Benito Council of Governments (“COG”) has responded to requests from the Intergovernmental Committee representing the cities of Hollister and San Juan Bautista and the County Board of Supervisors, to enact increased safety measures during the Caltrans’ Highway 156 construction project; and WHEREAS, at its October 11, 2023 special meeting on the safety of State Highway 156 was convened by COG and it included Caltrans District 5, the California Highway Patrol (“CHP”) and County Public Works where Caltrans answered the County question of “what do we need to do?” Caltrans described the need for a specific request from the County to make safety changes that include limiting the ability of drivers to make a left turns from County roads onto Highway 156 eastbound during the afternoon hours; and WHEREAS, at the November 1, 2023 Intergovernmental Committee meeting, the City was asked to support the County’s request to Caltrans for increased safety measures to include no left turns from County roads onto Highway 156 eastbound, during the hours of 3PM to 7PM, and that request be combined with a request to the CHP to increase enforcement of the new proposed safety changes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council agrees with both COG and the Intergovernmental Committee, and supports this collaborative effort to improve safety on State Highway 156, and agrees with the need for increased awareness and cooperation to make Highway 156 safer, as soon as possible.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SAN JUAN BAUTISTA CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS:

1. The City hereby requests from Caltrans the implementation of increased safety measures including but not limited to prohibiting left turns from County roads onto eastbound Caltrans Highway 156 between Hollister and San Juan Bautista from 3PM to 7PM during construction as soon as possible.

Page | 2

2. The City hereby requests that San Benito County modify traffic flows and signage on County roads leading to State Highway 156 in collaboration with Caltrans to implement increased safety measures including prohibiting left turns from County roads onto Caltrans eastbound Highway 156 between Hollister and San Juan Bautista from 3PM to 7PM during construction as soon as possible.

3. The City hereby request that the CHP increase traffic enforcement and support the safety measures requested above, as they are implemented to protect the safety of drivers using State Highway 156.

PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of San Juan Bautista at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of November 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES::

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
______________________
Leslie Q. Jordan, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Elizabeth Soto, Deputy City Clerk
Item # 5.E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 1

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2023
DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FROM: BRIAN FOUCHT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
TITLE: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION TO STAFF: SAN JUAN

BAUTISTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):

Discuss and provide direction to staff regarding the overall purpose, organization and staff support for San Juan Bautista economic development
II. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BACKGROUND:

The City Council formally established the Economic Development Citizens Advisory Committee (EDAC) via Resolution 2021-65 in November 2021 in response to a desire by the business community to establish a formal, organized approach to addressing business improvement, resiliency, and overall economic development in San Juan Bautista. The focus at the time was on 1) enhanced resources for local business development and support; 2) organized communication and follow up with staff and City Council regarding these concerns, and 3) ongoing liaison and follow up with economic development resources in San Benito County and through State and Federal agencies.

EDCAC was established as a “standing committee” , first with 7 members and then subsequently increased membership to 11 members shortly thereafter via Resolution 2021-74. Subsequent resolutions have been adopted recognizing member resignations and appointments; however, despite several opportunities to do so, the City Council’s intent and the assigned activities have not been amended in any way.

The City Council determined that organized, ongoing and formal communication regarding economic development requires a concerted partner-driven effort involving local education, the arts and culture, education, transportation, land development, public and private investment priorities, marketing and promotion. To accomplish this objective, the City Council established the EDCAC as a “standing committee” with the following purpose:
1) Stimulate the provision of enhanced resources for local business development and support; Item # 5.E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 2
2) Establish and maintain communication with City staff and City Council regarding business support, development, and overall economic development; 3) Establish and maintain an ongoing liaison with economic development resources in San Benito County and State and Federal agencies.

To accomplish this purpose, the City Council directed the EDCAC to conduct activities including but not limited to the following:
1) Host an active forum for exchange of ideas and information and otherwise reach out to the business community, residents, and visitors to promote business development; 2) Evaluate and determine the economic needs of the business community and residents; 3) Interact proactively with a broad spectrum of economic development interests; 4) Recommend strategies to the City Council to provide resources directly to local businesses.

III. EDCAC RECOMMENDATIONS
The City Council thereafter accepted the initial report of the EDCAC with the following recommendations:

EDCAC recommendations focused on capacity of the City to develop and sustain economic development programs by providing enhanced staff support and implementing workable strategies supported by the whole community.
o Urge Business Development and Retention subcommittee to create a work plan (Pg. 18 in Revitalizing Main Street), including timelines, assignments, itemized budget if needed, pertinent data, and evaluation (benchmarks) procedure. Also read and adopt significant ideas of the book Recast Your City by Ilana Preuss. Also review “Why Business Retention and Expansion Plans are Important for Downtowns” at
https://www.mainstreet.org/blogs/national-main-street-center/2017/05/24/why-businessretention-and-expansion-plans-are-important-for-downtowns. o Urge both Business Development and Retention and Community Relations and Resources subcommittee to review the Community Heart & Soul grant ( i.e.: seed funds to establish the CHS community engagement model in your district; https://www.mainstreet.org/howwecanhelp/fundingopportunities) and Mobile-T grants (https://www.t-mobile.com/brand/hometown-grants).
• The revitalization of the main street is essential, whether we use Retail Strategies or piggyback on some options with the downtown Main Street program. Whatever source(s) are chosen, the bottom line is that we need professional assistance in order to reach our desired goal. The City should invest in a staff person that is contracted specifically to work directly and closely with local businesses and groups to accelerate ED.

Item # 5.E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 3
Key EDCAC considerations include investment in the programs such as “Retail Strategies”, and the National Main Street Center Community Assessment and Transformation Strategy Development. The EDCAC recommended the initial Main Street strategy development program involving community engagement. Other programs supported by the current budget include limited access to training and other resources provided and sponsored by CalEd (California Association for Local Economic Development). including the Local Economic Advisory Program (LEAP) | edacademy.org.

IV. HIGH LEVEL ORGANIZATIONAL, FINANCIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT REVIEW (City Gate Associates, August 10, 2023)
Following adoption of the EDCAC report, the City Council adopted economic development related recommendations contained in the “High Level Organizational, Financial and Law Enforcement Review” as follows:

Strategic Recommendation #1: Prioritize Economic Development • Increase and broaden the City’s economic development programs and related policies, procedures, ordinances, and zoning regulations.
• Hold General Plan discussions and/or workshops in related areas affecting economic development.
• Consider full-time, part-time, or limited-term staffing for implementation of economic development-related items listed within the Five-Year Priority • Prioritize downtown cleanliness.
• Develop and implement a vacant property registration program and/or ordinance. • Develop a wayfinding signage program.
• Develop business improvement and incentive programs including facades (including forgivable loans and timeline grants).
• Fund downtown esthetics with landscaping, lighting, and art. • Evaluate funding opportunities including a Citywide fee assessment, adoption program, benefit districts, facilities and/or art districts, to support downtown fiscal stability. • Begin immediately: workshops and discussions related to the General Plan and adjustments related to growth and economic development. Engage business owners and appropriate volunteer groups to support elements of the Five-Year Strategic / Implementation Plan related to economic development and downtown revitalization efforts, including consideration of a vacant property registration program and/or ordinance.

Key considerations include enhanced staff support for economic development and increased financial support for economic development programs including public engagement in particular.

Item # 5.E
City Council Meeting
November 14, 2023
Page | 4
V. 2022-23 BUDGET
In adopting the proposed budget, the City Council did not approve a proposed part-time Economic Development Specialist position and instead determined that the Assistant City Manager would support this activity (Note: the Assistant City Manager has completed the CalEd Keys Course, the pre-requisite for advance economic development training through CalEd.) The City Council approved $$31,165 in economic development catalyst funding, including membership and training in CalEd, membership and National Main Street Community Assessment. Catalyst programs included $15,000 for the National Main Street Center Community Assessment and Transformation Strategy Development. However, despite the recommendation of EDCAC, the High - Level Organizational Review and staff, the City Council subsequently denied a professional services agreement with the National Main Street Center to conduct this program.

VI. RECOMMENDATION
Inconsistency of City Council actions necessitates clarification from the City Council regarding the overall economic development program; in particular, the role of the EDCAC in relation to economic development resources (Governor’s Office of Business Development, (GoBiz), California Association for Local Economic Development (CalEd), and the National Main Street Center and California Main Street, and other local and regional economic development entities.

Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and direct staff to return to the City Council a comprehensive approach and strategy for local economic development including any modification to the EDCAC purpose and organization, relationship to economic development resources in San Juan Bautista including but not limited to CalEd, National Main Street Center, Governor’s Office Of Business Development, Small Business Development Center, and other local and regional economic development entities. Staff recommends that the City Council consider any adjustments to the 2023-2024 budget necessary to accommodate the recommended strategy.

Item: # xx
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 1

CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2023 (continued from October 17, 2023) DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION
FROM: DON REYNOLDS, CITY MANAGER
BY:

TITLE: FIRST STEPS IN CONSIDERING AND ESTABLISHING A GOLF

CART/NEV TRANSPORTATION PLAN IN SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Direct Staff to:

1. Hold a Public Workshop to obtain community input on developing a Golf Cart/ Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan for The City of San Juan Bautista.

2. Authorize Staff to prepare an RFP to select and engage a Transportation Professional to moderate this workshop and prepare a summary report with recommendations and potential findings for Council Consideration. This report will define next steps which may include “no action” or may recommend adding the project to the Strategic Plan and implementation as appropriate.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:

On September 22, 2022 City Council was introduced to the concept of adopting a Golf Cart/NEV Plan as the first step in implementing an ordinance to allow and regulate these vehicles for use on City Streets. The Council, upon learning that State and local laws do not prohibit certain qualifying vehicles from currently operating on local streets, indicated that no action would be taken at that time, and requested additional information. The purpose of this report is to provide information for consideration and potential action.

The following information and definitions serve as a background to understand current laws and the planning process to adopt a Golf Cart/NEV Plan and Ordinance.

DEFINITIONS: VEHICLE CODE AND AB584
Several portions of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) regard golf carts as motor vehicles, including CVC 345, CVC 4019, and CVC 21115. AB584 requires a NEV Plan that defines what Item: # xx
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 2
a legal NEV is, and requires a CA Driver’s License, and insurance to operate one. This law identifies where golf-cart lanes can be developed within the city by a traffic engineer and Restricts the use of a golf cart or NEV to these special designated areas. It defines three types of golf cart lanes, with the most applicable to San Juan Bautista being “Class III lanes” which provide for shared use with automobile traffic on streets with speeds of 35 miles or less. Every street in San Juan Bautista meets this criterion. They can cross state highways where traffic is controlled.

DEFINITION - GOLF CART: Under the law, a golf cart is defined as a motor vehicle with four wheels and weighs less than 1,300 pounds when unloaded and is designed to be operated at no more than 15 mph. By design, it carries golf equipment and should have no more than two people on board including the driver.

Golf carts are street legal in California – but only when they’re properly equipped. A street-legal version of a golf cart is a motor vehicle that is based on the traditional body design made to carry golf equipment but has been modified to meet California’s requirements for street driving. To be street legal, a golf cart must have the following equipment, according to the DMV:
• A minimum of one headlamp
• A minimum of one tail lamp
• A minimum of one stop lamp
• Front and rear turn signals
• Front and side reflectors
• A rear reflector
• A rear-view mirror that shows 200 feet to the rear
• A horn
• Fenders
• A windshield made of safety glass
• Windshield wipers
DEFINITION - NEV: Some “golf carts” are technically considered Low-Speed Vehicles (LSV’s) or Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV’s) instead of golf carts under California law. If a vehicle has four wheels and weighs less than 3,000 pounds but can exceed 20 mph, it is considered a LSV or NEV, and must be registered. The law says registered LSV/NEVs should:
• Have 17-digit vehicle identification numbers (VINs)
• Meet Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) for operating on public roadways
• Be operated by someone with a valid California driver’s license • Be covered by insurance
TITLE AND REGISTRATION- Standard golf carts operating solely on golf courses are not typically titled. They operate at low speeds and stay within the borders of the golf course, plus they don’t have the necessary equipment to be street legal. However, to drive a golf cart anywhere Item: # xx
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 3
beyond one mile of a golf course, it should be titled and registered with the state of California. If you operate an LSV/NEV, the title/registration process is required.

Item: # xx
City Council
November 14, 2023
Page | 4
DISCUSSION:

IS A GOLF CART/NEV PLAN NECESSARY?
Developing a Plan and Ordinance would only be advantageous if the Council and community agree that:

1. Expanded use of golf carts/NEV’s should be encouraged, and use of these vehicles would benefit the general local community.

2. Current use, without regulation and enforcement would be detrimental to the safety of the community.

3. Parking and storage of these vehicles in relation to the public right-of-way should be regulated.

ELEMENTS OF A GOLF CART/NEV PLAN:
• Hold public workshops, as appropriate to determine the desirability and need for a Golf Cart/NEV Transportation Plan.
• Prepare and Adopt a Golf Cart/NEV Transportation Plan. Golf Carts and NEV’s as a form of “multi-modal transportation.”
• Describe impacts and benefits of accommodating Golf Carts and NEV’s. These considerations may include environmental (air quality, energy, climate change, etc), business and commerce, convenience, sense of community, individual and local economics.
• Assess vehicle equipment, operation, parking, and storage requirements. • Assess routes, signage, pavement legends.
• Assess mobility and accessibility provisions.
• Seek input from the community, COG, Cal-Trans, and law enforcement. • Develop appropriate local Standards.
• The City Council must make specific findings addressing safety. • Develop a funding strategy, which may include active transportation plan funds, or other regional or State grants, as well as Traffic Impact Fee or other local transportation funding sources.

Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Report prepared for Coachella Valley Association of Governments March 2015
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................1

1.1 Context and Definitions........................................................................................................................................1

1.2 NEV Plan Development Process ........................................................................................................................ 2

1.3 NEV Network Development Process................................................................................................................ 3 2 Legislative Context............................................................................................................4

2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................4

2.2 Federal Register: 49 CFR 571.500, 1998 ..........................................................................................................4

2.3 California Assembly Bill no. 61, Chapter 170, 2011........................................................................................4

2.4 California Streets and Highways Code ........................................................................................................... 5

2.5 California Vehicle Code....................................................................................................................................... 5

2.6 City Municipal Codes.......................................................................................................................................... 7 3 Existing Conditions..........................................................................................................14

3.1 Document Review................................................................................................................................................ 14

3.2 NEV Demand and Access Analysis..................................................................................................................16

3.3 Opportunities and Constraints........................................................................................................................26 4 Route Selection ................................................................................................................34

4.1 Route Selection Assumptions ..........................................................................................................................34

4.2 Network Concept............................................................................................................................................... 37 5 Design Guidelines ............................................................................................................48

5.1 Design Needs of NEV Facilities........................................................................................................................48

5.2 NEV Facility Classification and Selection....................................................................................................52

5.3 Class I NEV Path Design ................................................................................................................................... 53

5.4 Class II NEV Lane Design .................................................................................................................................60

5.5 Class III NEV Route Design .............................................................................................................................68

5.6 Implementation Strategies................................................................................................................................69

5.7 Facility Maintenance .......................................................................................................................................... 70

5.8 Additional AB 61 Considerations.................................................................................................................... 73 6 Recommended Education, Legislation, and Enforcement...........................................76

6.1 Legislation.............................................................................................................................................................. 76

6.2 Education and Enforcement............................................................................................................................. 76

6.3 Frequently Asked Questions............................................................................................................................ 77 7 Evaluation and Monitoring.............................................................................................78 8 References ........................................................................................................................80 Appendix A: NEVSA Features................................................................................................82 Summary of Total Possible Scores.............................................................................................................................82 NEVSA Inputs ................................................................................................................................................................82 Appendix B. Existing Transit, Bike, Golf Cart and NEV Facility Maps ................................84 CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
| ii | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Appendix C. Roadway Speed Limit Maps ............................................................................94 Appendix D – Existing Golf Cart Permit Requirements and Maps .................................. 104 Indio.................................................................................................................................................................................104 Cathedral City ..............................................................................................................................................................106 La Quinta........................................................................................................................................................................ 107 Palm Desert....................................................................................................................................................................108 Palm Springs..................................................................................................................................................................109 Rancho Mirage...............................................................................................................................................................110 Appendix E – Electric Vehicle Charging Station Locations.............................................. 111 List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of City Staff Issues and Plan Section Where Incorporated...............................................................2 Table 2: Vehicle Access Permitted by Legislation .................................................................................................................6 Table 3: Summary of City Ordinances.................................................................................................................................... 13 Table 4: Barriers to Connectivity ............................................................................................................................................ 24 Table 5: NEV Accessibility on Whitewater River Channel Bridges...............................................................................29 Table 6: Legal and Recommended Facility Type by Speed Limit....................................................................................35 Table 7: Stopping Sight Distance vs. Grade (Bicyclists)................................................................................................... 49 Table 8: Recommended Maintenance Activities..................................................................................................................70 List of Maps
Map 1: Where People Live.......................................................................................................................................................... 18 Map 2: Where People Work ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 Map 3: Where People Play .........................................................................................................................................................20 Map 4: Where People Learn...................................................................................................................................................... 21 Map 5: Where People Access Transit.....................................................................................................................................22 Map 6: Composite NEV Demand Map ...................................................................................................................................23 Map 7: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept.....................................................................................................38 Map 8: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept - Palm Springs ........................................................................39 Map 9: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Cathedral City ................................................................... 40 CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | iii
Map 10: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept –Rancho Mirage................................................................... 41 Map 11: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Palm Desert........................................................................ 42 Map 12: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Indian Wells......................................................................43 Map 13: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – La Quinta ........................................................................... 44 Map 14: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Indio.................................................................................... 45 Map 15: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Coachella ........................................................................... 46 List of Figures
Figure 1: Golf car modified for on-road use...............................................................................................................................1 Figure 2: Four and Six-seat NEVs...............................................................................................................................................1 Figure 3: Generalized NEV Plan Network Development Process..................................................................................... 3 Figure 4: Spatial Needs of NEVs ............................................................................................................................................. 48 Figure 5: Spatial Needs of Bicyclists....................................................................................................................................... 48 Figure 6: Typical NEV Parking .................................................................................................................................................50 Figure 7: FHWA Recommended NEV/Electric Vehicle Regulatory Parking and Charging Signs......................... 51 Figure 8: Preferred Cross Section for One-way Class I NEV Path where Passing is Permitted ..............................53 Figure 9: Preferred Cross Section for One-way Class I NEV Path where Passing is Not Allowed.........................53 Figure 10: Constrained Cross Section for All User Class I Path...................................................................................... 54 Figure 11: CV Link Type Crossride / Crosswalk Concept Markings..............................................................................55 Figure 12: Transition the Class I NEV Path into Class II NEV Lane...............................................................................56 Figure 13: Lateral Shift and Class I NEV Path Crossing.....................................................................................................56 Figure 14: Transition the Class I NEV Path Into Conventional Class I Shared Use Path .........................................57 Figure 15: NEV/BIKES USE PED SIGNAL Sign ...................................................................................................................58 Figure 16: Class I NEV Path Driveway Crossing..................................................................................................................59 Figure 17: Preferred Cross Section for Class II I NEV Lane...............................................................................................60 Figure 18: Constrained Cross Section for Class II NEV Lane ...........................................................................................60 Figure 19: Experimental Standard NEV Pavement Marking ............................................................................................ 61 Figure 20: Longitudinal Edge Striping Alternatives ........................................................................................................... 61 Figure 21: Combination NEV/Bike Lane Sign and Supplemental Plaques....................................................................62 CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
| iv | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Figure 22: NEV Prohibition Sign..............................................................................................................................................62 Figure 23: Dashed NEV Lane Next to Through/Right Lane .............................................................................................63 Figure 24: Through NEV Lane and Added Right Turn Only Lane................................................................................. 64 Figure 25: Combined NEV Lane/Turn Lane (Mixing Zone) ........................................................................................... 64 Figure 26: Through NEV Lane with Transition to Right-Turn-Only Lane (35 mph or lower)...............................65 Figure 27: Typical Right-turn Departure NEV/Bike Lane.................................................................................................66 Figure 28: Right-turn Departure NEV/bike Lane Roadway Section..............................................................................67 Figure 29: Shared Right-turn Only Lane with Exception for NEVs and Nikes...........................................................67 Figure 30: Shared Right-turn Only Lane Roadway Section..............................................................................................67 Figure 31: Typical Class III Route on Residential Street....................................................................................................68 Figure 32: Class III NEV Route Sign .......................................................................................................................................68 Figure 33: Proper Placement of Construction Signage Outside of NEV Lane ..............................................................72 Figure 34: City of Indio Golf Cart Map ................................................................................................................................105 Figure 35: City of La Quinta Golf Cart Map........................................................................................................................107 Figure 36: Palm Desert Bike and Golf Cart Route Map ...................................................................................................108 CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | v
This page intentionally left blank
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 1
1 Introduction

1.1 Context and Definitions
This Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan was
developed in conjunction with planning and design of CV Link, a new transportation and recreation pathway that will generally follow the Whitewater River flood channel
between Palm Springs and Coachella. CV Link is
anticipated to become a backbone for the further
development of pathways throughout the valley. In the CV Link Master Plan, NEVs are one of several types of Low
Speed Vehicle (LSV, also known as Low Speed Electric
Vehicle or LSEV) that are anticipated to use the new facility.

This Plan will describe the specific duties required of NEV operators and the key design parameters that will make
NEVs a practical option for mobility throughout the
Coachella Valley. While the federal definition may be
interpreted to exclude golf cars (carts), for the purposes of this plan three principal types of 3 or more wheel LSVs are considered:
• Golf cars (carts) that are factory designed to travel up to 15 mph within golf course environments.

Golf cars that are not modified for on-street use may be used on roadways or paths designated for such use by local jurisdictions
• Golf carts that are modified after manufacture for use on public streets and can travel up to 25 mph (Figure 1). While increasingly common, DMV guidance (FFVR37) requires owners to register them as motor vehicles that meet regular passenger vehicle standards or risk a citation. • Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs) that are designed and manufactured to be used on streets with posted speed limits up to 35 mph and can travel up to 25 mph (Figure 2) Figure 1: Golf car modified for on-road use Figure 2: Four and Six-seat NEVs A Neighborhood Electric Vehicle
(NEV) is a type of Low Speed Vehicle
(LSV) that can travel at least 20 mph
and up to 25 mph. By federal and state
law, NEVs can travel on any public
street in the general traffic lane as long
as the speed limit is 35mph or less,
unless a local jurisdiction passes a law
prohibiting this use. NEVs can travel
on a public street with a speed limit of
40mph or greater if there is a separate
lane or path provided.

Golf cars (carts) are usually designed
for use in private spaces and have a top
speed of no more than 15 mph. Some
cities permit golf cars on designated
public paths and roads.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
2 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
The following links provide more information on the differences in golf cars and NEVs.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration publication on the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for Low Speed Vehicles (LSVs) that are capable of at least 20 mph but not more than 25 mph):
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/rulings/lsv/lsv.html#lsv3 Alternative vehicles definitions and information from Newport Beach Police Department, with comprehensive list of California Vehicle Code references:
http://www.nbpd.org/community/altveh.asp
California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) fact sheet on LSVs and golf carts:
http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr37.pdf Golf Car Portal’s clear definition of the differences between golf cars and NEVs:
http://golfcarportal.com/education/defference_between.php

1.2 NEV Plan Development Process
A series of public meetings related to the Coachella Valley CV Link project also informed elements of the NEV Plan. The cities of Cathedral City, Indio, Palm Desert, and Rancho Mirage returned detailed stakeholder surveys that assessed their current efforts, existing conditions, and future interest in NEV facility implementation. Meetings were held with a number of agency staff:
• April 30, 2014 – Indio with the Principal Engineer
• May 6, 2014 - Cathedral City with the City Engineer
• May 6, 2014 – Palm Desert with the Director of Community Development • May 12, 2014 – Rancho Mirage with the Planning Manager • May 13, 2014 – Palm Springs with the City Engineer
• June 9, 2014 – La Quinta with the Director of Community Development • June 11, 2014 – Coachella with the Community Development Director • Meeting with the Agua Caliente Tribe Director of Planning and Natural Resources City staff input has been incorporated into this plan as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Summary of City Staff Issues and Plan Section Where Incorporated Key Themes Where Covered in This Plan
Inconsistent policies and laws;
prohibitions on use; confusion on
definitions
Section 0
City Municipal Codes
Section 5 Recommended Education, Legislation, and Enforcement Roadway speed limits are too high for use
of NEVs
Appendix C Roadway Speed Limit Maps presents city-provided or published information that was used in the route planning.

NEVs travel too fast to share designated
golf cart paths
Section 4 Design Guidelines recommends path widths likely to minimize user conflicts. Signage (e.g. Figure 22) may be used to identify where NEVs may operate at reduced speed or prohibited.

Concern about reducing 12’ wide car lanes
to accommodate 7’ wide NEV/bike lanes
Section 4.4 Class II NEV Lane refers to the key resources for city engineers to reference for narrower lanes.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 3
California Assembly Bill 61 stipulates that this transportation plan must be submitted to the director for approval following a review and recommendation by the California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CA-TCDC). This plan has been placed on the agenda for the March 5, 2015 committee meeting.

1.3 NEV Network Development Process
This NEV Plan has been based on the GIS NEV Suitability Analysis (NEVSA) described in Chapter 2 where the inputs are demographics (population, jobs, and land uses). The outputs are shown in the maps in this plan, which should be seen as the ultimate vision.

This analysis did not have the benefit of roadway information such as right of way width, curb-to-curb roadway width, and existing and proposed number of lanes at and between intersections. As a next step, a NEV Plan Implementation Program should be developed based on assessment of each roadway and intersection to determine how NEVs can be accommodated. The Implementation Program would follow a general process as outlined below.

Figure 3: Generalized NEV Plan Network Development Process The proposed standards in this document represent the desirable widths and conditions for Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) travel. To achieve a critical mass of connected trip ends, it is recommended that the maximum possible number of streets and paths be made accessible to NEV and golf cart operators even if the desirable widths cannot be achieved initially. Once the number of users has grown, higher geometric standards can be implemented on a segment-by-segment basis to permit more comfortable routes for all users.

Remove from NEV
network concept
Long term
improvement
Remove from NEV
network concept
Long term
improvement
Restripe road and
designate for NEVs
NEVs may
share lane
NEVs may
share lane
NEVs may
share path
Provide a
dedicated
lane or path
Yes
No
Speed
< 35 mph?
Enough
right-of-way to
widen sidewalk?
Enough room to
widen bicycle
lane to 7’? Road widening
or road space
reconfiguration
possible?
Existing
path 10’ or
wider?
Existing bicycle
lane ≥ 7’ leading to
and departing from
intersections?
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No Yes
No
Path
Lane
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
4 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
2 Legislative Context

2.1 Introduction
Recent California climate change and air quality legislation including Assembly Bill 32, Senate Bill 375, and Assembly Bill 1358 have strengthened transportation and land use policies aimed at reducing single occupancy vehicle trips through multimodal transportation options. Local policy and planning efforts must make progress toward reduction targets set forth by state climate change legislation and a growing number of communities have identified Neighborhood Electric Vehicles as an effective means of attaining those goals. A number of local cities and counties in California (Lincoln, Rocklin, Western Riverside County, Rancho Mission Viejo, Coronado, and Playa Vista), have developed NEV Plans with various goals such as reducing reliance on gasoline, reducing vehicle emissions, reducing roadway wear and tear, and creating more sustainable communities.

2.2 Federal Register: 49 CFR 571.500, 1998
In 1998, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) created a new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS-500) category for low speed vehicles (LSV) - including NEVs - in response to the growing popularity of low speed vehicles for short trips. The intent of 49 CFR Part 571 was to establish consistent treatment of LSVs at the Federal, state, and local levels with respect to onstreet operations, speed, and safety standards. The new LSV class was defined to include “small, 4- wheeled vehicles with top speeds of 20-25 mph.” This effectively removed conventional golf carts with a top speed of 15 mph from the classification and provided a more appropriate set of safety standards specific to LSVs (as compared to the umbrella “Passenger Car” class designation).

Consistent rulemaking specific to LSVs would in turn enable manufacturers of these electric vehicles to bring new technologies to the market. 49 CFR 571.500 did not affect state and local decision making with regard to permitting on-street operation of LSVs, or requiring existing LSV owners to retrofit their vehicles to meet the safety standards established. In subsequent years, NHTSA would amend the definition of LSVs to allow for commercial vehicle utility and anincrease in the maximum gross vehicle weight restriction from 2,500 lbs. to 3,000 lbs.

2.3 California Assembly Bill no. 61, Chapter 170, 2011
AB-61 authorizes the County of Riverside or any of its jurisdictions to develop an NEV Transportation plan for a designated plan area. The California Streets and Highway Code sections 1962-1962.8 were established to implement the bill.

Section 1 of AB-61 establishes the scope of NEV Transportation plans, which includes route selection and provisions for “NEV Lanes”, parking and turnouts, signage, striping and roadway markings, roadway crossings, connections to other travel modes, and electrical charging stations. The bill further requires the development of facility design criteria, traffic control devices, safety criteria, route restrictions, and plan evaluation measures. Sections 2 and 3 amend the California State Vehicle Code language with respect to vehicle class provisions, operation of LSVs on roadways with operating speeds in excess of 35 mph and the operation of LSVs at certain roadway crossings. Section 4 absolves the State of California CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 5
from responsibility for reimbursing jurisdictions for expenses incurred as a result of the state mandated local program. All NEV transportation plans must be submitted for review and approval by Caltrans.

2.4 California Streets and Highways Code
The California Streets and Highways Code Division 2.5 City Streets, Chapter 6 Section 1950-1961 establishes a framework for any county or city to establish a Golf Cart Transportation Plan. Golf carts are defined as:
“Golf Cart” means a motor vehicle having not less than three wheels in contact with the ground and unladen weight less than 1,300 pounds which is designed to be and is operated at not more than 25 miles per hour and is designated to carry golf equipment and not more than two persons, including the driver.

In the context of code Section 1962.1 authorizing the County of Riverside or cities contained within to establish NEV Plans, the code defines NEVs as:
(b) "Neighborhood electric vehicle" or "NEV" means a low-speed vehicle as defined by Section 385.5 of the Vehicle Code

2.5 California Vehicle Code

2.5.1 Definitions
According to California State Vehicle Code Section 385.5, NEVs are defined as “low-speed vehicles” and:
a) Having four wheels,
b) Attaining a maximum speed of 20-25 mph on a paved level surface, and c) Having a maximum gross vehicle weight of 3,000 pounds.

NEV drivers must be licensed as motor vehicle drivers and abide by the California State Vehicle Code when operating on street.

2.5.2 Lane Use
The California Vehicle Code (CVC)1permits NEVs on all roadways with posted speed limits of 35 mph and under. NEVs are also permitted on roadways up to 55 mph within on-street Class II NEV striped lanes. For roadways with posted speed limits above 55 mph, NEV travel can only be accommodated with a separated off-street path. Table 2 summarizes lane use allowed by the CVC. Please refer to Chapter 4 of this document for more information on how this legislation will impact route development.

1 http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21260.htm
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
6 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Table 2: Vehicle Access Permitted by Legislation
Traffic Condition ≤ 25 mph ≤ 35 mph 40-50 mph ≥ 55 mph
Shared general traffic
lanes
NEVs
Golf carts*
Bicycles
NEVs
Bicycles
Bicycles permitted Bicycles not advised
but may be permitted
Separate lane or
shoulder
NEVs
Golf carts*
Bicycles
NEVs
Golf carts*
Bicycles
Bicycles
Separate path NEVs
Golf carts*
Bicycles
NEVs
Golf Carts
* Generally limited to close proximity to golf courses and as authorized in a golf cart plan approved by the jurisdiction

2.5.3 Crossings
NEV crossings at roadways with speed limits above 35 mph must be orthogonal (90 degree intersection angles). If such crossings are a major part of the NEV network and the crossing is not orthogonal, there may be opportunities to reconfigure the geometry of the intersection to meet this requirement. Caltrans must approve any uncontrolled crossing of a state highway. The code states:
(1) The operator of a low-speed vehicle may cross a roadway with a speed limit in excess of 35 miles per hour if the crossing begins and ends on a roadway with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour or less and occurs at an intersection of approximately 90 degrees.

However, the CVC also permits NEVs on roadways with a posted speed of 40, 45, or 50 mph where that roadway has a dedicated NEV / bike lane. Such use would be impractical if turning or crossing movements were not continuous. The CVC is interpreted to mean that at an intersection, as long as the NEV / bike lane is carried all the way through the approach up to the stop line, and again on the departure side of any leg that a NEV would be permitted to travel to, the movement would be permitted.

If the movement is a left turn, then the NEV driver could perform:
• A two-stage turn (with or without special provisions) although at higher volumes there could be an issue with queuing space for NEVs
• A vehicular style left turn, just like a bicyclist is permitted to do, as long as they have a NEV/bike lane to turn into on the departure side. The NEV driver would not be in a designated NEV lane on the approach - like a vehicular bicyclist, they would be in the general traffic left turn lane. Even on a green indication, there should not be an issue with this because a NEV has similar acceleration and cornering capabilities as an automobile.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 7

2.6 City Municipal Codes
This section provides relevant golf cart and NEV vehicles and traffic regulations obtained from each jurisdiction’s municipal code available from the www.qcode.us, www.municode.com or www.amlegal.com websites.

2.6.1 Desert Hot Springs
No applicable municipal code.

2.6.2 Palm Springs
Definitions
Chapter 12.84 sets out the following definitions.
a) “Golf cart” means a motor vehicle having not less than three wheels in contact with the ground, having an unladen weight less than one thousand three hundred pounds, which is designed to be and is operated at not more than fifteen miles per hour and designed to carry golf equipment and not more than two persons, including the driver.
b) “Darkness” means any time from one-half hour after sunset to one-half hour before sunrise and any other time when visibility is not sufficient to render clearly discernible any person or-vehicle on the highway at a distance of one thousand feet.
c) “Real estate development offering golf facilities” means an area of single-family or multiple-family residences, the owners or occupants of which are eligible for membership in, or the use of, one or more golf courses within the development by virtue of their ownership or occupancy of a residential dwelling unit in the development. (Ord. 1405 § 1, 1991) Operation
a) Any person operating a golf cart on designated city streets shall abide by all applicable traffic laws of the city and state.
b) No person shall operate a golf cart on a designated city street after darkness unless the golf cart conforms with the equipment requirements of the California Vehicle Code. c) No person shall operate a golf cart on a designated city street for any other purpose than transporting persons and golfing equipment to or from a golf course. (Ord. 1405 § 1, 1991) Routes
Chapter 12.84.030 designates thirteen streets are for operation of golf carts. No NEV routes have been established in the municipal code, but the City published a NEV network map in 2009 (although this is no longer readily found on the city website). The map is provided in Appendix D to this plan.

Discussion
The Palm Springs definition of a golf cart (1300 lb / 15 mph) excludes NEVs and prohibits non-golfing purposes of travel, severely limiting the transportation utility of such vehicles. The city code does define an electric personal assistive mobility device (EPAMD, popularized by the “Segway” scooter, but does not define electric bicycles or NEVs.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
8 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

2.6.3 Cathedral City
Although city staff have advised that golf carts and NEVs are prohibited, no such prohibition is found in the municipal code.

2.6.4 Rancho Mirage
Definitions
Chapter 10.70 sets out the following definitions.

Golf cart means a four-wheeled motor vehicle with an unladen weight of less than one thousand three hundred pounds, which is designed to be and is operated at not more than twenty miles per hour and is designed to carry golf equipment and not more than two persons, including the driver, and can be utilized on local golf courses for the purpose of playing golf.

Golf cart facility means all travel ways, as designated by the city, that provide for golf cart travel. There shall be three categories of golf cart facility:

1. Class I golf cart paths provide an area separate from the roadway used by automobile traffic for shared one-way or two-way use by golf carts, bicycles and pedestrians.

2. Class II golf cart lanes provide a striped eight-foot lane for one-way golf cart and bicycle travel on a street or highway.

3. Class III golf cart routes provide for shared use with automobile and bicycle traffic. Class III facilities are established by placing golf cart route signs along roadways with speed limits of twenty-five miles per hour or less in order to link them to Class I or Class II facilities.

Golf cart circulation plan means the adopted map depicting routes and crossing that will be constructed, posted and designated for use by permitted golf carts. (Ord. 713 § 3, 1999) Operation
All golf cart operators operating golf carts on any golf cart facility in the city must conform to the following operator requirements and safety criteria:

1. Golf cart operators must be licensed drivers in the State of California with valid California driver’s license, or a driver’s license issued by another state.

2. Golf cart operators must comply with the financial responsibility requirements established pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 16000) of Division 7 of the California Vehicle Code.

3. Golf cart operators must maintain golf cart in a safe condition.

4. Golf carts are limited to daytime operation and are not permitted before one-half hour prior to sunrise or after one-half hour after sunset.

5. Golf cart operators must yield the right-of-way to automobiles, pedestrians and bicyclists.

6. Golf cart operators may only travel on designated golf cart facilities, and only in those golf carts that meet the minimum design criteria required by Section 10.70.030 and that are also properly permitted by the city. (Ord. 713 § 3, 1999)
Routes
The city has developed a golf cart map, last updated March 2012, identifying class 1 paths and class 2 on-street lanes between Dinah Shore Drive and Highway 111. This is provided in Appendix D.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 9
Discussion
The Rancho Mirage definition of a golf cart (1300 lb / 20 mph) excludes NEVs and in contrast to Palm Springs also prohibits night-time use of golf carts regardless of whether they are equipped for such use.

The lack of a connection between the Eisenhower Medical Center at Country Club Drive and The River at Highway 111 along Bob Hope Drive is a significant barrier to CV Link access.

2.6.5 Palm Desert
Definitions
“Golf cart” means an electric powered motor vehicle having not less than four wheels in contact with the ground and an unladen weight of less than three thousand pounds which is designed to be and is operated at not more than twenty-five miles per hour and is designed to carry not more than six persons, including the driver.
“Golf cart lanes” is synonymous with “golf cart routes” and means all publicly owned facilities that provide for golf cart travel including roadways designated by signs or permanent markings which are shared with pedestrians, bicyclists, and other motorists in the plan area. There shall be three categories of golf cart lanes:

1. Class I golf cart lanes provide a right-of-way completely separated from any highway, with cross traffic by other motorists minimized, and designated for the exclusive use of golf carts, or, where feasibly safe and when no parallel improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists are available, designated for the shared use of golf carts, bicyclists and pedestrians.

2. Class II golf cart lanes provide a restricted right-of-way on a highway designated by striping and signage for the exclusive or semiexclusive use of golf carts, with through travel by motor vehicles or pedestrians prohibited, but with vehicle parking and cross traffic by pedestrians and other motorists permitted.

3. Class III golf cart lanes are lanes on local streets with speed limits of forty-five miles per hour or less and are shared with pedestrians, bicyclists and other motorists. (Ord. 1174 § 1, 2008; Ord. 895 § 2, 1998; Ord. 703 § 1, 1993)
Routes
The city’s golf cart map was last updated in September 2010 and is provided in Appendix D.

Discussion
The Palm Desert definition of a golf cart (3000 lb / 25 mph) effectively includes NEVs. The exclusion of lanes on roadways with a posted speed of 50 mph is in variance with the California Vehicle Code which permits operation of NEVs within a designated lane on such roadways.

2.6.6 Indian Wells
No applicable municipal code.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
10 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

2.6.7 La Quinta
Definitions
Chapter 12.69 sets out the following definitions. “Golf cart” means a four-wheeled electric motor vehicle with an unladen weight of less than one thousand three hundred pounds, which is designed to be, and is operated at not more than twenty-five miles per hour, and is designed to carry golf equipment and no more than two persons, including the driver.
“Golf cart paths” or “golf cart routes” means all city-owned travel ways that allow golf cart travel, including roadways.

There shall be three categories of golf cart paths:

1. Class I golf cart paths provide an area separate from the roadway used by automobile traffic for shared one-way or two-way golf carts, bicycles, pedestrians, and equestrians.

2. Class II golf cart paths provide a striped eight-foot lane for one-way golf cart and bicycle travel on a street or highway.

3. Class III golf cart paths provide for shared use with automobile and bicycle traffic. Class III paths are established by placing golf cart route signs along roadways with speed limits of twenty-five miles per hour or less in order to link them to Class I or Class II paths. “Golf cart route” means the map depicting routes and crossings that will be constructed, posted and designated for use by permitted golf carts. (Ord. 474 § 1, 2009) Operation
All golf cart operators operating golf carts on any golf cart path in the city must conform to the following operator requirements and safety criteria:

A. Golf cart operators must be licensed drivers in the state of California with valid California driver’s license, or have a valid driver’s license issued by a jurisdiction in accordance with Vehicles Code Sections 12502 through 12505.

B. Golf cart operators must comply with the financial responsibility requirements (insurance) established pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 16000) of Division 7 of the California Vehicle Code.

C. No golf cart shall be operated on golf cart paths or golf cart routes within the city without a current golf cart permit decal visibly displayed on the right rear fender of the golf cart.

D. The golf cart permit shall be valid for two years from the date of issuance.

E. Golf cart operators must maintain the golf cart in a safe condition and be properly loaded to conform with CVC Section 24002.

F. Golf cart operators may only travel in those golf carts that meet the minimum design criteria required by Section 12.69.030.

G. Golf carts are limited to daytime operation and are permitted on public streets only during the time period between one hour prior to sunrise and one hour after sunset.

H. A maximum of two persons may ride in the golf cart and may only ride in the main passenger compartment equipped with safety belts. Both driver and passenger must wear safety belts at all times while the golf cart is being operated on Class I, II, or III golf cart paths.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 11
I. Golf cart operators must yield the right-of-way to pedestrians, bicyclists, and equestrians.

J. Golf cart operators may only travel on designated golf cart routes or along streets with speed limits of twenty-five miles per hour or less.

K. Golf cart operators may not travel on or along streets with speed limits in excess of twenty-five miles per hour except on designated golf cart routes, and shall only cross at controlled intersections as designated on the golf cart route map.

L. Golf carts modified by removing any of the above safety equipment or a modification that in any way creates an unsafe cart will result in the immediate revocation of the golf cart permit and will be subject to any violations that apply under the California Vehicle Code. Should a golf cart be impounded pursuant to a violation under the State Vehicle Code, the registered owner shall be subject to any regulations imposed by the impounding authority pursuant to Section 22850.5 of the California Vehicle Code.

M. No person shall operate or move a golf cart upon a sidewalk except those persons who in the course of their employment by a state, federal, or local government, or school district maintenance crew. (Ord. 474 § 1, 2009)
Routes
Undated map; includes specification of 8’ lanes; included in a detailed brochure.

Discussion
The La Quinta definition of a golf cart (1300 lb / 25 mph) effectively includes on some NEVs, because the maximum number of occupants is only 2. La Quinta has substantially more regulations beyond those provided in the California Vehicle Code.

2.6.8 Indio
Definitions
GOLF CART. A motor vehicle having not less than three wheels in contact with the ground that is designed to be and is operated at not more than 25 miles per hour and carries golf equipment, food/beverages for golfers, and one or more people, including a driver, and can be utilized on a golf course for play, service to golfers or maintenance.

GOLF CART CIRCULATION PLAN. The plan presented by city staff concurrent with this chapter's approval or such plan as may supersede same by determination of the Planning Commission. The golf cart circulation plan shall be a public record maintained by the City Clerk.

GOLF CART FACILITY. All travel ways, as designated by and located in the city within public right-ofway, that provide for golf cart travel. There shall be three categories of golf cart facilities:
1) Class I golf cart paths provide an area separate from the roadway used by automobile traffic for shared one-way or two-way use by golf carts, bicycles and pedestrians. 2) Class II golf cart lanes provide a striped lane for one-way golf cart and bicycle travel on a street or highway.
3) Class III golf cart routes provide for shared use with automobile and bicycle traffic. Class III facilities are established by placing golf cart route signs along roadways with speed limits of 25 miles per hour or less in order to link them to Class I or Class II facilities.

GOLF CART OPERATOR. Any person that operates a golf cart within public right-of-way per this chapter.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
12 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
GOLF CLUB. A public or private golf course owned by an institutional golf cart operator and located in its entirety on private or city-owned property with the sole exception of city street crossings identified in § 72.06.

INSTITUTIONAL GOLF CART. A golf cart owned by an institutional golf cart operator and operated exclusively within a golf club.

INSTITUTIONAL GOLF CART OPERATOR. Any entity, e.g., a company, corporation, homeowners' association, management association, etc., that owns and allows usage of golf carts at a golf club by persons who are playing golf, and are:
1) Members of the entity in question, or
2) Residents or guests of residents of a community related to the entity in question, or 3) Otherwise affiliated with, paying fees to, or in receipt of consent from the entity in question to do so. (Ord. 1583, passed 12-15-10)
Operation
A. A golf cart operator must be possess a valid California driver's license, a driver's license issued by another state, or other proof of legal authority to operate a motor vehicle in California; B. A golf cart operator must have insurance that complies with the financial responsibility requirements established pursuant to Cal. Vehicle Code Chapter 1, Division 7, §§ 16000 et seq.; C. Each golf cart must be maintained in a safe condition; D. In the case of an institutional golf cart, the party responsible to fulfill this duty to maintain the golf cart in question is the institutional golf cart operator, not an individual golf cart operator; E. Operation of a golf cart that does not meet the design criteria specified in § 72.03 is prohibited between one-half hour after sunset and one-half hour before sunrise at designated crossings; F. Golf cart operators must yield the right-of-way to automobiles, pedestrians and bicyclists; G. Golf cart operators may only travel on a designated golf cart facility, a golf club crossing conforming to § 72.06, or a public street with a speed limit of 25 miles per hour or less; and H. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, each golf cart operated in the city shall comply with the design criteria required by § 72.03 and be properly permitted as required by § 72.05. (Ord. 1583, passed 12-15-10) Penalty see § 72.99
Routes
Eight streets are identified for golf cart operation in the March 2011 map, provided in Appendix D.

Discussion
Indio’s definitions are less prescriptive than other jurisdictions, and could effectively include NEVs. The speed limit restriction to 25 mph roadways varies from the California Vehicle Code, which permits operation in mixed traffic lanes up to and including 35 mph posted speeds. The route map does not identify many local streets that could serve as Class III mixed traffic routes, and a explicit approval for such neighborhood street operation could clarify the bylaw.

2.6.9 Coachella
No applicable municipal code. As an aside related to the CV Link Master Plan, the code provides for bicycle licensing by the Chief of Police, applicable to resident operation of bicycles on city streets.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 13

2.6.10 Summary
A summary of City Ordinances Relevant to Golf Carts and NEVs is provided in Table 3, showing that there are no two cities with the same definition of a golf cart. By permitting golf cart operation up to 25 mph on designated city streets, three cities effectively permit NEVs. No city explicitly defines or prohibits an NEV.

Table 3: Summary of City Ordinances
Jurisdiction Weight (lb) Speed (mph) Maximum
Occupants
Prohibitions Routes
Desert Hot Springs N/A
Palm Springs 1300 15 2 Non-golf use Separate golf cart
and NEV maps
Cathedral City N/A
Rancho Mirage 1300 20 2 Night use Golf cart map
Palm Desert 3000 25 6 Golf cart map
Indian Wells N/A
La Quinta 1300 25 Golf cart brochure
Indio not defined 25 not defined Golf cart map
Coachalla N/A

2.6.11 Executive Order B-16-2012 and ZEV Action Plan, 2013 In March 2012, California State Governor Edmund (Jerry) Brown issued Executive Order B-16-2012 requiring all state agencies and entities to make efforts toward the rapid deployment of Zero-Emissions Vehicles (ZEV) in the state of California. This order also required that state agencies – including the California Air Resources Board, California Energy Commission and Public Utilities Commission – partner with the Plug-in Electric Vehicle Collaborative and California Fuel Cell Partnership to develop zero-emissions benchmarks for the state to achieve by 2015, 2020, and 2025. ZEVs as defined here include the broad range of electric vehicles including NEVs, but also other plug-in Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV), Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles (PHEV) and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.

The 2013 ZEV Action Plan was drafted in response, and outlines strategies and actions necessary to meet the benchmarks set forth in EO B-16-2012. The Action Plan places emphasis on the market conditions and charging/fueling infrastructure necessary for large-scale deployment of ZEVs, and the public-private partnership opportunities that will enable these developments. The plan consists of four general goals:
1) Complete needed infrastructure and planning
2) Expand consumer awareness and demand
3) Transform fleets, and
4) Grow jobs and investment in the private sector
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
14 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
3 Existing Conditions
As the Coachella Valley region continues to expand, attracting new residents and jobs, the mobility and accessibility needs of its residents will also increase. Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs) can contribute to a more livable and sustainable region. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a base understanding of the current state of NEV development and the plans for future NEV infrastructure development in the Coachella Valley region.

This chapter begins with summaries of existing local plans and relevant reports for NEV system design and policy in the Coachella Valley. Residential density, employment density and other key local destinations are used to complete an NEV Suitability Analysis (NEVSA). The chapter concludes with a summary of identified opportunities and constraints to NEV network development. Additional NEVSA documentation is provided in Appendix A and existing network maps are provided in Appendix B and C.

3.1 Document Review
Several local NEV plans and reports have been published in recent years. These plans and reports provide a number of effective approaches towards NEV system development directly applicable to the Coachella Valley region.

3.1.1 Draft CVAG PEV Readiness Plan
The recently published draft CVAG Plug-in Electric Vehicle (PEV) Readiness Plan provides the foundation for a regional NEV transportation network in the Coachella Valley. The purpose of the plan was to prepare for the system-wide deployment and adoption of PEVs throughout the region over the next decade. The plan is the result of close coordination between local communities, local, regional, state, and federal agencies, members of the California PEV Coordinating Council, electric vehicle industry representatives, and numerous stakeholder groups.

The plan estimates up to 13,000 PEVs will be on Coachella Valley roads by 2025. These projections were based on current vehicle registration data (there are currently about 148 PHEVs, 76 BEVs and 440 NEVs in the Coachella Valley). The plan notes that the NEV fleet has not grown over the last decade, which may be attributable to the current road network limitations. These projections were also used to generate demand estimates for non-residential charging stations. Several indicators of adoption were identified through surveys and market data. These indicators were then used to develop a weighted scoring methodology for charging station siting throughout the region. This was further refined to identify workplace and opportunity charging locations.

The PEV Readiness Plan considers the broad range of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) and Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs). As a result of this general scope, the PEV Readiness Plan focuses primarily on vehicle technology and Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) infrastructure and the corresponding market and policy/regulatory drivers necessary for deployment. That is, it does not specifically address the infrastructure required for NEV adoption - NEV Class I, II, and III facilities.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 15

3.1.2 WRCOG NEV Plan
The Western Riverside Council of Governments Neighborhood Electric Vehicle Plan (WRCOG NEV Plan) was drafted to develop the “backbone” network of NEV facilities between the cities of Corona, Norco, Riverside, and Moreno Valley in 2010. It was designed as a model plan for each of the individual cities to consult in developing their own local NEV Plans. Most of the backbone network is based on existing and planned routes with Class II bike facilities, as these can be relatively easy and cost-effective to convert for NEV use.

The WRCOG NEV Plan provides a model design guide section with guidance on NEV facility types, signage and pavement markings, wayfinding, charging stations, parking, and facility maintenance. This guidance informed the CVAG NEV Transportation Plan.

3.1.3 City of Lincoln NEV Transportation Plan
The City of Lincoln was the first city in California to adopt a NEV Transportation Plan. The Lincoln plan was primarily created to accommodate high usage of NEVs in the Sun City Lincoln Hills development and expand the NEV network to meet increasing demand in the greater Lincoln area. Much of that demand is generated from the large and growing retirement community in Lincoln. This provides a similar context for cities across the Coachella Valley. The plan was intended to prescribe relatively “minor modifications” to existing facilities including signing and striping improvements, parking, charging stations, and crossings.

The Environmental Justice element of the plan estimates that the cost of owning and operating an NEV is 20% of the cost of owning a passenger automobile, suggesting that NEVs provide an affordable transportation options for low-income drivers. The plan provides a special drivers permit to improve the safety and independence of aging or disabled drivers that can no longer hold a driver’s license.

3.1.4 Local Support and Opposition to NEVs
NEVs provide mobility options for a wide range of trip purposes, including commute trips, school, shopping, errands and recreation. The replacement of short passenger vehicle trips with NEV trips will reduce fuel consumption and emissions. With lower new vehicle purchase prices and reduced long-term maintenance costs, NEVs can be attractive to a wide range of household incomes, and have the potential to increase independence and mobility options of older residents who are no longer able to operate a motor vehicle. As the infrastructure and market develop, the barriers to NEV ownership and operation are further reduced.

As documented in the draft CVAG PEV Readiness Report, the opportunities for NEV development in the Coachella Valley are abundant. Many valley residents are already accustomed to travel by golf cart, and PEVs have been on the road in the region for over a decade. Current PEV and golf cart use has contributed to a general understanding of the need for improved facilities, and safer, more convenient connections to local and regional destinations. Several of the cities in the region have in recent years begun to invest more heavily in NEV infrastructure. For example, the City of Palm Springs has an electric vehicle fleet and has installed electric vehicle charging stations throughout the city.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
16 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
The majority of local and regional policy makers are supportive of NEV development efforts including CVAG, Riverside County Supervisors, and the mayors of most of the cities in Coachella Valley. In recent years, local and regional support for NEV development has centered on CV Link. While not necessarily specific to NEV vehicles or the infrastructure, this media attention has simultaneously elevated the profile of the project and reaffirmed the region’s goals toward NEV development.

Despite the many opportunities and benefits of NEV development, support has not been unanimous.

Outreach conducted for CV Link has indicated concern about the safety of mixing NEVs, bicyclists and pedestrians on existing and constrained new pathways. This NEV Plan and the CV Link Master Plan will help guide the development of facilities that minimize path user conflicts. However, the cities will also need to consider widening of existing paths and/or traffic control devices where widening is not feasible.

3.2 NEV Demand and Access Analysis
The purpose of this NEV Suitability Analysis (NEVSA) is to identify areas of high current and potential activity as well as patterns of land use and demographics that will generate NEV travel within the study area. This analysis will help guide route selection and infrastructure decisions.

The analysis provides the following benefits:
• Quantify factors that impact NEV activity, objectively identifying areas where NEV users might want to be, while focusing on destinations like schools, and parks • Provides the basis for a geographically based alternative alignment analysis • Quantifying the economic benefits that are derived from construction of various alignment alternatives
• Guide community leaders and the public on alternative alignment analyses

3.2.1 Development of NEVSA
The analytical methods in NEVSA provide an objective, data-driven process of identifying clusters of high potential NEV activity and areas with poor existing network connectivity.

Background, Overview of NEVSA, and Use Considerations
This NEVSA has its basis in a technique devised by prominent landscape architect, Ian McHarg. His influential book Design with Nature (1969) highlighted the importance of considering the natural environment when introducing new development and infrastructure. McHarg was an early pioneer of GIS analysis and established innovative techniques for route planning using photographic map overlays.

McHarg asserted that in order to find the most suitable route, one must determine the least social cost; meaning factors that would impact social values would have to be considered. Once identified, each factor was mapped on individual transparent sheets using three different color shades to represent the level of social cost. The sheets were overlaid into a single stack revealing the most suitable route location.

McHarg’s photographic map overlay analysis paved the way for the foundation of modern day GIS models.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 17
Models serve as an effective means to understand how factors in a complex system interact by providing a simplified version of the system for study. However, by definition, models are representations of reality and are constrained by the quality of available data and the complexity of the system under consideration.

NEVSA provides a general understanding of expected activity in the environment by combining categories representative of where people live, work, play, and go to school into a composite sketch of regional demand. Area specific land use and transportation factors, such as transit service, local retail and service destinations, and schools are considered, as well as demographic factors. This analysis will form the basis of the route selection process, because it predicts where there will be a high demand for trip making. Subsequent to completing this demand model, the likely routes, based on average NEV trip length and roadway suitability, can be prioritized.

NEVSA Demand Analysis Development
NEVSA’s Demand Analysis relies on spatial consistency in order to generate logical distance and density patterns. All scores are aggregated to a central location at the census block level, the census block corner, referred to as “NEVSA Point”. Census blocks closely represent the street network and therefore Census block corners closely represent street corners where NEV traffic is prevalent. This method is based on the “Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity” report2. The report discusses the benefits of using a smaller geographic setting for pedestrian and bicycle demand analyses rather than using more traditional traffic model features such as census block groups, census tracts or traffic analysis zones (TAZs). Due to the current lower range of NEV movement relative to automobiles, this smaller geographic unit of analysis is also suitable.

3.2.2 Utilization of NEVSA – Demand Analysis
Demand Analysis Scoring Method
Generally speaking, the scoring method for the demand analysis is a function of density and proximity of trip generators. Areas with a large number of destinations close to each other score highly. Similarly, areas that are expected to generate more NEV trips score highly. Appendix A provides further detail on destination types and feature scores and weights.

Results of Demand Analysis
The following thematic maps illustrate where people live, work, play, learn and access transit. For the purposes of this analysis, shopping centers are considered locations where people play.

2 Maaza, Mekuria, P. Furth, and H. Nixon. Low Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity. Mineta Transportation Institute.

May, 2012.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
18 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Map 1: Where People Live
Where people live includes 2010 census block level population density information. These locations represent potential trip origin locations. More trips can be made in areas with higher population density if conditions are right.Areas with the densest populations are found in the southeast portion of the region, in Indio and Coachella. This category is a function of the number of NEVSA points within a halfmile of each other. As for all maps, the areas shaded more deeply represent higher demand areas relative to lighter colors. See Appendix Afor scoring details.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 19
Map 2: Where People Work
Where people workmainly represents trip ends for people working within the Coachella Valley region regardless of residency. Its basis is 2010 total employment by census block.Areas of dense employment are found in Palm Springs, Palm Desert along Highway 111, Thousand Palms Indio and Coachella.Depending on the type of job, this category can represent both trip attractors (i.e., retail stores or cafes) and trip generators (i.e., office parks and office buildings) in terms of base employment population. It is therefore also used in thewhere people playcategory by overlaying with specific job types, such as retail. This category accounts for the number of employees per NEVSA Point within a halfmile. SeeAppendix Afor scoring details.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
20 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Map 3: Where People Play
Where people play is a combination of varied land use types and destinations. Overlays such as golf courses, retail destinations, parks and services and hospitals all contribute to this category. While hospitals and services are not exactly where one would expect to “play,” these civic amenities are still destinations of importance reflected in this category due to the temporary nature of the visit.As shown above,the greatest concentration of play destinations in the valley is found along Highway 111, in downtown Palm Springs and the northern portion of Indio.

This category accounts for the number of destinations per NEVSA Point as well as the relative importance of each destination. SeeAppendix Afor scoring details.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 21
Map 4: Where People Learn

Where people learnis important due to the number of children that could receive rides to school and the role schools play as civic destinations for all types of activities. Darker shading indicates areas where learning destinations are closer together and parents or other family members would have an easier time accessing multiple schools. Schools with the greatest proximity are found in population centers within the valley. SeeAppendix Afor scoring details.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
22 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Map 5: Where People Access Transit
Where people access transit is assessed using transit stop locations. This category accounts for the transit stops within a half-mile of each other. Areas with the greatest density of transit stations are typically in commercial areas, where roadways are served by multiple transit lines. This category is included in the model, because it is specified in the legislation prescribing the considerations for NEV plans in California. See Appendix Afor scoring details.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 23
Map 6: Composite NEV Demand Map
After independently processing the features, the composite model is created and grouped into five demand classes using natural breaks in the data values. Estimated demand is highest along Highway 111, between Palm Springs and Indian Wells, along Indio Boulevard in Indio, and at the confluence of retail land uses, ‘play destinations,’ residences and places of work. Moderate demand is seen between high demand areas, representing movement between destinations in these areas. Areas with moderate demand are often characterized by a single dominant land use (e.g., employment centers). The route selection process draws from this demand analysis to recommend the high priority NEV routes that can connect the areas in high demand using the appropriate street types.

SeeAppendix Afor a description of the extent to which each feature influences the composite demand model. By comparing the total possible score (per NEVSA Point) with the actual scores one can see both how social and cultural features affect demand and how increasing distance between origins and destinations reduces demand.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
24 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Areas with Poor Existing Network Connectivity
Areas with poor connectivity have barriers and gaps such as roadways with posted speed limits greater than 35 mph. In these cases, NEVs must either travel in an exclusive NEV/bike lane, travel along a designated grade-separated path or travel greater distances to arrive at their intended destination via lower speed, lower-stress local streets. A list of these high speed roadways are listed in Table 4 below, and are further illustrated in Appendix B and C. This table may include roads that currently have some segments marked for bike or golf cart lanes.

Table 4: Barriers to Connectivity
Road Speed Limit Road Speed Limit
Palm Springs
Highway 111 50 Alejo Road 45
Gene Autry Trail 50 Mesquite Avenue 45
Indian Canyon Drive 45 Palm Canyon Drive 40-45
San Rafael Drive 45 Tachevah Drive 40
Racquet Club Road 45 Amado Road 40
Farrell Drive 45 Baristo Road 40
Vista Chino 45 Escoba Drive 40
Sunrise Way 45 Ramon Road 40
Crossley Road 45 Sunny Dunes Road 40
Cathedral City
I-10 70 Ramon Road 45
Date Palm Drive 45-55 Perez Road 45
Highway 111 50 Dinah Shore Drive 40
Gerald Ford Drive 50
Rancho Mirage
Bob Hope Drive 40 Morningside Drive 50
Highway 111 50 Da Vall Drive 45
Frank Sinatra Drive 50 Country Club Drive 45
Dinah Shore Drive 50 Parkview Drive 45
Monterey Avenue 50
Indian Wells
Highway 111 45-55 Fred Waring Drive 45-50
Washington Street 50 Cook Street 45-50
Miles Avenue 50 Eldorado Drive 40
La Quinta
Avenue 53 55 Avenue 42 45-50
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 25
Road Speed Limit Road Speed Limit
Avenue 54 55 Dune Palms Road 40-50
Highway 111 50-55 Washington Street 40-50
Jefferson Street 45-55 Adams Avenue 45
Miles Avenue 50 Avenue 52 45
Fred Waring Drive 50 Madison Street 45
Avenue 50 50 Eisenhower Drive 40
Palm Desert
I-10 70 Portola Avenue 40-50
Highway 74 55 Highway 111 45
Frank Sinatra Drive 55 Fred Waring Drive 45
Gerald Ford Drive 55 Parkview Drive 45
Oasis Club Drive 55 Hovely Lane 45
Magnesia Falls Drive 50 Country Club Drive 45
Monterey Avenue 50 Haystack Road 45
Eldorado Drive 50 Cook Street 50
Washington Street 50 Mesa View 40
Indio
I-10 70 Avenue 52 45
Avenue 50 55 Avenue 44 45
Jefferson Street 40-55 Monroe Street 40-45
Indio Boulevard 50 Dr Carreon Boulevard 40
Fred Waring Drive 50 49th Avenue 40
Hjorth Street 50 Burr Street 40
Avenue 48 40-50 Clinton Street 40
Madison Street 45-50 Arabia Street 40
Jackson Street 40-50 Oasis Street 40
Miles Avenue 45 46th Avenue 40
Cabazon Avenue 45 Market Street 40
Golf Center Parkway 45 45th Avenue 40
Dillon Road 45 Calhoun Street 40
Highway 111 45 Van Buren Street 40
Coachella
I-10 70 Fillmore Street 40-50
Highway 86 S 65 Avenue 53 45
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
26 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Road Speed Limit Road Speed Limit
Highway 111 40-55 Jackson Street 45
Van Buren Street 50 Dillon Road 45
Harrison Street 50 Tyler Street 40-45
Avenue 54 50 Polk 40
Avenue 52 50 Avenue 49 40
Avenue 48 40-50 Avenue 50 40
Desert Hot Springs
I-10 70 Palm Drive 40-50
Highway 62 65 Dillon Road 45
Indian Avenue 55 Mission Lakes
Boulevard 40
Fairview Road 55 Hacienda Avenue 40
Pierson Boulevard 50-55 Camino Aventura 40
Little Morongo Road 40-55
Other network gaps occur at many of the Whitewater River Channel bridge crossings. These locations are considered to be constrained since they have limited space for new NEV specific facilities (and where outward expansion is cost prohibitive). In some cases existing golf cart or bike lanes exist and narrowing existing travel lanes can be a cost-effective way of accommodating shared Class II NEV lanes or an NEV path. As mentioned above, roadway speeds and right-of-way widths will determine whether Class II NEV lanes are possible on these bridges. These opportunities and constraints are explored in further detail in Table 2 of this chapter.

3.3 Opportunities and Constraints
This section identifies general opportunities and challenges for the development and implementation of a comprehensive NEV network in the Coachella Valley. Some of the opportunities and constraints identified here may apply more to some jurisdictions than others, but Riverside County and CVAG have a key role in coordinating NEV development efforts and ensuring that plans and development strategies are consistent throughout the region.

3.3.1 Connectivity and Circulation
Coachella Valley street networks are generally characterized by grids of multi-lane arterials on one mile spacing with curvilinear suburban residential streets within. The suburban style road networks create disconnected street patterns, which present major challenges for through transportation, because they limit route options and increase travel distances for all roadway users.

Fewer route choices, due to lower street and intersection densities, means that there are decreased opportunities for individuals to use low-stress streets to reach their destination. In general, the routes that do connect to key destinations (e.g. commercial centers, schools, and parks) are on more heavily travelled, high speed arterial streets. On streets with a posted speed limit greater than 35 mph and no CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 27
separate NEV accessible lane, NEV users are legally prohibited from completing their journey. Where a NEV accessible lane is present, many would-be users may not feel safe or comfortable alongside much faster vehicles
A second symptom of a disconnected street network is that street connections are often indirect.

Traveling to an adjacent neighborhood, a local park, or a commercial area may be a short distance “as the crow flies”, but taking the existing street network will lead to longer travel times due to out-of-direction travel. Since NEVs are generally slower than passenger automobiles, travel by NEV is at a competitive disadvantage to travel by automobile. This can be addressed through the design of roadways and intersections. For example, plans for CV Link will improve the level of service for NEV users by providing an alternative to the street network. Access to various roadway types permitted by legislation is summarized in Table 2 earlier in this document.

Street connectivity varies throughout each city in the Coachella Valley as a result of a unique mix of land uses including golf courses, limited access gated communities, drainage channels, major roads and highways, larger block sizes, and areas with lower residential densities. These constraints are illustrated in further detail in city profile maps in Appendix B and C.

There are also some areas within Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, La Quinta, Rancho Mirage, Cathedral City and Palm Springs where the residential street network includes lower speed streets, smaller blocks sizes, and an orthogonal grid. Roadways in these mostly residential areas have tremendous potential to serve as low-speed, low-stress NEV routes that connect to other NEV facilities and destinations.

In the long term, NEV connections to transit may provide residents with a “first and last mile” trip solution. SunLine Transit Agency provides bus service for the entire Coachella Valley region. Having a single regional transit provider offers the advantage of simplifying coordination between neighboring jurisdictions, allowing for a more seamless and convenient transit user experience. NEV Park and Ride facilities at local bus stations can offer residents a multimodal connection point for longer trips.

3.3.2 Integration with Existing Bike Network
Similar to Caltrans bicycle facility classifications, three classes of NEV facilities are proposed. These are described in detail in Chapter 5, and briefly described below. • Class I NEV paths are off-street facilities where standard passenger cars are prohibited. • Class II NEV lanes are travel lanes for the shared use of bicycles, NEVs and golf carts, adjacent to the right or left-most motor vehicle lane.
• Class III NEV Routes are shared lanes on low speed streets.

Planned Class II facilities listed in local bike plans and in the Coachella Valley Non-motorized Transportation Plan should be assessed for future shared NEV/bike lane use.

With minor roadway striping modifications, many NEV focused facilities can be shared with bicycles.

Maps of existing bike networks in each city are provided in Appendix B. In other cases, existing streets can be considered for future NEV route and NEV lane designations. Maps of street speed limits for each city are provided in Appendix C.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
28 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

3.3.3 Integration with Existing Golf Cart Network
The cities of Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, La Quinta and Indio all have existing golf cart transportation plans and policies. Existing public pathways designated for golf cart use may present opportunities for conversion to shared-NEV paths. However, many of these paths are constrained by geometries (widths and curve radii) more suited to the typical top speed of a golf cart (under 15 mph). Because NEVs are capable of travelling up to 25 mph, the route planning may suggest upgrades to existing golf cart facilities, or the use of other routes. NEV operators may also simply decrease their speed when using constrained paths. The existing width of the path, presence of shoulders (and potential for expansion of the path) will dictate whether the path can be used as one-way or two-way, whether there is sufficient space for passing and turnouts, and shared-use with bikes and pedestrians. The opportunities and constraints listed for Class II shared NEV/bike lanes apply to shared NEV/golf cart lanes.

NEV users are likely to prioritize routes that offer the most direct connection between points, so consideration should be given to minimization of out-of-way travel and potential congestion points.

These opportunities will need to be assessed in further detail during the implementation of the network.

Existing golf cart networks are typically designed around golf courses as the primary destination.

Because golf cart paths are designed for golf course access and circulation, they may not offer direct transportation connections to other destinations. When integrating these pathways into the larger NEV network, providing safe and convenient connections to a variety of destinations should be the top priority.

3.3.4 Wayfinding
Wayfinding signage provides NEV drivers with valuable travel information, including direction, travel distance, and estimated travel time. Signs help people reach destinations via optimal routes, with minimal uncertainty. The lack of consistent NEV wayfinding throughout the Coachella Valley limits the number of people who know how to access local destinations (e.g. parks, schools, and commercial centers) using existing low-stress routes, on-street lanes, and paths.

Basic Wayfinding Signage
The cities of Lincoln and Rocklin have already initiated a California Traffic Control Device Committee Request to Experiment process for the design of NEV wayfinding signage.. A simple potential wayfinding sign based on their design is presented as Figure 33 on page 68 of this document.

Custom Wayfinding Signage
Designing more personalized wayfinding could effectively provide CVAG and/or the individual cities within it the opportunity to use wayfinding as a branding tool. Establishing a unique style of wayfinding signage that will clearly differentiate each city’s Class I, II and III NEV facilities from other kinds of facilities could improve the visibility of the network as a whole. Unique branding will also help users navigate transitions between facilities. For example, if an on-street Class III NEV route transitions to an existing NEV/shared-use path, the path may already have a sign identifying it as such. However, a second sign of a differing color and/or shape will allow users to quickly identify it as being part of the Class III network. It is recommended that CVAG work with cities that adopt this plan during the implementation phase to design a custom wayfinding signage program.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 29

3.3.5 High-Speed Road Crossings
Even with marked crossings, some roads feel too uncomfortable for operators to cross in an NEV. As noted in section 2 of this document (page 6), California Vehicle Code Section 21260 specifies that NEVs shall not cross roadways with speed limits greater than 35 mph, unless the crossing “begins and ends on a roadway with a speed limit of 35mph or less and occurs at an intersection of approximately 90 degrees.” NEVs are also not permitted to cross state highways at uncontrolled locations unless the crossing has been approved and authorized by Caltrans.

Undercrossings and overcrossings are one such improvement, but they are also often cost prohibitive.

The CV Link Master Plan includes many of these types of crossings. Securing funds for their development can be a long-term challenge, especially for jurisdictions with multiple major road and highway crossings and poor on-street connectivity.

3.3.6 Whitewater River Channel Crossings
One of major impediments to NEV travel in the Coachella Valley is the lack of accessible Whitewater River Channel crossings. The CV Link Master Plan focuses on the path crossings of the arterials, while this NEV Plan identifies gaps for access to the path and across the channel between other origins and destinations.

As new bridges are built, wide (7’+) shared bike/golf cart lanes or paths are typically included on both sides. Therefore, where a bridge is currently deficient but programmed for replacement, it is assumed that NEV access will be provided. Class II NEV lanes are recommended for bridges on roadways with speeds 35 mph and under. However, many of these bridges are on roadways with posted speed limits greater than 35 mph. In these circumstances, Class II Lanes may be considered on roadways with posted speed limits up to 55 mph. A NEV Class I grade-separated path is the only option on bridges with speed limits over 55 mph. Sufficient space and the potential for road diets, lane narrowing, conversion of existing golf/bike lanes, and other lower-cost path alternatives should be explored at each location.

Table 2 below details the existing roadway provision of bike/golf cart lanes, posted speed limits and opportunities for future Class II NEV/Bike/Golf cart lanes and Class I NEV Paths.

Table 5: NEV Accessibility on Whitewater River Channel Bridges Bridge Existing
Provision3
Possible
Class II
Lane*
Possible
Class I
Path?*
Bridge
Replacement
Planned
Posted
Speed Limit
Date Palm Drive None NO NO YES 40
Country Club Drive Class II Bike lane YES NO NO 45
Indio Boulevard None NO NO NO 50
Monroe Street None NO NO NO 40
Jackson Street None NO NO NO 40
Bob Hope Drive 4’ Sidewalk NO YES NO 40

3 Existing facility widths are approximate measures obtained via Google Earth.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
30 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Bridge Existing
Provision3
Possible
Class II
Lane*
Possible
Class I
Path?*
Bridge
Replacement
Planned
Posted
Speed Limit
Monterey Avenue None NO YES NO 50
Fred Waring Drive W None NO YES NO 50
Miles Avenue W 5' Bike lanes YES YES NO 50
Washington Street None NO YES NO 50
Jefferson Street 7' Bike lanes YES YES NO 55
Miles Avenue E 5' Bike lanes YES YES NO 45
Vista Chino 6' Shoulder
(Westbound),
Wide sidewalk
(Eastbound)
YES YES YES 35
Ramon Road None NO NO YES 40
Cathedral Canyon Drive 4'-5' Shoulder
(both directions)
NO NO YES 40
Cook Street 12' Golf Path
(Southbound)
Bike Lane
(Northbound)
YES YES YES 50
Dune Palms Road 18' Shoulder
(Northbound)
YES YES YES 45
Ave 44 8' Shoulder (both
directions)
YES YES YES 45
Dillon Road 4’ Shoulder NO NO YES 45
Ave 50 None YES YES YES 40
Ave 52 7' Shoulder (both
directions)
YES YES YES 50
Ave 66 7' Shoulder (both
directions)
YES YES ? 55
Adams Street ? ? ? YES 45
Airport Blvd (Ave 56) None YES YES ? 35
Ave 62 7' Shoulder (both
directions)
YES YES ? 25
Dinah Shore Drive Wide Sidewalk YES YES NO 40
El Dorado Drive 8' Shoulders YES YES ? 40
Frank Sinatra Drive None NO NO YES 50
Gene Autry Trail 8' Shoulders (both
directions)
YES YES ? 35
Golf Center Parkway 8' Bike lane YES YES NO 35
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 31
Bridge Existing
Provision3
Possible
Class II
Lane*
Possible
Class I
Path?*
Bridge
Replacement
Planned
Posted
Speed Limit
Indian Canyon Drive Wide Shoulder YES YES ? 55
Lincoln Avenue None NO YES ? 25
Portola Avenue 7' Bike Lane, 7'
Golf Path
YES YES NO 50
Railroad Bridge None NO NO ? N/A
SR-111 (Grapefruit Road) None NO NO ? 55
State Highway 86 8' Shoulders (both
directions)
NO (due to
speed)
YES ? 65
US Highway 111 None NO (due to
speed)
YES YES 65
* Considers travel lane narrowing/re-striping
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
32 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

3.3.7 NEV Parking
Section 5.1 of this document provides guidelines on NEV parking.

Local parking ordinances can be structured to support NEV development by prescribing a minimum number of NEV parking spaces in zoning and building codes, variable/free on-street NEV parking rates, and free or reduced rate electric vehicle charging station parking. Agencies may also consider development incentives for on-site electric vehicle parking and charging stations. At the very least, local parking ordinances should allow NEV parking spaces to count toward parking minimums.

Design standards for NEV parking should be consistent throughout a planning area. After adopting consistent design guidelines, cities could develop a design toolkit to assist developers and property owners in designing off-street NEV parking spaces. Coordination between County planning staff and local jurisdictions for the planning and implementation of parking facilities will help to avoid inconsistencies in design. The PEV Readiness plan contains some general design guidelines that could be adopted by all local jurisdictions and made available through design toolkits. CVAG or Riverside County could further assist local jurisdictions by providing design toolkit workshops or trainings that would ensure consistency, enhance participation, and lend transparency to local planning efforts.

3.3.8 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
Section 5.1 of this document provides guidelines on NEV charging facilities.

To support widespread NEV adoption, providing frequent and appropriately located EV charging facilities will ensure that NEV operators can get from point A to point B without running out of energy and getting stranded. Insufficient or poorly located charging stations can lead to “range anxiety” and is a major inhibitor of NEV adoption for longer trips. Charging stations at workplaces and other opportunity locations such as grocery stores and shopping centers help to alleviate the uncertainty associated with NEV energy requirements, and the reliability of NEVs for longer trips. CV Link access points provide an opportunity for users to park and recharge while using the facility for recreation.

The cost of installing charging stations is much less expensive when the location is“pre-wired” for EV charging stations. Local building and zoning codes can be amended to require such pre-wired parking spaces for new development. Alternatively jurisdictions can offer other incentives such as FAR bonuses, reduced development fees, fast-tracked permitting, etc. to have developer’s pre-wire projects for future NEV charging stations. The CVAG PEV Readiness Plan provides information about EV Charging Station design and installation.

3.3.9 Market-based Opportunities
According to the CVAG PEV Readiness Plan, supporting NEV economies including NEV retail sales, maintenance and repair, battery recycling, and NEV sharing programs, are likely to develop as NEV sales increase. As such, the plan suggests that “targeted strategies to attract these particular enterprises” are not necessary. The plan also suggests the College of the Desert’s specialized Advanced Transportation Technologies degree program could play a key role in developing the skilled workforce of technicians needed as NEV use expands.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 33
The plan focuses on engineering and design supply chain strategies to promote widespread NEV adoption. These include NEV vehicle and component manufacturing, and engineering and design of vehicles and charging infrastructure. According to a study by Zhou et.al4 , PEV manufacturing economies
tend to present lower barriers to entry, as a result of their horizontal supply chain structures and simple componentry. This presents the Coachella Valley region with an opportunity to re-establish its largescale manufacturing base that has experienced significant declines during the recession. The PEV Readiness plan provides a summary of economic development strategies for NEV business attraction, retention, expansion, and incubation.

4 Zhou, Lei, J.W. Watts, M. Sase, and A. Miyata. Charging Ahead: Battery Electric Vehicles and Transformation of an Industry. Deloitte Review. Issue 7. 2010.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 34
4 Route Selection
The purpose of this chapter is to outline the proposed method for developing a safe and comfortable regional NEV Network Concept. The first part of this chapter explains the assumed facility hierarchy and considerations relating to CV Link, street crossings, golf courses, existing golf cart routes, existing NEV routes, and sidewalk paths. The latter part of this chapter provides a narrative and visual summary of the recommended Network Concept, including alternative facility improvements that may be considered given physical constraints or budget.

4.1 Route Selection Assumptions
The following assumptions form the basis for the preliminary assignment of priority NEV routes throughout the Coachella Valley. According to the Streets and Highways Code (section. 1962.3), the plan must address how the route will accommodate NEVs without an adverse impact upon traffic safety.

Towards this end, the routing method seeks to minimize conflict opportunities between NEVs and conventional vehicles, and suggests methods to reduce the probability and severity of collisions.

4.1.1 Facility Hierarchy
Route selection prioritizes placing NEV routes on the “most comfortable” roadways, a relative measure that takes into account roadway posted speed limits, separation of modes, standardized designs, and the opportunity to communicate clear NEV user expectations. The potential facility types that will make up the network are listed below:
• Class I NEV Path (such as CV Link)
• Class II NEV lane (shared with bikes and golf carts)
• Class III NEV Route (shared with bikes, golf carts and motor vehicles) An example of a Class I NEV Path is the CV Link. The CV Link represents an enormous opportunity to provide quick, convenient and safe connections for residents. It will enhance the experience for residents using NEVs, bikes, and pedestrians within and between cities by providing a major non-motorized corridor eventually running from Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs all the way to the Salton Sea. This backbone path network will allow NEVs to traverse longer distances without driving on major arterials or highways, and connect them to local destinations via local streets with Class III NEV routes and Class II NEV lanes.

Class II NEV Lanes are on-street striped lanes exclusive to NEVs, bicycles and golf carts. The exclusive NEV lane is intended for roadways with a posted speed limit of 55 mph and under, but generally recommended on roadways with lower speeds since the striped lane does not feature any physical separation from higher speed traffic. This facility offers some flexibility to make connections along or across high speed roadways where barriers or network gaps exist such as bridge crossings and where space or cost does not permit a Class I Path.

In the proposed Network Concept, Class III NEV Routes are the recommended facility on selected roadways 25 mph and under, because NEVs sharing the roadway with conventional vehicles are traveling approximately the same speed, reducing the severity of any collisions that may occur. These streets are CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 35
ideal candidates for additional treatments such as traffic calming and wayfinding. The Class III signed route designation provides a navigational function optimized for direct travel, directing users to safe transitions at high speed crossings, lending predictability to the system, and clarifying roadway user expectations.

Detailed descriptions of NEV facility types are available in Chapter 4, and are consistent with Assembly Bill 61 and the California Streets and Highway Code Division 2.5, Chapter 7.1 Section 1962. In infrastructure terms, they are similar to the Caltrans Class I, II, and III bikeway infrastructure categories.

The appropriate type of NEV facility depends on the posted speed of the roadway, vehicle volumes, roadway geometry and lane widths. As noted in section 2 on page 5, the CVC permits NEVs on all roadways 35 mph and under. Table 2 presents a broad categorization of NEV facilities by speed limit.

Table 6 further describes the legal and recommended facility types.

Table 6: Legal and Recommended Facility Type by Speed Limit Facility Type Category Posted Speed Limit
≤25 mph 30-35 mph 40-55 mph ≥60 mph
Minimum Required Facility Type on NonDesignated Routes None None Class II NEV
Lanes
Class I NEV
Path
Legal Facility Type for Designated Routes Class III NEV Routes
Class III NEV
Route
Class II NEV
Lanes
Class I NEV
Path
Recommended Facility Type for
Designated Routes
Class III NEV
Route
Class II NEV
Lanes
Class I NEV
Path
Class I NEV
Path
The recommended facility type may differ from the legally required facility type for the purpose of enhanced comfort and user safety. The Class II NEV lane facility is legally acceptable for roadways with a posted speed limit of 55 mph and under, but generally recommended on roadways with lower speeds since the striped lane does not feature any physical separation from higher speed traffic. This facility offers some flexibility to make connections along or across high-speed roadways where barriers or network gaps exist such as bridge crossings and where space or cost does not permit a Class I NEV path.

4.1.2 CV Link Routes
The plan’s routing method assumes that CV Link will attract all NEV trips with origins or destinations within a 1.2 mile travel shed. This figure is based on a method proposed by the South Bay Cities Council of Governments and the mature suburban context of each of the cities, where the average trip length is estimated at 1.13 miles. Route selection is based on roadway network distances rather than direct, “as the crow flies” distances, and takes into account potential access issues from different directions.

4.1.3 CV Link Street Crossings
All street crossings are assumed to provide access to CV Link, although not all streets that the CV Link crosses will have dedicated NEV facilities along them. The route selection method considers all access points equal, for the purpose of transportation. Further consideration will be given to points that may not be accessible from every direction due to roadway or intersection configuration and NEV facility type.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
36 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Opportunities for access points at these locations will require future evaluation of designs for gradeseparated CV Link crossings and other nearby route opportunities.

4.1.4 Golf Courses
All golf courses within 1.2 miles of CV Link will be considered major destinations and will be connected to CV Link via designated NEV routes. Similar to CV Link, route selection is also based on roadway network distances rather than direct “as the crow flies” distances. Route evaluation will also consider limited access from different directions.

4.1.5 Existing Golf Cart and NEV Routes
Based on their existing design characteristics, existing golf cart “routes” should be reclassified as either Class I NEV/Golf Cart Paths, Class II NEV/Golf Cart Lanes, or Class III NEV/Golf Cart Routes per Streets and Highway Code 1962.3(g). After this is established, a determination can be made whether to maintain, relocate or upgrade the facility. Existing golf cart routes and NEV routes will be considered for inclusion in the NEV network if there is an opportunity to connect local and/or regional origins and destinations. Where existing golf cart or NEV routes are within ½ mile of the proposed NEV route and where only a short (up to ½ mile) detour is required to access the same point, the preference is to include the existing golf cart or NEV route in the network. In addition, consideration should be placed on improving existing golf cart facilities on roadways greater than 35 miles per hour. For example, where an opportunity exists to widen an existing off-street golf cart path along a 45 mph roadway, a higher priority should be given to this option than relocating the route to lower speed streets. These improvements should be completed with user safety and comfort in mind, as this is critical to increasing NEV usage across the region.

4.1.6 Sidewalks
In some communities, the existing golf cart network may route a golf cart “path” on what would otherwise be considered a sidewalk. Here, sidewalks are defined as:
• Paths less than 10’ wide
• Paths greater than or equal to 10’ but not designated for shared use (e.g. commercial district sidewalks)
Due to the low level of service and NEV incompatibility with pedestrian activity, sidewalks are not considered valid NEV facilities. As mentioned above, it may be possible to upgrade a sidewalk to a path, but not at the expense of separated pedestrian facilities.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 37

4.2 Network Concept
The Network Concept presented in this section illustrates the primary backbone network for NEV travel throughout the region. Roadway characteristics such as speed, bridges, and block structure create gaps in network connectivity, and limit the options for low-stress NEV route alternatives. The Network Concept considers these factors in addition to the above route selection assumptions to connect regional origins and destinations in a complete NEV network. In Figure 4, Class I paths do not include CV Link or any existing trails such as the Tahquitz Creek Trail; Class II lanes do not include bicycle lanes without golf cart or NEV symbols, and Class III routes do not include all the local streets which are accessible but not signposted.

Figure 4: Existing and Proposed Network by Class
The Network Concept takes advantage of CV Link as the most attractive and desirable NEV path in the valley. As CV Link would be utilized for most trips, it is important to have a dense network of connected facilities on all roads that intersect with CV Link. By designating facilities on these roadways, travel by NEV is simplified and users are not required to spend significant effort remembering where designated routes exist.

The recommended network routing and facility types take advantage of the directness of arterial streets.

However these tend to be higher volume and speed streets, so both Class I and Class II facilities should be considered in the actual designing of the routes. As such, the city route maps on the following pages illustrate the recommended facility type, as well as an alternative facility type for consideration after factoring speed limits, location-specific constraints, and budget. Jurisdictions may choose to adopt a phased approach to the recommended improvements based on the ease of implementation, cost, traffic safety impact and community support.

This concept will involve the reallocation of road space on some major arterial streets. Class II NEV lanes are optional on streets with speed limits higher than 25 mph, but would provide a more comfortable experience for all vehicle drivers, and therefore lane narrowing is recommended, where possible, to 23 55
46 98

78 35

0 20

40 60

80 100

120

140

Class
I
Paths
Class
II
Lanes
Class
III
Routes

Miles

Proposed

Existing

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
38 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
accommodate this facility type on streets with 30 or 35 mile per hour speed limits. Similarly, for streets and bridges with speed limits higher than 35 mph, motor vehicle lane narrowing or, in some cases, sidewalk widening treatments will be needed to accommodate NEV users on a separated Class I NEV path or Class II NEV lanes. On streets with speed limits higher than 25 mph, consideration should be given to the facility type that provides greater separation to reduce the probability and severity of collisions between NEVs and highway capable motor vehicles. Finally, separated off-street facilities are required on roadways with speed limits greater than 55 mph.

Minor route adjustments should be considered when it is possible to reroute the network away from locations with specific safety challenges such as high-speed crossings, or where the recommended facility type is infeasible. However, this should be accomplished with out of direction travel limited to ¼ mile or less.

Map 7: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 39
Map 8: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept - Palm Springs CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
40 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Map 9: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Cathedral City CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 41
Map 10: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept –Rancho Mirage CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
42 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Map 11: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Palm Desert CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 43
Map 12: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Indian Wells CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
44 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Map 13: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – La Quinta CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 45
Map 14: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Indio
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
46 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Map 15: CVAG NEV Recommended Network Concept – Coachella CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 47
This page intentionally left blank
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 48
5 Design Guidelines
This chapter is intended to assist the Coachella Valley Association of Governments and member jurisdictions in the selection and design of on-street NEV facilities. These guidelines are consistent with California state code and have been developed based on existing guidance in NEV plans for Lincoln CA, Rocklin CA, and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG). The following guidance is not exhaustive and is not intended to substitute for professional design and engineering judgment under local conditions.

5.1 Design Needs of NEV Facilities

5.1.1 Spatial Needs of Users
NEVs and bicyclists are the expected users of NEV facilities, and design dimensions should be built with these user types in mind. Similar to conventional motor vehicles, NEVs and bicyclists exist in a variety of sizes and configurations. These variations occur in the types of vehicle and behavioral characteristics (such as the skill level of the driver). The design of an NEV facility should consider reasonably expected user types on the facility and design for the appropriate dimensions.

Physical Dimensions
The figures below illustrate the operating space and physical dimensions of NEVs and bicyclists, the typical users of NEV paths and lanes. Because NEVs and bicyclists require clear space to operate within a facility, the minimum operating width is greater than the physical dimensions of the user.

Dimensions below are based on GEM vehicles, a popular NEV manufacturer. All GEM NEVs are the same width regardless of model. The GEM catalog refers to 55” (4’7”) width however this is from fender edge to fender edge. A GEM with dual mirrors was measured at the Palm Springs Energy Summit and found to be 60” (5’).

Figure 5: Spatial Needs of NEVs Figure 6: Spatial Needs of Bicyclists CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 49

5.1.2 Travel Speeds
Based on the legislated maximum NEV speed (25 mph) and the Highway Design Manual (HDM) table 1003.1, the path design speed conventionally would be 30 mph. In an effort to maintain the desired maximum speed of the pathway, a design speed of 25 mph should be utilized.

In comparison, the adult cyclist typically travels between 8 and 15 mph5 . AASHTO guidelines specify
that 18mph is a sufficient design speed for most relatively flat shared bicycle paths6. American roads are often over-engineered, or designed to accommodate higher speeds that are not only faster than the posted speed limit, but faster than is appropriate for the area. Aligning the design speed (the speed that vehicles can navigate the facility without losing control) with the desired driving speed, results in a speed that makes sense for the context.

5.1.3 Other Geometric Design Details
It is assumed that NEVs can stop at least as quickly as bicyclists under the same conditions, and the operating requirements of bicyclists are the limiting factor in shared NEV/Bicycle facility design. As such, horizontal curves and stopping sight distances should be calculated according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition. It is presumed that these measures will meet the needs of NEVs, although research has not been conducted to support this assumption. Through future testing and evaluation these guidelines may change to reflect NEV specific operating conditions.

Stopping Sight Distance
Stopping sight distance is the distance required by the NEV driver to be able to see in order to have room to stop in advance of an obstacle on the path. Trees, vegetative buffers, and other landscaping elements should be maintained so as not to obstruct visibility, especially at intersection and driveway approaches.

The NEV braking distance is 10 feet at 25 miles per hour. Based on a maximum speed of 30 mph, AASHTO lists stopping sight distances for bikes ascending a hill as 300’ (0%) and 200’ (.15%), and descending a hill, as 250’ (0%) and 1,600’ (.15%).

Table 7: Stopping Sight Distance vs. Grade (Bicyclists) 0% Grade 15% Grade
Ascending 300 Feet 200 Feet
Descending 250 Feet 1600 Feet
Horizontal Curves
NEVs come in various shapes and sizes. A typical 4-seat NEV has an inside turn-radius of 12’ and exterior turn radius of up to 18’. Based on the maximum design speed of 25 mph, the smallest horizontal curve along an NEV facility segment should be 115’. Turns tighter than this should be signed and/or striped well in advance of the turn, and sign location should be based on breaking distance.

5 FHWA. Characteristics of Emerging Road and Trail Users and Their Safety. 2004. 6 AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. 2012.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
50 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

5.1.4 NEV Parking
Some jurisdictions (e.g. Indio) prohibit golf carts from parking in a “motor vehicle” space, notwithstanding that the California Department of Motor Vehicles will register a golf cart as a motor vehicle. To the general public, a golf car and an NEV are indistinguishable and any such parking prohibitions will be confusing and may limit adoption of LSEVs. Given that golf cars and NEVs can serve the same purposes as a regular car and there would therefore have no impact on parking supply and demand, parking should be permitted in any space. The following guidelines are intended to provide greater parking capacity because golf cars and NEVs are smaller and therefore more of them can fit in a given land area compared to regular motor vehicles.

A typical NEV parking space is 15’ x 7’ utilizing a 6” white striping pattern, compared to 18’ x 8’6” for standard vehicles. NEVs occupy less physical space than standard passenger vehicles, so a relatively higher number of NEV spaces can be accommodated in a given parking area. This means that NEVs may also be able to utilize existing spaces more efficiently, in a wider assortment of configurations, both onstreet and in private lots and garages.

Parking should be located adjacent to charging stations if available.

Figure 7: Typical NEV Parking
Leng th:
15’
(13’
min)
Width:
7’
NEV Charging Station
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 51

5.1.5 Charging Stations
NEV parking location s should be configured with or placed within functional reach of electric vehicle charging stations. To date, no symbol has been developed that can effectively convey regulations associated with electric vehicle charging or parking facilities.

Symbols that have not been adopted in the CAMUTCD for use in a specific application cannot be used in untested applications without approved official experimentation that includes the requisite human factors evaluation for comprehension and legibility.

FHWA guidance provides typical examples of modified parking restriction signage to identify, reserve and regulate parking and charging locations. Some of them have been explicitly adopted for use in California. These signs are:
• No parking – FHWA R7-111, R7-112, and R7-113 are augmented in the CAMUTCD by R113, R113A • Supplementary text – FHWA R7-113aP and R7-113bP signs (approved in informational letter dated 6/17/13) have been approved by the CA-TCDC for inclusion in the next CAMUTCD • Blue background EV sign D9-11b (FHWA) or G66-21B (CA) may be used as per FHWA approval lA-13-1 issued 4/11/11
Figure 8: Recommended NEV/Electric Vehicle Regulatory Parking and Charging Signs R113 (CA) R113A (CA) D9-11b (FHWA) / G66-21B (CA)
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
52 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

5.2 NEV Facility Classification and Selection

5.2.1 Facility Classification
There are three Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) facility classes.

Class I NEV Paths
Class I Paths are physically separated pathways
exclusive to NEV and bicycle travel. Due to the
speed differential, Class I NEV paths are not
intended for shared-use with pedestrians although
in constrained conditions this may be unavoidable.

Class I paths should be located immediately
adjacent, or as close to the street as space permits
to provide direct connections to local destinations
and minimize out-of-direction travel.

Class II NEV Lanes
Class II Lanes designate an exclusive space for
NEVs and bicyclists through the use of pavement
markings and signage. The lane is typically located
on the right side of the street, between the
adjacent travel lane and curb, and is used in the
same direction as motor vehicle traffic.

An additional buffer treatment can be
implemented between the NEV/bike lane and
travel lane where space provides.

Class III NEV Routes
Class III Routes are low-volume, low-speed streets
with shared operating conditions comfortable for
use by NEVs and bicyclists. Treatments such as
signage, pavement markings, traffic calming and/or
traffic reduction are utilized to achieve specific
speed or volume targets.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 53

5.3 Class I NEV Path Design
Class I routes provide for a physically separate path for the use of NEVs and bicyclists, golf carts, pathway maintenance vehicles, emergency service, and potentially water district maintenance. Typically, Class I NEV paths will be one-way, on the right hand side of the street traveling the same direction as the adjacent general-purpose traffic lanes.

5.3.1 Cross Sections
The preferred pathway width for a one-way Class I NEV path is 12 feet with 1-foot shoulders on each side.

This provides adequate room for a NEV and bicyclist to pass side-by-side in comfort, and may permit two NEVs to pass in the event of a breakdown. Providing for passing within the Class I path is important if a physical barrier or landscaping prohibits convenient egress from the path.

Figure 9: Preferred Cross Section for One-way Class I NEV Path where Passing is Permitted If passing is not required, or if the configuration permits users to easily and safely leave the path, the pathway width for a one-way Class I path should be 6 feet, with 1-foot shoulders on each side. In tightly constrained segments, a 5-foot pathway with 1-foot shoulders may be necessary. Constrained segments should be indicated with warning signs or markings.

Figure 10: Preferred Cross Section for One-way Class I NEV Path where Passing is Not Allowed General Purpose Class
I
NEV Path:
12’ Pedestrian Path
Travel
Lanes
Path
Separation
Shoulder:1’ Shoulder:1’
Class I NEV Pedestrian Path
Path: 6’
General Purpose
Travel Lanes
Path
Separation
Shoulder:1’ Shoulder:1’
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
54 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
In highly constrained conditions, it may not be possible to provide separate path treads for pedestrians and NEVs/bicyclists. In these conditions, a class I shared use path used by a wide spectrum of users may be considered. This is only appropriate where there is limited right of way or if necessary to provide connections to the CV Link.

In this configuration NEV and bicyclists are only permitted to travel in one direction, matching that of adjacent traffic. Pedestrians and other non-motorized users may travel in both directions. Because NEV and bicycle users should operate following the same direction as adjacent traffic, Class I paths along roadways should generally be provided on both sides of the street to offer mobility in both directions.

The recommended pathway width for an all user class I shared use path path is 12 feet, with 1-foot shoulders on each side. In tightly constrained segments, a 10-foot pathway may be necessary.

Constrained segments should be indicated with warning signs or markings. Efforts should be made to maintain a reduced NEV operating speed in areas shared with pedestrians.

Figure 11: Constrained Cross Section for All User Class I Path

5.3.2 Markings and Signs
Sign Size
The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) lists sizes for shared use path regulatory signs in Part 9, Traffic Control for Bicycle Facilities. Proposed sign sizes should be based on the larger dimensions found in the Roadway column of table 9B-1(CA). California Bicycle Facility Sign and Plaque Minimum Sizes.

Class I NEV Path Crosswalk Markings
Consider implementing a unique crosswalk marking style to support path crossings on the NEV network.

Enhanced crosswalk designs may serve to raise awareness of the NEV path crossing to all users. Standard Class I NEV/ Shared
Use Path: 12’
General Purpose
Travel Lanes
Path
Separation
Shoulder:1’ Shoulder:1’
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 55
marked crosswalks may be enhanced with decorative painting and designs, assuming such designs do not compromise the effectiveness of the crosswalk.

Per FHWA guidance7
, enhanced crosswalks designs should:
• Use subdued-coloredaesthetic treatments between the legally marked transverse crosswalklines. • Be devoid of retroreflective properties to clarify that they are not a traffic control device. • Not diminish the effectiveness (contrast) of the legally required white transverse pavement markings (however, a crosswalk is not needed to provide a legal crossing at intersections) • Acceptable colorsfor these materials would be red, rust, brown, burgundy, clay, tan or similar earth tone equivalents. The colors yellow, blue and green are discouraged to prevent confusion as a traffic control device.
• If brighter colors are desired, a buffer space or black coloring may be used to create the necessary contrast. This is not preferred by the FHWA, but may be acceptable.

The current CV Link crosswalk design concept is shown in Figure 12. This is a conceptual illustration only. The concept could be augmented with white lines parallel to the crosswalk. The FHWA representative to the California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CATCDC) has advised that the ruling is guidance and jurisdictions can exercise engineering judgment. The conceptual CV Link crosswalk may need to be further refined in discussion with local jurisdictions, including materials testing for enhanced durability in the desert environment.

Figure 12: CV Link Type Crossride / Crosswalk Concept Markings

7 Interpretation Letter 3(09)-24(I) – Application ofColoredPavement - August 2013.http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/3_09_24.htm CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
56 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

5.3.3 Intersection Crossing Strategies
The following general strategies apply when Class I NEV Paths approach signalized intersections.

Convert to Class II NEV Lane
One strategy in advance of the crossing is to transition the Class 1 NEV into a Class II NEV Lane. Motor vehicles must make right turns from the right most travel lane, which requires NEVs and motor vehicles to negotiate right of way upstream of the intersection. See Section 4.4 for additional guidance on how to integrate Class II lanes with right turn lanes.

Figure 13: Transition the Class I NEV Path into Class II NEV Lane Separated Class I Crossing
When a greater degree of separation is desired, the separate Class I NEV Path should be maintained. To ensure adequate visibility, consider laterally shifting the path toward the roadway and/or establish a clear zone in advance of the intersection. Consider signalization schemes that allow NEVs to cross with the pedestrian signal.

Figure 14: Lateral Shift and Class I NEV Path Crossing
Convert to Shared Use Path
In highly constrained conditions the Class I NEV path may be converted into a conventional Class I shared use path.

Lateral Shift and Clear Setback
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 57
Because this design potentially combines NEVs, bicyclists and pedestrians in the same space it is important to encourage NEV speeds closer to that of pedestrians. Markings, warnings signs and tactile markings may be used to indicate a speed transition zone.

Figure 15: Transition the Class I NEV Path Into Conventional Class I Shared Use Path Clear Setback
Advance Stop Bar
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
58 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Street Crossing Signal Phasing
When operating on Class I NEV Paths, users will rely on either the standard traffic signal indication or the pedestrian signal head to provide traffic control at signalized intersections.

When NEV and bicyclists are expected to use the pedestrian signal head, a modified R9-5 NEVs/BIKES USE PED SIGNAL sign should be provided. This sign has been approved by the CATCDC for inclusion in the next CAMUTCD.

Figure 16: NEV/BIKES USE PED SIGNAL Sign
Protected Signal Phasing
In areas where conflicts between NEVs and turning motor vehicles is a high risk, providing an exclusive pedestrian phase for use by NEVs, bicyclists and pedestrians will provide full protection of NEV Crossings. Right turn on red should be prohibited at these locations.

Leading Pedestrians/NEV Interval Phasing
Where a protected signal phase for pedestrians/NEVs is impractical, it may be possible to provide a short-duration head-start protected phase to allowing path users to enter the intersection before adjacent conflicting motor vehicles. Right turn on red should be prohibited at these locations.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 59
Signal Detection and Actuation
NEVs can be detected at signalized intersections using the same technologies that are often used to detect bicycles. Similar to bicycle detection and actuation, NEV detection and actuation, can employ video imaging detection, magnetometers, microwave radar, and embedded inductive loop detectors at signalized intersections and further upstream. Embedded inductive loop detectors and video imaging detection systems are the most commonly used detection technologies for passenger vehicles and bicycles.

More research is needed to determine the most effective loop detector configuration for NEVs given their larger width and wheelbase. However, if the sensitivity of the loop detector is adjusted for bicycles (more sensitive), and pavement markings or signage are used to indicate appropriate NEV position, then NEVs can effectively use existing bike detectors. Installing new loop detectors would serve both NEV operators and bicyclists.

Driveways
Motor vehicles are required to yield to NEVs, bicyclists and pedestrians at driveways. It is important for driveway designs to communicate the priority of these users, and to encourage appropriate turning speed by motor vehicles.

Figure 17: Class I NEV Path Driveway Crossing
Landscaping, fences or
other elements to
Maintain grade of Class I
NEV Path and adjacent
sidewalk.

Provide clear zone in
advance of driveway.

Steep driveway apron to
slow driver turning speeds.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
60 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

5.4 Class II NEV Lane Design
Class II NEV/Bike lanes provide for a separate striped lane adjacent to roadways with speed limits of 55 miles per hour or less. The lane may be shared with bicyclists, or may be configured as an additional lane adjacent to a bicycle lane. Adjacent general traffic lanes may need to be narrowed to between 10-11’ to accommodate wider Class II NEV/Bike lanes. Less than 12’ wide lanes are proven to improve safety for all road users and are appropriate for multi-modal urban arterials as noted in the California Highway Design Manual and other documents supported by Caltrans promoting multi-modal design8.

5.4.1 Cross Sections
Class II lanes should have a minimum width of 7 feet. Where possible, a 3-foot or wider buffer should allow for passing and provide additional comfort and separation from traffic and/or parking lanes. See Figure 16 for buffer striping options. Special attention should be given to the continuity of NEV lanes through intersections, between vehicle travel and turn lanes and transitions to other NEV facility types.

In constrained locations, Class II NEV Lanes may be 7’ wide and delineated with a single 8” white stripe.

Figure 18: Preferred Cross Section for Class II I NEV Lane Figure 19: Constrained Cross Section for Class II NEV Lane

8 http://www.dot.ca.gov/Documents/2014-4-2-Flexibility-in-Design.pdf Class
II Pedestrian Path
NEV
Lane:
7’
General Purpose
Travel
Lanes
Longitudinal
Marked
Buffer
Class
II Pedestrian Path
NEV
Lane:
7’
General Purpose
Travel
Lanes
8”Edge
Line
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 61
Normal
white
line
or
Buffer
48 inches 64
inches 48
inches 64
inches 48
inches 72
inches 72
inches

5.4.2 Markings and Signs
Preferential Lane Markings
The California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CATCDC) has approved the inclusion of the letters “NEV” for use in the bike lanes markings in the next CAMUTCD and this marking may be implemented now. Subject to approved experimentation process, it is recommended that a graphic symbol pavement marking design be developed so that the markings are more legible to locals and tourists who may not fully understand the difference between an NEV and a motor vehicle or golf cart. Additionally, a graphic symbol serves international needs and does not require comprehension of written English.

Figure 20: Experimental Standard NEV Pavement Marking
Lines and Buffers
Class II NEV Lanes require lane striping to identify the boundary between the NEV Lane and the adjacent travel lane. Class II lanes are typically marked with a normal 6” white line, although in locations with insufficient room for a standard buffer, a line of up to 12” may be used9 . Preferential lane striping is described
in section 3D.02 of the CAMUTCD and the buffers shown have been adopted by the CATCDC.

Figure 21: Longitudinal Edge Striping Alternatives (modified CAMUTCD Figure 9C-104)

9 For example, the City of Davis, CA has recently installed 12” striping on 5th Street where there was insufficient room for a full buffer
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
62 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Signs
The combination NEV/Bike Lane sign should be placed on NEV Lanes designed for use by both NEVs and bicyclists. The sign should be placed at the far side of collector street intersections and at a minimum of one-half mile intervals on all continuous NEV lane segments.

Figure 22: Combination NEV/Bike Lane Sign and Supplemental Plaques In locations where a NEV Lane is terminated or transitioned into or from a Class I or Class III facility, the R81A “BEGIN” or R81B “END” plaques may be used to the Combination NEV/Bike Lane sign.

NEV prohibition
This regulatory plate may be placed at entrances to public streets that will not accommodate NEV travel.

This sign may be placed on the right-hand side of the roadway approximately 25 feet past the intersection so it is visible to operators before they enter that portion of the public right-of-way.

Figure 23: NEV Prohibition Signs

The CTCDC has explained that NEV is an acronym for Neighborhood Electric Vehicle or Neighborhood Electric Vehicles, and accordingly will be adopted with “NEV PROHIBITED” rather than “NEVS PROHIBITED”. This sign may be used in conjunction with an existing “BEYOND THIS POINT” supplementary sign or in one sign.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 63

5.4.3 Intersection Design Elements
Right Turns and NEV Lanes
Experience in the City of Lincoln indicates that there are no significant issues with NEV use of conventional roadway left turn lanes. From the Lincoln Evaluation Report10 :
“NEVs tend to move over to the left turn lane, much like bicycles are able to do. The general feelings of safety for turning and maneuvering an NEV are subjective. Driving skills, experience, and familiarity with the driver’s surroundings area all key factors. However, as a general rule of thumb, if a bicycle has sufficient speed, site distance, and capability to move from a bike lane to a left turn lane, then an NEV would certainly have similar capability, since NEVs are generally faster and more visible than a standard bicycle.”
Because such operation requires shared roadway conditions for short segment, exercise caution when expecting this type of operation on roadways with a posted speed limit above 35 mph.

Managing Right Turns and NEV Lanes
Managing conflict between NEVs and right turning vehicles is one of the most important aspects of Class II NEV Lane design at intersections.

At locations adjacent to a shared through/right turn lane, the NEV lane should be dashed in advance of the intersection to allow right turning vehicles to turn from the rightmost lane of the street. Motorists are required to yield to NEVs and bicyclist prior to positioning for the right turn. However according to the CVC they can enter a bike lane 150' prior to an intersection when safe to do so.

Figure 24: Dashed NEV Lane Next to Through/Right Lane
In areas of high right turn volumes, a dedicated right-turn-only lane should be provided. The right turn only lane should be added to the right of the NEV lane and the merge area should be marked with dashed lines. The NEV lane alignment should be straight through the merge area (so the right-turn lane is

10 City of Lincoln and City of Rocklin. Neighborhood Electric Vehicle Transportation Plan Evaluation. 2011. 50-200 ft dotted line at signalized intersections
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
64 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
designer as an “add” lane) with as little deflection to the NEV lane as necessary. Motorists are required to yield to NEVs and bicyclist at the entrance to the right-turn-only lane.

Figure 25: Through NEV Lane and Added Right Turn Only Lane When there isn’t adequate space for a dedicated right-turn-only lane, a Combined NEV/Turn Lane (Figure 22) may be provided to encourage users to negotiate priority in advance of the intersection. This treatment is based off a similar configuration used for bike lanes11 . Signs should be used to permit
through movements by NEVs and bicyclists in these locations.

Figure 26: Combined NEV Lane/Turn Lane (Mixing Zone)

11 NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide: Combined Bike Lane/Turn Lane. 2012.

R4-4
R3-7R
R4-4
R3-7R
“Except NEV” plaque
Short Right Turn Lane
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 65
In situations where a through travel lane becomes a right-turn-only lane, NEV operators and bicyclists are required to move laterally to maintain a through position to the left of the right-turn-only lane. This situation is highly undesirable, as motor vehicles are traveling at a high rate of speed and user priority is ambiguous.

Because this configuration creates a short-length of shared-roadway condition, exercise caution when applying this treatment on roadways with a posted speed limit above 35 mph.

Figure 27: Through NEV Lane with Transition to Right-Turn-Only Lane (35 mph or lower) Signals Detection and Actuation
At signalized intersections the Class II NEV Lane users must be able to reliably and easily actuate the signal controller if the signal is not operating on fixed timing mode. Most commonly this is done through loop detectors or other technology.

Loop Detectors
NEV/Bicycle-activated loop detectors are installed within the roadway to allow the presence of an NEV lane user to trigger a change in the traffic signal. Loops that are sensitive enough to detect bicycles should be supplemented with pavement markings to instruct users how to activate the signals.

Video Detection Cameras
Video detection systems use digital image processing to detect a change in the image at a location. These systems can be calibrated to detect NEVs and bicyclists. Video camera system costs range from $20,000 to $25,000 per intersection.

Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor Detection (RTMS)
RTMS is a system which uses frequency modulated continuous wave radio signals to detect objects in the roadway. This method marks the detected object with a time code to determine its distance from the sensor. The RTMS system is unaffected by temperature and lighting, which can affect standard video detection.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
66 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Right Turn Access Lanes
In many areas of the Coachella Valley where arterial roads intersect other arterial roads, consecutive right-turn lanes can present a significant challenge for NEV operators and bicyclists. To make a right turn, an NEV operator would use the right-turn lane as though they were in a motor vehicle. However, once they’ve executed the turn, they no longer have a dedicated NEV facility, and are instead forced to share another right-turn lane with vehicles turning into driveways or parking lot entrances. This is especially problematic for NEV operators because they must negotiate a shared space with faster travelling vehicles entering the right-turn lane, while trying to merge over into the through travel lane (again with faster moving vehicles continuing straight). Two options are presented below.

Figure 22 depicts a typical right-turn departure NEV/bike lane transition. This lane striping provides separation after the turn and forces vehicles to turn across the NEV/bike lane to access driveways. The dashed vehicle merging area can utilize a green colored surface treatment to further highlight the potential conflict area. Where roadway widths allow, buffered bike lanes (on one or two sides) offer additional space, and increased comfort for NEV operators and bicyclists along higher speed roadways.

Physical separation can also be achieved with a concrete channelization island near the intersection.

Figure 28: Typical Right-turn Departure NEV/Bike Lane
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 67
Figure 29: Right-turn Departure NEV/bike Lane Roadway Section When the roadway is not wide enough to accommodate a 7-foot NEV/bike lane, a secondary option is to provide a shared or “mixing” lane, where motor vehicles must turn right for driveway access, and NEVs and bikes are permitted to proceed through (Figure 24). Shared lane markings (“Sharrows”) may be used and “Right-Turn Only – Except NEVs/Bikes” signage should be used in this context.

Figure 30: Shared Right-turn Only Lane with Exception for NEVs and Nikes Figure 31: Shared Right-turn Only Lane Roadway Section
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
68 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

5.5 Class III NEV Route Design
Class III Routes are shared, on-street facilities without exclusive NEV striping or separation from motor vehicles, bikes or other modes, typically designated on residential streets with posted speed limits of 25 mph or less12.

Designers should create streets with low design speeds to create “self explaining” or “self enforcing” operating conditions. Narrow cross sections and traffic calming elements such as speed tables, chicanes and neighborhood roundabouts should be used to encourage appropriate driver operating speed without the need for enforcement or education.

5.5.1 Cross Sections
When Class III Routes coincide with designated bicycle boulevards, Class III Routes may also feature a bicycle shared lane marking to indicate the facility type to other roadway users. Commonly, the centerline is not marked, to permit and encourage full use of the roadway for comfortable passing.

Figure 32: Typical Class III Route on Residential Street

5.5.2 Markings and Signs
No identifying pavement markings are required for Class III NEV Routes. NEV ROUTE signs should be used to raise awareness to other users of the presence of NEVs. The word BIKE has been included because it is assumed that any route preferred for NEVs would also be a preferred for bicyclists.

Figure 33: Class III NEV Route Sign

12 State regulations permit shared roadway NEV use on streets with speed limits of 35 mph or lower.

Pedestrian Path Class
III
NEV Route: Pedestrian Path
Width Varies
Parking Parking
No Marked
Centerline
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 69

5.6 Implementation Strategies

5.6.1 Travel Lane Reconfigurations
The removal of a single, wide travel lane may provide sufficient space for NEV lanes on both sides of a street. Streets with excess vehicle capacity provide opportunities for NEV lane retrofit projects.

Depending on a street’s existing configuration, traffic operations, user needs and safety concerns, various lane reduction configurations may apply. For instance, a four-lane street (with two travel lanes in each direction) could be modified to provide one travel lane in each direction, a center turn lane, and bike lanes. Prior to implementing this measure, a traffic analysis should identify potential impacts.

5.6.2 Travel Lane Narrowing
Lane narrowing utilizes roadway space that exceeds minimum standards to provide the needed space for NEV lanes. Many roadways have existing travel lanes that are wider than those prescribed in local and national roadway design standards, or which are not marked. Most standards allow for the use of 9-12 foot travel lanes to create space for NEV lanes.

Special consideration should be given to the amount of heavy vehicle traffic, desired speed of the roadway and horizontal curvature before the decision is made to narrow travel lanes. Narrow travel lanes have proven effective in reducing motorists speeds on roadways as they are more appropriately designed for the predominate passenger vehicle users of the roadway rather than the largest roadway users like semi trucks and buses ability to drive the design speed. Two way left turn lane or Center turn lanes can also be narrowed to 9'-11' in many situations to repurpose pavement space for NEV lanes.

AASHTO supports reduced width lanes in A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets: “On interrupted-flow operation conditions at low speeds (45 mph or less), narrow lane widths are normally adequate and have some advantages.”

5.6.3 Parking Lane Removal
Like travel lane removal, the removal of one or both parking lanes may provide necessary space to establish NEV lanes. Typical parking lane widths of 8 feet are directly compatible with one-direction NEV lanes and such conversions may be very cost effective. Parking lane removal may be controversial and a public process is typically needed.

5.6.4 Shoulder Widening
NEV lanes can be accommodated on streets with excess right-of-way through shoulder widening.

Although roadway widening incurs higher expenses compared with re-striping projects, NEV lanes can be added to streets currently lacking curbs, gutters and sidewalks without the high costs of major infrastructure reconstruction. Due to the cost of street reconstruction, shoulder widening is most appropriate on roads lacking curbs, gutters and sidewalks.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
70 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

5.6.5 Speed Limit Adjustments
In some cases, a roadway may be operating at a speed too fast for Class III shared roadway use (> 35 mph), but would otherwise be compatible with NEV operation. In these situations, it may be possible to adjust the design speed of the road through striping, geometry adjustments, and traffic calming to reduce the posted speed limit to 35 mph or less as appropriate for NEV use.

5.7 Facility Maintenance

5.7.1 Considerations
Regular NEV facility maintenance includes sweeping, maintaining a smooth roadway, ensuring that the gutter-to-pavement transition remains relatively flush, and installing bicycle- and NEV-friendly drainage grates. Pavement overlays are a good opportunity to improve NEV facilities. The following recommendations provide a menu of options to consider enhancing a maintenance regimen.

Table 8: Recommended Maintenance Activities
Maintenance Activity Frequency
Inspections Seasonal – at beginning
and end of Summer
Pavement
sweeping/blowing
As needed, with higher
frequency in the early
Spring and Fall
Pavement sealing 5 - 15 years
Pothole repair 1 week – 1 month after
report. Marked with high
visibility paint until repairs
can be completed.

Culvert and drainage
grate inspection
Before Winter and after
major storms
Pavement markings
replacement
As needed
Signage replacement As needed
Shoulder plant trimming
(weeds, trees, brambles)
Twice a year; middle of
growing season and early
Fall
Tree and shrub
plantings, trimming
1 – 3 years
Major damage response
(washouts, fallen trees,
flooding)
As soon as possible
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 71

5.7.2 Street Sweeping
NEV users often avoid shoulders and lanes filled with gravel, broken glass, sand accumulation and other debris; they will ride in the roadway to avoid these hazards, potentially causing conflicts with motorists.

Debris from the roadway should not be swept onto sidewalks (pedestrians need a clean walking surface), nor should debris be swept from the sidewalk onto the roadway. A regularly scheduled inspection and maintenance program helps ensure that roadway debris is regularly picked up or swept. Street sweeping maintenance practices should include:
• Establish a seasonal sweeping schedule that prioritizes roadways with NEV facilities • Sand removal should occur after each wind storm event • Sweep NEV facilities whenever there is an accumulation of debris on the facility. • Develop a “debris in roadway” hotline to report
• In curbed sections, sweepers should pick up debris; on open shoulders, debris can be swept onto gravel shoulders
• Pave gravel driveway approaches to minimize loose gravel on paved roadway shoulders • Perform additional sweeping in areas where debris accumulates

5.7.3 Gutter to Pavement Transitions
On streets with concrete curbs and gutters, 1 to 2 feet of the curbside area is typically devoted to the gutter pan, where water collects and drains into catch basins. On many streets, the NEV lane is situated near the transition between the gutter pan and the pavement edge. This transition can be susceptible to erosion, creating potholes and a rough surface for travel.

The pavement on many streets is not flush with the gutter, creating a vertical transition between these segments. This area can buckle over time, creating a hazardous condition for bicyclists. Gutter maintenance strategies include:
• Ensure that gutter-to-pavement transitions have no more than a ¼” vertical transition. • Examine pavement transitions during every roadway project for new construction, maintenance activities, and construction project activities that occur in streets. • Inspect the pavement 2 to 4 months after trenching construction activities are completed to ensure that excessive settlement has not occurred.
• Provide at least 5 feet of smooth pavement outside of the gutter seam.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
72 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

5.7.4 Access through Construction Areas
Wherever NEVs are allowed, measures should be taken to provide for the continuity of a user’s trip through a work zone area. NEV drivers should not be led into conflicts with work site vehicles, equipment, moving vehicles, open trenches, or temporary construction signage.

Efforts should be made to re-create an NEV lane (if one exists) to the left of the construction zone. If this is impossible, then consider the closure of a standard-width travel lane to accommodate separated NEV travel.

Contractors performing work should be made aware of the needs of NEV users and be properly trained in how to safely route NEVs through or around work zones.

Construction Signage
• Place in a location that does not obstruct the path of NEV drivers, bicyclists or pedestrians. • Detour and closure signs related to NEV travel may be included on all bikeways where construction activities occur. Signage should also be provided on all other roadways.

Travel on and around Steel Grates
Plates used to cover trenches tend to not be flush with pavement and have a 1”-2” vertical transition on the edges. This can puncture a hole in a bicycle tire and can be be jarring to NEV drivers. Although it is common to use steel plates during non-construction hours, these plates can be dangerously slippery, particularly when wet. Good practices include:
• Require temporary asphalt (cold mix) around plates to create a smooth transition. • Use steel plates only as a temporary measure during construction, not for extended periods. • Use warning signs where steel plates are in use.
• Require both temporary and final repaving to provide a smooth surface without abrupt edges.

Figure 34: Proper Placement of Construction Signage Outside of NEV Lane Construction
signs
placed
outside
of
NEV
lane
or
sidewalk.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 73

5.8 Additional AB 61 Considerations

5.8.1 Safety and Maintenance Requirements
NEVs eligible to use NEV lanes shall meet the safety requirements for low-speed vehicles as set forth in Section 571.500 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, included below.

TITLE 49 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
§571.500 Standard No. 500; Low-speed vehicles. S5. Requirements.

S5. Requirements.
(a) When tested in accordance with test conditions in S6 and test procedures in S7, the maximum speed attainable in 1.6 km (1 mile) by each low-speed vehicle shall be not more than 40 kilometers per hour (25 miles per hour). (b) Each low-speed vehicle shall be equipped with:
(1) Headlamps,
(2) Front and rear turn signal lamps,
(3) Taillamps,
(4) Stop lamps,
(5) Reflex reflectors: one red on each side as far to the rear as practicable, and one red on the rear, (6) An exterior mirror mounted on the driver's side of the vehicle and either an exterior mirror mounted on the passenger's side of the vehicle or an interior mirror,
(7) A parking brake,
(8) A windshield that conforms to the Federal motor vehicle safety standard on glazing materials (49 CFR 571.205). (9) A VIN that conforms to the requirements of part 565 Vehicle Identification Number of this chapter, and (10) A Type 1 or Type 2 seat belt assembly conforming to Sec. 571.209 of this part, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 209, Seat belt assemblies, installed at each designated seating position. (11) Low-speed vehicles shall comply with the rear visibility requirements specified in paragraphs S6.2 of FMVSS No. 111.

S6. General test conditions. Each vehicle must meet the performance limit specified in S5(a) under the following test conditions.

S6.1. Ambient conditions.

S6.1.1. Ambient temperature. The ambient temperature is any temperature between 0 °C (32 °F) and 40 °C (104 °F).

S6.1.2. Wind speed. The wind speed is not greater than 5 m/s (11.2 mph).

S6.2. Road test surface.

S6.2.1. Pavement friction. Unless otherwise specified, the road test surface produces a peak friction coefficient (PFC) of 0.9 when measured using a standard reference test tire that meets the specifications of American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E1136, “Standard Specification for A Radial Standard Reference Test Tire,” in accordance with ASTM Method E 1337-90, “Standard Test Method for Determining Longitudinal Peak Braking Coefficient of Paved Surfaces Using a Standard Reference Test Tire,” at a speed of 64.4 km/h (40.0 mph), without water delivery (incorporated by reference; see 49 CFR 571.5).

S6.2.2. Gradient. The test surface has not more than a 1 percent gradient in the direction of testing and not more than a 2 percent gradient perpendicular to the direction of testing.

S6.2.3. Lane width. The lane width is not less than 3.5 m (11.5 ft).

S6.3. Vehicle conditions.

S6.3.1. The test weight for maximum speed is unloaded vehicle weight plus a mass of 78 kg (170 pounds), including driver and instrumentation.

S6.3.2. No adjustment, repair or replacement of any component is allowed after the start of the first performance test.

S6.3.3. Tire inflation pressure. Cold inflation pressure is not more than the maximum permissible pressure molded on the tire sidewall.

S6.3.4. Break-in. The vehicle completes the manufacturer's recommended break-in agenda as a minimum condition prior to beginning the performance tests.

S6.3.5. Vehicle openings. All vehicle openings (doors, windows, hood, trunk, convertible top, cargo doors, etc.) are closed except as required for instrumentation purposes.

S6.3.6. Battery powered vehicles. Prior to beginning the performance tests, propulsion batteries are at the state of charge recommended by the manufacturer or, if the manufacturer has made no recommendation, at a state of charge of not less than 95 percent. No further charging of any propulsion battery is permissible.

S7. Test procedure. Each vehicle must meet the performance limit specified in S5(a) under the following test procedure. The maximum speed performance is determined by measuring the maximum attainable vehicle speed at any point in a distance of 1.6 km (1.0 mile) from a standing start and repeated in the opposite direction within 30 minutes. [63 FR 33216, June 17, 1998, as amended at 68 FR 43972, July 25, 2003; 79 FR 19249, Apr. 7, 2014] CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
74 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments

5.8.2 Operator Requirements
Operators shall be required to possess a valid California driver’s license and to comply with the financial responsibility requirements established pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 16000) of Division 7 of the Vehicle Code.

5.8.3 Restrictions on Use
Operation of NEVs is restricted to those NEV routes identified in the transportation plan, and limited to those NEVs that meet the safety equipment requirements specified in the plan.

5.8.4 Violations
Any person operating a NEV in the plan area in violation of these rules and regulations is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100).

5.8.5 Evaluation and Monitoring
Any city that adopts a NEV transportation plan shall submit a report to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2016, in consultation with the Department of Transportation, the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and any applicable local law enforcement agency.

The report shall include all of the following:

1. A description of the NEV transportation plan and its elements that have been authorized up to that time.

2. An evaluation of the effectiveness of the NEV transportation plan, including its impact on traffic flows and safety.

3. A recommendation as to whether AB 61 should be terminated, continued in effect, or expanded statewide.

More detail on evaluation and monitoring is provided in section 0 of this plan.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 75
This page intentionally left blank
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
76 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
6 Recommended Education, Legislation, and Enforcement

6.1 Legislation
The disparate patchwork of current bylaws and policies are presented in Appendix D. In order to provide greater consistency across jurisdictional boundaries, support the objectives of CV Link, and promote wider adoption of lower cost and environmentally friendly transportation options, a model set of municipal city codes and policies should be developed to include:
• Coachella Valley wide standard definitions of the types of golf cars, NEVs, LSVs and LSEVs based on the California Vehicle Code
• All golf carts and NEVs shall be permitted to park in any parking space • NEVs and golf carts that have a state issued registration for on-street use shall be exempt from city permits
• The acceptance of permits issued by other jurisdictions in the State of California and/or a California Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) issued license plate for operation on identified routes
• Publication of a map indicating which streets with posted speed limits above 35 mph have NEV facilities, and which designated golf cart paths are available for:
o Unrestricted NEV speed (up to the legal 25 mph limit) as conditions permit o Restricted NEV speed up to 15 mph due to geometric or other considerations o Prohibited for NEVs but still permissible for golf carts (not recommended, as this may lead to confusion and enforceability issues)

6.2 Education and Enforcement
As NEVs are a nascent technology, many residents and officials conflate them with golf cars (carts).

Following on from the recommendation for a Coachella Valley wide set of definitions, there will be a need to educate the public on what each type of vehicle is and where they may be used. • CVAG and the member cities should conduct outreach and public service announcements to clarify the various vehicle types
• All Coachella Valley DMV offices should feature hardcopies of the DMV’s fact sheet available online here: http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr37.pdf • Member cities should distribute to all residents the adopted uniform municipal code sections applying to NEVs and golf carts via regular mail as well as throughout all city departments including the police
• Riverside County Sheriffs Department should distribute the DMV’s fact sheet and applicable municipal city codes to all officers
As previously noted, to support the development of golf cart and NEV plans, streets and paths must be designated for use or prohibited access.
• Inter-jurisdictional development and publication of maps with routes for the operation of NEVs.

This is needed for planning and design of streets, education, wayfinding, and enforcement purposes
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 77

6.3 Frequently Asked Questions
Q. What does the State of California require me to do to drive an NEV/ LSV, and do I have to follow the same laws as a car driver?
A. An NEV / LSV driver must have registration, insurance, and driver's license. Although the legislation has established a separate class for LSVs, almost all laws applicable to motor vehicle drivers also apply to LSV drivers. A driver may not operate a vehicle under the influence of alcohol (CVC 23152) Q. Can I modify my golf cart to achieve 25 mph like a NEV? A. While it is not difficult to do this and many businesses are currently doing it, the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) states:

A golf cart cannot be converted for registration as an NEV/LSV. If you modify your golf cart to go faster than 15 mph or seat more than two persons, the vehicle is considered a regular motor vehicle and must comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Standards for passenger vehicles. Failure to comply with all necessary regulations may result in a citation.

You may register the golf cart with the DMV as a golf cart, and you may obtain any currently required city permits for operation on public pathways or streets with speed limits generally limited to 25 mph, but you will not be able to legally operate a modified golf cart on a street with a speed limit of 30 or 35 mph.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
78 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
7 Evaluation and Monitoring
To meet the reporting requirements of Assembly Bill No. 61, CVAG must submit to the legislature by January 1, 2016 an NEV Plan Evaluation and Monitoring Report to the legislature, in consultation with the Department of Transportation, the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and local law enforcement agencies.

According to AB 61, the report shall describe the plan adopted, evaluate its effectiveness and impact on traffic flows and safety, and make a recommendation to the Legislature on whether to extend the sunset date or expand the authorization for NEV transportation plans statewide. Required elements include:
• A description of NEV transportation plan and its elements that have been authorized up to that time.
• An evaluation of the effectiveness of the NEV transportation plans, including their impact on traffic flows and safety.
• A recommendation as to whether AB61 sunset date should be extended and if the authorization for NEV transportation plans should be expanded statewide.

In 2011 the City of Lincoln and Rocklin prepared an NEV Plan Evaluation for the California Legislature to meet the requirements of AB 2963. The Lincoln evaluation requirements are equivalent to those in AB 61, and as such offers a model for CVAG to follow in preparation and execution of their own Evaluation and Monitoring Report. It is recommended that the CVAG report evaluate the same categories included in the Lincoln/Rocklin report plus additional measures not previously evaluated. The recommended evaluation categories for CVAG are:

Traffic Engineering Speed Study
Histograms of operating speed frequency for both motor vehicles and NEVs on Class II and Class III facilities.

Incident and Traffic Violation Databases
Inquiry and analysis of NEV-involved traffic collision or violations from local law enforcement agencies and the California Highway Patrol.

Surveys
Surveys of travelers of all modes, to understand the perception of NEV use safety and NEV facility design. Survey results can be evaluated separately by mode to understand differences in perception between motorist, NEV operators and bicyclists. A copy of the full survey used by the City of Lincoln is available in Appendix C of the City of Lincoln NEV Transportation Plan Evaluation report.

Energy and Air Quality Impacts
A detailed travel survey can form the bases of an analysis of air quality and energy benefits of current and future NEV use.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 79
Evaluation of Signs, Striping and Pavement Markings
To understand comprehension and compliance with NEV specific traffic control devices, methods such as surveys or an analysis of operation should evaluate the effectiveness of non-standard signs and markings. This evaluation may be necessary as part of an experimentation process with the MUTCD.

Education Campaign
Experience in other cities indicates that there may be some confusion about compatibility between NEV and golf cart facilities. It is important to educate users about the limitations and capability differences between the two vehicle types. A NEV Brochure/Route Map would help educate the public about where NEVs can be legally and comfortably operated, and help explain the difference of NEVs and golf carts. The brochure can include safety tips for NEV operators and answer frequently asked questions about using the network.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
80 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
8 References
Planning, design and implementation standards in this document are derived from the following sources:
• AASHTO, Roadside Design Guide, 2002.
• U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), 2009. • Caltrans, California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2012. • USDOT, FHWA, Conflicts on Multiple-Use Trails: Synthesis of the Literature and State of the Practice, 1994.
• Caltrans, Highway Design Manual, 2014
• Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities, 1997. • National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2nd Ed, 2012.
• Assembly Bill No. 61. Chapter 170. 2011-2012. Section 571.500 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations
• Coachella Valley Area Governments (CVAG), Whitewater River/Parkway 1e11 NEV/Bike/Pedestrian Corridor Preliminary Study Report, 2012 • CVAG, Coachella Valley Non-motorized Transportation Plan Update, 2010 • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), Development Design Manual, 2010 • Riverside County, General Plan Draft Circulation Element, Trails and Bikeway System, 2013 • City of Lincoln, NEV Transportation Plan, 2006
• City of Lincoln, CTCDC Approved Experimental Standards, 2005 The sources listed above provide details on many aspects of path design, but a) may contain recommendations that conflict with each other; b) are not, in most cases, officially recognized “requirements”; and c) do not cover all conditions on most paths. All design guidelines must be supplemented in the application to specific situations by the professional judgments of the path designers and engineers.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 81
This page intentionally left blank
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
82 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Appendix A: NEVSA Features
Summary of Total Possible Scores
Ø Where People Live – 20%
Ø Where People Work – 20%
Ø Where People Play – 30%
Ø Where People Learn – 20%
Ø Where People Access Transit – 10%
NEVSA Inputs
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 83
This page intentionally left blank
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
84 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Appendix B. Existing Transit, Bike, Golf Cart and NEV Facility Maps The following maps are based upon the:
• Published golf cart maps for each jurisdiction (where available) • Non=Motorized Transportation Plan (NMTP)
• City staff feedback
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 85
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
86 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 87
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
88 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 89
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
90 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 91
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
92 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 93
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
94 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Appendix C. Roadway Speed Limit Maps
The following maps are based upon data collected from CVAG, jurisdictions that supplied data, and inspection of posted speed limit signage as found via street-view imagery available online in 2014. This data was used in the development of the network maps, as NEVs are only permitted to share a general travel lane if the speed limit is 35mph or less.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 95
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
96 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 97
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
98 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 99
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
100 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 101
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
102 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 103
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
104 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Appendix D – Existing Golf Cart Permit Requirements and Maps The following maps are the latest versions of any maps available on each city’s website or as obtained through interviews with city staff. Traffic regulations and definitions are provided in more detail in Chapter 2 of this plan.

Indio
The City of Indio adopted a Golf Cart Transportation Plan in 2010 that sets out definitions, design and safety criteria, permits, crossings for golf clubs, and enforcement policy.

The City of Indio’s definition of a golf cart is a motor vehicle that “is operated at not more than twentyfive (25) miles per hour” which conflates higher speed golf carts with federal and state certified NEVs that are street legal on roadways up to 35 mph. Furthermore, the City of Indio defines Class III routes as roadways with speed limits of 25 mph or less, while federal and state legislation permits a street legal NEV to operate on roadways with speed limits of 35 mph or less. It is likely that there are few roadways which serve as connections between Class I paths and Class II lanes posted for 25 mph or less.

Indio’s plan also sets out a seven-step procedure for obtaining a permit for street operation, including the requirement to provide proof of insurance. After scheduling a police department inspection of the golf cart at the applicant’s home and payment of a $50 two-year permit fee, the “applicant may drive golf cart with permit ONLY on designated pathways, sidewalks, and bicycle lanes, as well as on any residential street, for two (2) years.” In comparison to the requirements for operating a car on a public roadway, this procedure is more involved and may dissuade the public from adopting NEVs that are designed for street legal operation from the outset.

The city prohibits parking of golf carts in motor vehicle spaces. By federal and state legislation, an NEV is a motor vehicle, yet the similarity between golf carts and NEVs is likely to lead to confusion on whether or not an NEV operator may park in a “motor vehicle” parking space. As a golf cart or an NEV can serve the same trip purposes as a highway capable car, there is no reason from a parking demand and supply perspective for this restriction.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 105
Figure 35: City of Indio Golf Cart Map
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
106 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Cathedral City
City staff have advised the following (paraphrased):

Golf carts and NEVs are currently not allowed on Cathedral City streets. Their use is illegal on public streets, and they have been cited. The City vehicle code would need to be changed in order to permit their use.

The city’s municipal code: http://qcode.us/codes/cathedralcity/ does not reference golf carts or NEVs.

NEVs are permitted by state legislation on public streets, although the same state legislation permits cities to pass bylaws prohibiting their use.

Cathedral City does not publish a golf cart or NEV route map online.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 107
La Quinta
The City of La Quinta has a golf cart ordinance regulating the operation of golf carts on public streets.

The city does not mention NEVs. A permit is required, but it is less costly ($20) and difficult to obtain than it is in Indio. The standards which conflict with current developments in NEV design and are likely to limit wider adoption of NEVs include the following, with commentary added in parentheses:
• Golf carts are limited to daytime operation (golf carts modified for street use and factory designed NEVs have front and rear lighting that meet USDOT standards, so there is no obvious reason for this prohibition)
• Golf carts are limited to streets with speed limits of 25 mph or less (this would need to be clarified so that vehicles meeting the LSV definition are permitted on streets with speed limits of 35 mph or less)
• Golf carts must be designed to carry golf equipment and no more than two persons including the driver (NEVs are not designed to carry golf equipment and models are available that carry up to six persons including the driver)
The city publishes a brochure that includes a map of routes by class as shown in Figure 36.

Figure 36: City of La Quinta Golf Cart Map
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
108 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Palm Desert
Figure 37: Palm Desert Bike and Golf Cart Route Map
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 109
Palm Springs
Palm Springs is the only known Coachella Valley city to have a route map aimed at NEVs, dated 2009. It is not readily found on the City’s website.

CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
110 | Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Rancho Mirage
CVAG Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Plan
Coachella Valley Association of Governments | 111
Appendix E – Electric Vehicle Charging Station Locations

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

INSTITUTING RULES OF CIVILITY AND DECORUM FOR CONDUCT OF CITY

OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DURING PUBLIC

MEETINGS
WHEREAS, across the nation, many public entities have adopted policies and rules to enhance civility at public meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Juan Bautista values its commitment to the democratic process, the public’s right to expression, robust debate, and tolerance for disparate views; and WHEREAS, the City of San Juan Bautista City Council and the City of San Juan Bautista’s various boards, commissions, and other public bodies may, from time to time, convene public meetings to address issues, including controversial matters that engender passionate and often conflicting opinions; and
WHEREAS, impropriety, incivility, and disrespect at public meetings risks stifling participation and debate, and undermines the democratic process; and WHEREAS, adopting rules of civility and decorum applicable to all public meetings will help ensure that civic engagement and local democracy continue to flourish in the City of San Juan Bautista:

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of San Juan Bautista accepts and adopts the San Juan Bautista Rules of Civility and Decorum.

PASSED AND APPROVED this __th day of November 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
_________________________
Leslie Q. Jordan, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Elizabeth Soto, Deputy City Clerk
City of San Juan Bautista Rules of Civility and Decorum

Page 1 of 2 ends

San Juan Bautista City CouncilNovember 14, 2023

San Juan Bautista City Council
November 14, 2023