Agenda, regular meeting — Sanger City Council, April 6, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

AGENDA

AMENDED

SANGER CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING
TH
URSDAY, APRIL 6, 2023
6:00 P.M.

COUNCIL CHAMBER
1700 7th Street, Sanger, California 93657
Prior to action by the Council on any item on this agenda, the public may comment on that item.

A. CALL TO ORDER
B. OPENING CEREMONIES
Invocation
Flag S
alute
Roll Call
C. A GE

NDA APP ROVAL, ADDITIONS AND/OR DELETIONS
D. CEREMONIAL MATTERS

1. Int
roduction of newly appointed EMTs Wayne Clark and Sherry Velasquez.

E. PRESENTATION S

1. The
CrisCom Company report.

AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW 72 HOURS

PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AT THE SANGER LIBRARY, CITY CLERK’S

OFFICE AND THE SANGER CITY HALL
LOBBY.

This meeting will be available for public viewing and participation through Zoom.

Weblink : https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82937956561
Telephone n umber: 1-669-900-9128
Meeting ID: 829 3795 6561
Public comment will be accepted in person, via Zoom, and by email at [email protected]. 1 F.

PUBLIC FOR UM
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Council on any matter not otherwise on the agenda and within the jurisdiction of the City Council.

Speakers shall address all comments to the Mayor and the Council as a body and not to any particular Councilmember or member of the staff. Speakers should limit their comments to three (3) minutes.

G. C

ONSENT C ALENDAR
(Matters listed under the consent calendar are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion and one vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, a member of the audience or a Councilmember may request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and it will be considered separately.)

1. SUBJECT
: Minutes of the Regular Meeting held on March 16, 2023.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve.

2. SUBJEC
T: A doption of Change of Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment No. 22-05 (Hodges/Recharge Basin).

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2023-03, amending the City of Sanger zoning Map, to achieve compliance with General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01, approved by the City Council on March 16, 2023.

3. SUBJ
ECT: Appoi ntment to the Commission to Advance the Status of Women and Girls, District 2 Representative.

RECOMMENDATION: Tha t the City Council consider and approve Mayor’s District 2 appointment to the City’s Commission to Advance the Status of Women and Girls: Kim Maldonado.

4. SUBJ
ECT: Emer gency Medical Services Contract Extension.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the extension for Emergency Medical Services with the County of Fresno and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City.

5. SUBJ
ECT: Aut horization for Out of State Travel – Councilmember Esmeralda Hurtado and Councilmember Dolores Melendez.

RECOMMENDATION: That the Cit
y Council authorize Out of State travel
for Councilmember Hurtado and Councilmember Melendez to attend the NALEO (National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials) 40th Annual Conference in New York City, New York, from July 11 – 13, 2023. 2 6. SUB
JECT: A pproval of Sole Source Provider and Contract for Purchase of Access Control System.

RECOMMENDATION: That t he City Council approve the use of a sole source provider, Surveillance Integration, and approve contract for the purchase and installation of a new Access Control System at the police department and city annex building.

7. S
UBJECT: Initiate Proceedings to Levy the Annual Assessment for Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 1.

RECOMMENDATION: That th e City Council approve Resolution No. 2023- 12, initiating proceedings to levy the annual assessment for Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 1.

8. S
UBJECT: I nitiate Proceedings to Levy the Annual Assessment for Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 2.

RECOMMENDATION: That th e City Council approve Resolution No. 2023- 13 initiating proceedings to levy the annual assessment for Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 2.

9. SUB
JECT: A greement for Emergency Use of the Community Center between the City of Sanger and the American Red Cross.

RECOMMENDATION: That th e City Council ratify the contract for the emergency use of the Sanger Community Center during the period between March 9, 2023 and March 17, 2023 for the purpose of emergency sheltering of victims from flooding between the City of Sanger and the American Red Cross.

H. PUBLIC HEARING

1. SUBJECT: Establishment of Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council conduct a public hearing, and following its conclusion, adopt Resolution No. 2023-14 approving the Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Study and establishing a new groundwater recharge development impact fee.

I. DEPARTMENT REPORTS

1. SUBJECT: Measure S Gang/Drug Prevention/Intervention Services Grant Program Awards.

RECOMMENDATION: The Citizens Ov ersight Committee recommends the City Council select Set Free Church ($30,000), Sanger Young Life ($40,000), Boys and Girls Club ($20,000) and SAM Academy ($10,000) as the approved grant recipients for Measure S Gang/Drug Prevention/Intervention award and staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with each recipient.
3 2. SUBJECT: City of Sanger Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-15, which approves the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for fiscal years 23/24 – 27/28.

3. SUBJECT: C
onsulting Engineer Agreement for Community Development
Block Grant Projects Services.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council award a Consulting Engineer Agreement for Community Block Grant Project Services to Yamabe & Horn Engineering, Inc., and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City.

4. SUBJECT: C
onsideration of Water and Sewer Rate Study and Initiation of Proposition 218 Process.

RECOMMENDATION: That th
e City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-16
accepting the rate study relating to water and sewer rates; authorizing required actions under Proposition 218; setting a Proposition 218 Public Hearing date to June 15, 2023 to consider rate increases.

5. SUBJECT: Zoning Amendment No. 2022-04 (City- wide Rezones).

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council waive the full reading and introduce Ordinance No. 2023-02, amending the City of Sanger Zoning Map, to achieve compliance with 2035 Sanger General Plan, rezoning real property for a total of 346 parcels within the City.

J. CI TY MAN AGER/STAFF COMMUNICATION

K. MATTERS INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
(This portion of the meeting is reserved for Councilmembers to initiate new matters and to request updates and/or status on existing matters. Under this section, the Council may also take action on any items specifically agendized.)

1. Consideration and/or direction of installing flashing lights at 8 th Street and
Academy Avenue – Councilmember Hurtado.

L. ADJOUR NMENT

I certify under the penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted in accordance with the applicable legal requirements. Dated this 3rd day of April 2023.

Rebeca Padron, City Clerk

4 ADA COMPLIANCE AND REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS P OLICY. Th e Council has adopted a Reasonable Acco mmodation Policy wh ich i s ava ilable on the City we bsite at www.ci.sanger.ca.us or upon r equest by em ailing the C ity Clerk at [email protected]. The Policy provides a procedure for receiving and resolving requests for accommodation to participate in this meeting. If you need as sistance in order to attend this Council meeting o r require auxiliary aids or services, e.g., hearing aids or signing services to make a presentation to the Council, please email the City Clerk or call by phone at (559) 876- 6300 extension 1350 so such aids or services can be arranged. Accommodations should be re quested as early as possible as additional ti me may be required in order to provide the requested accommodation. 5 q I
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Sanger City Council THURSDAY, MARCH 16, 2023
6:00 P.M.

COUNCIL CHAMBER
1700 7th Street, Sanger, Califomia 93657
A. CALL TO ORDER
The City Council called their meeting to order at 6:03 PM.

B. OPENING CEREMONIES
The invocation was offered by Pastor Joe.

The flag salute was led by Mayor Frank Gonzalez.

Roll Call

Present:

Absent:

C. AGENDA AL. ADDITIONS AND/OR DELETIONS
The Council by motion of Councilmember Hurtado moved Agenda Item I-1 to immediately follow Agenda Item D-3. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Montelongo and approved by the following vote:

Mayor Frank G onzalez, Councilmember Esmeralda Hurtado, Councilmember Michael Montelongo
Mayor Pro Tem Daniel Martinez, Councilmember Dolores Melendez

GONZALEZ, HURTADO, MONTELONGO
NONE
NONE

MARTINEZ, MELENDEZ
AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

D ONIAL MA
l Woman of the Year Award.

Mayor Gonzalez recognized Mia Geil as the City of Sanger 2023 Woman of the Year E. PRESENTATIONS

1. Mid Valley Disposal Report.

Laurie Zaninovich presented Mid Valley Disposal's report to the Council. 6 City Council Minutes
March 16, 2023

Page 2 ends

2. Sanger Chamber of Commerce Report.

Karen Pearson presented the Sanger Chamber of Commerce's report to the Council.

3. Measure SFY 2022123 GranlRecipient Reports.
a. Boys & Girls Club
Kim Ozuna presented the Boys & Girls' Club report.
b. SAM Academy
Sergio presented SAM Academy's report.
c. Sanger Young Life
Mia Geil presented Sanger Young Life's report.

I. DEPARTMENT REPORTS

1. SUBJECT: Measure S Gang/Drug Prevention/Intervention Services Grant Program Awards.

Administrative Services Director Patrick Chaffee presented on the item.

Jacob Zailianpresented Set Free Church's grant proposal report.

Stephanie Reyes presented Sanger Young Life's grant proposal report.

Sergio and Jerry Yaladez presented SAM Academy's grant proposal report.

Diane Carbray presented The Boys & Girls Club's grant proposal report.

The City Council called for a recess at 7:55 PM.

The City Council reconvened their meeting at 8:01 PM.

Public comment:

Jess stated he is a mental health therapist at Turning Point and has provided and received services for ten years. He asked how will Measure S grant recipients use informed trauma and healing approaches that are nationally recognized.

Fred Ratzlaff stated he is the Community Chair for Sanger Young Life. He said there are more than 30 volunteers for Sanger Young Life.

Jacklyn Contreras stated she was born and raised in Sanger and she is a mother of two. She stated Set Free Church has given her a light at end oftunnel. She stated Set Free has taught her how to live again and on f,rtting in again.
7 City Council Minutes
March 16, 2023

Page 3 ends

An unidentified audience member stated she has been a registered nurse for more than 50 years.

She stated Set Free Church should be commended for their improvement rate of 80%.

Pastor Joe of Sanger Community Church, said he is torn tonight because he loves Jacob and Set Free and also knows that Young life is doing incredible work.

An unidentified audience member read a letter from Dr. Ponce in support of Jacob and Set Free Church. In the letter, Dr. Ponce stated Set Free has helped troubled students make life changes. He stated Jacob and Set Free have proven that they have the love, skills, and desire to help those in need.

An unidentified member of the audience stated he is a Wyldlife leader at WAMS. He stated Wyldlife provides a way to interact with kids and their environment. He said he wished the City could give more money. He said success is measured by the relationships with kids.

Bobbi Phillips stated there are a lot of great programs and she is in support of them all.

Councilmember Montelongo made a motion to adopt the recommendation from the Citizens Oversight Committee to award Measure S Gang/Drug Prevention/Intervention grants as follows:
$30,000 to Set Free Church, $40,000 to Sanger Young Life, $10,000 to SAM Academy, and $20,000 to Boys & Girls Club. The motion was seconded by Mayor Gonzalez. The motion failed by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Councilmember Hurtado made a motion to adopt the award recommendation from the Citizens Oversight Committee, to award an additional $10,000 to SAM Academy, and to bring back the item during budget preparation for consideration of further funding. The motion failed for lack of second.

Councilmember Montelongo made a motion to adopt the recommendation from the Citizens Oversight Committee to award $30,000 to Set Free Church, $40,000 to Sanger Young Life, $10,000 to SAM Academy, and $20,000 to Boys & Girls Club. The motion was seconded by Mayor Gonzalez. The motion failed by the following vote:

GONZALEZ, MONTELONGO

HURTADO
NONE

MARTINEZ, MELENDEZ

GONZALEZ, MONTELONGO

HURTADO
NONE

MARTINEZ, MELENDEZ
Councilmember Montelongo made a motion to table the agenda item. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Hurtado and approved by the following vote:
8 City Council Minutes
March 16, 2023

Page 4 ends

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN
ABSENT:

GONZALEZ, HURTADO, MONTELONGO
NONE
NONE

MARTINEZ, MELENDEZ
F. PUBLIC FORUM
An unidentified member of the audience stated he was born and raised in Sanger and currently lives in an apartment owned by JD Rentals. He said the apartments have mold and no heating. He said the apartments flooded during the recent rains. He said the landlord is negligent and he doesn't know what to do anymore.

Shar Thompson stated she works with an organization that focuses on housing insecurities and to help tenants speak up for their rights. She said tenants living in the apartments owned by JD Rentals have no heat source and the tenants do not report it for fear of being kicked out.

Ricky stated he lives in the same apartment complex. He said the pipes leaked in kitchen and into the bedrooms and mold got in. He said the landlord cleaned up the mold by painting over it but the carpets were not replaced.

An unidentified member of the audience stated he lives at Sierra Woods Apartments, owned by JD Rentals. He said he moved in two years ago and has had issues with the air conditioning. He said the landlord refuses to allow PG&E to do an inspection.

Rosa Huerta stated she is president of the Sanger Friends of the Library. She stated recently, library staff took videos and pictures of participants in a library program and that the participants were told they did not need to provide a release for minors. She said the community needs to be trained that they have the right to refuse people of authority from taking photographs of children in public spaces.

G. CONSENT CALENDAR
The Council by motion of Councilmember Hurtado removed Agenda Items G-6 and G-l1, and approved the following items on the Consent Calendar:

I
2 SUBJECT:
2023.

APPROVED - Minutes of the Regular Meeting held on March2, SUBJECT: INFORMATIONAL ITEM - Warrants including CheckNos. 88550 through 88890.

3. SUBJECT: APPROVED - Payroll including Direct Deposit Nos. 59013 through 59237; Payroll Check Nos. 58844 through 58876; and Benefit Check Nos. 1864 through 1871.
9 City Council Minutes
March 16, 2023

Page 5 ends

10. 5
7 4. SUBJECT: INFORMATIONAL ITEM - Police Department Monthly Report.

SUBJECT: INFORMATIONAL ITEM - Fire Department Monthly Report.

SUBJECT: APPROVED - Repair of the Domestic Effluent Bar Screen - WWTP.

The City Council:
(1) Accepted the quote from MuniQuip, LLC for the purchase of the domestic waste water bar screen for an amount not to exceed $98,000 including taxes; (2) Approved contract with MuniQuip, LLC and authorizethe City Manager to execute all related documents; and
(3) Rescinded the contract award to Hydro-Dyne.

8. SUBJECT APPROVED - Award of Contract - Rehabilitation and Repairs of Well No. 25.

The City Council:
(1) Awarded the contract for the rehabilitation and repairs of Well No. 25 in the amount not to exceed $58,603.40 to Arsenal Well Drilling, Inc. located at 15162 Avenue 288, Visalia, CA93292;
(2) Authorizeda 10% contingency in the amount of $5,860.00; and (3) Authorized the City Manager to execute the contract documents on behalf of the City.

SUBJECT: APPROVED - Acceptance of Grant Deed for Sewer Lift Station Property for Tract 5826.

The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-10, which:
(l) Accepts for public purposes the real property described in the Grant Deed attached thereto as Attachment l, which acceptance is contingent upon completion of the Consummation Conditions to the satisfaction of the City Manager and City Attorney; and
(2) Authorizes the City Clerk to sign and deliver a Certificate of Acceptance upon completion of the consummation conditions.
9 SUBJECT: APPROVED - Final acceptance for North Ave Reconstruction Project from Academy to Faller Avenue.

The City Council:
(1) Accepted the work for the North Avenue Reconstruction Project from Academy to Faller Avenue in the amount of $629,280.07;
(2) Authorized recordation of the Notice of Completion with the Fresno County Recorder; and
(3) Authorized payment of 5o/o retention in the amount of $31,464.00 to Emmett Valley Construction upon expiration of the 35-day lien period. 10 City Council Minutes
March 16, 2023

Page 6 ends

6. SUBJECT: Grant Acceptance from State Homeland Security Grant Program.

After further discussion, the Council by motion of Councilmember Hurtado accepted the grant allocation in the amount of $6,284.00 from the FY 2022 State Homeland Security Grant progftrm.

The motion was seconded by Councilmember Montelongo and approved by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

11. SUBJECT: Fagade Improvement Grant Program.

Public comment
Karen Pearson asked whether information that the program will be effective retroactively was provided to business owners.

After further discussion, the Council by motion of Councilmember Hurtado, approved the Fagade Improvement Grant Program Guidelines & Application, and the Fagade Improvement Grant Agreement Template. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Montelongo and approved by the following vote:

G ONZ ALEZ, HURTAD O, MONTELONGO
NONE
NONE

MARTINEZ, MELENDEZ

GONZALEZ, HURTADO, MONTELONGO
NONE
NONE

MARTINEZ, MELENDEZ
H. PUBLIC HEARING

1. SUBJECT: Zoning Amendment No. 2022-0a (City-wide Rezones).

The Council held a public hearing to discuss ZoningAmendment No. 2022-04 regarding city-wide rezones.

No public comment was offered by the public.

The Council closed the public hearing
The Council by motion of Councilmember Montelongo:
(l) Adopted a Finding of Consistency with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047) prepared for the General Plan;
(2) Waived full reading of Ordinance No. 2023-02; and
(3) Introduced Ordinance No. 2023-02, approving Zoning Amendment No. 2022- 04, amending the Zoning Map to rezone real property for a total of 347 parcels within the City to be consistent with the 2035 General Plan. 11 City Council Minutes
March 16, 2023

Page 7 ends

The motion was seconded by Councilmember Hurtado and approved by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

SUBJECT: Approval of General Plan Amendment 2022-01and Adoption of Change of Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment No. 22-05. (Hodges/Recharge Basin).

The City Council held a public hearing to discuss approval of General Plan Amendment No.2022- 01 and adoption of change of Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment No. 22-05 (Hodges/Recharge basin).

No public comment was offered by the public.

The Council closed the public hearing.

The Council by motion of Councilmember Hurtado
(l) Adopted Resolution No. 2023-11 approving General Plan Amendment2022-01, redesignating APN 315-051-10 from theoostorm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the o'Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions; revising the General Plan Circulation Element to identifr the California Avenue alignment; and revising the Land Use Element to permit "recharge basins" in the Public Facilities district (includes adoption of a finding of consistency with the 2035 General Plan and environmental impact report (EIR); and (2) Waived full reading of Ordinance No. 2023-03; and
(3) Introduced Ordinance No. 2023-03 adopting Change of Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment No. 22-05, amending the official zone map for APN 315-051-10, containing approximately 27.53 acres within the City (Hodge/Recharge Basin) by title only.

The motion was seconded by Councilmember Montelongo and approved by the following vote:

GONZALEZ, HURTADO, MONTELONGO
NONE
NONE

MARTINEZ, MELENDEZ

GONZALEZ, HURTADO, MONTELONGO
NONE
NONE

MARTINEZ, MELENDEZ
12 J
City Council Minutes
March 16,2023

Page 8 ends

TAFF CO
City Manager Tim Chapa stated the atmospheric river and rain caused flooding in town. He said Acting City Manager Greg Tarascou responded appropriately to make sure ponding basins would act accordingly. City Manager Chapa commended Management Analyst Esperanza Rosales for the outstanding job she did in providing staff support during the flooding.

City Manager Chapa stated Sanger was asked to be an evacuation center after it was determined the normal evacuation center in Reedley would have to be moved due to flooding at Reedley College and Reedley's wastewater treatment plant. He said there were people in the evacuation center through today and EOC has now closed the center.

City Manager Chapa stated there was an issue at the Dollar Tree store and other stores located in the same shopping center. He said the issue was a function of architectural issues that were already there. Some buildings have been red tagged and some shut down. The owner has engaged a contractor to do the repairs.

K. TED BY
Councilmember Montelongo

1. Thanked Chief Tarascou for keeping the Council informed during the rains and flooding.

2. Thanked staff from Public Works, Police and Fire for their work in making sure the City was safe.

3. Stated that International Paper had an issue with the pump station. They turned it on and contacted the City.

Councilmember Hurtado
l. Thanked staff for taking initiative and providing shelter for evacuees.

2. Requested and received consensus to bring back an agenda item regarding the installation of flashing lights at 8th and Academy. Consensus was given.

Mayor Gonzalez

1. Asked whether the City still has the walking path by the river. City Manager Chapa said the City does still have it. Mayor Gonzalez said an organization has offered to maintain the area. City Manager Chapa said the Sanger Environmental Fund oversees the maintenance.

2. Thanked Karen for helping the Red Cross contact restaurants to request their assistance in providing food to the evacuees.
13 City Council Minutes
March 16, 2023

Page 9 ends

L. ADJOURNMENT
Being no further business, the Council adjourned their meeting at 9:33 PM.

ATTEST:

Rebeca Padron, City Clerk
14 For the Meeting of:

Agenda Item No.:
4pn16,2023
!-zCrrYoF SINGER
RE,PORTTO THE. CIry COUNCIL
To:

From:

Subject:

Mayor and Councilmembers
David Brletic, Community Development Director
Ordinance No. 2023-03, implementation of Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05, compliance with 2035 Sanger General Plan Designation for property located northeast of Acacia Avenue across the Southern Pacific railroad line tracks, west of Academy Avenue northwest of the Fowler Switch Canal, and south of the future E. Califomia Avenue alignment (APN 315-051-10) (Hodge/Recharge Basin).

Attachments: (1) Ordinance No. 2023-03
(2) March 16,2023 Staff Report to City Council
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council waive the full second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2023-03, amending the City of Sanger ZoningMap, to achieve compliance with General Plan AmendmentNo. 2022- 01, approved by the City Council on March 16,2023.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On March |6,2023,the City Council of the City of Sanger adopted General Plan Amendment No.2022- 01, redesignating property from the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations within an existing lot in a different arrangement, for property located northeast of Acacia Avenue across the Southern Pacific railroad line tracks, west of Academy Avenue northwest of the Fowler Switch Canal, and south of the future E. California Avenue alignment (APN 315-051-10) (Hodge/Recharge Basin).

Prepared by: David Brletic Approved by:

REVIEW: City Manager: Finance: City Attomey:

TYPE OF ITEM:

X Consent
Informational Item
X Action Item
Department Report
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROYED DENIED NO ACTION
Public Headng
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Othet:

Continued to:
15 On March 16, 2023, the City Council of the City of Sanger also introduced the First Reading of Ordinance No. 2023-03, approving Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05, changing zoning designations from Light Manufacturing (M-L) to Recreation, Schools, And Conservation (RSC) and High Density Residential (RM-l).

Ordinance No. 2023-03 achieves compliance with General Plan AmendmentNo. 2022-01, approved by the City Council on March 16,2023. Ordinance No. 2023-03 accommodates zoning for development of the current Ground Water Recharge Basin project and future development of the High Density Residential site.

BACKGROUND:

Project Site & Surroundines:

Prope4y Owner: Keith and Susan Hodge
Lot Size: 42.6 Acres
Existing Land Use: Vacant
General Plan Designation: "Residential High Density" and "storm Drain Facility" Zoning Designation: M-L
Adjoining Land Uses:

General Plan Zone District Existins Land Use
North Residential -
Medium Low
Density
N/A (County of Fresno) Agricultural
South Residential -
Medium Density
R-l-6, Single Family
Residential
Single Family Residential
Dwellings
East Commercial
General
C-M, Commercial and Light
Manufacturing
Vacant
West Residential -
Medium Density
R-1-6, Single Family
Residential
Single Family Residential
Dwellings
Location: The subject property is located northeast of Acacia Avenue across the Southern Pacific railroad line, west of Academy Avenue northwest of the Fowler Switch Canal, and south of the future E. Califomia Avenue alignment. Project site is depicted in the diagram, below. The APN for the subject property is 315- 051-10, containing approximately 27 .53 acres.

Location:

The project as proposed would result in the rezoning of the land in order to facilitate the required area needed for water recharge facilities and high-density residential uses, as well as changes to the General Plan Circulation Element to address California Avenue alignment and minor changes to land use definitions. 16 On March 16, 2023, the City of
Sanger City Council approved
General Plan Amendment No.2022-
01, reconhguring the location/acreage
of Residential - High Density with the
location/acreage of the Public
Facilities land uses within the parcel,
while still retaining the same overall
acreage of the site (15.5-acres of
Public Facilities and approximately
I2.l acres of Residential - High
Density).

On March 76,2023, the City of Sanger
City Council approved Zoning
Amendment No. 2022-05, to achieve
consistency with the 2035 Sanger
General Plan (as amended by General
Plan Amendment No. 2022-01)
designating the property as "Residential
- High Density" and "Storm Drain
Facility", consistent with the RM-1 and
RSC districts. Proposed changes are in
the adjacent diagram.

General Plan Desienation
Zoning Map Designation
tt ,:

I
iI
.1
..i
I
Rlt-l
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Ordinance No. 2023-03 achieves compliance with General Plan AmendmentNo.2022-01, approved by the City Council on March 16,2023. Ordinance No. 2023-03 accommodates zoning for development of the current Ground Water Recharge Basin project and future development of the High Density Residential site.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No fiscal impact.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to approve Ordinance No. 2023-03.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

If adopted, Ordinance No. 2023-03 will go into effect 31 days following adoption.

Residential -
High Density
Public Facilities
17 ORDINANCE NO. 2023-03

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER ADOPTING CHANGE OF ZONING ORDINANCE MAP AMENDMENT NO. Z2.O1,AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONE MAP FOR APN 315.051.10, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY

27.53 ACRES WTTHTN THE CITY (HODGE/RECHARGE BASrN)
WHEREAS, the 2035 General Plan applies to all property within the City's jurisdiction and sphere ofinfluence; and
WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 redesignated APN 315-051-10 from o'Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions; and WHEREA$ Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05 changes the zoning designation of APN 315-051-10 from Light Manufacturing (M-L) to Recreation, Schools, And Conservation (RSC) and High Density Residential (RM-1) districts, achieving consistency with the 2035 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission ofthe City of Sanger did conduct apublic meeting in the Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, on February 23,2023,to consider Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05, submitted by City Staff, to rezone APN 315-051-10, containing approximately 27.53 acres be consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01; and
WHEREA$ the proposed zoning for all parcels achieves consistency between the Zoning Map and the adopted 2035 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City has conducted an environmental analysis of the project as required by the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has been determined to be a project that is consistent with the 2035 General Plan and EIR certified by the City for the General Plan; and WHEREA$ a Finding of Consistency with the General Plan Environmental Impact Report is proposed to be adopted for the project; and
WHEREA$ the Planning Commission reviewed the staff report prepared for Zoning Amendment No.2022-05, and conducted a hearing with an opportunity for public testimony offered regarding the request to change the zoning designations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve Zoning Amendment No. 22-05 and adopt a Finding of Consistency consistent with the requirements of CEQA; and
WHEREA$ the City Council of the City of Sanger did conduct a public meeting in the Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, to consider ZoningAmendment 01236.010s/86s246.1
18 No. 2022-05, and concurrently considered General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 and the associated Finding of Consistency, which were previously approved for the project; and WHEREAS, as all legal prerequisites thereto have been satisfied, the City Council now desires to adopt this ordinance approvingZoning Amendment No. 22-05.

The City Council of the City of Sanger does ordain as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby hnds that all of the facts set forth in the recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein.

Section 2. CEQA. Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, the City, as the Lead Agency, has analyzed the proposed Project for consistency with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #201803t047) certified by the City for the 2035 General Plan. The City Council has fully considered the proposed hnding of consistency with the EIR, and has adopted the same concurrently with the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01, all of which were considered with the introduction of this ordinance. The impacts associated with the proposed rezone were previously analyzed in the EIR and finding of consistency. The City Council further find that there is no substantial new evidence in the record that this project may have additional significant impacts that were not analyzed as signif,rcant adverse effects in the finding of consistency with the EIR. Additionally, there is no substantial new evidence of potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts that were not discussed in the finding of consistency with the EIR, and no potentially signifrcant adverse effects peculiar to the project.

Finally, the City Council finds that there are no previously identified significant effects, which as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the finding of consistency with the EIR was adopted, that have a more severe adverse impact than assessed in the EIR. As such, no further action is required under CEQA.

Section 3. ZoningAmendment Consistency. The City Council finds thatthe proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Sanger General Plan. In this regard, the City Council finds that public necessity, convenience, general welfare, or good zoning practices justitr adoption of Zone Amendment No. 2022-05. Specifically, the change of zoning amendments are consistent with the General Plan goals and policies, any operative plan, or adopted policy, and specifically implements the planned land uses in the General Plan. (See also General Plan p. 2-38.) The changes are also consistent with the pulpose of the Development Code to promote the growth of the City in an orderly and sustainable manner, and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare. The change is also necessary for good zoning practices to achieve the balance of land uses desired by the City and to provide sites for needed retail, commercial, and public facilities, consistent with the General Plan including the Master Plan.
0I236.OLO5/865246.L
19 Section 4. Approval. The City Council adopts this ordinance approving a Finding of Consistency with the City General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopting Zoning Amendment 2022-05 as set forth in Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance.

Section 5. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, or applications of this Ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.

Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the thirty-first (31st) day after its adoption.

Section 7. Publication. The City Clerk is authorized to cause this ordinance or a summary of this ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Sanger, within fifteen days after its adoption. If a summary of the ordinance is published, the City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of the full text of the proposed ordinance to be posted at City Hall at least five days prior to the meeting at which the ordinance is adopted and again after the meeting at which it is adopted.
* * :i *,*,1. {. * * * * * rl. r* {. {. * * * * * * *,f, The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sanger held on March 16, 2023, and was passed and adopte d at a regular meeting of the City Council held on April 6,2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:

COI.INCILMEMBERS:

COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

Rebeca Padron
City Clerk
Frank Gonzalez,Mayor
City of Sanger
01236.010s/86s246.1
20 Fot the Meeting of: March 16,2023
Agenda Item No.: ll-2_
CnYoF SINGER

RE,PORT TO THE, CITY COUNCIL
To Mayor and Councilmembers
From: David Brletic, Community Development Director
Subject: Public Hearing
Proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01, Proposed ZoningAmendment No. 2022-05, and Finding of Consistency with the Environmental Impact Report Prepared for the 2035 General Plan for property located northeast of Acacia Avenue across the Southem Pacihc railroad line tracks, west of Academy Avenue northwest of the Fowler Switch Canal, and south of the future E. California Avenue alignment (APN 3 1 5-05 I - I 0) (Hodge/Recharge Basin).

Attachments: Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-02 CEQA Finding of Consistency
Resolution No. ;]c I3- I t
First Reading Ordinance No. 2,o25-o3
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council receive the staff s report and conduct the public hearing and then:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 2.c )b - r I approving General Plan Amendment 2022-01, redesignating APN 315-051-10 from the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions; revising the General Plan Circulation Element to identifu the California Avenue alignment; and revising the Land Use Element to permit "recharge basins" in the Public Facilities district (includes adoption of a finding of consistency with the2035 General Plan and environmental impact report (EIR); and
Prepared by: David Brletic Approved by:
1 2
J
4 07236.0705/865238.7
REVIEW: City Manager 6 Finance: City Attorney:

TYPE OF ITEM:

Consent
Informational Item
Action Item
Depattment Report
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION
X Public Hearing
Mattet Initiated by a Council Membet
Other
Continued to:E
21 2. Waive the full reading and introduce Ordinance No. 2o Zg - o\adopting Change of Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment No. 22-05, amending the official zone map for APN 315-051-10, containing approximately 27.53 acres within the City (Hodge/Recharge Basin) by title only.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 redesignates property from the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations within an existing lot in a different arrangement. Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05 is zoning designation change from Light Manufacturing (M-L) to Recreation, Schools, And Conservation (RSC) and High Density Residential (RM-1) districts. Approval includes adoption of a finding of consistency with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047) prepared for the 2035 General Plan (APN 315- 0s1-10).

General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 and Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05 accommodate development of the current Ground Water Recharge Basin project. General Plan Amendment No. 2022- 01 and Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05 also accommodate future development of the High Density Residential site. General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 clearly defines the California Avenue alignment, provides efficient connection to Academy Avenue, and provides suitable access to the Ground Water Recharge site and the High Density Residential site.

BACKGROUND:

Proiect Site & Surroundings:

Prope4y Owner:

Lot Size:

Existing Land Use:

General Plan Designation:

Zoning Designation:

Keith and Susan Hodge

42.6 Acres
Vacant
"Residential High Density" and o'Storm Drain Facility"
M-L
Adjoining Land Uses:

General Plan Zone District Existing Land Use
North Residential -
Medium Low
Density
N/A (County of Fresno) Agricultural
South Residential -
Medium Density
R-1-6, Single Family
Residential
Single Family Residential
Dwellines
East Commercial
General
C-M, Commercial and Light
Manufacturing
Vacant
West Residential -
Medium Density
R-1-6, Single Family
Residential
Single Family Residential
Dwellings
Location: The subject property is located northeast of Acacia Avenue across the Southern Pacific railroad line, west of Academy Avenue northwest of the Fowler Switch Canal, and south of the future E. California Avenue alignment. Project site is depicted in the diagram, below. The APN for the subject property is 315- 05 1 - 1 0, containing approximat ely 27 .53 acres.
0l 236.01 05/865238. I
22 Location:

General Plan Amendment No.2022-
01 has been submitted by city staff to
revise the General Plan in three areas.

General Plan Amendment No. 2022-
01 reconfigures the location/acreage
of the Residential - High Density
with the location/acreage of the
Public Facilities land uses within the
parcel, while still retaining the same
overall acreage of the site (15.5-acres
of Public Facilities and approximately
l2.l acres of Residential - High
Density). (See diagram.)
Residentiel -
High Density
General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01also amends the Land Use Element to expressly recognize"recharge basins" as an allowable use under Public Facilities designations as a subcategory of "Storm Drain Facilities". Finally, General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 amends the Circulation Element to identifu the California Avenue alignment. The identified Califomia Avenue alignment plans for future development Public Facilities
tf*t
0t 236.01 05/865238 I
23 by extending Califomia Avenue from Academy Avenue to S. Indianola Avenue (see diagram below) California Avenue Alignment:

Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05 has been submitted by city staff to rezone the subject property from M-L (Light Manufacturing) to RM-1 (High Density Multiple Family Residential) and RSC (Recreation, Schools, and Conservation).

Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05
achieves consistency with the Sanger
General Plan, designating the property
as "Residential - High Density" and
"Storm Drain Facility", consistent with
the RM-l and RSC districts. Proposed
changes are in the adjacent diagram.

A review of existing planning
applications on the site indicates that
the portion of the site designated for
"Storm Drain Facility" is intended to be
used for a recharge basin project.

Environmental Analysis
The City of Sanger has conducted an environmental analysis of the proposed General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Amendment, and this project has been determined to be consistent with the 2035 General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047) certified by the City for the General Plan.

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a Finding of Consistency with the EIR for this project. (f
J
U
{IJ
U
z:IUF
CALIFORNIA A\€
I
6og
z
g
it'.'I
'J
o:zr<oz
i
ll)i
ni
UIJa
Uz
=0
t
.,t ::i'
.'.'':
'.1.'
i: I-i
@
E
avz
@
ea
{ldrts[lilma
I
I
o
s front 2
Ftr Dfl[IUruffi R& GNIC
NOI jNCtUoaD rN
ESNAE
i,
i
i .:':
0gffi
'"DlIE-
IiIIIIOR ARTERIAL CROSS SECION
2A'
ru.r4
LANE
CALIFORNIA Alf
PRELlMIMRY
NOI FOR CONSIRUCTIO'\
aM-l
RSC
rrflle I
I
I
{
:rT: I .i:1.---::-: , i: l. r"rl " ls,. t"..t "-- | '.'..1-,.,,1 ':-,'""1
j:|li.'lI
,:-.1'*-'-i
0l 236.01 05/86s238.r
24 REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01, and Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05 accommodate development of the current Ground Water Recharge Basin project. General Plan Amendment No. 2022- 01 and Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05 also accommodate future development of the High Density Residential site. General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 provides a final alignment as to the exact location of Califomia Avenue, provides effrcient connection to Academy Avenue, and provides suitable access to the Ground Water Recharge site and the High Density Residential site.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No fiscal impact.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to approve General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 and Ordinance No.-. ?.o?b' D3
ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:
2oL8'o3
Following City Council action, Second Reading of Ordinance No. _ is tentatively scheduled for April 6,2023.
0t 236.01 05/865238. I
25 ATTACHMENT 1
26 CITY OF SANGER

PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2023.02
ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2022-05

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

SANGER RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2O22.OI _ REDESIGNATING REAL PROPERTY FROM THE "STORM DRAIN FACILITY' AND 66RESIDENTIAL _ HIGH DENSITY'' DESIGNATIOI\S TO THE OOSTORM DRAIN FACILITY" AND ..RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY'' DESIGNATIONS IN DIFFERENT

PROPORTIONS, AND REVISE THE GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION

ELEMENT TO IDENTIFY THE CALIFORNIA AVENUE ALIGNMENT AND LAND USE ELEMENT TO PERMIT "RECHARGE BASINS' IN THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT; AND ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2022-05 - ZONING

DESIGNATION CHANGE FROM LIGHT MANUFACUTRING (M-L) TO THE

RECREATTON, SCHOOLS, AND CONSERVAITON (RSC) AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTTAL (RM-l) DISTRICTS, FOR ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 315- 051-10, SANGER, CA 93657, AND ADOPT A FINDTNG OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE 2035 GENERAL PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) (SCH #2018031047').

WHBREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Sanger did conduct a public meeting in the Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, on January 26, 2023, to consider a Resolution recommending approval to the City Council of General Plan Amendment 2022-01 to redesignate real property (APN: 315-051-10) from the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions as well as revise the General Plan Circulation Element to identify the California Avenue Alignment and Land Use Element to permit "Recharge Basins" in the Public Facilities district; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Sanger did conduct a public meeting in the 27 Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, on January 26, 2023, to consider a Resolution recommending approval of Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05, to rezone real property (APN:
315-051-10) from the M-L (Light Manufacturing) and RM-l (High Density Residential) districts to the RSC (Recreation, Schools, and Conservation) and RM-l (High Density Residential) dishicts, consistent with the General Plan designations proposed in General Plan Amendment No. 2022-07; and WHEREA$ the existing zoning designation of the project site is Light Manufacturing (M-L) and staff is requesting the zoning designation be changed to Recreation, Schools, and Conservation (RSC) and High Density Residential (RM-l) districts; and
WHEREA$ the project site was designated as "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" in the 2035 General Plan; and
WHEREA$ California Land Use Regulations require zoning to be consistent with the General Plan;and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment and Zoning Ordinance Amendment intended to facilitate the development of a new groundwater recharge basin is considered a "project" by California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); however, staff has prepared a Finding of Consistency with the 2035 General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047), and no significant environmental impacts will result; and
WHEREA$ the Commission reviewed the staff report prepared for General Plan Amendment 2022-01 and Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05, which is herein incorporated by this reference; and heard public testimony offered at the public meeting on the request to redesignate real property (APN: 315-051- l0) from the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density'' designations to the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions as well as revise the General Plan Circulation Element to identify the California Avenue Alignment and Land Use Element to permit "Recharge Basins" in the Public Facilities district; and to rezone real property (APN: 315-051-10) from the M-L (Light Manufacturing) and RM-1 (High Density Residential) districts to the RSC (Recreation, Schools, and Conservation) and RM-l (High Density Residential) districts; and 28 WHEREAS, staff has prepared an exhibit, hereby incorporated by reference, which provides diagrams showing the existing General Plan designation and Zoning, as well as the proposed General Plan designation and Zoning.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOVLED that the Planning Commission of the City of Sanger, State of Califomia, recommends the City Council of the City of Sanger approve Resolution No. 2023-02, recommending approval to the City Council of General Plan Amendment 2022-01 to redesignate real property (APN:315-051-10) from the'oStorm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions as well as to revise the General Plan Circulation Element to identiff the California Avenue Alignment and Land Use Element to permit "Recharge Basins" in the Public Facilities district; and recommending approval of Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05, to rezone real property (APN: 315-051-10) from the M-L (Light Manufacturing) and RM-l (High Density Residential) districts to the RSC (Recreation, Schools, and Conservation) and RM-1 (High Density Residential) districts, consistent with the General Plan designations proposed in General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 r* {. {. rl. rF {. {. t< rk * t< * rl. {< {< * *
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of a Resolution duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Planning Commission of the City of Sanger, California, at a meeting held on the23'd day of February 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: CHAIR KEVIN CARTER, VICE CHAIR KEN GARCIA, COMMISSIONER

ANTONIO AGUILAR, COMMISSIONER KARI DANISKA,

COMMIS SIONER VICTOR ECHEVERRIA,

COMMISSIONER MARY LOPEZ
NOES
ABSENT: COMMISSIONER DREW ESQUER
ABSTAIN:
{*
&*#) efe
David Brletic
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Dated: February 23,2023
29 of the City of Sanger
Exhibit A
Existing and Proposed Zoning and General Plan Designations Zoning Amendment2022-05 - Hodges Basin Rezone Project, Assessor Parcel Number: 315-051-10
Existing General Plan Designation
Proposed General Plan Designation
inotHcntial - High 0cn$ty
HLY-
T,.

Ii
I
Residential -
High Density
Public Facilities
:'-
j-t .
30 Existing Zoning Designation
Proposed Zoning Designation
"f"
I
!
I
q
!16r(rn?-rnl
'i;
RM.1
RSC
M.L.iiR;
7 i
1 €
i;iR 1
l
Rr1-
!
-6
ifi,R:1 H
31 ATTACHMENT2
32 CITY OF SANGER
FINDING OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE 2035

GENERAL PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN EIR
(scH#20180310471
PROJECT NAME: Parcel Number 315-051-10 ReconfiguratiorL General Plan Amendmenf Circulation Element Amendment and Zone Designation Change to Accommodate a Proposed 15.5-Acre Groundwater Recharge Basin
LEAD AGENCY: City of Sanger
PROIECT LOCATION: The site is a27.6-acre triangle-shaped parcel located generally west of Academy Avenue, south of the E. Califomia Avenue extension and east of the Fowler Switch Canal within the City limits of Sanger (See Figure 1- Project Vicinity Mup).

PROTECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Sanger is proposing to construct a groundwater recharge basin on a 15.5-acre portion of a27.6-acre parcel (APN: 315-051-10) located generally west of Academy Avenue, south of the E. Califomia Avenue extension and east of the Fowler Switch Canal (See Figure 1 - Project Vicinity Mup). The existin g27.6-acre parcel is vacant and is currently designated by the Crty's General Plan as "Residential - High Density" (along the western/southem portion of the parcel) and "Public Facilities" (along the eastem/northem areas of the parcel).

See Figure 2 for the site's existing configuration and General Plan land use designations. To accommodate the proposed recharge basin, the City is proposing to reconfigure the parcel to swap the general location/acreage of the Residential - High Density with the location/acreage of the Public Facilities land uses within the parcef while still retaining the same overall acreage of the slte (27.6-acres). As suctr, the Project consists of the following components:
crTY oF SANGER I FOC
33 1. Construction and operation of a 15.5-acre recharge facility with an estimated 800 acre-feet per year of capacity. Depth of the basin will be from 6-10 feet and the soil that is excavated will generally remain on site for use as levy walls. Water will be conveyed to the site from the existing Consolidated Irrigation District's Fowler Switch Canal. A new headworks will be installed at the canal, and water will be conveyed from the canal by gravity feed to the recharge basin by pipe. Access to the site will require an easement until permanent access can be secured once Califomia Avenue is constructed (see Project component #4 regarding Califomia Avenue).

2. General Plan Amendment to expressly recognize "recharge basins" as an allowable use under the existing Public Facilities designations. Since recharge basins are not expressly recognized as an allowable use under this designation, the City is proposing to amend the General Plan to clarify that recharge basins would be an allowable use under the subcategory of "Storm Drain Facility" within the Public Facilities designations.

3. General Plan Amendment to redesignate the location of the recharge basin. The City is proposing to reconfigure the parcel to swap the location/acreage of the Residential = High Density with the location/acreage of the Public Facilities land uses within the parcel, while still retaining the same overall acreage of the site (15.5-acres of Public Facilities and approximately 12.1-acres of Residential - High Density). See Figure 3 for the proposed reconfiguration of the parcel.

4. Circulation Element Amendment to identify the Califomia Avenue alignment (See Figure 4). The proposed alignment would extend Califomia Avenue from Academy Avenue to S. Indianola Avenue.

This extension was identified in the City's Circulation Elemenf however, a final alignment was not previously determined. Therefore, to accommodate the reconfiguration of the site, an alignment is proposed as shown in Figure 4. It should be noted that construction of the Califomia Avenue alignment is not proposed at this time. This current effort is to amend the Circulation Element to reflect the proposed alignment for future development.

5. Rezone of the parcel to accommodate the proposed amendments to the General Plan. The Residential - High Density portion will be zoned RM-1 The Public Facilities portion will be zoned RSC (Recreatiory School and Conservation), which expressly allows "water conservation recharging basins" as a by-right use.

6. Site Plan for recharge basin: Pursuant to Sanger City Code Section 90-155 a site plan will be submitted for review.

7. Property Transfer I Parcelization: The Project will require transfer of property ownership to accommodate the reconfirmation of the parcel.
2crTY oF SANGER I FOC
34 Figure 1: Proiect Vicinity Map
IProject Area
(.lllY Ol"- S,'\NCF:R I l:O(, 3
35 Figure 2: Existing Parcel Configuration and General Plan Designations Figure 3: Proposed Parcel Reconfiguration
Note: Dark gray is "Public Facilities" and light gray is "Residential - High Density" ifiFrt/sl:1,Vf
IUij>
Htri
D
t(
L
Eaeidantial DsndtyHigh
nF'
H*lr' .4
Ft0R[Fies,4yE
.s5Oil{]rs;rL/s
gTFf?tlldc riVF
.t;___^- -;nit-
_:!g_
....-.il*:ra.-{L
[4 4 a.*
P..cd Lln' onc au t6 l.r d lPcrc!' 2 oroseJ
Fd.rel fn6 ond aurva ldbo fP*.l 2 - tr.t:
i,
]
!I
H
4crTY oFSANGER I FOC
36 Figure 4: California Avenue Alignment
=C)
I
LJ
fi]
L!
LLI
a
UzIIOF

CALIFORNIA AVE

CALIFORNIA AVE
cAuaoBt^ lw AUc{Em truoY
ruN'RE RAIL CROSSING

NOT INCLUDED IN
ESTIMA]E
U
)oz
1 I
tl>rolr1 l
U
al<z
mt
L
U
fuIFU
co
SEE FIGURE 2

FOR DETAIL
l@r
il
I
rl
i'l'tli
tltJ
U\
LJ
z
:
()
I
.<
2 i,
l.ii
a
'\ U
oo
o
=z.l!Uu.
3A
0 3m
1'."3C0

MINOR ARTERIAL CROSS SECTION
SCIE-l'4
28',, 28'
--r'tgffi.mffir
0'16' 12'

TWLTLWATKI ANFI ANF LANE LANEWALK

PRELIMINARY
NOl FOR CONSTRUCIION
CITY OF SANGEI? I FOt,, 5
37 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The City of Sanger has conducted an environmental analysis of the above-described project (see attached Finding of Consistency with 2035 General Plan / CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist) and it has been determined to be a project that is consistent with the 2035 General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047) certified by the City for the General Plan. Therefore, the City of Sanger Development Services Department proposes the City of Sanger adopt a Finding of Consistency and associated Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for this project.

The City previously prepared and certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the 2035 General Plan, which was adopted in June 2020, and which analyzedthe impacts of development anticipated with various land use designation changes throughout the City. At that time, the subject parcel (APN 315-051-10) was designated by the 2035 General Plan as Residential - High Density and Public Facilities. The proposed Project is not proposing to change the overall land uses on the site, but is proposing to reconfigure the parcel to operate more efficiently when the parcel is developed. The parcel will retain the Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations in an altemate configuration. To accommodate the reconfiguration, the Circulation Element is proposed to be amended to identify the future alignment of Califomia Avenue. However, construction of this alignment is not being proposed at this time. The Project is also proposing to construct and operate a 15.5- acre recharge basin within the Public Facilities portion of the parcel. The Residential - High Density portion of the parcel is not being developed at this time and no applications have been submitted to the City. Should future development be considered on the Residential - High Density portion, it will be subject to its own CEQA review.

The 2035 General Plan and its EIR specifically contemplated the subject site under the land use designations of Public Facilities and Residential - High Density. Since the parcel will retain these designations (although in a different configuration), it is not anticipated that the reconfiguration will result i. *y impacts beyond what was arralyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR. In additiory the recharge basin would be constructed on vacant land on a parcel that was contemplated by the City's General Plan for Public Facilities. These Projects would be subject to streamlining under CEQA based on consistency with the General Plan (see page 2-28 of the 2035 General Plan EIR for the list of subsequent projects that were anticipated under the EIR). The impacts associated with this Project were previously analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR. After conducting a review and assessment the Development Services Department of the City of Sanger finds the proposed project is consistent with the adopted 2035 General Plan and its EIR.

After conducting a review and environmental assessment, the Development Services Department also finds that no substantial new evidence in the record that this project may have additional significant impacts that were not analyzed as significant adverse effects in the EIR prepared for the 2035 General Plan. Additionally, C IY OF SANGER I FCC 6
38 there is no substantial new evidence of potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts that were not discussed in the EIR prepared for the 2035 General Plan, and no potentially significant adverse effects peculiar to the project. Finally, there are no previously identified significant effects, which as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the EIR for the 2035 General Plan.

Therefore, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the City, as the lead agency, intends to find that the proposed Project is consistent with the 2035 General Plan and the EIR certified for the 2035 General Plan, and that no additional environmental review is required by CEQA.

The 2035 General Plan and its EIR are available for review at the City's website:
http://www.ci.saneer.ca.us/458/2035-General-Plan-Update. These documents may also be reviewed in person at the City Planning Department offices, located at1700 7th Street, Sanger, Califomia, 93657. Please contact David Brletic, Senior Planner at (559) 876-6300 for more information.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PREPARED BY:

David Brletic, Senior Planner
SUBMITTED BY:

CITY OF SANGER DEVELOPMENT

SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DATE: November XX,2022
7crTY oF SANGER I FOC
39 Finding of Consistency With 2035 Generol Plon EIR / CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist
This CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist is being used herein to evaluate potential additional environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project that were not assessed in the City's 2035 General Plan EIR. For purposes of this Finding of Consistency checklist for this project, the following answers have the corresponding meanings:
a. "No Impact" means the subsequent project will not cause any additional significant effect related to the threshold under consideration which was not previously examined in the 2035 General Plan EIR. b. "Less Than Significant Impacf'means there is an impact related to the threshold under consideration that was not previously examined in the 2035 General Plan EI& but that impact is less than significant. c. "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation" me€ms there is a potentially significant impact related to the threshold under consideration that was not previously examined in the MEI& however, with the mitigation incorporated into the projecf the impact is less than significant. d. "Potentially Significant Impacf'me€rns there is an additional potentially significant effect related to the threshold under consideration that was not previously examined in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Potentiolly Significant lmpocts
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentialty Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ! Aesthetics I Air Quality
! niotogical Resources n Cultural Resources n Energy
n Geology / Soils
Agriculfure Resources
and Forest Resources
f Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards &
Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology / Water
Quality
CITY CF SANGER I FO(- 8
tr Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources
40 Noise
l-l Recreation
! uutitius / Service
Systems
T
n Population / Housing n Public Services
Transportation Tribal Cultural
Resources
Wildfire

DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environmenf and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION willbe prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE 9crTY oF SANGER I FOC
41 DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

DateName:

Title:
crTY oF SANGER I FOc r0
42 ENVI RONMENTAL C H ECKLIST
I. AESTHETICS
Would the proiect:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resourcet
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway?
c. In non-urbanued areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that
are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and regulations
goveming scenic quality?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f T
d. Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
tr

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments,Zotte Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

The 2035 General Plan and its EIR specifically contemplated the subject site under the land use designations of Public Facilities and Residential - High Density. Since the parcel will retain these designations (although in a different configuration), it is not anticipated that the reconfiguration will result ir *y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR. In additioru the 15.5-acre u
tlCITY OF SANGER I FOC
43 recharge basin would be constructed on vacant land on a parcel that was contemplated by the City's General Plan for Public Facilities. The proposed Project would result in minor alteration of the existing visual character of public views of the site with the addition of the recharge basin (below grade) and perimeter fencing (above-grade). Due to nature of the Project, the recharge facility itself will not be visible from the adjacent roadsides. Flowever, a perimeter fence will be installed around the recharge basin and will be visible from adjacent areas. Once constructed, the Project will not result in a substantial change to the existing visual nature of the area. These types of developments are typical of urban areas and are generally expected from residents of the City. Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result i. *y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.

CIIY OF SANGER I FOC 12
44 II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST

RESOURCES
Would the project:
c.
e.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a.
b. Conflict with existing zoning for
agriculfural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
Califomia Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 1222O(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), ot
timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Govemment Code section
s110a(g))?
Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nafure, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
d
X
X
crrY oF SANGER I FOL t3
45 RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

The Project is within the City limits of Sanger and is designated for urban (non-agricultural) uses. The 2035 General Plan and its EIR specifically contemplated the subject site under the land use designations of Public Facilities and Residential - High Density. Since the parcel will retain these designations (although in a different configuration), it is not anticipated that the reconfiguration will result i. u.y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR. In additiory the 15.5-acre recharge basin would be constructed on vacant land on a parcel that was contemplated by the City's General Plan for Public Facilities. Therefore, the Project will not result i. *y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
l4clTY oF SANGER I FOC
46 III. AIR QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan? X
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal
or state ambient air quality standard?
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d. Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors or adversely affecting a
substantial number of people)?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

Site preparation and construction of the basin would involve excavation and other dirt moving activities.

During construction, the Project could generate pollutants such as hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, and suspended PM. A major source of PM would be windblown dust generated during construction activities. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site and trucks carrying uncovered loads of soils. Vehicles leaving the site could deposit dirt and mud t5clTY oF SANCER I FOC
47 on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. PMro emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the nature and magnitude of construction activity and local weather conditions. PMro emissions would depend on soil moisfure, the silt content of soil, wind speed, and the amount of operating equipment. Larger dust particles would settle near the source, while fine particles would be dispersed over greater distances from the construction site. These emissions would be temporary and limited to the immediate area surrounding the construction site.

The proposed basin will not generate emissions once constructed. The San foaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has established thresholds of significance for criteria pollutant emissions. Using project type and size, the Air District has pre-quantified emissions and determined a size below which it is reasonable to conclude that a project would not exceed applicable thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants. Long term air emissions are typically associated with vehicle trips associated with new development. For example, the Air District pre-determined that residential developments that would generate less than 1,453 vehicle trips per day would not exceed any established criteria pollutant emissions thresholds. As the proposed well Project will not result in vehicle trips (other than minor temporary trips associated with construction and then periodic maintenance once operational) it is determined that the Project could not exceed any air emission thresholds established by the Air District.

However, during construction, the contractor will be required to adhere to the Air Districfs rules and regulations, including Regulation VIII (Fugitive PMro Prohibitions), Rule 4002, Rule 4102 (Nuisance), Rule 4601 (Architectural Coatings), and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Mainten.u:lce Operations).

As described above, construction/operational emissions would not exceed the SJVAPCD's significtrnce thresholds for ROG, NOx, PMro, and PMz.s. As a result, the Project uses would not conflict with emissions inventories contained in regional air quality attainment plans and would not result in a significant contribution to the region's air quality non-attainment stafus1. Likewise, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant within the SJVAPCD jurisdiction.

Finally, the Project would also not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. It will not cumulatively increase any criteria pollutant and will not result in substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result in any impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required
1 San foaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. Guide to Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. February 19,2015. Page 65. https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAOI-2015/FINAL-DRAIT-GAMAOLPDF. Accessed October 2022.

CITY OF SA|.IGER I FOt- t6
48 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
b
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the proiect:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the Califomia Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by the
Califomia Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vemal poof coastal, etc.) through direct
removaf filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
X
X
X
CITY CF SANGER I FCC 17
49 e. Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Nafural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regionaf or state habitat
conservation plan?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

The City's General Plan EIR included policies and mitigation measures to protect biological resources within the City and surrounding areas. The General Plan EIR provided a breakdown of regions/areas that would be subject to certainbiological mitigation measures if development was contemplated in that area (See Figure 3.4-1 and Section 3.4 of the General Plan EIR). For the proposed Project, the parcel is located in an area designated as "Ruderal" which includes disturbed habitats such as deep-ripped fields, barren land and construction sites with no vegetation other than sparse conunon weeds.2 Since the proposed recharge basin is located in this specific area of the City, it is subject to the following mitigation measures from the City's General Plan EIR:
2 Sanger General Plan EI& page3.4-6.
clTY OF SANGER I FOC IB
50 Swainson'sHnuk
BIO-8 (Temporal Avoidance): ln order to avoid impacts to nesting Swainson's hawks, construction activities in the rural zone shall occur, where possible, outside the nesting seasorL typically defined as March 1-September 15.

BIO-9 (Preconstruction Surveys): If construction activities in the rural zone must occur between March 1 and September 15, a qualified biologist shall conduct preconstruction nest surveys for Swainson's hawks on and within lz rrrtle of the work area within 30 days prior to the start of construction. The survey shall consist of inspecting all accessible, suitable trees of the survey area for the presence of nests and hawks.

BIO-10 (Avoidance of Active Nests): Should any active Swainson's hawk nests be discovered within the survey area, an appropriate disturbance-free buffer shall be established based on local conditions and agency guidelines. Disturbance-free buffers shall be identified on the ground with flagging, fencing, or by other easily visible meerns, and shall be maintained until a qualified biologisthas determined that the young have fledged and are capable of foraging independently.

Burrowing Owl
BIO-11 (Take Avoidance Survey): A preconstruction "take avoidance" survey for burrowing owls shall be conducted by a qualified biologist between 14 and 30 days prior to the start of construction according to methods described in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012). The survey area shall include all suitable habitat on and within 200 meters of the constructior\ zotte, where accessible.

BIO-12 (Avoidance of Active Nests): If construction activities are undertaken during the breeding season (February 1-August 31) and active nest burrows are identified within or near the constructior\ zorre, a 200-meter disfurbance-free buffer shall be established around these burrows, or altemate avoidance measures implemented in consultation with CDFW. The buffers shall be enclosed with temporary fencing to prevent construction equipment and workers from entering the setback area. Buffers shall remain in place for the duration of the breeding season, unless otherwise arranged with CDFW. After the breeding season (i.e. once all young have left the nest), passive relocation of any remaining owls may take place as described below.

BIO-13 (Avoidance or Passive Relocation of Resident Owls): During the non-breeding season (September 1-January 3L), resident owls occupying burrows in the construction zone may either be avoided, or passively relocated to altemative habitat. If the project applicant chooses to avoid t9ciTY oF SANGER I FOC
51 active owl burrows within the construction zone during the non-breeding season, a SO-meter disfurbance-free buffer shall be established around these burrows, or altemate avoidance measures implemented in consultation with CDFW. The buffers shall be enclosed with temporary fencing and shall remain in place until a qualified biologist determines that the burrows are no longer active. If the project applicant chooses to passively relocate owls during the non-breeding seasory this activity shall be conducted in accordance with a relocation plan prepared by a qualified biologist.

BIO-14 (Compensatorv Mitisation): The proiect applicant shall mitigate, at a 1:L ratio, for all potential burrowing owl habitat removed within 600 meters of active burrowing owl burrows, as identified during the preconstruction surveys provided for in Mitigation Measure BIO-9.

Potential burrowing owl habitat in the planning area generally includes agricultural fields (suitable for foraging), ruderal habitat (suitable for nesting), and non-native grassland habitat (suitable for nesting or foraging). Compensatory mitigation shall entail either (L) acquiring suitable replacement habitat in the project vicinity, to be preserved in perpetuity under conservation easement and managed according to the provisions of a long-terrn management plan, or (2) purchasing credits at a CDFW-approved burrowing owl conservation bank.

AmericnnBnilger
BIO-15 (Preconstruction Surveys): A preconstruction survey for American badgers shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 30 days of the start of construction. 810-16 (Avoidance of Natal Dens): Should an active natal den be identified during the preconstruction surveys, a suitable disturbance-free buffer shall be established around the den and maintained until a qualified biologist has determined that the cubs have dispersed or the den has been abandoned.

Tricoloreil Blackbiril, Northern Harriel White-taileil Kite, Long-enreil Owl, Loggerhead Shrike, anil Other Nesting Migratory Birils and Raptors
BIO-17 (Construction Timing): If feasible, project construction will occur outside of the avian nesting season, typically defined as February 1 to August 31.

BIO-18 (Preconstruction Surveys): If construction must occur between February 1 and August 31, a qualified biologist shall conduct preconstruction surveys for active migratory bird nests within crrY oF SANGER I FOC 20
52 14 days prior to the start of work. For projects within the urban zone, the survey area shall encompass the work area and accessible surrounding lands within 100 feet. For projects within the rural zotte, the survey area shall encompass the work area and accessible surrounding lands within 250 feet.

BIO-19 (Avoidance of Active Nests): Should any active nests be discovered within the survey area, the biologist shall identify a suitable disturbance-free buffer around the nest(s). Buffers shall be identified on the ground with flagging or fencing and shall be maintained until the biologist has determined that the young have fledged and are capable of foraging independently.

Implementation of these mitigation measures, as identified in the City's General Plan EI& will ensure that the Project does not result i. a.y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR. ctTY oF SANGER I FOC 21
53 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
V. CU LTU RAL RESOU RCES
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as
defined in 515064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to $15064.5?
c. Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
X
n

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments,Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

Although no culfural or archaeological resources, paleontological resources or human remains have been identified on the Project site, the possibility exists that such resources or remains may be discovered during Project site preparation, excavation and/or grading activities. The City's General Plan EIR provided mitigation measures that are applicable to the Project as follows:

CUL-1 Should any potentially significant cultural, historicaf archaeological or fossil resources be discovered, no further ground disfurbance shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Planning Director concurs in writing that adequate provisions are in place to protect crTY oF SANGER I FOe 1l
54 these resources. IJnanticipated discoveries shall be evaluated for significance by a certified professional archaeologist or paleontologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards. If significance criteria are met then the project shall be required to perform data recovery professional identificatiory radiocarbon dates as applicable and other special studies; curate materials with recognized scientific or educational repository; and provide a comprehensive final report as required by Senate Bill 18; Califomia Historical Building Code (Tltle 24, Part 8); Califomia Public Resources Code Sections 5020-5029.5,5079-5079.65,5097.9-5097.998, and 5097.98; and Califomia State Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, as applicable.

CUL _2 In order to ensure that the proposed project does not impact buried human remains during project constructioru the project proponent shall be responsible for on-going monitoring of project construction. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the project proponent shall provide the City of Sanger with documentation identifying construction personnel that will be responsible for on-site monitoring. If buried human remains are encountered during construction, further excavation or disfurbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall be halted until the Fresno County coroner is contacted and the coroner has made the determinations and notifications required pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If the coroner determines that Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c) require that he give notice to the Native American Heritage Commissiory then such notice shall be given within 24 hours, as required by Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c). In that even! the NAHC will conduct the notifications required by Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Until the consultations described below have been completed, the landowner shall further ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices where Native American human remains are located, is not disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the Most Likely Descendants on all reasonable options regarding the descendants'preferences and treatments, as prescribed by Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b). The NAHC will mediate any disputes regarding treatment of remains in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 5097.94(k). The landowner shall be entitled to exercise rights established by Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(e) if any of the circumstances established by that provision become applicable.

Mitigation Measures CUL - 1 and CUL - 2, as identified in the General Plan EIR, will be implemented to ensure that Project will not result i. a.y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 23
55 VI. ENERGY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a. Result in potentially significant
envirorunental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments,Zorrc Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

During construction of the recharge basin, the Project will consume moderate amounts of energy in the short-term; however, Project operations are passive in nafure and are expected to consume minimal amounts of energy.

During constructiory the Project would consume energy in two general forms: (1) the fuel energy consumed by construction vehicles and equipmenf and (2) bound energy in construction materials, such as asphalt, steef concrete, pipes, and manufacfured or processed materials such as lumber. TitIe 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards provide guidance on construction techniques to maximize energy conservation and it is expected that contractors and owners have a strong financial incentive to use recycled materials and products originating from nearby sources in order to reduce materials costs. As crTY oF SANGER I FOC 24
56 such, it is anticipated that materials used in construction and construction vehicle fuel energy would not involve the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy.

Operational Project energy consumption would occur for multiple purposes, including pumps and other vehicle and equipment use. The proposed Project would be required to comply with Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which provide minimum efficiency standards related to various building features. Implementation of Title24 standards significantly increases energy savings, and it is generally assumed that compliance with Title 24 ensures projects will not result in the inefficien! wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy.

As discussed in Impact XVII - TransportationlTraffic, at build-out the Project will generate minimal daily trips (for maintenance and operations). Th" length of these trips and the individual vehicle fuel efficiencies are not known; therefore, the resulting energy consumption cannot be accurately calculated.

Adopted federal vehicle fuel standards have continually improved since their original adoption rr.1975 and assists in avoiding the inefficient wastefuL and unnecessary use of energy by vehicles.

As discussed previously, the proposed Project would be required to implement and be consistent with existing energy design standards at the local and state level. The Project would be subject to energy conservation requirements in the Califomia Energy Code and CALGreen. Adherence to state code requirements would ensure that the Project would not result in wasteful and inefficient use of non- renewable resources due to building operation.

Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result in any impacts beyond what was analyzedin the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 25
57 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
a. Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault ZoningMap issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquef action?
iv. Landslides?
b Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the projecf and
potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1-8 of the most recently
adopted Uniform Building Code
X
X
X
c.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC /6
58 e.
creating substantial risks to life or
property?
Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
X
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

Construction activities associated with the recharge basin involves soil-moving work. These activities could expose barren soils to sources of wind or water, resulting in the potential for erosion and sedimentation on and off the Project site. During construction, nuisance flow caused by minor rain could flow off-site. As identified in the General Plan EI& the City and/or contractor would be required to employ appropriate sediment and erosion control BMPs as part of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would be required by the California National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). In addition, soil erosion and loss of topsoil would be minimized through implementation of the SVJAPCD fugitive dust control measures (See Section III). Once construction is complete, the Project would not result in soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Compliance with state regulations will ensure that impacts remain less than significant. Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result in any impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 2-7
59 VIII, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
tr
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

Emissions from construction of the recharge basin would be temporary in nature. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has implemented a guidance policy for development projects within their jurisdiction. This policp "Guidance for Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA," approved by the Board on December 17,2009, does not address temporary GHG emissions from construction, nor does this policy establish numeric thresholds for ongoing GHG emissions. Therefore, construction-generated GHGs are less than significant. Once constructed, the Project does not include any significant long-term emissions (usually associated with vehicle trips). As such, the Project will not conflict with any applicable GHG plans/regulations and operational GHG emissions are considered less than significant. Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result i. *y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
ctTY oF SANGER I FOC 28
60 IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS

MATERIALS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
b
a
c.

Create a significanthazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
Create a significanthazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
notbeen adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport would
the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project
area?
Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
X
X
X
d
e
t.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC
T
29 61
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
g. Expose people or structures either directly
or indirectly to a significant risk of loss,
i.jtry or death involving wildland fires?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

Proposed recharge basin construction activities may involve the use and transport of hazardous materials.

These materials may include fuels, oils, mechanical fluids, and other chemicals used during construction.

Transportatiory storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. Compliance would ensure that human health and the environment are not exposed to hazardous materials.

In addition, the Project would be required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program through the submission and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan during construction activities to prevent contaminated runoff from leaving the Project site. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur during construction activities.

The Project would not create a significant hazard through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, nor would a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the reasonably foreseeable upset and accidental conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment occur. In addition, there are no schools within l/E mile or airports that would be impacted by the proposed recharge basin. Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result i. *y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required
crTY oF SANGER I FOL 30
62 X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER

QUALITY
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface or
ground water quality?
b. Substantiallydecreasegroundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattem of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off- site;
ii. substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
offsite;
iii. create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
u
crTY oF SANGER I FOC
T T
3I
63 X. HYDRCLOGY AND WATER

QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
! X
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quahty control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan?
n T

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments,Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

The proposed construction activities associated with the recharge basin could temporarily increase runoff, erosiory and sedimentation. Construction activities also could result in soil compaction and wind erosion effects that could adversely affect soils and reduce the revegetation potential at construction sites and staging areas.

Three general sources of potential short-term construction-related stormwater pollution associated with the proposed Project are: 1) the handling, storage, and disposal of construction materials containing pollutants; 2) the maintenance and operation of construction equipmen! and 3) earth moving activities whictu when not controlled, may generate soil erosion and transportation, via storm runoff or mechanical equipment. Generally, routine safety precautions for handling and storing construction materials may crrY oF SANGER I FOC aa
64 effectively mitigate the potential pollution of stormwater by these materials. These same types of common sense, "good housekeeping" procedures can be extended to non-hazardous stormwater pollutants such as sawdust and other solid wastes.

Poorly maintained vehicles and heavy equipment leaking fuel, oif antrfreeze, or other fluids on the construction site are also common sources of stormwater pollution and soil contamination. In addition, grading activities can greatly increase erosion processes. Two general strategies are reconunended to prevent construction silt from entering local storm drains. First erosion control procedures should be implemented for those areas that mustbe exposed. Secondly, the area should be secured to control offsite migration of pollutants. These Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be required in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be prepared prior to conunencement of Project construction. When properly designed and implemented, these "good-housekeeping" practices are expected to reduce short- term construction-related impacts to less than significant.

In accordance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Program, the Project will be required to comply with existing regulatory requirements to prepare a SWPPP designed to control erosion and the loss of topsoil to the extent practicable using BMPs that the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has deemed effective in controlling erosiory sedimentation, runoff during construction activities. The specific controls are subject to the review and approval by the RWQCB and are an existing regulatory requirement.

Once constructed, it is anticipated that the recharge basin will have a positive impact on groundwater supplies by providing a facility to recharge the areas groundwater. The recharge basin will be subject to the rules and regulations of the Califomia State Regional Water Quality Control Board and other standards.

Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result i. *y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 33
65 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the proiect:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a. Physically divide an established
community?
b. Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendmerfts,Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

The Project would not divide an established community nor conflict with any land use plan. Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result in any impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
ctTY oF SANGER I FOC 34
66 XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of
the state?
X
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
X

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

As identified in the General Plan EI& there are no mineral resources in within the City (the nearest inventoried mineral lands are along the Kings River). Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result i. *y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
clTY oF SANGER I FOC
67 XIII. NOISE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
perrnanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b. Generation of excessive groundbome
vibration or groundbome noise levels?
c. For a project located within the vicinity of
a private airstrip or an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise
levels?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments,Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

The 2035 General Plan and its EIR specifically contemplated the subject site under the land use designations of Public Facilities and Residential - High Density. Since the parcel will retain these designations (although in a different configuration), it is not anticipated that the reconfiguration will result i. a.y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR. In additioru the L5.5-acre recharge basin would be constructed on vacant land on a parcel that was contemplated by the City's General Plan for Public Facilities.
crTY oF SANGER I FOc 36
68 Recharge basin construction activities will involve temporary noise sources. Typical construction related equipment include trenchers, small tractors and excavators. During the proposed Project constructiory noise from construction related activities will contribute to the noise environment in the immediate vicinity. Activities involved in construction will generate maximum noise levels, as indicated in the Table below, ranging frorn 79 to 91 dBA at a distance of 50 feet without feasible noise control (e.g., mufflers) and ranging from 75 to 80 dBA at a distance of 50 feef with feasible noise controls.

Iypicol Conslruction Noise levels
Type of Equipmenl dBA ot 50 tt
Wilhout Feosible Noise Conlrol Wlth Feosible Noise Conlrol Dozer or Troclor 80 75
Excovoior 88 80
Scroper 88 80
Fronl End Looder 79 75
Bockhoe 85 75
Grqder B5 75
Truck 91 75
The distinction between short-term construction noise impacts and long-term operational noise impacts is a typical one in both CEQA docurnents and local noise ordinances, which generally recognize the reality that short-term noise from construction is inevitable and cannot be mitigated beyond a certain level. Thus, local agencies frequently tolerate short-term noise at levels that they would not accept for permanent noise sources. A more severe approach would be impractical and might preclude the kind of construction activities that are to be expected from time to time in urban environments. Most residents of urban areas recognize this reality and expect to hear construction activities on occasion.

Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground bome vibration are construction equipment, steel- wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. Construction vibrations can be transienf random, or continuous. Construction associated with the proposed Project is earthmoving activities associated installing pipelines and installing equipment.

The approximate threshold of vibration perception is 65 VdB, while 85 VdB is the vibration acceptable only if there are an infrequent number of events per day.3 The following Table describes the typical construction equipment vibration levels.
3 Ttansit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Final Report No. FTA-VA-90-1003 prepared for the U.S. Federal Transit Administration by Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc., May 2006.Page7-5. http://www.rtd- fastracks.com/media/uploads/nm/14 Section 38 NoiseandVibration Part3.pdf. Accessed February2019.

CITY OF SANGER I FOL 37
69 Typicol Conslruclion Vibrqtion levels
Equipment VdB ot 25 ft
SmollBulldozer 5B
Jockhommer 79
Vibration from construction activities will be temporary and not exceed the Federal Transit Authority threshold for the nearest sensitive receptors.

Upon completion of the recharge basin, there will be no noise associated with its operation.

Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result i. *y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.

CITY OF SANCER I FOC 3B
70 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in
an area, either directly (for example,by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding Generat Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

There are no aspects of the Project that increase or induce population growth. Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result in any impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required
clTY oF SANGER I FOC 39
71 XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a. Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
govemmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered goveffunental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the
public services:

Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

X
X
crrY oF SANGER I FOC 40
72 There are no aspects of the Project that increase the need for public services. Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result i. *y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 41
73 XVI. RECREATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
TX

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments,Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

There are no aspects of the Project that increase the use of recreational facilities. Therefore, it is determined that the Project will not result i. any impacts beyond what was analyzedin the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 42
74 XVII. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with a program plan" ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian f acilities?
b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent
with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
X
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.9., farm equipment)?
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

The Project also includes an amendment to the City's Circulation Element to reflect the proposed alignment of California Avenue. The proposed alignment would extend Califomia Avenue from Academy Avenue to S. Indianola Avenue. This extension was identified in the City's Circulation Elemenf however, a final alignment was not previously determined. Therefore, to accommodate the reconfiguration of the site, an alignment is proposed as shown in Figure 4. It should be noted that clTY oF SANGER I FOC 43
75 constmction of the Califomia Avenue alignment is not proposed at this time. This current effort is to amend the Circulation Element to reflect the proposed alignment for future development.

There are no aspects of the Project that increase traffic beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 44
76 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code section
21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a Califomia Native
American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the
Califomia Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
ii. A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code section 5024.1..In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of the Public
Resources Code section 5024j1., lhe
lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
Califomia Native American tribe. X
ctTY oF SANGER I FOe 45
77 RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments,Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

As part of the City's General Plan EIR process (tn2020), the City sent out letters to the applicable tribes notifying them of various land use changes throughout the City, including the subject parcel. According to AB 52, lhe tribes had 90 days from the receipt of the letter to request consultation with the City of Sanger. None of the Tribes requested consultation. Since the subject parcel is retaining the same underlying land use designations on the site as was identified during the tribal consultation done for the General Plan (Public Facilities and Residential - High Density), it is not anticipated that the proposed Project will not result i^ a.y impacts beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.

CITY CF SANGER I FOC 46
78 XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage electric power, nafural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to
serye the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the projecfs
projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastrucfure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
e Comply with federal, statg and local
management and reduction stafutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
c
X
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 47
79 RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a L5.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments,Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

The proposed recharge basin itself will have a beneficial impact on water supply by providing a facility to recharge groundwater. There are no aspects of the Project that increase impacts to utilities beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 48
80 XX. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the project:

Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
T
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
Impact
No
a
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c. Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power
lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate
fire risk or that may result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the environment?
d. Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
T
X

RESPONSE
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the reconfiguration of Assessor's Parcel Number 315-051-10 (while retaining Public Facilities and Residential - High Density designations); construction/operation of a 15.5-acre recharge basin; and implementation of the corresponding General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, and Circulation Element Update as described in the "Project Description" herein.

The proposed recharge basin is located in a highly disturbed area (roads, active agriculture, water conveyance facilities, etc.) which precludes the risk of wildfire. The area is flat in nature which would limit the risk of downslope flooding and landslides, and limit any wildfire spread. To receive construction perrnits, the proposed Project would be required to be in compliance with the adopted emergency response plan. As such, any wildfire risk to the Project structures or people would be less than significant. There are no aspects of the Project that increase impacts to wildfire beyond what was analyzed in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 50
82 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been formulated based upon the findings of the Finding of Conformity to the City's 2035 General Plan and General Plan EIR (FOC) for the proposed Project. The MMRP lists mitigation measures recorunended in the FOC for the proposed Project and identifies monitoring and reporting requirements.

The first column of the Table identifies the mitigation measure. The second column, entitled "Party Responsible for Implementing Mitigation " names the party responsible for carrying out the required action. The third column, "Implementation Timing," identifies the time the mitigation measure should be initiated. The fourth column, "Party Responsible for Monitoring," names the party ultimately responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented. The last column will be used by the City to ensure that individual mitigation measures have been monitored. crrY oF SANGER I FOC 51
83 Mitigotion Meosures from the Generql plon EIR
Applicoble lo lhe Projeci
Biology
Swoinsont Howk
BIO-8 (Temporol AvoidonceL ln order to ovoid
impocts to nesting Swoinson's howks,
construction octivities in the rurol zone sholl
occur, where possible, outside the nesting
seoson, typicolly defined os Morch I -
September 15.

BIO-9 {Preconstruction Survevs): lf construction
octivities in the rurol zone must occur between
Morch I ond September ,l5, o quolified
biologist sholl conduct preconstruction nest
surveys for Swoinson's howk on ond wilhin 1/z
mile of the work oreo within 30 doys prior to the
stort of construction. The survey sholl consist of
inspeciing oll occessible, suitoble irees of the
survey oreo for the presence of nests ond
howks.

BIO-.l0 (Avoidonce of Active Nesis): Should ony
octive Swoinson's howk nests be discovered
within the survey oreo, qn oppropriote
disturbonce-free buffer sholl be estoblished
bqsed on locol conditions ond ogency
guidelines. Disiurbonce-free buffers sholl be
identified on the ground with flogging, fencing,
or by other eosily visible meons, ond sholl be
mointoined until o
Verificolion
(nome/dote)
Porly
responsible
for
Monitoring
City of
Songer ond
Construction
Monoger
lmplemenlolion
Timing
Prior to ond
during
construction
Porly
responsible
for
lmplemenling
Mitigqlion
City of Songer

CITY CF SANGER I FOC
lified bi ist hos
3l
84 Mitigotion Meosures from the Generql plon EIR
Applicoble lo lhe Project
determined thot the young hove fledged ond
ore copoble of foroging independently.

Burrowing Owl
BIO-I I (Toke Avoidonce Survey): A
preconstruction "toke ovoidonce" survey for
burrowing owls sholl be conducted by o
quolified biologist between l4 ond 30 doys prior
to the stort of construction occording io
methods described in the Sloff Reporf on
Bunowing Owl Mitigotion (CDFW 2012). The
survey oreo sholl include oll suitoble hobitot on
ond within 200 meters of the construction zone,
where occessible.

BIO-,l2 {Avoidonce of ive Nesisj: lf
construction octivities ore undertoken during
the breeding seoson (Februory 1-August 31)
ond octive nest burows ore identified within or
neor the construction zone, o 200-meter
disturbonce-free buffer sholl be estoblished
oround these burrows, or olternote ovoidonce
meosures implemented in consultotion with
CDFW. The buffers sholl be enclosed with
temporory fencing to prevent construction
equipment ond workers from entering the
setbock oreo. Buffers sholl remoin in ploce for
the durotion of the breeding seoson, unless
otherwise orronged with CDFW. After the
breedin seoson
Verificqtion
(nome/dole)
Porty
responsible
for
Moniloring
City of
Songer ond
Construction
Monoger
lmplemenlqlion
Timing
Prior to ond
during
construction
Porty
responsible
for
lmplemenling
Mitiqotion
City of Songer

CITY OF SANGER I FOL
e. once oll hove left
(a
85 Mitigolion Meqsures from lhe Generol Plon EIR
Applicoble lo lhe Projecl
the nest), possive relocotion of ony remoining
owls moy toke ploce os described below.

BIO-13 (Avoidonce or Pqssive Relocotion of
Resident Owls): During the non-breeding
seoson (September l-Jonuory 3l), resident owls
occupying burrows in the construction zone
moy either be ovoided, or possively relocoted
to olternotive hobitot. lf the project opplicont
chooses to ovoid octive owl burrows within the
construction zone during the non-breeding
seoson, o 5O-meter disturbonce-free buffer sholl
be estoblished oround ihese burrows, or
olternote ovoidonce meosures implemented in
consultotion with CDFW. The buffers sholl be
enclosed with temporory fencing ond sholl
remoin in ploce until o quolified biologist
determines thot the burrows ore no longer
octive. lf the project opplicont chooses to
possively relocote owls during the non-
breeding seoson, this octivity sholl be
conducted in occordonce with o relocotion
plon prepored by o quolified biologist.

BIO-l 4 (Compensotorv Mitiootion) : The project
opplicont sholl mitigote, of o l:l rotio, for oll
potentiol burrowing owl hobitot removed within
600 meters of octive burrowing owl burrows, os
identified during ihe preconstruction surveys
provided for in Mitigotion Meosure BIO-9.

Potentiol burrowing owl hobitot in the plonning
oreo nerol
Verificolion
(nome/dole)
Porly
responsible
for
Moniloring
lmplemenlolion
Timing
Porty
responsible
for
lmplemenling
Miliqotion
clTY oFSANGER I FOL
includes riculturol fields
54 86
Miligotion Meosures from the Generql plqn EIR
Applicoble lo lhe Projecl
(suitoble for foroging), ruderol hobitot (suitoble
for nesting), ond non-notive grosslond hobitot
(suitoble for nesting or foroging).

Compensotory mitigoiion sholl entoil either (1)
ocquiring suitoble replocement hobitot in the
project vicinity, to be preserved in perpetuity
under conservotion eosement ond monoged
occording io the provisions of o long-term
monogement plon, or (2) purchosing credits ot
o CDFW-opproved burrowing owl conservotion
bonk.

Americon Bodger
R.ta\_ t ( lPrannnclrr rr.tinn Qr rnrarrcl A
preconsfruction survey for Americon bodgers
sholl be conducted by o quolified biologist
within 30 doys of the stort of construction.

BIO-16 (Avoidonce of Notol Dens): Should on
octive notol den be identified during the
preconstruction suryeys, o suitoble disturbonce-
free buffer sholl be estoblished oround the den
ond mointoined until o quolified biologist hos
determined thot the cubs hove dispersed or the
den hos been obondoned.

Tricolored Blackbird, Norfhern Hqrrier, Whiie-Ioiled
KiIe, Long-eored Owl, Loggerheod Shrike, ond Oiher
Nesfrng Migroiory Birds qnd Ropfors
BIO-lZ (Construction Timing): lf feosible, project
construction will occur outside of the ovion
Verificotion
(nome/dote)
Porty
responsible
for
Moniloring
City of
Songer ond
Construction
Monoger
City of
Songer ond
Construction
Monoger
lmplemenlolion
Timing
Prior to ond
during
construction
Prior to qnd
during
construction
Porly
responsible
for
lmplemenling
Mitiqqlion
City of Songer
City of Songer
crTY oF SANGER I FOC EIJJ
87 Mitigotion Meosures from lhe Generol plqn EIR
Applicoble lo lhe Projecl
nesting seoson, typicolly defined os Februory 1
io August 31.

BIO-l 8 (Preconstruction SurvevsL lf construction
must occur between Februory I ond August 31,
o quolified biologist sholl conduct
preconsiruction surveys for octive migrotory
bird nests within 14 doys prior to the stort of
work. For projects within the urbon zone, the
survey oreo shqll encomposs the work oreo ond
occessible sunounding londs within ,l00 feet. For
projects within the rurol zone, the survey oreo
sholl encomposs the work oreo ond occessible
surrounding londs within 250 feet.

BIO-.l9 (Avoidonce of Active Nests): Should ony
octive nests be discovered within the survey
oreo, the biologist sholl identify o suitoble
disturbonce-free buffer oround the nest(s).

Buffers sholl be identified on the ground with
flogging or fencing ond sholl be mointoined
until the biologist hos determined thot the
young hove fledged ond ore copoble of
foro ging independently.

Verificolion
(nome/dote)
Culturol
cut-1 Should ony potentiolly significont
culturol, historicol, orchoeologicol or
fossilresources be discovered, no further
ground disturbonce sholl occur in the
oreo of the d
Porty
responsible
for
Moniloring
City of
Songer ond
Construction
Monoger
lmplementotion
Timing
Prior to ond
during
construction
Porty
responsible
for
lmplemenling
Mitigotion
Ciiy of Songer

CITY CF SANGER I FOC
until the Plonni
56 88
Miligotion Meosures from the Generol plqn EIR
Applicoble io lhe Project
Director concurs in writing thot
odequote provisions ore in ploce to
proteci ihese resources. Unonticipoted
discoveries sholl be evoluoted for
significonce by o certified professionol
orchoeologist or poleonfologist thot
meets the Secretory of the lnterior's
Professionol Quolificotions Stondords. lf
significonce criterio ore met, then the
project sholl be required to perform
dotq recovery, professionol
identificotion, rodiocorbon dotes os
opplicoble, ond other speciol studies;
curoie moteriols with recognized
scientific or educotionol repository; ond
provide o comprehensive finol report os
required by Senote Bill 18; Colifornio
Historicol Building Code (IiIle 24, Port 8);
Colifornio Public Resources Code
Sections 5O2O-5O29.5, 5079-5079.65,
5097.9-5097.998, ond 5097.98: ond
Colifornio Stote Heolth ond Sofety
Code, Section 2050.5, os opplicoble.
cur-2 ln order to ensure thot the proposed
project does not impoct buried humon
remoins during project construction, the
projeci proponent sholl be responsible
for on-going monitoring of project
construction. Prior to the issuonce of ony
groding permit, the project proponent
sholl
Verificoiion
(nome/dole)
Porty
responsible
for
Moniloring
lmplemenlolion
Timing
Porty
responsible
for
lmplemenling
MitiEqtion
crTY oF SANGER I FOC
de the of Son with
E1J/
89 Mitigotion Meosures from the Generol plon EIR
Applicoble to lhe Projecl
Verificotion
(nome/dote)
documentotion identifying construction
personnel thqi will be responsible for on-
site moniioring. lf buried humon remoins
ore encountered during construction,
further excovotion or disturbonce of the
site or ony neorby oreo reosonobly
suspecied to overlie odjocent remoins
sholl be holied until the Fresno County
coroner is contocted ond the coroner
hos mode the determinotions ond
notificotions required pursuont to Heolth
ond Sofety Code Section 2050.5. lf the
coroner determines thot Heolth qnd
Sofety Code Section 2050.5(c) require
thot he give notice to the Notive
Americon Heritoge Commission, then
such notice sholl be given within 24
hours, os required by Heolih ond Sofety
Code Section 7050.5(c). ln thot event,
the NAHC will conduct the notificotions
required by Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98. Until the consultotions
described below hove been
completed, the londowner sholl further
ensure thot the immediote vicinity,
occording to generolly occepted
culturol or orchoeologicol stondords or
proctices where Notive Americon
humon remoins ore locoted, is not
disturbed by further development
octivity until the londowner hos
discussed ond confered with the Most
Porty
responsible
for
Monitoring
lmplemenlotion
Timing
Porty
responsible
for
lmplemenling
Miliqotion
crTY oF SANGER I FOC 58
90 Mitigotion Meosures from lhe Generol Plon EIR
Applicoble to lhe Projecl
Likely Descendonts on oll reosonoble
options regording the descendonts'
preferences ond freotments, os
prescribed by Public Resources Code
Section 5092.98(b). The NAHC will
mediote ony disputes regording
treotment of remoins in occordonce
with Public Resources Code Section
5097.94(k). The londowner sholl be
entitled io exercise rights estoblished by
Public Resources Code Section
5097.98(e) if ony of the circumstonces
estoblished by thot provision become
opplicoble.

Verificotion
(nome/dote)
Porty
responsible
for
Moniloring
lmplemenlqtion
Timing
Porty
responsible
for
lmplemenling
Miliqotion
CITY OF SANGER I FOL 59
91 crTY oF SANGER I FOC 60
92 ATTACHMENT3
93 RESOLUTTON No. eoe3- I I

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2022-0r, REDESTGNATING ApN 315-051-10 FROM THE "STORM DRAIN FACILITY' AND 6'RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY" DESIGNATIONS TO THE 6'STORM DRAIN FACILITY'' AND 66RESIDENTIAL - HIGH DENSITY' DESIGNATIONS IN DIFFERENT PROPORTIONS; REVISING THE

GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT TO IDENTIFY THE CALIFORNIA AVENUE ALIGNMENT; AND REVISING THE LAND USE ELEMENT TO PERMIT 66RECHARGE BASINS" IN THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT
(HODGE/RECHARGE PROJECT)
WHEREA$ the Planning Commission ofthe City of Sanger did conduct apublic meeting in the Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, on February 23,2023,to consider a Resolution recommending approval to the City Council of General Plan Amendment 2022-01 to redesignate real property (APN: 315-051-10) from theoostorm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions as well as revise the General Plan Circulation Element to identifu the California Avenue Alignment and Land Use Element to permit "Recharge Basins" in the Public Facilities district; and
WHEREAS, the project site was designated as "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential High Density" in the2035 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, California Land Use Regulations require zoning to be consistent with the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment intended to facilitate the development of a new groundwater recharge basin is considered a "project" by California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); however, staff has prepared a Finding of Consistency with the 2035 General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047), and no significant environmental impacts will result above those previously assessed in the EIR; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Sanger, at the February 23,2023, Planning Commission meeting approved Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-02, recommending the City Council of the City of Sanger approve General Plan Amendment 2022- 01 to redesignate real property (APN:315-051-10) from the "storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the oostorm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions as well as revise the General Plan Circulation Element to identifr the California Avenue Alignment and Land Use Element to permit "Recharge Basins" in the Public Facilities district; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the staff report prepared for General Plan Amendment 2022-0I, which is herein incorporated by this reference; and heard public testimony 01236.01051865244.1
94 offered at the public meeting on the request to redesignate real property (APN: 315-051-10) from the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions as well as revise the General Plan Circulation Element to identi$ the Califomia Avenue Alignment and Land Use Element to permit'oRecharge Basins" in the Public Facilities district; and WHEREAS, staff has prepared Exhibit A, hereby incorporated by reference, which provides diagrams showing the General Plan designation and California Avenue alignment.

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Sanger, State of California as follows:

Section 1 Recitals. The City Council hereby finds that all of the facts set forth in the recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein.

Section 2. CEQA. Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, the City, as the Lead Agency, has analyzed the proposed Project for consistency with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047) certified by the City for the2035 General Plan. The City Council finds the project is consistent with the EIR. The 2035 General Plan and its EIR specif,rcally contemplated change of zone designations for properties whose land use designations were changed under the 2035 General Plan, and identihed such actions as being subject to streamlining under CEQA based on consistency with those documents. The impacts associated with the proposed rezone were previously analyzed in the EIR. The City Council further find that there is no substantial new evidence in the record that this project may have additional significant impacts that were not analyzed as significant adverse effects in the EIR. Additionally, there is no substantial new evidence of potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts that were not discussed in the EIR, and no potentially significant adverse effects peculiar to the project. Finally, the City Council finds that there are no previously identified significant effects, which as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, that have a more severe adverse impact than assessed in the EIR.

Section 3. CEQA Approval and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Based on the foregoing, the City Council adopts the Finding of Consistency prepared for the project, including the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as the project will not result in any significant, adverse, environmental impacts greater than that assessed by the EIR with the mitigation imposed by the EIR. The City of Sanger Community Development Department located at 1700 7th Street, Sanger, CA,93657, is designated as the custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision is based. The City Councils authorize the Director, or designee, to execute and file with the Fresno County Clerk, as appropriate, aNotice of Determination for approval of the project.

Section 4. General Plan Findings. The City Council finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Sanger General Plan. In this regard, the City Council finds that public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good practices justifu adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01. Among others, the 2035 01236.010518652M.1
95 General Plan and its EIR specifically contemplated the subject site under the land use designations of Public Facilities and Residential - High Density. Since the parcel will retain these designations (although in a different configuration), the overall site remains consistent with the General Plan as adopted. The clarifications and additional detail provided by General Plan Amendment No.2022- 01 will also facilitate the construction of a 15.5- acre recharge basin within the Public Facilities portion of the parcel, along with alignment of a nearby roadway, which in turn facilitate the provision of public services and promote development consistent with the intent of the General Plan as adopted. Approval is in the public interest.

Section5. Approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01. The City Council approves General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 for specified land use designations and other items specifically identified on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein.

Section 6. This Resolution shall become immediately effective upon adoption. {. {. *. rl. r*,l. tl. {. X * * * * * * * :t
The foregoing Resolution was considered by the City Council of the City of Sanger at a regular meeting of said Council held on the l6th day of March2023 and approved by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN
ABSENT:

COUNCILMEMBERS:

COLINCILMEMBERS:

COUNCILMEMBERS:

COI.INCILMEMBERS:

ATTEST:

Rebeca P. Ramirez, City Clerk
01236.01051865244.1
96 Exhibit A
General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01
Assessor Parcel Number: 315-051-10
(HodgelRecharge Basin; California Avenue Alignment)
General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 is approved and amends the City of Sanger 2035 General Plan as follows:

1. ooRecharge Basins." The 2035 General Plan is generally amended to expressly recognize "recharge basins" as an allowable use under the subcategory of "Storm Drain Facility" within the "Public Facilities" designations. Additionally, the Location Criteria on page 2-35 ("Other Land Use Designations") is amended to read in relevant part as follows:
"Other public uses should be appropriately-located depending on their function and potential impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. such as Storm Drain (including recharge basins) and other public uses."

2. Land Use Designation. The site is an approximately 27.6-acre triangle-shaped parcel located generally west of Academy Avenue, south of the E. California Avenue extension and east of the Fowler Switch Canal within the City limits of Sanger known as APN 3 I 5-05 1- I 0. The land use designation is amended to internally restructure the designations from the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to the "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density," while still retaining the same overall acreage of the site (15.5-acres of Public Facilities and approximately l2.l-acres of Residential - High Density) designations as follows:

Orisinal Land Use Desisnation
tesidontirl - High Deneity
Publlc FaelHtlst
01236.010s/8652M.t
97 New Land Use Designation

3. Circulation Element Amendment to identify the California Avenue alignment. The 2035 General Plan Circulation Element generally proposed an alignment to extend California Avenue from Academy Avenue to S. Indianola Avenue. However, no final alignment was identified. The Circulation Element of the General Plan is amended to adopt the following final alignment for Califomia Avenue from Academy Avenue to S. Indianola Avenue:

California Avenue Alignment:
&ffirlmma
=OJU(n
UUa
UzfI
ts
2 CAT'FtrNIA A!€
!.

CAUFORNIA A\€
{sFr:9EFI;::I-
i: i: -i :l _l :I:r
i9;<
iolz
:6
4 I
tl
()lOI
Uu
U1
Uz
IcI
I
J
E
r6
I
,'
6 a
ll
lr
:t
I@
tutu8
'T: i
iI
6o
I2
Eo
,76,,
lza',za',1
I to'l a' rz' 16' rz' a'l ro'l!STERF'FG;-T6-HR!1II|FwMNtras "'-'- ffrlxilarr IIINOR ARTERIAL CRO88 SECTIOil
ru.r{
Residentiel -Iligh llensity
Public Facilities
lll*t
01236.0105t865244.r
98 ATTACHMENT4
99 ORDTNANCE No. 4 023-63
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAI\GER ADOPTING CHANGE OF ZONING ORDINANCE MAp AMENDMENT NO. 22-0',AMENDrNG THE OFFTCIAL ZONE MAP FOR APN 315-051-10n CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY

27.53 ACRES WITHTN THE CrTy (HODGE/RECHARGE BASrN)
WHEREAS, the 2035 General Plan applies to all property within the City's jurisdiction and sphere ofinfluence; and
WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 redesignated APN 315-051-10 from "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations to "Storm Drain Facility" and "Residential - High Density" designations in different proportions; and WHEREA$ Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05 changes the zoning designation of APN 315-051-10 from Light Manufacturing (M-L) to Recreation, Schools, And Conservation (RSC) and High Density Residential (RM-1) districts, achieving consistency with the 2035 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Sanger did conduct apublic meeting in the Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, on February 23,2023,to consider Zoning Amendment No. 2022-05, submitted by City Staff, to rezone APN 315-051-10, containing approximately 27.53 acres be consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01; and
WHEREA$ the proposed zoning for all parcels achieves consistency between theZoning Map and the adopted 2035 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City has conducted an environmental analysis of the project as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has been determined to be a project that is consistent with the 2035 General Plan and EIR certified by the City for the General Plan; and WHEREAS, a Finding of Consistency with the General Plan Environmental Impact Report is proposed to be adopted for the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the staff report prepared for Zoning Amendment No.2022-05, and conducted a hearing with an opportunity for public testimony offered regarding the request to change the zoning designations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve Zoning Amendment No. 22-05 and adopt a Finding of Consistency consistent with the requirements of CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Sanger did conduct a public meeting in the Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, to consider ZoningAmendment 01236.0L0s/86s246.L
100
No. 2022-05, and concurrently considered General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 and the associated Finding of Consistency, which were previously approved for the project; and WHEREAS, as all legal prerequisites thereto have been satisfied, the City Council now desires to adopt this ordinance approvingZoningAmendment No. 22-05.

The City Council of the City of Sanger does ordain as follows:

Section l. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds that all of the facts set forth in the recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein.

Section 2. CEQA. Pursuant to the authority and uiteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, the City, as the Lead Agency, has analyzed the proposed Project for consistency with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047) certified by the City for the 2035 General Plan. The City Council has tully considered the proposed finding of consistency with the EIR, and has adopted the same concurrently with the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01, all of which were considered with the introduction of this ordinance. The impacts associated with the proposed rezone were previously analyzed in the EIR and finding of consistency. The City Council further find that there is no substantial new evidence in the record that this project may have additional significant impacts that were not analyzed as significant adverse effects in the finding of consistency with the EIR. Additionally, there is no substantial new evidence of potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts that were not discussed in the finding of consistency with the EIR, and no potentially significant adverse effects peculiar to the project.

Section 3. ZoningAmendment Consistency. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Sanger General Plan. In this regard, the City Council finds that public necessity, convenience, general welfare, or good zoning practices justifu adoption of Zone Amendment No. 2022-05. Specifically, the change of zoning amendments are consistent with the General Plan goals and policies, any operative plan, or adopted policy, and specifically implements the planned land uses in the General Plan. (See also General Plan p. 2-38.) The changes are also consistent with the purpose of the Development Code to promote the growth of the City in an orderly and sustainable manner, and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare. The change is also necessary for good zoning practices to achieve the balance of land uses desired by the City and to provide sites for needed retail, commercial, and public facilities, consistent with the General Plan including the Master Plan.
01236.010s/85s246.1
101
Section 4. Approval. The City Council adopts this ordinance approving a Finding of Consistency with the City General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopting Zoning Amendment 2022-05 as set forth in Exhibit 'oA" to this Ordinance.

Section.6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the thirty-first (3lst) day after its adoption.

Section Publication. The City Clerk is authorized to cause this ordinance or a swnmary of this ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Sanger, within fifteen days after its adoption. If a summary of the ordinance is published, the City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of the full text of the proposed ordinance to be posted at City Hall at least five days prior to the meeting at which the ordinance is adopted and again after the meeting at which it is adopted.
* * * :t rl. tl. * * t {. * * * * * * * !t * * * * r* r* The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sanger held on 2023, and was passed and adopted at aregular meeting of the City Council held on 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:

COLINCILMEMBERS:

COI.INCILMEMBERS:

COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

Rebeca Padron
City Clerk
Frank Gonzalez,Mayor
City of Sanger
oL236.OLO'/86s246.r
102
CA Nt'lRn
q_j
Exhibit A
Zoning Ordinance Amendment2022-05 Zoning Map Update
Accessors Parcel Number 315-051-10
Existing Zone District Designation
New Zoned District Designation
I
I
tI
RS{
R}I-T
I\I-L
R-1-7,5 : ,.. R-1-6
q
'J R- 1-6 R- 1-6' s€ouoJdnyg
I
1-6' , !R-r-e
E,
n-f .lg R-1.5
I
i
R-I
Q n-rirrn
lR-i'ri
1-7.5
f\o
utH\rre dlt-n
E/
:
a
R-1-6
-ltji n-r-o
H.

R-1
103
-\*_' ' -_
h
F
1 lFfl - I ro] .!or *$j p* q.t p:*d
{rtq a rsr}c} .ebt *'} ts {!n ti.d
g
F
104
For the Meeting of: April 6,2023
Agenda Item No.:
0-s
CrrY oF SINGER

RE,PORT TO THE, CITY COUNCIL
To:

From:

Subject:

Councilmembers
Mayor Frank Gonzalez and Tim Chapa, City Manager
Appointment to the Commission to Advance the Status of Women and Girls, District 2 Representative
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council consider and approve the Mayor's District 2 appointment to the City's Commission to Advance the Status of Women and Girls: District 2 - Kim Maldonado

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On November 3,2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No.2022-94 establishing membership comprised of six members: four members to be residents of the four Council Districts, and one member a resident of the City at large and one member to be a woman between the ages of 16 and 24, and attending high school, college, or university. Five of the six appointments have been made based on nominations from Council Members from their respective districts and based on a recruitment that closed on November 28,2022. This report presents Council Member Melendez' (District 2) nomination and the Mayor's appointment is subject to approval by the Council.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

To complete the appointment process for the last remaining position.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

ALTERNATIVES:

Preoared bv: Tim Chaoa Approved by:

NA
REVIEW: City Manager: Finance: Ciry Attomey: _
TYPE OF ITEM:

X Consent
Info Item
Action Item
Department Report
Redevelopment Agency
COUNCILACTION: APPROVED DENIED NOACTION
Public Hearing
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to:

X
105
S ANG
,r,trit,,,
DR
For the Meeting of: April 6,2023
Agenda Item No.: g _rt
ClrYoF SANGER
RE,PORTTO THE, CIry COUNCIL
To:

From:

Subject:

Attachments:

Mayor and Councilmembers
Greg Tarascou, Fire Chief
Emergency Medical Services Contract Extension
First Extension of Services dated April 712022
Original Emergency Medical Services Contract
Exhibit A - Fresno County Ambulance Service Area Zonel
Exhibit B - Fresno County Ambulance Zone I - Metro Area CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council approve the extension for Emergency Medical Services with the County of Fresno and authorizethe City Manager to sign the contract on behalf of the City.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The current three-year agreement is for the continued provision of emergency medical services by the City of Sanger Fire Department, as authorizedby law within the City of Sanger and in the unincorporated area of Fresno County as designated by Exhibit "A" of the attached agreement. The agreement also provides for the monetary compensation to the City of Sanger from the County of Fresno for estimated cancelled calls and uncollectable charges. This one-year extension is allowable under the provisions of the initial contract.

RACKGROUND:

Since 1951 the City of Sanger has been providing emergency medical ambulance service to the commturity Ptepated by: Gres Tarascou Approved by:

REVIEW: City Finance City Attorneyi _
TYPE OF ITEM: COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION x Consent
Info Item
Action Item
Depattment Report
Redevelopment Agency
Public Hearing
Mattet Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to:-Y
106
of Sanger and the County of Fresno. In 1964 the Sanger Fire Department became the exclusive provider of ambulance service and on September 1, 1985 Sanger became the first and only fire department in the State of Califomia to provide paramedic level ambulance transport. Also in 1985, the first Emergency Medical Services agreement was approved and signed by City Council. The agreement extended the ambulance response zone into the unincorporated area of Fresno County and established the first monetary compensation for the medically indigent county population at $2,350.00 per month. The Fire Department has provided advanced life support ambulances and services since.

This extension of services has no changes arld all provisions under the initial contract will remain the same.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The current Emergency Medical Services Agreement between the City of Sanger and the County of Fresno expired on June 30,2022. The f,rrst extension was authorized by the City Council at the April 7 , 2022 council meeting and this is the second and last authorized extension.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Fresno County's monetary responsibility for the County's medically indigent population within our service area will remain at $16,875 for the year.

ALTERNATIVES:

Do not accept the agreement in which case ambulance service would be rendered solely within the incorporated boundaries within the City of Sanger as defined by Health and Safety Code Section 1797 .201with a subsequent loss of the County's monetary responsibility towards its medically indigent population. Additionally, loss of the contract would have a significant reduction of the ambulance service revenues to the City with an estimated40-60% reduction in revenues.

ACTIONS APPROVAL:

Upon approval the attached documents will be signed and forwarded to the Fresno County Department of Public Health for signature.
\\nas I \shared\Forms & Templates
107
County of Fresno

DEPARTMENT OF PUBTIC HEATTH
David Luchini, Director
Dr. Rais Vohra, Interim Health Officer
February 6,2023
Frank Gonzalez, Mayor
City of Sanger
1700 7th st
Sanger, CA 93657
Re: One-Year Extension of Agreement # 19-41 2 for Paramedic Ambulance Services Dear Mayor Gonzalez,
The County's Agreement# 19-412, which was approved by the Board of Supervisors on August 24, 2019, allowed for the option of two - twelve (12) month renewals upon satisfactory performance of services during the then-current period (July 1 ,2019 through June 30, 2022), and by written notice of renewal by the Department of Public Health (Department) Director. This is the second of the allowable twelve (12) month renewals.

Contract service performance was reviewed by the Department and was determined to be satisfactory, Therefore, the Department provides this letter as notice of renewal, extending the Agreement for an additional twelve (12) month period beyond the current term, July 1,2023 through June 30, 2024. lt you, as the signing authority for City of Sanger, would also like to ex- tend the agreement as stated, please sign and date below and retum this letter to Douglas Loera at County of Fresno, Department of Public Health - 1221Fulton Street, Fresno, CA 93721, or via email at [email protected] by June 1 ,2023.

Please note, a renewal letter signed and dated, past (June 1,2023), is outside of the contract's renewal condition clause and will make the renewal letter invalid, causing a lapse in the contract term. A lapsed contract would require Board approval, which could result in a lapse in service and compensation, depending on processing timelines and/or cancellation of service contract, pending Board action. Your attention to this request is greatly appreciated to avoid a lapse in the contract term.
ly,
Ci$ Attorney Date
t,
of Public Ith
cityclerr Date
City Manager
Cc: Ron Alexander, CAO Analyst MaYor
Daniel Lynch, Division Manager, Emergency Services
Prornotion, preseruation aad prot€ctlbn of tlre co,nrnu nltyb tlealttr 1221 Fulton Street/P, O. Box 11867, Fresno, CAg3ns
rhe county
"rffi,ffiffi,nity
Emproyer
www.co.fresno.ca.us . www.fcdph.org
Date
Date
108
County of Fresno

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEATTH
David Luchini, Director
Dr. Rais Vohra, Interim Health Officer
February 15,2022
EliOntiveros, Mayor
City of Sanger
1700 7th St
Sanger, CA93657
Re: One-Year Extension of Agreement#19-412 for Paramedic Ambulance Services Dear Mr. Ontiveros:

The Agreement#19-412, which was approved by the Board of Supervisors on August 20,2019, allowed for the option of trvo fwelve (12) month extensions upon written approval of both parties no later than thiny (30) days prior to the first day of the next twelve-month extension period (July l, 2A22) and authorized the Director of Public Health to execute such written approval on behalf of the County.

The Department's review of the contracted services provided by City of Sanger is determined to be satisfactory. Therefore, the Department would like to extend the agreement from July 1,2022 through June 30, 2023. lf you, as the signing authority for City of Sanger, would also like the agreement to be extended as stated, please sign and date on the line below and return this letter by June |,2A22 b:

Douglas Loera
Department of Public Health
P.O. Box 11867
Fresno, C493705
Respectfully,
xA-Aa-
David l.uclrini 1f:f b ):1, l02l 12:23 PSf i
David Luchini, RN, PHN
Director of Public Health
cc: Ron Alexander
lt'W[a a Yh,nA 4hlzt
City Attorney I Date
Clerk
ayor
a?
Date
.{ h lzz-EC-
7 tu
Date
Ptomotion, prcsemation and protection of the communi$'s health 1221 Fulton Street /P. O. Box 11867, Fresno, CA93775
(ss9) 600-3200 . FAX (s59) 600-7687
The County of Fresno is an Equal Employment Opportunity Employer www,co.fresno.ca.us . www.fcdph.org
109
L
4 5
o
7 I
$
l0
11 t:
13 .rl

1.6 1?
ia
19 ?CI
:1
t't
41 t\
JD
ll
Agr*emenl No, 19-412
F [t F RGFIlfCY [l rnICAL SERI'ICES AGtEEnlENT
THIS ACR.IEMENT is marlc and entered into lhis , ,?$lr*_.clay nf .- ,{ugual . _.". , ]01C, by and betrveett tlre COUNTY OF FRE$NO, a Political $uhdivision of rlre $:atc of Califirrnia. hereiuafter refenrd tr: ns'"COUNT\'." and the CITY OF SAI{GER. r il{urricipal Corpcrarion, u.hose address is I ?0t"1 Severrth Street, Sanger, Calilbnria, 9-165?. lrereinaticr referred rn as ..CON RACTOR."
TlITNESSETH:
\\'HEREAS, CCILINT\'. tlrrerugh its bepartrnent of Puhlic Hcalth.lrss heen clesigrratcd as rhc Local Ufulli Agency cf lhc fuunty *f Fresn* pursrant to Califonria I lerlth and Safcry Code Secriur l?97,!001 and
\\'HEREAS, thc ('OitlTR;lfTOR desirc$ tn provide cnlergenf,y anrhulancc senices as sulhorized hy la* *'ilhirr lhe incorporated hnundaries of thr City nf $anger and rvithin thc unincorprrraterl area of Fresno Counly. alI as tiesignated irr Exhibil "A". nuached herelo rrrri hy this rrference iuccrporated herein.

N0\\'. Tl{EREFORE, the panies hereto sgree a$ i-nllo*'s:

I. The parties *ckncrvledgc that the COUNT\"s Departrnerrt rif Puhlic Health has hecrr d*ignated as the Locill EM$ Agency *f tlre COUNTY rvith the ruthority to plan. atlrninister. irlplcrnent and evaluate ,irr onergency nredical services syst€m in Fresno Clounty prlr$uarrl to Califomia Herlth anrl $rfbtyC*de Sectiorrs l?$?.lt)0 and l?9?.204. The parties.:lso acknorvledge that the Local EfulS Agency has implemented CCTLJNTY EL'lS Policy d200lAuthoriration of Arntrulance Provider Ageneies in f rr"srro Ceruntyl, The parties futrlrer acknorr'ledgc that the EM$ fulerlical Director of rhe COUNT\"s Departnre nt af Putrlic Hcalth hss the authnrity sel frrrth in Htalth and $al'ery Code Secrion l?*8. CONTRACTOIT shall operate its ernergency rtedicrl care progrant in confbnnity rr'ith the rnedical policies, procedures ard standnrds issued snd amenderl hy thc l-oe*l EMS r\gency {hereinaftcr collectively re li:rred to a$ thc "COi,'NT\' [Lt$ Policies and Prrrcsdurer." and irrdividually' refcrrcd trr as "COLiNTI' Er'lS folicl ,i'"),

2. DUTIES OF CCIIiTRACTOR
CONTRAfTOR shall be respor:sible t'or fumi-tfrirrg serviccs, equtprnent and '-':::-l:.*i''' (.a aRESil'-
ltt es:"
28 A"
110
t-
z
?
4 5
6 B
I
].0
11 1)
l--}
L4
15 t8
19 an
21"
aa

7.6 t1
aq
rnaterials as hereina*er set krr1h, in order lo provide imergency n:edical servic€* to p€t'-qons in need thereolwithin thc inc*rporated bnundaries af the City crf $anger urd fh*t certain portior: sf the unineoryrorated area sf Fre$no County, which include Arubulanre $*rvice Zone'-l0l ftruugh t04," all sha.*n an Exhibit *A""
Nsither tlre fact thai ihis Apeernent is entered intr.r nor afiythhg cantained in this Agreemcnt shall be colrstfted as an admission by either party hereNo reganling CON"|RACTOR's l*gal authcrity, if atty, to pla*. implernant. and operate u,ithin *r rvithoul its carporai* boundaries a s]6tenl nf anergency rnedical servir:es {including but not !irnited 1o, arnbulance sen ices} independent srf COUNT'Y'* authorizstion or appraval-
E. CONTRAfTOR shall rnaintain sutofilfftic vehicle lacators in each authorizrd *lnergsncy ambulanp* unit snd authorized disaster respanse unil.

C" CONTT{.AC?'OR agrees to rneat perfor*lan*e stanclards and requirerfrents as furlh*r discussed in Sectiein 6 crf this Agrccm*nt.
.1" DUTIES OT COUTIJTY
A" COUNTV shall apenate a centrel disporching faeility and rhall irnrnediately rcfer all calls for emergency nedical care and ambulancc rerdces within the area set furth in Exhitrit "A'' to the Fire FJepartment of th* Cily of Sangcr in aec*rdancr wjth COUNTY EMS Policics and Frocedures.

I ) COLJNTY will assist {:CINTRAfTOR in devel*ping, imple:renling and tnaintaining an tnteroel field supervisioir systern !o pror,,ide evaluation of COFITRACTOR's personnel pr+viding servic* under this Agreernent accnrding to t}:e standards establisl"rcd by the COUNTY EMg Pd icies alid PrCIred ures"
21 COUNTY wilt do pcridir and annual inspcctions *f CON'| RACTOR's f,mergsncy anrbulance seruises personnfl certificatian*, re{.ords, vehiclet, equipment, and faci}itierq rcquired by law and this Agremnent.

B. hlolrryithstanding thr: fbreg*irig provisiolls of $ubse*tion 3.A" afthis Agreement, C$l"jN'i"Y ii not re*tricted by rearon af tl:is ,Ag"reement franr en{ering into anCIther agreenrent fr:r serviccs tlrat arc the sar:c as r:rr *i:nilar tr-r lhcse prr:vrded by CONTRAf|OR Fursuitnl to ?his {ltf,i;?{?Y lF FR.ES!r'}
!-a'ert:41, {:A
111
:
2 .t
5 6
7 s
t0
11 t?
13 l-4
'rq
Ir}
L{
18 I9
2l_
??
t3
za
?q.
26 ZT
z&
Agreernent with rn entity other than f*NTRAfTOR for the provisir:n *f emergen*y medical seffices rvithin the sanre goographic nreil as descrihed in Hxhihit *A". COLINTY shell notify COI{TRACI'OR af any pr*posal ift enter intrr such an agre$neni with arry other entity, el least rhi*y {30} days prinr ta *wsrd of sucir 8gr6ernenl"
f. COUNI'Y thal! conduet reguler rsviervs pf CONTRACTOR. ecmpliance as ,]eeessary to cornply with *pplicable provisions of law.

D. The COUNTY shall pr*vide the lbllcrwing for CilhiTRAfTOR'S use during tlre terrn of this Agreeinerrt;
I ) The use of COUN1Y c*:nmunieaticrnc infrastructure f*r EMS Med {"'hannels. xs provided herein-
21 Comrnunicatians Equipnrent:

COUNl'Y shall allow lhr corrtinued use cf previously provided Portable {H*ndheld) Radics, Pagers, *rrd hr-Vchi*}* Rndios, hcwever, the rnainten*nee and replacement nf *rese radios previausly pr*vided hy C'$UNT'Y shall be the raspnnsibility tf CSNTRACTOIL. Such c*mmunications equiprnsnt shallbs returned to COUNTY by CCNTRACTOR at lhe tirvre *f replacernent.

4. 0UALIFICATJON OF COF{TRAq:rOR
CONTRACTOR shallat all tin'res rneet the requirerncnts set forth h'y the Calilbrnia Higliway Fatrol, the Calitb'rnia Vehicle Code, the State Departme*t af Health, lhe Califrrrnia H*dtlr and Safbty C*de, the faljfcrrnia Code of Regulalions, the COLIh{TY's l)eparrtmerrt illPublic Health with respect to medi*al slandardx, and any otlrer applic*ble strtute or regulatiun rvith respect {o the scrvices, equipnrent, and matcrials, rvhich are the subjeet mattcr *f this Ag:ecment, In the event nf conllieting $letutes or rcgulalion$, thfi slalutr nr regulalion setting f*rth the mnurt stringeni requirements shalI be adhered to bl COhiTRAe.ICIR, Jn the cvent *f * ccnflirl between trhe tffrn$ $f this Agreenre*t and any reseilutir:n ur rrgulati*n of thc CCLIN"I*Y, the terms of this Agrcemcn{ shall pre vail.

5. AREA SER\IED
CONTRA{:I'ilR shail pr*vir}e er?rffSensy medieal rrrvices, on a fis$-sxrrlusive basis, {giJNTy (}F l.'p"tJstlfl
F r r'! f,. r :-!.
112
I
.)
3 +
5 6
1 o
s
to
L}
tz
-LJ
14 :"5
,IA
L7
t8
L9
?0
2L
t3
34 AG
1E
:7
upsn disparch by couNTY and upon dire* eall to coNTRAf"t'oR-* Fire Depaflnlenr lo a::y l+c*rion or incident within the territ*rry of F'resno County Arnbutrance Service Zones "101 tkough I04" as dessribed in Exhibit "'A," In addition- upon rflque$t of the COUNTY EMS Csmrnuniea{iors Cefiter, CONTRACTOR *hall, to the extent eonsislenl with its prirnary respansibility tc prcvide crnsrgsncy nrsdical *ervices in the arra of Exhibit "A," render all reasonable prehospiral .'rnutual aid" to thqrse provider* of einerg*ney rn*dical services rperating wilhin the adjacent $erviee Zcnr Areas in crder l* ensurc that timely etnergfncy medical servises are rendcrcd tc persons in nead of such serviees within those ar*as"
s" &nvlcEs TQ.pE PnovIpEIl ANp PERFq$SIANCjE STAITIDARIIS A, CONTRACTOR. shall provide appropriat* alntr$lanc*, paramedic, ard rnedieal equipment and serpport personnel in order to furnish "Advanced l-itb $uppcrt". (ALS) and "Basic Life Support'" {Bf-$) services t$ persons within thc ares defined in Exhibit "A" {rn a non-exclusive, nn-call bati*, twanty-fbur {24} lrours per day, sevan {?} days per wcek. "Advanced Life !iupp**'' serviees shail rnean speeial senices de.tignetl tei pnrvide definitive enrergency medical care, irrctuding, but not lirnited ta, cardiopulmoilary resuscilali{}n, cardiae nr*niloring, cardias defibrillntir:n, advanced airrvay tranagcln€nt, intravencus theraBy, adminl-stration of speeified drugs md *ther medical preparati*ns, and rrttrer spe*ified teehniques and procedures administered by auth*rizcd personnel under direet supervisir:rR of a b*se siatian hnspital rr according to appr*vsd writlen protocols. "Basi'r Lil"r Suppor{" services ghall mcan em€rsfnsy first aid and *ardiopulrnonary res'uscitation procedures which, ss a minimurn, irrcludes recognizing rcspiralory and cardicc arrest and starting the prapcr application of cardiopuln'ronary resuscifaticn *r maintain life withnut invasive techniques until the patient rncy be lransported {,r until advanced lite suppnr{ is availahle,
F- Respons*,Arcas and Fsfonnance Stantiards
3) fulrtropqlitan RrqFpggg.4r**
Th* Mctr*p*litan Response Arca is defined as {lrat ar*a wifhin t}te c{n?$rate Lirnitc $f th* Clit-y of Sanger plus an erea rvirhir one {l} slalut*ty rnile nf said r:orporete flntri"Y oF FnEsNs
Ft-Ffln{:i, {:A
.4
113
1 e
?
4 q
6 7
I
I
10 11
1't
1a
:t
!J
r6
t7
18 19
20 4I
aa
21 'i d;a
?5
?6
'! o
linrits, rrhich is dcffriSgd ilr Hxhil:it "R". attachcrJ hereto and incorporarctl hsrein hy reli:rcnce. ll B-uel_!fsgx)!€s 4$c
'l'he Rural Resgron.se Atea is dclined fl$ thilt areu beyond the merropolitnr re$Ponscarea lirnits. whieh isd{:s,crihed in Exhibir "C"', attnclrcd hereloantJ incarpararcd hmcirr !:y rglcrent:c-
3l Bglpqq5g_].llpEllcrfo-rmrru:q Sra'fJgd*
Rcsponsc time slandards for the ahovemcntinnecl areas arc rl*fined in F.xhibit "D". altac:hcd hcrcrn and bv this rrfercncr incorpcratctl herein" 4) 't'he clrltlt*'l'Y [lcpartnrenl of Puhlic Hsalrh ririry, uFron receipt af n n'ritten rcqufst tj"onr thc c'oN'rR'\{''IoR. e.xcmpt the cON'l"EAC't'{}R iiom lilte ruspr}rlscs f$r those calls rvl:cre geirgaphical lirnitaliorrs exist rvhrn rhe COhl'RAC'l'OR respond.r tranr prosr loeatitrns dicialed b-v thc CON'I'RACTOR's nrtnrnal stationing trl arnbulanees or systcln siarus plffi str long as the fON-lRA{"1'Oll, hss othcrwisc sdhercd to operati$nul and purf+nnsnee standlrds of rl:e Cuunrv HMS Policy and Procedure Mtrnual. Arrl'ealls so excrnptcrl shall be exempl linrn the lnclusion o{'thc detcrminatiarr ol'conrpliancc 'lilh rc.spouse tinrc rcquircrrrcrrts hcruin, 6) Thc rcquired respons€ times under this Agrccnrent dle muasure*l frorn llre tilnc t-CINl'RACT'OR is alened fbr a res;x:nsc to the tirrre that COi\{1-RAC"IOR sn.ivcs at srcne q.rf the incitlrrtt u'ilh a fully slaft'rd arrtl *,quipped cmergr'ncy arubulnner unir. COl,lN'l"y preivieJes CON'l"RAt-'XCIR rvith sigltificant flcxibiliry in fON'1-RA(.TOR's rtcthods of'pror"iding sairJ sen,ice.s in ondcr ttt dchieve mininturn re.suhs rcquiru{ under this r\greement. 'l'lris is hasul upon C'ONI'RACTOR's cutntnilment to pcrf'onrr to thc resptrnsc time standards required under this Agroement. 'l"hcrefore, a dcfieicncl, or an err$r Lry fON]'IIACTOR irl one or lnrlre phascs nf its opertitiotts shall nol Lrt ttre htsis lbr tlre EMS i\grncy grsniing al exccption to f(iNTRACTOR ftrr itE perfnnnance in anotltm phirse of its *peration {*.g., resprrns* {inrc pcrfrmancc}. Required rsspor$e tinres shtll be ntea.surcei in ntinut*s and scconds. and -shall he rirnc sramlxd b1'thc LlvlS Agcncy's c{tmFulcr Hidctl tlisp*tcit {(:AD} systenr consislsnt rvith the requircments herein. f{itli\T'Y antl dlc EMS Agency recogRiz"*s that dispntclt aperations are r{t a responsihilit5'or undcr thc control cf {:Oh'l'RACll'OR, {.OUN'['Y and the EMS Agnrcy acknorvledge tliat ('ON'lRA(''|OR is rrcr to hc ,:'il:lli'ty t:F FF gsl{r{,:

Ft-*s:::,. i. ";r
114
1 2
3 4
5 6
,|
a
9 10
11 t2
13 1A
1"5
r6
1'?
-rtJ
't cl
20 t't
z1

16.,
26 l!
'to
held responsible for delays that rnay occur due fo dispatching and lh* CONTRACTOR acknorvledges that thc COUHTY EM$ fomrnunications Cenrer requires rdequat* lirne ta Froce$s each request {e"g., finre *om reguest rsceived to flre tine of unit alert). CSLINTY egrees to monitar the {IOUNTY EMS Conrmunicalians Centcr {o Bnsure lhat iis disp*tch perftrrm*nce remains within the standards develaped by COUI.ITY and the lccai EMS ,Age*ey. llte €.M$ Ageney mny grant e.:{emptions kofil re$ponse tirne perfonnanc* nuquirements stated herein, on case-by-case basis, fr:r calls where weather c*nditi*ns, ntulti-casually incidenls, or ather situations treyond the CONTRACTOR's s*ntrol rsuse unavoidabte delay. All such calis shall be individually ex*mined by the EM$ Agency as tc systenr status plan and staffing levels, di"spatclr a*d iu-service timcs, and othor inffr:encing faclors {r..g., wealher crrnditionsl, nnd if the cir{:rlmslancsr w6rrsnt, rhe Hh{.8 Agency may authorize the exclusicn cf such call* when rneasuring perfunnance requirenre*ts, [xslusion of a c*Itr under ihis paragraplr means lhat a late call whicl:r has rs,ejved approval fnr an appeal will not courll af an cn-iime respilnsr. Theref*re, it is excludcd linm the datsbase for the purpo$e *f tracfile per{irr*rance calculaticn {i.e.. perfonnnnce ffieasured by fra*ions of a minute or hour).
lrr crder to be eligible for such exemption, the CfiNl'RA{'TOIl sball notifu the FMS Ag*ncy within a r*asonable affiouilt of tiffie of the occurrence- Lquiprneff f,ailure, personnel ersr, or lack of s nearby ambulanee ds€s nct constilute grounds for exemption knm resp*nse tirnc perfonnartce requiremenls.
a| Failure t* Repon "At Scene"
ln inxlances when emergency arnbulance units {bil to report ''ar scen6.'' lhe time of the ne.rt comnrunications by rhase units with tl:r COUNTY EMS Communiealiong fen{sr shall bc ilsed as the -at Brene" tirne. H*wever, CONTRACTOR may appeal silch instances wh*n il can document lhc ectual anival lime thrcrugh another means {*.g." I*n-CONTR,ACTSR" first respondrr ecmmunication rec*rding and antomatic vchicle kcalori, i) '*At Scene"
At s*ene *hall be defirtcd *s tbe manrent wlien an appropriately sta{&d and equippeti ambulance arrivcs r{ or within IQfl feel of fh* sffine of rhe incidenl, ln instance* where lhe ernergency arnbulnnce unit responds tt s i*cation other fhan the scenr-' {e.tr;," staging *rea)" arrival "irt sc*.:l:" sha}l bc the tirre such CIILI}.IT"J CF TRESNI
Fr*sns, l&
115
't
3 4
a;
"1
I
I
10 1l_
13 L3
1*
L5
16 17
L8
1C
2*
:l-
dt
?1
24 25
26 ?7
e8
unit arrives al, or is within one hundrcd {l00i feet of the designated staging location, The arrival sf a non-tranrporl advancrd life ruppo* {pararnedic.} unit, alon*" will nnt satirfy the respons* tirne standard.

Nar will the arrival of a BLS unit or a call requiring the respcnsc of a paranredic ambulartce, satisfy the responsc lime standard. However, the combixed response rf these twc {2} types of unit* would sati*fy thc resp$nsc {irn* stanrlard Lrased upo:r the arrjvai ofboth unils at lhq sc*ne, I{espoase time rnea*uranent, i* sucb * ease, rvould be trased uflon the srival tinie nf the larer *niving ernit. 7) gg:!-@tsesl:e"'
Requireri rceFcns€ tirne rtandards do not apply to iRstances where CONTRACTCIR is cancelled prior lir arriva] "at scenc".
8l br@iaqgdlnitiati*gEpsponse
The following performance indicators shall be used {o evaluate the timclincss of COFI"I-RACT{}R.'s lirld *perations {lionr tin:e nf unitr alerr tr tirne "at sceue"'J ir:
rcspsilse t$ rcqu€sts that reguire an inrmeeliale dispaleh {Priorities I and ?} or an urgent dispatch (Frinrities 3 and 41. $ur;h perfonnance indicators are nol nsed as standards for enf*rcing CONTRACTf-IR's eonrpliance with requird resprlnse time standards under this Agreernent" Rather. th*y are utiliaed a$ fl m€snr ofdeterrnining whethv CANTRATTOR meels the criteria lbr an exeeption lo re$ponse time standsrds and frrr evalualing the need far more in-depfh Quality improvernent review by the EMli ,Agency and/rr CONTRACTOR *fCON1"RACTOR's $ervices.

Crew llespqnsgFhas.@
For roquests for immcdiale respcnses {Prirrities 1 and 1} ancl urgent tespon$es (Friorities 3 and 4]. the'"Chute Time" i* the rncasurernsfit of elapsed tinre tiorn "unit alert'" to tht timc fhat all crewmenrbers ave ln thr ambulrnce unit, begin responsc, and reporl $fl radi* to the C{JUI\iTY EM$ eamn:uni*alions Center of "unit €luoute-" For C*NTR.ACTOR's primary arnbulance units, tlre maxirnuin pemrissitrle Chule lime shallbe one hundred t$Ienty (l?fJl secsnds nr l**s. This ptrfhnr-lance indicator is a perfurrnaflce tR€&surernent of CONTRACTOR's perf'orrnance $eparat$ lr*n: any *ther perforrtlancc stnnclard in this Agreernen{. i) "Uriit Alerr.'
$hall hrr'dsfined as the rncment ths COL]NTY EblS
cctt['iTY oF FEES}IO
!t:esne, CA
7 116
a
3 4
5 6
6 s
t0
1')
13 14
15 1.6
17 1€
30 4t
,.}
23 24
25 ZQ)
Ftn
E6
f*mrnunicatiCIns fefit*r alerts COHTR {CTOR's c.msrgency arnbu}ancc unit lbr a respon$e. 9i Ambulances alrall be staffbd and equipped *t the sppropriate response level ftr the rcsPonse incident {Advanced t"ife $*ppol"t or Fs.sic l"ife Support}. Th* CONTKACTOR may urilizc il* own discrction olr resource management with regard lrl advanced life supporl {paranledic} ambulance urits" The CONTRACTOR rnay operate a sing{e-riered.$}stcff - utilizing advan*ed life suppart {pararnedici arnbularce units for all respanses or lhe CONTR.ACTOR fiay operale * mu{ti,tiered rl,srs'd, - staffing di{ferent typ* of units with differe*t stafling levels in crder to service the varirrus types af respcnses. The CONTRACTOR lras lh€ aperationai f'lexibiliry to operats under eilher mrxlel in nrdsr ln provide a *aet-effective systern. Hor,rever, tile fONTRA(1I OR's nbligation ta perforrr its minimurn parformatrce requirxtnents under this Agreern€nt trl the reas,onable satisfaction nf th* C"*unty and rhe EMfi Agency shall nct be lessened if CONTRAC'I OR el*ts tn opsrate a rnul$-riet'ed s.frtenl - that is, rhe CON:'RAf,TOR shall in any evenr be resporuible to prcvide an appnrpriatcly slaf?bd and equippd arnb*lanee unit tr: sne-hffidred percenr t 100%l request* for scrvices, ss defined in the EM$ Ageilcy Pal icy and llrocedures.

The EM$ Agency requirement for nrinirnum *taftir:g of actva*ced lit"e suppon lparanredic) units it onc { I ) eurrently California-li*e,tsed *nd leieal}y-accredired pararnedic and *ne ( l } turently trained and locally certified EMT. The minimunr staffing fcr a Bl"[i unit is rwo {2} locally cer{itled EL,lTs.

When fONTRAfTOR utitrizs BL$ ambulances as a pan of e nwlti+iered$rsren. and when, in lhe eas* of incidents which r*quire the response of on advanced life suppart {parameclic} ambulancc unit. the fOblTRA{:?OR utilizm SLfi arrbr-rlances ir} ennjunction wirh non-trat}sprrrl advsneed life support {p,ararnedi*} units, the fbllowing standdrds shal} appiy:
a) Rendezvous bstivcen BLS anrbulance units and arlvence{l life support {pnranredie} units chall he initiareri aectrding tr} ths standanis dercrihed in EMii P*licy #510; and
h) BLli ambulanc* pcrsonnel .thali adhere fo IMS Agency Pr:li,;y and Procedures regarding treatffrent ond the nrgerlcy of {ranspafi, Parient {*1IFN? CF F'iEsNf"}
Frs.sr1o. CA
.|l
117
1 2
3 4
6 6
?
I
I
10 Ll-
1?
13 14
L5
16 11
1"8
l_9
:0
21 -j ')
t1
J5
11 trunsp$rr shall nrrf hc inappropriatcly dcluyed, contrnry to llMs Agcncy Falicy and llrttcedures, in arder to wait lirr thc:rrrival of r nan-lranspnrt ad'nnced lil'e supprrt {par*nredic} unit in onlcr to pr€!'enl the levy of liquidatcrl tlarnagcs regrrrlirtg a BLS resprrnse-
e I BLS lsy{:l amhulanccs thr sen"ices undur this Agreenrent shall be cquippctl tnd stall'cd ar the ltL5-de{ihrillarion level, l0l fONTRA{"TOR shall nrakc (and shall nraintain for l$0 days) a tapc rectrded arpy nf all r*qucstli ltrr ntt:dical aid thrcrugh the dcsignatetl putrlic satery ansu'ering puint, I ll CCINTRArTOR shall. c*nsi$tent rvith rhc COUNTY EMS poticies and Frocctlures. dcvclop. cotk:ct. nt*intain antl transmit dtta rcgarding its delivcry clservices hercundcr.
l:) CONTRACTCIR slrall norify the COUNTy bMS Coffnruricarion$ Celrtcr irrtmeciiately uprn reccipt irf calls lirr mulical aid antl,'cr trnnspnrlatiorr, and ntrempt ta firnvarel rnedical Ul I calls to the COL.XTY EMS Cnnrtnunirr*tions Center to allo*'lbr telephrure lnedical pre- arrival instructions.
1l) CONTRACTOR shall mnke and nrainrain rndio contacr wirh rhe COUNTY liMS flttntmunicntions Center on thc COUNT.\' EM.q Mctl-Net $ystenr frrr thc purpose of tra uk ing. c*ard i nati lrg. and data r:ol I uction,
l4l CO,r.-I"RACTOR agrues ta preiviile an inten:al quality impr$venrenr progrum, which adhcrqs tti the couNTY FMS Policius and pnicrdures.

7. SOUTFMEI$I ANP PER$ONNEL
CONTRACTOR shall fumish, r'lflcratc, rnaintain und replase, a$ ncsessilry, any and all itans ulequipnrent" apparatus antl supplies. rvhcther renl, pcrsrrnal. ur utherrvise. and quatitierl flcnxrnnsl as nr{y he necesrary to fultilt its ohligatians uncler rhis Agrce rnenl, As betrl,scn the puxi*s hcrctu. titlc 16 all such cquipnrent, apparatus anri supplie* fumrshed by {'Ol,-TRA('TOR. untlcr this Agrcement shall rentsilr at alI tirrtcs in CONTRA(-TOR" tnd persrrnnel assigneti by CONTRA{]T{iR hr lhe pcrlitrrnance cf this Agreentent ere *nd siroll renrrin ernplnyees {rr crlnlritctors ol'lhc {.f}NTRACTOR,
ilfull',{TY LJ1, FS;.{jii:_-r
tr t .: c--r ,'n
*
118
"t
*
?
5 6
v
I
9 .l- u
1X
17 ,tJ
z4
1CIJ
16 rt
t"g
79 2L
!3
z+
25 26
'l?
t{J

8. IHpErpNpEt{TCON].R4qT!}R
lrr or<ier to establish that COU!{TY is not a co-employer o!'CONTRACTOR's affic€rs. agents rir crnployees, lhe parties figrse to thc pr*visi*n* of rhjs Seqtion 8.

In psrformance olthe work, duties, *nd obligatioas assurned by C{INTRACTf)R under tkix Agreennertu :'t is mutually undergt*od and egrerd that e' CIN'l'RAfTOl?, including any and all of CSIITRACTOR's officers, agettts. and empl*yees, will at sll timss be acting and perlonring as ar ind*petdent cslrtractor, and shall ac.t in an ir:dependant capacity and n*t as an afficer, agent, $srvant, employee, jtint venturer, partner, or assosiate *f the COUI'ITY. CCIUNTY shall retain the right tc1 *dminisler lhis Agreernent str as l* vcrify that CONTRAfT'OR ie perforrning its ob}igations in acc,nrdance with the terms and c-r:rnditions tfierenf CO;{TRACTOR and COUNTY *hall cornply with all applicable provisions of larv and the rul*s and regulations. lf any, *f gcvemmental authorities havingjurisdiction over rxstters rhe subjeet therso!,
Because of its statu$ as an indepe.ndent contract*r. fON'I'l{.4(lfOR shall lrave *bseilutely no right to emptnl"rnent rights and benefits available to fOLJt'lTY ernplayees.

CSNTRACTOR shall bc *ol*ly liable and resporrsible tbr pruviding to, or *n behalf *{ its etr:ployees all l*gatrly-required ernployee beuefits. In additir:n, CONI'RACTOR shall be solely rcsprnsihle and save CCIUNTY harrnlesx j-ronr sll matlers relating to payment of CIINTLACTOR's enrployee s, including c*mpliance with $ocial Security, ',vithholding, and sll other regulations govenring such mafiw$" h is acknowledged rhat during the tcnx rf rhis o{greelncn{, fONTRACTSR rnay be prnviding srrvi{:es to otherx unrelated ro ihe COUNTY r:r to this Agrerment- s. cq$qps'RA'r'1(}ry
A, C$IJNTY shall nert be obligated t* raise laxe$, eir t* ad*pt or appr,Lrve any tan rnes$ur€s to provide fundsn in order to cornp€nsate CON?RAfTOR in connectinn with rhis Agrcerncnt, l'he orrly csffipensation payable try {'O[INTY ro CI}NTLA{.ITOR lsr CONTRACTOR's perfdrn:rance *l'its services under this Agreernenr is as lollq,,v*;

8. COUN'IY shallprovitle monetary c*rnpensation t* f,'ON'|RACTOR fr:r the sfltisfactsry p*rlbmrane* rilite *ervires as prcvided, herein. {:'':Ul'l'l'Y *f',eREtt{{]
Irl:rt snt . CA
119
1 t
3 4
5 v
o
o
1CI
11"
L2
13 t4
15 t6
L7
t8
t9
20 11
')i
&.t
?ri
zb
ao
l) Mgrxlp:ygsrapqn{e$op
ai COTNTY shall pay to CONTRACTOR r monthiy luurp-paymenr r:f One Thausand Faur Hundred $ix anrJ ?51100 Dcllars {$1,406.25} to assist in estirnated dry rurrs and uncolleclible *harges. Th* total maximunr morefary compensati*n payable under thir sseernent for eslinnaled dry runs and uncollectihle charges fnr eac,'h year shall *ot excecd Sixt*en Thousand Eight Hundred $eventy- Five and lrlo/ I 0t) Doliars ($ I 6"8?5.t}il). bl The total rnaxirnum monetary corxprnsation payable under this agreernffit chall not ex*eed Eighty-Four Thousand Thrse Hundrecl $eventy-Five and No,ll00 Dcllar* i$84,375.00).

IO. AU'TITS AIiI} INSFECTION$
The CONTRI,CTOR shall at any time during businrss hours, arrd as cllen as the COUFil'Y ntay deem nfi*e$$ary, nrake availalrle to the fSUNTY for examination ail of its records and data with r€sftect ts {he mnlters c*vered by tlris Agreernent. The IONTRACTOR shall, upon request by the COLNTY, p*nnit lhe COUNTY to audit and in*pect all of such records and data r**essary t6 en$ure CSNTRACTOR'S compliarrce with ihe tenn.s of this,4greement. lf this Agre*ment sxceeds tsn thouxand dollars ($ 1CI"0$0,fi0), COIiTRACT$R ihall trg subject ta the exaffinatirn and audit *f lhe Audif*r C*neral frlr a period of three {3) years aller final pay*ent under contrsct {Covemrnent Code Section 8546.7r.

I l. II{SURANCA
Without limiiing the COLINTYI rigltt to t:btain indernnificalirn fron: C*NTRACTOR or flny third Bartie*, f$NTR ACTOE. at its sale Ertlense! shall mrintairr in f*ll forr:q: and efl'ect the follawing in,rurance policies or s prograsn of seif-insurance, inctruding but not limited to, nn inrurance p*oling a?rangcmfint q.rr Joint Foryers Agreement {JF,{} thrnughout tlre tenn of this Agreernent:

A. {kunrnsrEialGeneralLiEhility
Can.ln:ercial General Li*bility lnsur*nc* wiih limits of n*t lesr than Trvo Million floll*rs ($?,Oilil,i)0C) per occunenc.e snd ar annual aggregat€ r:f flrlur Million Dollars {$4-0CI0,CIf10}.

This policy shall be issued on a per occurrerlce ba*is. County nray rcqui;c spe*ific coverage ilr*luding ti f-{:l-l}J"Y flii lr'REgl;Lr
e r{ r 4l-r r i'L
120
I
I
3 {
t
b
7 I
9 10
3- t_
12 13
l4
l_5
1b
3"7
1ts
1"9
4\J
IL
)")
4J
24 1r
'lE
It
28 completed operetion$? product liabiiity, contractual liability, Expio*ion-Collapse-Undergrouncl (XCI_J], fire leggl liability or any other liabiliry insuranee d*ernad n€ce$sary becaus* of the natur* of the contract.

8. Autnmobile Liability
Corrrprehenrive Aulornsbile Liability Insurance rrrith a combinerl single limit of not less One Million Dollars {S 1,0O0,0CI0J per aceident. Ccverage should inelude orvned and non- owned vehieles used in conneetion rvith this Agreement- C. Freifessional Liabilitv
Professio:ia! t"iabiliiy lttsurance {Errors and Omissions} lvith linrits of n*r less than sne Million Doilsrs {$ l,os{},f0CI} per occurrence, Threc Million Doll*rs {53.00fl,0fl0} aunual sggfegale.

D. Workerls CornFensation
A paiicy of $t'crker's Compen:ation insurance as rnay be required by lhe Califomia Lsbor Code,
E^ Cyber l"iability
Cyber Liability lnsuran*" with lirnils nat less tl:an $2,00f],00t) per occuffenee or clairn, $2,fl#(},CI00 flEgregale, Coverage .shall he sufficienlly broad ta respo*cl to the dulies and obligatirns as is undert*en hy CCINTRACTOR in this agreernent and shall include. but n$r be timired lo, claims involving infringemenl of intellectual property, iecluding but nc{ linrited to in*ingement of copyright, trademark, lrade dress. invarion of privacy violationx, informatirn theft, darnage to sr drstructiau clf electronic information, relezse of privat* infonrratirn, alleration ofeleetxrnic inftrnnalion, €xtt rti(ln and neirryork security. The peili*y shall provide coverage fcr breach respanse Eosts as well as regulatary fines and penatrtie* as lvell as credit monitoring EJ{penses with litnits sufficienr ts reb?aud to thesr rbligations.

Add itiqr ual Requi rements R el ati ng tr_r lns urance IONTRACTOR shall nbtain endsrsements tcr lhe Conrnercial Ceneral l.iability ittsurance naming the County of Fresn*, its of?icers, agents, and einplnyees, indivitlually and colleetiveiy, as additiernal insured, lrut only inscfar as tlre operations unetcr this Agreernryrl are I*IINTY 0F FllLl.-qa{t-1
Fr-|:Elt+. fA
121
l0
t1
l_2
13 14
1"5
1"6
L7
18 1"9
20 l1
.J'J
1?
?4
?Ii
e6
27 2A
1 z
1 4
5 5
7 I
I
c{rnccrned. Such coverage for additional insured shall apply as primary insurarre and any otlrer insurance, or self-insuraneen maintained by COUNTY, its officers, agents and employeEs shall be excess only and not contributing with insursnce provided under CONTRA(rIER's policies hercin.

This insurance shall not be caneelled or ehanged without s minimum of thirry {30} days advance written notice givec tc COUHTY.

CONTRACTOR heTeby waives its right to rscorrer Forn COLJNTY, its officersn agents, and employees any anrounts paid by the policy of worker's compensation insurancc rcquired by this Agreement. CONTRACTOR is solely responsiblc to obtain any erdorsernent to such policy thst mey be necessary to ac*omplish such waiver of subnrgation. but CONTRACTOR's waiver of subnrgation under this paragraph is effcctive whether or not CONTRAC'IOR obtains such an erdorsemenr.

Within thirty {30} days from the date CONTRACTOR signs rhis Agreement, CONTRACTOR shall provide certificates of insurance and endorssnent as stated above for alt of the foregoing pslicies. a"s required hqrcin. to the County of Fresno. Department of Public Health" p.O. Box I 1867, Fre€nrJ. CA 93775, Attn: Conlracts Sestions - 6rh Floar, slating lhat such inswance covfrage hsve been ohtaincd and are in full force; thal tlre County of Fresro, its officers, agents and employees will not be re*ponsible for any premiums on ths policie+; thar for such worker.s compensation insurtncc the CONTRACTOR has waived its right ts r*$vsr frorn the COUNTY" its officers, agents" and ernployees any amou*ts paid under the insurance policy and that waiver does not invalidate the insurance policy; that such Commercial Generat Liabiliry insuranee names thr County of Fresn*. its cfficers. agents and ernpioyee, individually and collectively, as additianal insurod, but only insofar as the operttions under this Agreernent are concerngd; that sucir coverage for additionat insured shall apply as primary insurance and any other insurance, or self-insilrancc, rneintained by COUNTy, its oiftcers, agsnt$ and employecc, shall be exee$s only arrd not contributing with insurance provided under LIONTRACTOR's policies herein; and that this insurance shalt not be csrrceltod or changed without a rninimum of thirt'y {30} days ndv&nce, written notice given ro couNTy.

In the event CONTRACTOR fails to koep in effect at all tirnes insurancs coverage as herein pravided, the COUNTY rnay. in addition to other remedics ir rnay havq suspcrrd or terminate this Agreenrent upon the cc*srr€nce ofsueh event.
.11 COIIITTY GF FR'iSI{O
Fregn.:, cA
122
1 4
J
4 q
b
7 &
s
J-l
z2
1J
l4
15 L6
1'7II
l_8
1-9
2A
a1
a1
,a
ai
dE
2'.]
28 All poticie* sirall be with adrnitsl insurers licensed t* do business in the Stat* of Califomia- In,quranc€ purehasd slrall be pwchased fronr companies passessing a cffrent A.M. Best, Inc. rating of A F$C Vll rr bettsr.

The insurance requiremenrs of,this Sertion I I shall apply r* C{)NTRAC1?R's personfiel during their perinrmance of ary flctivity which ir the subje*t of this Agre*ment, or any amendmenl hereta. inclurling, but n$t lirnited t*" their grarticipati*il i* clinical *ducati*n pragranrs nlrcl preho*pital experlencc while assigned to a ssparats param#ic grcrulrd *mbulance pravider. m. FruTu"jll.lNpEMNrFreATtot:{
A. CONTRACTOR agrce*. ts pnltest, deftnd, indcnrnify and hofd hannless COUNTY, its elective and appointive boards, officeri, agfnf$, elnploye*s, l*eal EM$ Agency, anti EMS Medieal Direrlor{s}, lrom any and all claims, suits, liabilities, expenses, sosts, darnag*s- and judgrnents cf *ny naiureu including attornsy fees and couil eosts, fbr injury tr:r, and death ot, any person, and for injury tu any Froperty. ineluding con.requenlial damages of any natllr* resulting therefiom, arising oul o{ or ia any wey connected with any acls or onrissions by. *r *n treha}f clf CCIh:T"RAf'f OR, its *ffrcers, employees, agefits *t contra(tors in perfonning r:r failing to perfonn any servicrs or furrctians provided feir or re&rred to or in alry r$fiy sonnesteri with an-v wrlrk, service-s, or functinns t* be perfon*cd by CONTITACTOR, its *f,ficen, +nrirloyees, egants, or **ntract*rs under this Agreernent. The i*regoing elause shall in no way obligate the CQN"1'RACTOR tc provide sueh protoction, inriernnificalion, cr dcfense tn thc extenl nf acts or anis*i*ns by tl:e COLJNT.f, its rfficers, employees, agenfs, or gontract{Jrs.

B. COUHTY egreu$ lo prcltsct, defend, indenrnify *nel trold llarmless CONTRAf,TOR, i1s clective and appoinlive brards, officers, ag$n{s and arrployees &om ar:y *nd a}l clairns" suits. liabilitie$, €,rped$es, costs" darnages, and judgments af any narure. including attoruey's fees antl c$ufi c{}!ts, fbr injury 1o, *nd d*afh of, flny pcrsons" and fnr injury tl: any Srraperty, inclurJlng *cnsc*;uerttitl d*mag*s of any nature resulting therefrom, erising CIirt of, or in aliy way urnnecled with lhe ect.c or t"rmissi*ns Lry. *r on bahalf *f CQUN"I'Y, its nfflcers, enrployres, figl:nts or contra*lurs in perfi-rn-ning nr failing t* perf,ann any scrvice* or functio*s provided for ar referred t* or in any wey connected with any work, servic*s, r:r funrtinns to be perfonned by CCIUHTY" it* officcrs, enrpl*yeer, - 1,1 - fnr,:t'iTT L-1F Ft?E.qfi*
lrssno. tF.
123
l"
z
a
*
5 5
7 I
1E
11 !z
'l 1

3.4 15
15 T7
18 19
2A
a1
22 24
1A
'jG
2t
't9
ag€nts or contractors under this Agm,rnert. The fr:reg*ing clause shatl in no way rbligate the COUNTY ta pr*vide such prntectinn. indannifi*atio*, or deNensa to the extenl of acts or omissions by the CI(}?.?I'RACTOR, its r:fficers, ernployees, agenls, sr contractors.

C. COUNTY agrees lo protsct, deiend" indemnify and hcld hannless rhe CONTIi,4fl{}R, ils officert, agenls lrrd empi*yees, frsrn clsin* brought by p*rs*ns {'ON'IIACTSIR transFort$ a? the rsque$t of a peac* offi*er or individual aufhoriaed by Welfarc and Institutigns e'ocle Secfion 51 50 tc cause a persor {o be takerr into eustcdy, but only insofar as lhose claims are based on acts inherent in carrying out the detenti*n nf thc pernon ffs rtrlutrled by thc peace otlicer or authoriaed individual' This indcmrrity slrall nnt exterd Ia elairns lbr negligence in the provision nf transportation or to any medical care prcvided during lransport" This section shall in no rvffy obiigate the COUN'Iy tn provide such prctcetion. indernnificati*n, nr def,ense tLl dle €ftt€nt af negligent or wrnngfu3 a€ts 6r ornissions by the |ONTRACTOR, its officers, employees. agen*i. or c$ntract*rs €tceFt as explicitly stated ahflve.

D" The aforesaid indemnity and hold harnless clause*i by CONTRACTOR and COLINTY shali apply to ail damagcs and clairas for damages of every kind ruf&red, nr allegeil to have been suffered by the party lo be indenrnified- includi*g but nnt lirniled to alt.rmey fees and cpurl cosfs, by rrssiln rif the afcresaid operati*ns of the indernnifying ,.)arty, regardless of rvhether or nnt &e insurancc policies *r fentral San Joequin Valley Risk Managernent Auil'rority {CSivR&{A} progranr or self-insurance of the indemnifying pfl,ty shall hove boen detenrincrJ t* be appticable tc any sueh darnages *r claims for darnagec.

13. TERil{ $F.AGREEIT.IENT
The tenr: nf this Agfeernent she II be for a p*rioti of three {3} ye*rs, c*mmencing rn July l" ?0l g through and i*clueling Junc 30, 2*22. This Agreenrcnt may he exteneled f*r twc {l} edditional n:nsecutive twclve {l ?} rnonth pa'irds upcn wrifien approval of both pa*ies no lefer than thirty {3tt) days pri*r to the first day *f the next lwelve {l l} nrantlr e.xtcnsisn period, The Direct*r $f the Dcpatlmenl *f Fublic Health or his or her designee is auihcrierd t$ exscule sueh rvritien apprr:val r:n behatrf ni {'oIJNTY }:ased on fo}i'IRAC]'*R's satirfacrory pcrfi:rmance, 1:, COI-I]'JTY SF FRf;$lIi}
F:ee,nr:. f,.4
124
L
'1.
.1
4 5
6 "l
I
9 1"0
11 t,)

1.3 14
1"5
i.6
t?
i_8
r9
2A
2L
22 al
24 25
25 27
?8
I{. TERMINATION
A' Non-Allocatisn of Fu&ls - The tenn$ of this Agreement, and tlre services to be provided hereund*r, are contingent on the approvat of fundr hy rhe appropriating govemment agency, Should sufficisnt funds not be altocated, the scrvics$ provided may he modified, or rhir Agrement tenninated, at 0ny time by giving the CONTRACTOR thiny (30) days advanc* written nctice.

E. Breoch of Cuutrasf - The COI.]}{TY may imnrediately suspend or rerrninate this Agrrmncrrt in whole or in part, where in the dstsrmination of the CoUNTy thcre is:
l) An illegal or improper use of funds;
2) A failur-e to comply with any term of this Agreement; 3) A substantially iuconwt or incomplae report submitted to the COUNTy; 4) Irnproperly pufonnal serrrice,
ln no evenl shall any payrnfllt by th€ CQUNT'Y constitute a waiver by the COUNTy of any breaclr of this Agrseilellt $r sny default which may then exi$t on the part ofrhe CONTRACTOR.

Neither shsll euclr paymerrt impair or prejudice any ranredy available rs the COUNTy with respect tc the breach or default" The COUNTY shall have the right to dcmnnd of the CONTRACTOR rhe repayrnent to the COUNTY of any ftnds disbursed to the CONTRACTQR under rhis Agreonent, which in the judgrnent of the COUNTY were not expendod in accordance witlr the tenns of this Agreernort. The CONTRACTOR shall pro:nptly refund any sucb funds upon dernand. c, without $altsq - unde-r circumstanes sther thar those set forth above, this Agreement may be teiminatd by COUNTY upcrn the grving of thirty {30} <lays advance written norice of an inr€mtion to tenninffteto CONTRACTOR,
I5. NON-DISCRIMINAT]ON
During the perforrnance af this Agrcement, CONTRACTOR shall not unlawfully riiscriminate against any employce or applicunt for employmeut, or recipient of serviees, bpcause of' race, religiaus ffe*d, color, national origin, anse$fry, physical disability, me$tal disability,lnsdical condition, genetic inibnnation, tnarital status, rex" gender. gender idenrity, grntler expressign, ags, sexual orientation, military or vstcrail sraru$, pursuant to all applicable State of Califarnja and trederal ststulss nnd regulations.
-tf- c0u*TY ol.' FRESNo
Fr.esns/ CA
125
1 z
3 4
5 6
g
g
l8
11 :.3
1f
14 15
15 1"7
'ts
19 2L
aa
!3
1a.
z,
')E
2'-l
;8
t6. roRcE MA:tquRE
A' lf eitl'ler party heret* is renclersd unabl*, wholly or in part, by Force h4ajeure t* carry sut its *bligatierns undcr lhis Agre*rreirl, tha? party shall give rc the otlrer party here?o prompt wri{ten notice cf the Force Majeure with full particulars relating theret*. Thareupon, the obligation ot. the party giving the notice, ss thr as thcy are affested by the F'eirce Majeure, shall be cuspended during but no longer than, the cnn{inuance of the Forco Majeure, exfeFt frr a r€asonable tirne thereafter requireel to re*urne perfonnance.

B' During my period in whish either party hereto i* excuse{, Forn perlonnance by re$sotr of lhe r-rscut?€nce of an event of Force Ma,ieure, the perty so ex*used shall prornptly, diligently. and in good faith take all reasonahlc aeti*rr required in order far il to be able to prornptly ft)mrnence or rssurxe perfeintaxce alitt obligations under thi* Agreerncnt. Without lirniting the generality of thc for*going tle Farry so excused fronr pcrfarmance shall. during any such pedod of Foree Majeure, take all reasonable actian neeessary ta terminate {ny tempcrary restraininS order or preli:ninary or pffrnaneill injuncti*ns to enable it to so corrme.nce or resume perf,crrnance *f its cbligatians untler this Agreemenl.

C' The party whose perfunnanee ie excused due to the occurrence of an event of Force Majeure shatrl, during srrch period, keep the *ther party heretei notified nf atl sucft actions rquired in order for it t* be able 10 comnsnce or resufilc perf"onnzulce eif its ubligati*ns under lhis Agreenient.

D' -'Force lvfa.ieure" is clcflned as sn Aet of God, act of public str6lny, rar. anrt ather €xttasrdinary causes not reasonatrXy within ths Efr,nlro] of eithcr *f the panier heretc.

17. fiovERiltNc L,{w
Venue for any actir:n arising out of or relaled to this Agreernent shall t:n!y be in Fresn* County, Califrrmia,
'I-he rights and obligaticns of the partis:t and all interprctstinn^c &nd peri?:nnanee clthis Ag,ree.ment shall b,* gaverned in all respect.r by the larvs sf thr: State *f Cali{brnia- IS. CONFIPENTIALITY
All services pertbnnecl by CONTH.AfTOR under this ,,{greement shal? be in stri*r " l_? titit*''" $I1 FRESNO
Fr. e-1.- aI
126
1 2
A
5 5
I
L0
l.t
12 L3
:"4
1frJ
1"6
L"7
18 :"9
2L
')'t
z3
z,
?,5
2G
27 zd
confonnsilce with all applieable Fedcral, State of Califemia and/or ]oca! laws and regulatitns relaling to eonfidenliality, including ali Hcallh Insurance Portatrility Accou*ting Act {HIFAA} regulalions. l$. F{OTICES: The persons and their addresses having authcri{y to give and receive n$ticss under this Agrwrnen! include tlre ftll*wirrg:

CE.JNT\:

Director. Courtv r:f Frcsna
Dena$ment sf Puhlic Hr.alth
F.O. B*x I186?
Fresno, CA 93fi5
CITY
Citv:rf,Saflser
Attn; fitv Manacer
I?ilCI 7h $rreer
$ang*', CA 93657
All notices between theCOLNTY and CONTRACTOR prrvicterl furor pennittutr under this A,grcement murt be in writing and delivered either by personal service, by first-class Unitd $tates maitr, by an *ven$ght *onn:nercial courier service, or by telephonje facsiluile fra:rsnissiorr. A nntice delivererl by personal service is elfectiv* uprn sen'ice ta the rtripien!. A notice delivsred by first-class United $tates rnail is eflbctive thrse COUNTY busine$s days after dapasir in the {Jnited $iates ruri!, po$tfige prepaid, addrcsscd to the recipivtt. A noti# delivered hy an overnrght commercial cowier scrvice is effeative one COUI{TY business day aftar deposit rvith the nvemight commer*ial criurier service, delivery fees prepaid, with delivery instrur:ti*r'ls given f*r next dey dellvcry" addressed to the recipient. A nslties delivercd by telephonic facsimile i* effective when transrnission m tlre reripienr ls **mpletd ibut, if such transrnission is c*rnpleted outside of COUN?Y business hours, then such delivery shall be tleemed to be effsctive a! the nexi beginning of a CI}UNTY businesi day!, provided that the.qender rnrirrtains a machine recsld *f lhe completed transrnission, For all clairns arising rlut o{'*rrelated to t}ris Agreemen{, no&ing in this sec.tion establishes. rvaiv€s, or modifies any clairns rlre;centation rtquireixer:ts or procalures provided try larv, including but ntrt lhrited ts: the G*vernmcnt Claims Act {Division 3.6 of Title I of thc Gevernment C*de, begiffiing with sec.tisn 9101.
:0- MODTI'ICATION; Arry matte.rs of this Agreenrcnt rn*y be rnodified fiam tirne ru lime by the wrirten conidnl r:f all the parties wi*rout, in any way, affecling the rernain**r.

21. NEIN-A$SIGNME$'{": lrleither party shall assign. tnmsfer or sub-contract this Agreanent nor thcir rights or dutier under this A$eement urithour the pri*r uritfen cnnsenf nf the other parly.
- 1A - CCTiTIIY nr FRf:iXrr
ireg.tnl:, CP,
127
1 a
3 5
b
I
I
I
10 1L
1a
11 L4
tcLJ
L6
1?
18 19
EV
2L
'Ja
73 311
'1 tr
26 '),7
28 22. SEVERASILITY: The provisions of this Agreement sre severable. The inv*lidity or unenfcrcssbility *f *ny one provision in the Agroflne$t shall not affeet th€ otha' provisicnn T3. ENTIRE AGREEMEryT
This Agreemeril csnstitptm theentire agresilent bcrwoen the CONTMfTOR ar:d CSUNTY wit! respect ta thc subjcct tncttrrhcrfof and supemedes all previous Agrxmartt negotiatiom, pnrpcsals, conrrnitmattg writinp, ndwrliscmsntq publieations, and under${sndingof any nahae whatsowcr unless expre**ly inch*ded in this Agreernent. t{/
#l
{#
ltf
t#
t//
#1
t//
il/
l/t
/t/
ilt
t/l
1$
llt
/ft
- lY - COLI'{TY SF fRgtt}ii
freFn(,. f,&
128
I
?
3 4
5 5
'l
I
o
10 1r.
r2
13 L4
15 16
1?
18 L9
20 2t
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 May*r
IN WITNE$S WHEREOF. the parries hcrelo have er(lcuted this Agrcement ns of the day a*d lcrr firrt hercinabove writftn.

CTTY OF I{CER COUNTY Of FRESNO
'':1.

Nslhm Magsr& Chcirman of the Bo*d of
Supervirors of the Caunty of Frsno
1 Tim Chapa. City M

4. '' o *b,t*
Bccky Padftn. City Clerk
$f*{e.Ynr,rF
Flilda Cf,nni Montoy, City dttoruey
1700 7'l'sF€d
$rnger, CA 93657
FOR ACCOUNTINC USE ONLY:

Fund: 0001
$ub,clars: I00m
ORG No.: 56!01695
Account Ns-: 7?9$
ATTEST:

Bcrnice E. S€idsj
Clc* ofthc Botrd of Supcn'is*rs
County of Fresno. $tnn of Califonria
By;
c$JlrrY oF ?Fsg$o
Frerno, CB
-?il.
129
Lirhibir A
Fresn{r C*urtty drnhulsnr* $erviee Area
TnneI
llcscriplion
L Be-ein*ing flt the inter*,ectiru ol N. Mefall ,{vense and Ashlan Avsnue . ?- Pntreed stulh along frl. lllcCrrll 4vcnuc t* the in[er$estian N. McCrll Avenuc antl $rarc Higltway I 80/Kings Calyrn.

3. fr*:rc.e*d west on Stale Flighw*.v IE0lKings Cauyon ro lhe inrer#{li.}n oFStale }lig!r**try l801Kings {ian3.ol and N, DeW*lt'rlveiluc.
4- Prmccd stulh r:n N. DeWnlf Avcnu* ln thc interscclicn nf S. lleWnlf strd rhe Il.

Anrericen Av*nuc.

5. hrrceed easl *rl E" Anmricat Ar'enus tr th* inter*ec{i{rn fif E. .Anuri{an Averrue and 5.

McCall rtvenue-
6, PnN:eed ${ruth iln 5- McCsll Avcnuc tc thc inter$e$ion *[ S. McCalt r\venue and E.

Jcffcmon A venuc.
?- Pr*cced sssl on E. Jeiferson Avetue t$ ftr i$lfrsrction gf E. Jelfersns Avenue ant! S.

Atatierny Avenue,
l{, Prru*etJ sruth nn 5. Acatlcirry ,rlvcnue to thc intersegtion of $. Aradenry Avenue and E_ Adanrs Avctr,lc.

L Frnreed easl on E. Atlanrs Avrnue to {he intersa{risn of E. Arlamx Avsnuc *nd S. f*iervrnark Avenur:.

10. Fraceed il!fihea.rtfrtly in n slraigh{ line ltaru thc inlerscctinn *f E* ArJarns Ave nuc anel S- lrlet+"n:ark Av*n$c to the intersertjon al'Mac&rugh Avcnue *nd ll{ac0cnugh Avenuc (norlh nf Ga*dfrll*w r\venus r.vhcre Macdrugh Avenu* nrskf,* a right hatrl lurnl.

I L Frocsstl ncrflh in a straighl llne {rtrrn thc inters*ction of MacDrugh Avenuc a*rl Mac$onugh Avenue 1n*rth rrf Srrrdf*lluw Avenuel tr a paint where MarDrutough Avenue intsrse*lr with Watt: Valley Road.
130

12. Frocccd southwexl akng Wntts Valley R$ad ta the inrersection of Wa{rs Valley Rr:ad and l{ Ashtrarr .dv*lr*e.

13. Fn:cecrl Wexl al*ng E Ashlan Avcnue ter thc inlersection of E Ashlan Avenue antI l-l Me(lall Avenae.
131
ErfiibitA
Fresno County Amhulance Service Area
Zone I

ESHHIPSA'E
I rxarenva
&
t
s
d
*
l{
Lu
fs
d.
a
*ul#
ssAr
:r*3f
F$gr
F'L
e
ry
*
llror G
&
a
g
t
&
:c
{:to
Eb +l*'h 110 lltg
.&
-etErO
EIir -stt
o u!t*dE'UA5lsg
Efrzi-*
E
SeID
! *,'v-rmr: €
E
I
Io
&
g
I
G
ts
u*g
IE{-
a$
T
E
!p!<
td
ug
2 u>
tr!
!a--El
'a
gd
ee*oET(<
l!
o=tItr
EtuTLgrt st
l:auFl}n!Arr/E
FELiTS{tlAVe
LI.tTE4i'g
g
E*{Io
I
rgllnllr r0JE
$t
I€E
I
Ou[]
tcUH:)U<ro{t
zJ
e
6rt
!
u
c+
,,"'
c
aI{
5 It
I
Eta,
.gctrY^lE E C(ttGAve
f Jr*r;a*
c?tn Egt GTtItlrF31
E rqiftqlxtsEio
EililKCTOLEOf,
.*t
f'o
!}-
td^
e.:%
:Lrvrl'l rvE \
E*CAtr{'AVf
N
ig
++'
-+"+' as
*fo*
€ Sfl'ilOrrr^vE
CSMt Ff,LA'/E
&Ia
grnSt3r,nre
B|$ilrlrJE
fifrvtlsRorllt
j35.r,trtgrrG
T
teu
!
it
: ltArurraslE
*€tLF$irtwE
€ tl{gficrtArEg,
{ tltxte*rvrIiuHStv{(
luI
CJ
fii>o-E-o
*"#\
*+*
4"
,$ e!It
7 F
{
'F
i
te
f,
d
tl
*llrrIJT$a5
E
{
I
Hg
{
6t
Ig
l
t
J
6 !gr
oIt
E?ur.[[**q
El/l.iBolt
E trar& $/E
E BF,-TYSa1.'nOA"f-
lrjg
a
g
I
TJ
a
!
g
a
tIJ
s
E CEr'f tt
Et
*
q
o
6 t Lric cLx AvE
g
Il
!!
C{A{YCtrto

E A'TIIAOA-F TME
l-onSx*{t;<d6
$E

4. d
ag
G
E
c
E
gac.att!6rrrE
cr.Jvl
I*0
I3E
-
rl
q
z€
*{
q
l!>
g
g
u
U
{:
fi
Lagend
Zone
Soeetgi
r
E i.|*TT.{JE
132
Exhibil B
Frcrno County Amhulance Service Area
Zone I
Mermpolirnn Responre A rea Dercription
l. Beginning at rhe poinr wherc E. King* canyan Road and n*, Del Rey Avenue nrler$ecl.
3' Procecd $oulh along N. Del Rcy Avenuc tc the intersection of N. Del Rey Avenue and E" Cenarcl Avrnue.

Prucesd east along E. Central Avenuc ta the lnter$ectinn of E. Cenlrul Avenue nud S_ Bethcl Avenue.

Proeecd $outh along S. Bcthgl Avsue to th€ intcrsetion of S, Bethel Avcnue an<l thc E. American Avenuc.

Proeeed eau alorrg H. Aurerican Avenue ro the inter*ecliorr of thc E. Amcrican Avenue alignmcnt and the S. Rivelbend Avcnue *lignmenr, Proceed nonh along rhe s. Riverbend Avenue *lignmenr to lhe inters€ction of s.

Riverbe:rd l\verrltc and E, Annadale Avenue.

Prucecd *est along E. Annadale Ave*ue lo lh€ intersection of E. Annadslc AvEnue and thE S, ilediker Avenuc alignmenr.

Fr<reetl north along the $- Zcdikcr Aven$e alignnrent lo the intcrselion of the s, Zediker Avcnue alignmenr and E. King* Canyon ltoatl.

Prsrced we$ along E. Kings Canyon Road ttl rhe poinr of origin.

3. 4.
5 6.

I
s.

I
133
E(hibit B
Fresno County Ambulance Service Area
Zone I
MEtropslitan Respo nse Area
Legend
Sreets
Zona I lvletro Response
1u!
t3g
at@
E
c$d
&flLERTUTLER
g
F
I
{
!!:r
Ig
600of,Ettotlt
ro$*
wrlE sAtt
N
A
Allt{asa#
fr{usot
>
EE
llrE
^l-?b
't-r :-"
c'
ultcol.ll
cIJ
{t!r
ug
{te
fi
tr
I
AitlRtf it
ats
trl
lr,t1t,ER
at
rlt
a!Ea
E
JSl{]lElt
It3oz0o(t
t
CEITftAL
d
d
AI J€Ff EFgOII
FAilVI
:
134
Exhibit C
Fresns County Arnhula*r,-e Servic* ,Areir
/'onr: I
Rural lterponse Art-a llescription
Thc l{m"nl Resptnse Area in*ludes the aren u,ithin the Fresnn t-nunty;ln:bulance Scrvice Aret Zanc I {i:xhibit A} e xcluriing lke are*s idenlilied as the Meirnproliran Response Area {Exhibit 8;^
135
s
&
au
J
{t
x4 u
llr
aa
du*
34vJbf gvls
$
a
ilg
tloa
p
a
IAV fl$rlt{ltlN 34f gu'rilo31s
lnv,\:lu 1fg E
ut
t(5
d
=Grrl
F
rg
{Tn
F
b
H
II|
e
5oul
td
u
o
u
{I
5 f;!l
(til
=D6
F
ud !rs/ .rnMgON s.a 3rl|t inrn
E
f:(:t
a/$rE:nu8
:l v v6(nlgTl{
0il:{lrJwE fir
5 s
Jrrvvrs{^ olEE
a
*
ttg
iurrJ{l!2
lr,ut
6 :lw{lxrg,uus
f,A!ur3lt313AHX
{XoEUJ)
P4,i7,e& t.?\** b"*
"%- +
v!'I
lrluAltrlvllt
:uwrl]Ys fAvvl"lYs
3nvf,lEC rd
?J
il
auq
a4utL>

7. 1
7,4qE
iJ
:IW
{,* :l^rHtrluod l.t
ltvulHSflEl rl
] uat&
;ll1?nvlrN
3 z N
!l{vNogd'lgr-{lN
{o|rCo
o-olot
o
oE
ss.}ltNA
[lo
tD
ocog.sst
6 I
g
ocoN
oNsulr{u l{
ru
e{F
ld
s
tr}
l v*nlEYSrrN
l!
{
u,u
Br
tt
rrl
g
it
t-
a:

Bs
r,
e
i
U
a

4. IiJ
u
Srtvtlvtsn!
a'\Ytiltlo?tr
lAV)rwrtilJH
s
u
Ii,
ct
i{
3g
uE
5F
t
tiw
:hV
tArilo6drtiHr s
fr{/oHlrlr{0tHs
l YOtYf\ao:nS
l/, l$
ou
G
$
t/w'lfl{ll0 N
Y'lor$dt0HtN
3rtv,{ftt ll{I Fa
1#f$V3O]S
1 V lSNVtEldF[t]. S
l^vitvsl H
o
*
Z
{
Urt
tg
oL
{o
.g
Lrt
fiuo'<(JE $
-, lE- Cri---t^
P=EE.tr= Q oX EN O
u{ tr
FF
-bb-IJ
6tro
otr0oL.

TL
136
For the Meeting of: April 6,2023
Agenda Item No.:
3-sCrrY oF SaNGER

RE,PORTTO THE, CITY COUNCIL
To:

From:

Subject:

Mayor and Councilmembers
Tim Chapa, City Manager
Authorization for Out of State Travel - Councilmember Esmeralda Hurtado and Councilmember Dolores Melendez
Attachments: None
CONF'I,ICT INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council authorize Out of State travel for Councilmember Hurtado and Councilmember Melendez to attend the NALEO (National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials) 40ft Annual Conference in New York City, New York, from July l1 - 13, 2023.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Councilmembers Hurtado and Melendez requested and received a consensus from the City Council to bring an item back to Council to consider approval of out-of-state travel to attend the NALEO Annual Conference.

The estimated cost to attend the Conference is $3,822.00. Both Councilmember Hurtado and Melendez will use their travel budget for FY 202312024.

BACKGROUND:

The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) is a non-partisan membership association whose constituency includes Latino elected and appointed officials from across the country committed to ensuring that Latino elected and appointed officials are effective advocates for the communities they serve.

Prepared bv: Beckv Ramfuez Approved by:

REVIEW: City Finance: Ciry Attorney: _
TYPE OF ITEM:
_x_
X
Consent
Info Item
Action Item
Depattment Report
Redevelopment Agency
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION
Public Hearing
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to:
137
FISCAL IMPACT:

The total estimated cost related to this travel is $3,822.00 which covers the expense of registration, travel, food, and lodging. Both Councilmember Hurtado and Melendez FY 202312024 estimated travel budget is $5,000 each.

ALTERNATIVES:

The Council not approve the out-of-state travel request.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Confirmation of travel arrangements and accommodations. \\nas l\shared\Forms & Templates
138
For the Meeting of: Apn16,2023
Agenda Item No.

CrrYoF SaNGER
RE,PORT TO THE, CIry COUNCIL
9 -t,
To:

From:

Subject:

Attachments:
_X_ Consent
Info Item
_X_ Action Item
Deoartment Reoort
Redevelooment Asencv
Mayor and Council Members
Greg Garnern Chief of Police
Approval of Sole Source Provider for Police Department
A. Price Quote from Vendor
B. Sole Source Letter
C. Resolution 2023-06
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council approve the use of a sole source provider, Surveillance Integration, and approve contract for the purchase and installation of a new Access Control System at the police department and city annex building.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The Police Department currently has three different types of locking systems within the buildings (main station and "Annex" Investigations Unit structure) and on the grounds.

Currently, six main building doors are controlled by an access control system installed between 15 and 20 years ago.

Prepared by: Apptoved by:

REVIEW: City Finance: Ciw Attornev:

TYPE OF ITEM:

NO ACTION
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED
Public Hearing
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to:
139
The remaining doors in both buildings of the police department are accessed using a lock and key, each door with its own key. There are currently more than twenty different locks within the police department, veT few of which can be accessed by the same key. Additionally, the perimeter fence gate system is on a separate access control system, which requires a different access key card from the building.

Upgrading the police department locks to a remote access control system will allow the police department to control access to all the doors using an access level system. Additionally, the system will record each time an assigned fob, key card, or phone access a lock, keeping a record of when doors were accessed and by whom.

BACKGROUND:

The police department initially allocated $30,000 in the 2022-23 fiscal year budget for this project and presented the proposed budget to the Measure S Citizens Oversight Committee, which determined the expenditure was an appropriate use of Measure S funds. Police staff obtained a quote to complete the project and learned the projected cost was estimated over double the budgeted amount, totaling approximately $69,000.

On 2116123, Administrative Services Director Patrick Chaffee presented a budget revision to the Council. Included in that budget amendment was $50,000 identified and allocated for the access control system for the police department (locks). Council approved the budget revision, Resolution No. 2023-06.

The police department currently has $80,000 allocated and approved to complete the access control system upgrade.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The Police Department has utilized the services of Surveillance Integration for the past three years to design, install and maintain the Department's surveillance camera system, at the police department and around the city.

Surveillance Integration possesses the knowledge and experience in working with Municipal Police Departments and has effectively recognized the needs of the Sanger Police Department, effectively installing, maintaining, and troubleshooting our systems. They are familiar with the Fresno County Computernetworks and infrastructure and also routinely collaborate with LINITY, who supplies IT services for the crty.

Surveillance Integration has designed an access control system that will work seamlessly with the police department's current surveillance system, allowing access to police facilities to be recorded by the use of a key fob or other access control device, as well as the current video surveillance system. This will allow the police deparfnent a means to authenticate when any authorized personnel access a locked door at a police facility.
140
Surveillance Integration is a trusted provider and they have continually provided quality services to the police department. The access control system they have designed will allow the police department to integrate the new system into the current surveillance systems, which will more effectively serve the needs of the police department. Therefore, it is requested that Surveillance Integration be designated the Sole Source Provider for the purchase, installation, and maintenance of the police departrnent's access control system.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

ALTERNATIVES:

Should the Council reject the request to designate Surveillance Integration as the Sole Source provider for the access control system, the Police Department will seek additional quotes from other businesses. Those quotes may include an additional cost for hardware, and software as they will not be compatible with the police department's current surveillance systems.

ACTIONS F'OLLOWING APPROVAL:

The Police Department will move forward with the purchase and installation of the access control system through Surveillance Integration.
141

ATTACHMENTA
142
Proposal
1lo
{
4 Access Control 2022 Option 02
Sanger Police Dept.
1700 7th st,
Sanger, CA 93657
;tJ! i I
sS
Surveillance I nteg ration
4570 East Pine Ave
Fresno, CA 93703
(559) 579-1122
www.survint.com
"Leading edge
su rveilla nce sol utions
You can count on"
\ \ \rrr.

Presented By
Modified:

Revision:
11tl12022
0 I
I
I
a
a
a
RATION
143
Su rveillance I nteg ration
It
Access Control .> -)
-SCOPE OF WORK
SERVER

EQUIPMENT / MATERIALS / LABOR, RECOMMENDED TO COMPLETE
TNSTALLATTON OFACCESS CONTROL ON (13) DOORS, (3) PEDESTRTAN GATES, & (2) VEHTCLE GATES.

ACCESS CONTROL ENTERPRISE APPLIANCE FOR 32 READERS
physical appliance I embedded 64 bit Linux OS & Open LDAP for configuration database lAccess Control Manager Security Management Software | 32 Reader Count Software License I One (1) ACM Verifo | ACC Video lntegration I Five (5) partitions I ldentities CSV export, recurring, one-time, long & short format I Total reader capacity can be expanded from 32 to 400 readers, in increments of 16, with the purchase of the desired quantity of AC-SW-LIC-16RCU-6-P, 16 Reader Count Software Licenses I Supports up to 512 controllers I 250K identities and 150M stored events and twenty (20) simultaneous operators (via browser).

HID iCLASS 3000- Clamshell card provides 13.56 MHz read/write contactless smart card technology in a cost effective card package, with an ABS shell construction that provides durability in harsh environments. iCLASS provides enhanced security through encryption and mutual authentication while delivering the convenience, affordability and rel iability of proxim ity tech nology for which H I D is known worldwide

UHFWINDSHIELDTAG
The UHF Windshield Tag is a vehicle identification tag. lt offers cost effective long- range identification for parking applications. Based on passive UHF technology (* 900 MHz), the UHF Windshield Tag is identified up to 10 meters (33 ft) with uPASS Target or 5 meters (16 ft) with uPASS Reach. The tag does not contain a battery and is maintenance free.

SIXTEEN DOOR MERCURY INTEGRATED POWERSYSTEM
lncludes painted steel enclosure, removable pre drilled back plate, controller standoffs and mounting screws and a 150 walt12Yl12Aor 24V16A power supply- battery charger. The power supply is pre-wired to eight Class 2, Power Limited (CL2PL) outputs (D8P Board) delivering a regulated independent power connection to Mercury boards and auxiliary equipment. The power supply features dual outputs, Battery space for two 12V, 8Ah batteries is available in cabinet.

Cabinet size: 20" x24" x4.5" with door lock, tamper switch and two (2) keys.

Weight 25|b.
4 Battery PowerSupply 12V 4Amp Hour Battery
1 $4,910.21
$627.00
$242.50
$5,711.00
$124.00
rkl-r

CREDENTIALS
100
@
25 BACKUP SYSTEM
1 #
@
* Price lncludes Accessories
Presented By: Surveillance lntegration
Project Name: Access Control 2022 Oplion 02
11t1t2022

Page 2 ends

144
C116@-
I* Btag
ld€:.J
ffi
2 Battery Power Supply 12V TAmp Hour Battery
DC Power Supply/Charger, Network Ready, 12Ol23O Volt AC 170 Watt lnput, 12 Ampere 12Volt DC/6Ampere24Volt DC, 150Watt,66 BTU/Hr, 8.25"Width x2.5" Depth x 5.5" Height
60GHz CUBE WITH 5GHz BACKUP
The 60 GHz frequency is unaffected by the crowded wireless spectrum, it offers high speed and capacity. Features an automatic 5 GHz failover. Powerful directional antenna so that the 5 GHz range can keep up with the 60 GHz.

Supports up to 8 clients.

2.READER INTERFACE MODULE
2 reader: mag, wiegand, 4 reader OSDP, 8 inputs, 6 relays 1 DOOR INTELLIGENT CONTROLLER
Linux Based with 1 door, 2 inputs and 2 outputs, PoE+ Support, expandable up to 17 doors.
2 DOOR INTELLIGENT CONTROLLER
Linux Based with 2 doors, 8 inputs and 4 outputs, expandable up to 64 doors HID R15 SMART CARD READER
Read range up to 3.6 inches or 9 centimeters, 13.56 Mhz, Mounts on any standard back boxes or any flat surface.

HID R40 iClass long range smart card reader, read range up to 5.2 inches or 13 centimeters, 13.56 Mhz, Mounts on any standard wall-switch box or any flat surface.

LONG RANGE UHF READER
UHF RFID readerfor long-range vehicle identification. Based passive UHF technology, vehicles are identified up to 10 meters (33 feet). Dimensions 286 x285 x 78 mm (11.26x 11.22 x 3.01 in). lP66 weather protection. Operating temperature -30 - +60"C (-22 - +140"F).
$84.00
$1,163.80
$1,080.00
$5,137.08
$2,360.25
$2,961.38
$2,727.72
$2,121.56
$11,644.00
$2,502.00

NETWORK
4 4
g

GONTROLLERS
6 2

CARD READERS

DOOR HARDWARE
[
ffi
ffi
ffi
3 9
7 2
$
I 7440 ELECTRIC STRIKE
Door Electric Stri ke, Sq uare Corner, Fai I Safe/Fai I Secu re, 12124 Y olt AC/DC, ClearAnodized, With 4-718" Flat Faceplate, For Hollow MetalM/ood Door * Price lncludes Accessories
Presented By: Surveillance lntegration
Project Name: Access Control 2022 Oplion 02
11t1t2022

Page 3 ends

145
'.'b
rrl
10 9

REQU EST-TO-EXIT DETECTOR
Single or double door use. Wall or ceiling mountable. lnternal vertical pointability Wrap-around coverage patter. Selectable relay trigger mode. Selectable fail safe/failsecure modes. Dimensions: 1.5 in. x6.25 in. x 1.5 in.

DOOR CONTACT
Closed Circuit, Rare Earth Magnet, 0.75" Gap, 24" Pre-Wired Lead, 3/4" Diameter x1-114" Length, Rhodium Metal, Steel, Black
$1,220.00
$108.00
$1,350.00
$1,650.00
$6,300.00
$2,500.00
$7,500.00

INSTALL MATERIALS
3 12" RUGGED WEATHERPROOF ENCLOSURE
12" x10" x 5" Constructed from molded fiberglass reinforced polyester, it is well suited for high temperature or corrosive environments. The raised lid features a stainless steel continuous hinge and stainless steel quick release latches with padlock hasps. The raised lid is fully gasketed. The enclosure material is UV stabilized.

INSTALLATION MATERIALS; ConduiVEMT, Fittings, Flex, Clamps, Wire Connectors, Seals, Panduit Trim, Fasteners.
&
6000 BUNDLED MULTI-CONDUCTOR ACCESS CONTROL CABLE
Element 1: 18-04 U NS, Elemenl2: 22-3P OAS, Element3: 22-02 U NS, Element 4:
22-04 UNS.

INSTALLATION
1 Technical administrative time associated with system programming, software application training. System networking and other specialized connectivity requirements.

Two lnstallers, one service truck, ladders, & hand tools. lncludes travel for installers. Scope of work is estimated at 0days.

CUSTOMER TO PROVIDE

1. Make network available for access controllertraffic

2. Power outlets where required to power access control hardware, server, and network switches.

3. lf any rigid conduit is required for low voltage cable, this may be outside scope of work.

4. Necessary Rack Space and electrical requirements at serverlocation.

WARRANTY
1 CONTRACTOR LICENSE #927851
SURVEI LLANCE I NTEGRATION WARRANTY!
* ONE YEAR ON WORKMANSHIP* ONE YEAR ON WIRELESS, CONTROLLERS* THREE YEARS ON STRIKES, PUSHBARS, LOCKSETS* FIVE YEARS ON POWER SUPPLIES FORCONTROLLERS 1 * Price lncludes Accessories
Presented By: Surveillance lntegration
Project Name: Access Control 2022 Oplion 02
11t1t2022

Page 4 ends

146

TERMS OF SALE
* 5Oo/o DOWN PRIOR TO INSTALLATION* 5Oo/o AFTER INSTALLATION Project Subtotal: $64,024.50
* Price lncludes Accessories
Presented By: Surveillance lntegration
Project Name: Access Control 2022 Oplion 02
11t1t2022

Page 5 of 6 ends

147
Project Summary
Equipment:

Labor:

Sales Tax:

Grand Total:
$54,024.50
$10,000.00
$4,713.64
$68,738.14
Glient: Date
Gontractor: Surveillancelntegration Date
* Price lncludes Accessories
Presented By: Surveillance lntegration
Project Name: Access Control 2022 Oplion 02
11t1t2022

Page 6 of 6 ends

148

ATTACHMENT B
149
SAilGER PIILICE BEPARTMETTT

GREG GARNER, CHIEF OF POLICE
TO
RE
DATE: March 21,2023
Patrick Chaffee
Finance Director
FROM: Greg Garner
Chief of Police
Request to designate Surviellence Interagration a Sole Source provider for the Police Department Access Control System Project
The Police Department has utilized the services of Surveillance Integration for the past three years to design, install and maintain the Department's surveillance camera system, at the police department and around the city.

Surveillance Integration possesses the knowledge and experience in working with Municipal Police Departments and has effectively recognized the needs of the Sanger Police Department, effectively installing, maintaining, and troubleshooting our systems. They are familiar with the Fresno County Computer networks and infrastructure and also routinely collaborate with UNITY, who supplies IT services for the city.

Surveillance Integration is a trusted provider and they have continually provided quality services to the police department. The access control system they have designed will allow the police department to integrate the new system into the current surveillance systems, which will more effectively serve the needs of the police department.

Therefore, it is requested that Surveillance Integration be designated the Sole Source Provider for the purchase, installation, and maintenance of the police departrnent's access control system.

SANGER POLICE DEPARTMENT
TTOO 7TH ST. SANGER, CA 93657
150

ATTACHMENT C
151
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-06

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER APPROVING REVISIONS TO THE CITY OF SANGER OPERATING BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Sanger adopted a City Operating Budget for the City for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 onJune 23, 2022; and
WHEREAS, staff has prepared and presented revisions to the FY 2022-2023 operating budgefls financial section; and
WHEREAS, a public meeting on said revisions was duly scheduled, and held, and all persons were given an opportunity to be heard and their suggestions or objections carefully considered, and
WHEREAS, after the conclusion of the public meeting, the City Council further considered the proposed revisions to the FY 2022-2023 Operating Budget and directed additional revisions it deemed advisable.

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIT OF THE CITY OF SANGER HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

1. The Council has reviewed the proposed Revised City Operating Budget and the funds included therein (e.g. all govemmental, proprietary, and fiduciary funds) for the period of july '1,2022, through June 30, 2023, and hereby finds that such budget, as revised, is a sound financial plan for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 for required municipal operations and services.

2. The document entitled "Revised Operating Budget 2022-2023" which document is incorporated herein by title reference onlp is hereby adopted with the following revisions, modifications and policy limitations as the Financial Section of the Adopted Budget 2022-2023 of the City of Sanger effective lu.ly L,2022.

3. Any unused appropriations at the end of the fiscal Year 2022-2023 in active Capital Improvement Projects are re-appropriated for continued use in Fiscal Year2023-2023

4. Remaining balances in approved grant programs at the end of Fiscal Year 2022-2023, except for balances reallocated as part of the budget process, are re-appropriated for continued use in Fiscal Year 2023-2023 and all legislated revenues from such approved grants for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 fhat are not realized by year end are authorized to be continued.
152

5. Appropriations in the budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 may be adjusted by reconunendation of the Administrative Services Director and approved by the City Manager when the budget is not increased in total amount. Savings from appropriations in one section of a Department budget may be used to fund another section of a Department budget with the recommendation and approval as set forth herein. A.y increase in appropriations that increases the total budget herein adopted shall be approved only by the City Council.

6. The final revised adopted budget document containing the City Operating Budget shall contain all revisions made by the City Council.

The foregoing Resolution was considered by the City Council of the City of Sanger, Califomia at a regular meeting of said Council held on the l6thday of February 2023 and approved by the following vote.

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: GONZALEZ, MARTINEZ HURTADO,

MONTELONGO, MELENDEZ
NONE
NONE
NONE
P. Ramirea City
NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

COUNCILMEMBERS:

COUNCILMEMBERS:
153
For the Meeting of; April 6,2023
Agenda Item No.
9-tCrrYoF SINGER

REPORTTO THE, CITY COUNCIL
To: Mayor and Council Members
From: John F. Mulligan, Public Works Director
Subject: Approve a Resolution Initiating Proceedings to Levy the Annual Assessment for Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. I Attachments: 1) Resolution
2) Map
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Resolution No.2_r:29:l_a , a resolution initiating proceeding to levy the annual assessment for Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 1.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City of Sanger has two established Landscaping and Lighting Districts that were established to maintain city parks, landscaped areas, block walls, and streetlight operation and maintenance. Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No.l (LLMD No.l) was established in 1990 and was amended with the passage of Proposition 218 in 1997. The assessments collected in LLMD No.l are now used primarily for street lighting purposes.

The annual assessment process begins with the attached resolution initiating the proceedings to levy the assessment in the established LLMD No.1 area. This resolution does not implement the assessment but rather continues the process for further discussion and directs the City Engineer to prepare the appropriate required detailed report. After the Engineer's report is submitted, a Public Hearing will be set for further discussion to levy the assessment.

Prepated by: Approved
REVIEW: City Finance: Citv Attomev:

TYPE OF ITEM: COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION X Consent
Info Item
Action Item
Depattment Report
Redevelopment Agency
Public Heating
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to:

X
154
BACKGROUND:

On June 29,1990, the Sanger City Council established Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 (LLMD No. 1) for the purpose of maintaining city parks, landscaped areas and streetlights.

The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 et. seq was designed to allow local governments the ability to collect assessments to defray the cost of maintaining street lighting, and landscaped areas within the public right-of-way. These costs were recognized as costs which directly benefit property owners by increasing the value of their property.

Adequate street lighting increases safety and decreases crime. Well-kept landscaped areas enhance the quality of life in neighborhoods and directly affect the marketability and value of property.

With the passage of Proposition 218, the City of Sanger eliminated the assessment in LLMD No. 1 for maintaining city parks and landscaped areas. LLMD No. 1 assessments are used only for street lighting purposes.

The attached resolution initiating proceedings to levy an annual assessment, to defray the cost of maintaining the street lighting within the LLMD No. 1 City right-of-way, begins the process for the City to provide a public hearing, for the purpose of discussing the proposed collection of the annual assessment for the LLMD No. 1. This resolution directs the City Engineer to prepare a report in accordance with Article 4, Chapter 1 of the Streets and Highway Code of the State of California. The engineer's report and additional resolutions will come before the City Council for approval of the proposed assessments.

Approving this resolution does not implement the assessment; it only continues the process for further discussion.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The LLMD No.l assessment is utilized to offset the costs of streetlight and right of way maintenance and operations within the established LLMD No.l area. Street lighting and well maintained landscaping increases safety and the quallty of life and directly affects the actual property values of homes and businesses located in the City of Sanger.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Total assessments for fiscal year 2023 2024 are estimated at $140,000. The engineer's report will provide more detailed information regarding the potential revenue that may be collected if approved by the Council.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternative is to eliminate the assessment and absorb the expenditures into the appropriate General Fund division budget.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Direct the City Engineer to prepare the detailed LLMD No.l report to be approved at a subsequent City Council meeting.
155
ATTACHMENT 1
156
RESOLUTION NO. 2o 3-t2

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER

INITIATING PROCEEDINGS

TO LEVY ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR
SANGER LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Sanger by Resolution No. 2581 on June29,l990 formed Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, California Streets and Highways Code Section22500 et. seq, for the pu{pose of collecting assessments to defray the cost of maintaining the street lighting, graffiti and vandalism abatement and City landscaping and parks in the City of Sanger; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to initiate proceedings to levy annual assessments for the hscal year 2023-2024 under such district which are allowed by the law; and
WHEREAS, the proposed assessment for fiscal year 2023-2024 will be imposed to collect for street lighting and maintenance of public right of ways; and WHEREAS, the imposition of an annual assessment for the maintenance of these facilities is categorically exempt under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act.

NOW, THEREFORE' BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Sanger as follows:

The City Engineer of the City of Sanger is hereby ordered and directed to prepare and file with the City Council a report in accordance with Article 4, Chapter I of the 157
Streets and Highway Code of the State of California, beginning at section 22565, including the plans and specifications for improvements, an estimate of the costs of the improvements, a diagram of the assessment district, and an assessment of the costs of the improvements. The improvements shall consist of the maintenance of all the street lighting facilities and maintenance areas in the public right of way on City property located in the City of Sanger's Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1. :1. tt t ,1. {. ,1. ,t :1. rl. rl. * * * * {. !t
I hereby certifr that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Resolution duly and regularly adopted and passed by the City Council of the City of Sanger, California, at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of April,2023,by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

COTINCIL MEMBERS:

COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Rebeca Ramirez, City Clerk
158
ATTACHMENT 2
159
2 tli

CITY OF SANGER
Landscape and Lighting District 1 and 2
5199
#
szzt l
"#
* sogr
5490 .
""S
a
LEGEND
,,]q -
t a.i t ]EdF
n|
m
I r fl!E!"ril
EF-N]
ffiIE!E!E
=E=EE= IE
f @
ffi
Htffitil
IHffiffi
1197 .. i!E m
!!
li'il![
!l !B!
E
F]
firffiL. l
--Lr'!ll n frl
E
#
LANDSCAPE AND LICFITING DISTRICT - 2
(AREA r)
LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTINC DISTRICT . 2
(AREA 2)
NOTE: AIL OTIIER PARCELS WTITIIN CITY
LIMITS ARE LOCATED IN TTIE I.{NDSCAPB

AND LIGIITING DISTRICT I
"rfi#
SCIIE l' -lod
CITY IJIIIIS:
160
CrrYoF SINGER

RE,PORTTO THE, CITY COUNCIL
To: Mayor and Council Members
From: John F. Mulligan, Public Works Director
Subject: Approve a Resolution Initiating Proceedings to Levy the Annual Assessment for Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenace District No.2 Attachments: 1) Resolution
2) Map
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

Unknown
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Resolution No.2g_e&6_, a resolution initiating proceedings to levy the annual assessment for Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 2.

For the Meeting of: April 6,2023
Agenda Item No.:
9-s
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City of Sanger has two established Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Districts that were established to maintain city parks, landscaped areas, block walls, and streetlight operation and maintenance. Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No.2 (LLMD No.2) was established in 2004 to levy and collect assessments to cover the cost of maintaining streetlights, landscaping, and irrigation systems within the LLMD No. 2 City public right-of-way, and to cover the cost of maintaining special amenities located within the LLMD No. 2 public right-of-way or easements, including, but not limited to, maintaining masonry walls, storm water holding ponds, and roundabouts.

The annual assessment process begins with the attached resolution initiating the proceedings to levy the assessment in the established LLMD No.2 areas. This resolution does not implement the assessment but rather continues the process for further discussion and directs the City Engineer to prepare the appropriate required detailed report. After the Engineer's report is submitted and approved, a Public Prepared by: Apptoved
REVIEW: City Finance: City Attorney: _
TYPE OF ITEM:

X
X
Consent
Info Item
Action Item
Depattment Report
Redevelopment Agency
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION
Public Hearing
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to:
161
Hearing will be set for further discussion to levy and collect the assessment.

BACKGROUND:

On April 1,2004, the Sanger City Council established Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 (LLMD No. 2) to levy and collect assessments to cover the cost of maintaining streetlights, landscaping, and inigation systems within the LLMD No. 2 City public right-of-way, and to cover the cost of maintaining special amenities located within the LLMD No. 2 public right-of-way or easements, including, but not limited to, maintaining masonry walls, storm water holding ponds, and roundabouts.

The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 et. seq was designed to allow local governments the ability to collect assessments to defray the cost of maintaining street lighting, and landscaped areas within the public right-of-way. These costs directly benefit property owners by increasing the value of their property. Adequate street lighting increases safety and decreases crime. Well-kept landscaped areas enhance the quality of life in neighborhoods and directly affect the marketability and value of property.

The attached resolution initiating proceedings to levy an annual assessment, to defray the cost of maintaining the street lighting, and landscaping within the LLMD No. 2 City right-of-way, begins the process for the City to provide a public hearing, for the purpose of discussing the proposed collection of the annual assessment for the LLMD No. 2. This resolution directs the City Engineer to prepare a report, which ensures that the annual assessment established for all properties within the proposed assessment district covers the City's cost for maintenance, related services, and incidental expenses. Assessments may be increased each year using an inflation escalator based upon the Consumer Price Index. The engineer's report and additional resolutions will come before the City Council for approval of the proposed assessments.

Approving this resolution does not implement the assessment; it only continues the process for further discussion.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The LLMD No.2 assessment is utilized to offset the costs of streetlight and right of way maintenance and operations within the established LLMD No.2 areas. Street lighting and well maintained landscaping increases safety and the quality of life and directly affects the actual property values of homes and businesses located in the City of Sanger.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Total assessments are estimated at $190,000. The engineer's report will provide more detailed information regarding the potential revenue that may be collected if approved by the City Council at alater date.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternative is to eliminate the assessment and absorb the expenditures into the division budget.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Direct the City Engineer to prepare the LLMD No.2 report to be approved by the City Council 162
ATTACHMENT 1
163
RESOLUTION NO. 2O 2 3.tZ

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER

INITIATING PROCEEDINGS

TO LEVY ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR
SANGER LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.2 (PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Sanger by Resolution No. 3604 on April 1, 2004 formed Sanger Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 to levy and collect assessments pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting District Act of 1972, California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 et. seq. for the purpose of collecting assessments to defray the cost of maintaining street lighting, landscaping, and irrigation systems within the City public right-oGway, the maintenance of any special amenities located within the public right-of-way or easements, including, but not limited to, maintenance of masonry walls, maintenance of storm water holding ponds, and maintenance of roundabouts; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to initiate proceedings to levy annual assessments for the fiscal year 2023-2024 wder such district which are allowed by the law; and
WHEREAS, the proposed assessment for fiscal year2023-2024 will be imposed to collect for street lighting and maintenance of public right of ways; and WHEREAS, an assessment district to collect assessments for maintaining street lights, and City landscaping is categorically exempt under the provisions of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Sanger as follows:

The City Engineer of the City of Sanger is hereby ordered and directed to prepare and hle with the City Council a report in accordance with Article 4, Chapter 1 of 164
the Streets and Highway Code of the State of California, beginning at section 22565, including the plans and specifications for improvements, an estimate of the costs of the improvements, a diagram of the assessment district, and an assessment of the costs of the improvements. The cost of the improvements shall consist of the utilities, depreciation, and maintenance of all the street lighting facilities and landscape maintenance areas in the public right-of-way as described above. The City Engineer is hereby ordered and directed to ensure that the annual assessment established for all properties within the assessment district covers the City's cost for maintenance, related services, and incidental expenses. Assessments may be increased each year using an inflation escalator based upon the Consumer Price Index, California, All Urban Consumers, for each year.

I hereby certiS'that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Resolution duly and regularly adopted and passed by the City Council of the City of Sanger, California, at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of April,2023,by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Rebeca Ramirez, City Clerk
165
ATTACHMENT 2
166
E
/ti

CITY OF SANGER
Landscape and Lighting District 1 and,2
#
" sut'
stii a
,tf6;;s
r !!91; *:'
'-
5490, .s Effi
t
6 LEGEND
526'1
I dr. t ]h-6
H!
il!r1
EIF l
iF\Ei
F lls.l
tlE
.sS
EUT l!
LANDSCAPE AND LICI fING DISTRICT - 2
(AREA l)
LANDSCAPE AND LIGTITING DISTRICT , 2
(AREA 2)
NOTB: ALL OTIIER PARCELS WTTHIN CITY
LIMITSARE LOCATED IN THE LA}.IDSCAPE

ANDLIGHTINGDISTRICT I
"r$S
SCAI: l' -lood
CIIY IJTIII|:
167
SA NCe
,,,,,3,.,
R
For the Meeting of: Apd 6,2023
Agenda Item No.:

CrrYoF SINGER
RE,PORTTO THtr, CIry COUNCIL
9-1
To:

From:

Subject:

Attachments:

Mayor and Councilmembers
Greg Tarascou, Fire Chief
Agreement for the Emergency Use of the Community Center between the City of Sanger and the American Red Cross
Facility Use Agreement between City of Sanger and American Red Cross CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council rati$ the contract for the emergency use of the Sanger Community Center during the period between March 9,2023 and March 17,2023 for the purposes of emergency sheltering of victims from flooding between the City of Sanger and the American Red Cross.

Due to timelines, the Acting City Manager signed the agreement prior to the City Council meeting and is recommending Council ratifu this contract.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

During the heavy rains at the beginning of March, it became necessary to utilize the Community Center for an evacuation site in Fresno County. In the past, the Community Center has been utilized as a shelter location for residents of Sanger and/or Fresno County in the event of a local emergency. A request from the American Red Cross was received to utilize this space as a shelter for both residents of Fresno County and their small pets and City staff coordinated the use of the facility for this purpose.

BACKGROUND:

In an effort to help residents of Fresno County that were affected by the Atmospheric River weather Prepared by: Apptoved by:

REVIEW: City Finance: Ciw Attotnev:

TYPE OF ITEM COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION
x
x
Consent
Info Item
Action Item
Department Repott
Redevelopment Agency
Public Hearing
Mattet Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to:
168
event that took place during the majority of March, the American Red Cross (ARC) responded to assist with evacuees from eastern Fresno County. Initially the ARC was going to utilize Reedley College as an evacuation site, however because of the potential flooding that was predicted in that area of Reedley along with the potential flooding of Reedley's wastewater treatment plant, representatives from the ARC contact the City of Sanger for assistance.

City staff met with representatives from the ARC to determine their needs and capabilities. It was agreed upon that the ARC would set up the evacuation site within the basketball areaof the Community Center and the Central California Animal Disaster Team, in partnership with the ARC, would set up shelters for pets inside the larger meeting room. Staff met internally afterward and began to cancel classes and programs that were scheduled for the Community Center for the time the ARC would be housing evacuees. During that week, the open gym was cancelled as well as scheduledZumba classes and one private event was cancelled. Acting under Sanger Municipal Code Section26-6 (7),the Acting City Manager signed the Facility Use Agreement between the City and ARC for the use of the facility.

The ARC hosted approximately four residents from Fresno County that were evacuated due to flooding along with a couple of pets. The evacuation center was demobilized on March 17,2023 and normal Community Center activity resumed.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

This facility use agreement was signed before the City Council could convene, therefore this item is brought to the City Council for ratification.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Considering the large private event that was scheduled the City refunded the applicant $1,345 for their deposit on the Community Center. Zumba classes were also cancelled but as of this report no refunds have been issued yet.

ALTERNATIVES:

N/A
ACTIONS F'OI,I APPROVAL:

This agreement will be filed per normal document retention with the City Clerk. \\nas I \shared\Forms & Templates
169
Facility Use Agreement
tI *:r"dh*
The American National Red Cross ("Red Cross"), a non-profit corporation chartered by the United States Congress, provides services to individuals, families and communities when disasters strike. The disaster relief activities of the Red Cross are made possible by the American public who support the Red Cross with generous donations. The Red Cross's disaster services are also supported by facility owners who permit the Red Cross to use their buildings as shelters and other service delivery sites for disaster victims.

This agreement is between the Red Cross and a facility owner ("Ownef) so the Red Cross can use the facility to provide services during a disaster. This agreement only applies when Red Cross requests use of the facility and is managing the activity at the facility.

Parties and Facility
Owner:

RedCross:

FullName of Owner Crt 4 oF (dhqu
Address 14o PccrtahM 4'x , a q1b5'?
Z4-Hour Point of Contact
Name and Title
Work Phone
CellPhone
fAjfira,.cnu , 6nCl,,;eP / *a*.r* k\ Waay-
6<4, tte - 6og
6q- qag'22t1
Address for Official
NoUces (only if different
from above address)
rloaltl". sv
hrqar,0A 1Z$'7
Chapter Name L-u\*frg. V U*rFV<f
ChapterAddress l3oo Co Jha,uJ (h 48 ) ft4j,w, eA 9irrt
24-Hour Point of Contact
Name and Title
Work Phone
CellPhone
l&y*ti,- CrotS^., $r. QPF.{
(Ss1).*14-r:ra
Address for Official
Notices
American Red cross, Disaster cycle services Logistics, 8550 Arlington Blvd., Fairfax, V422031
lnsert name and complete street address of building or, if multiple buildings, write "See attached facility list," and attach facility list, including complete street address of each building that is part of this agreement lf ttie Red Cross will use only a portion of a building, then describe the portion of the building that the Red Cross will use.

QnT, (aw*rnt\ &,,Cen
110 Vtct eaha^ /t*e
e*V*, h 4un
LOG Facility Use Agreement JT V.5.0 2023.02.16
170
Facility Use Agreement
t
Ameriean
RedCross
terms and Conditions

1. Use of Facility: Upon request and if feasible, Owner will permit the Red Cross to use and occupy the Facility on a temporary basis to conduct emergency, disaster-related activities. The Facility may be used for the following purposes (both parties must initial all that apply):

2. Facilitv Manaoement: The Red Cross willdesignate a Red Cross officialto manage the activities at the Facility ("Red Cross Manage/'). The Ownerwill designate a Facility Coordinator to coordinate with the Red Cross Manager regarding the use of the Facility by the Red Cross.

3. Condition of Facilitv: The Facility Coordinator and Red Cross Manager (or designee) willjointly conduct a survey of the Facility before it is tumed over to the Red Cross. They will use the frst page of the Red Cross's Facility/Shelter apeninglCloslng Form to record any existing damage or conditions. The Facility Coordinator will identiff and secure all equipment in the Facility that the Red Cross should not use. The Red Cross will exercise reasonable care while using the Facility and will not modify the Facility without the Owne/s express wriften approval.

4. Food Services (This paragraph applies only when the Facility is used as a shelter or seruice cenfer.): Upon request by the Red Cross, and if such resources are available, the Ownerwillmake the food service resources of the Facility, including food, supplies, equipment and food service workers, available to feed the shelter occupants. The Facility Coordinator willdesignate a Food Service Manager to coordinate meals at the direction of and in cooperation with the Red Cross Manager. The Food Service Manager will establish a feeding schedule and supervlse meal planning and preparation. The Food Service Manager and Red Cross Manager willjointly conduct a pre-occupancy inventory of the food and food service supplies before the Facility is turned over to the Red Cross. \Mten the Red Cross vacates the Facility, the Red Cross Manager and Facilig Coordinator or Food Service Manager will conduct a post-occupancy inventory of the food and supplies used during the Red Cross's activities at the Facility.

5. Custodial Servrces (This paragraph applies only when the Facility is used as a shelter or seruice center.): Upon request of the Red Gross and if such resources are available, the Owner will make its custodial resources, including supplies and workers, available to provide cleaning and sanitation services at the Facility. The Facility Coordinator will designate a Facility Custodian to coordinate these services at the direction of and in cooperation with the Red Cross Manager.

6. Security/Safetv: ln coordination with the Facility Coordinator, the Red Cross Manager, as he or she deems necessary and appropriate, will coordinate with law enforcement regarding any security and safety issues at the Facility.

7. Signaoe and Pu-blicity: The Red Cross may post signs identiffing the Facility as a site of Red Cross operations in locations approved by the Facility Coordinator. The Red Cross will remove such signs when the Red Cross concludes its activities at the Facility. The Owner will not issue press releases or other publicity concerning the Red Cross's activities at the Facility without the written consent of the Red Cross Manager. The Owner will refer all media questions about the Red Cross activities to the Red Cross Manager.

8. Closinq the Facilitv: The Red Gross will notiry the Owner or Facility Coordinator of the date when the Red Cross will vacate the Facility. Before the Red Cross vacates the Facili$, the Red Cross Manager and Facility Coordinator willJointly conduct a post-occupancy inspection, using the second page of lhe ShelterFacility Opening/Closing Fotm, to record any damage or conditions. 2 Service Center (Operations, Client Services, orVolunteer Intake) V -fu
Storage of supplies (.1( *ke
Parking of vehicles
t|{ '---fu
Disaster Shelter hy .4"e
LOG Facility Use JT V.5.0 2023.O2.16
171
Facility Use Agreement
t' #[.dli?t

9. .Feg (Ihts paragnph does not apply when the Facility is used as a shelter. The Red Cross does not pay fees to use facilities as shelfers.): Both parties must initial one of the two statements below:
a. Owner will not charqe a fee for the use of the Facilitv.

Owner initials: [f, - neo Cross initials,il+
b. The Red Cross will pay $_ per select for the dght to use and occupy the Facility. Owner initials: Red Cross initials:

10. Reimbursement Subject to the conditions in paragraph 10(e) below, the Red Cross will reimburse the Owner for the following:

Damage to the Facility or other property of Owne4 reasonable wear and tear excepted, resulting ftom the operations of the Red Cross. Reimbursement for facility damage will be based on replacement at actual cash value. The Red Cross, in consultation with the Owner, will select from bids from at least three reputable contractors. The Red Cross is not responsible for storm damage or other damage caused by the disaster.
b. Reasonable cosfs associated with custodial and food seruice perconnel and supplles which would not have been incurred but for the Red Cross's use of the Facility. The Red Cross will reimburse at per-hour, straight-time rate for wages actually incuned but will not reimburse for (i) overtime or (ii) costs of salaried staff.

Reasonable, actual, out-of-pocket costs for the utilities indicated below, to the extent that such costs would not have been incurred but for the Red Cross's use of the Facility. (Both parties must initial all utilities that may be reimbursed by the Red Cross):

The Owner will submit any request for reimbursement to the Red Cross within 60 days after the occupancy of the Red Cross ends. Any request for reimbursement must be accompanied by supporting invoices. Any request for reimbursement for personnel costs must be accompanied by a list of the personnel with the dates and hours worked.
lf the disaster is a Federally-declared disaster and Owner is a municipal or state government entity, then the Owner will work with appropriate emergency management agencies to seek cost reimbursement through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's program for administering Public Assistance Category B under the Robert T. Stafford Act. The Red Cross is not obligated lo reimburse the Owner for cosls covered by Public Assistance Category B. 1 1. lnsurance: The Red Cross shall carry insurance coverage in the amounts of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence for CommercialGeneral Liability and Automobile Liability. The Red Cross shallalso carry Workers' Compensation coverage with statulory limits for the jurisdiction within which the facility is located and $1,000,000 in Employers' Liability.

12. lndemnification: The Red Cross shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify Owner against any legal liability, including reasonable attorney fees, in respect to claims for bodily injury, death, and property damage arising from the negligence of the Red Cross during the use of the Facilig.

13. fgg: The term of this agreement begins on the date of the last signature below and ends 30 days afier wriften notice by either party.
a.
d.
e.
3 6 n,
(& V.(
(fi 4r"
VA -*.(
LOG Facility Use Agreement JTV.5.0 2023.02.'16
172
Facility Use Agreement
t
Amerlcan
RedCross
Digital Signature: Each party agrees that eilher party's execution of this agreement by DIGITAL signature (whether ELECTRONIC or encrypted) is expressly intended to authenticate this AGREEMENT and to have the same force and effect as manual signatures. The term DIGITAL signature means any electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed and adopted by aputy with the intent to sign such record, including facsimile or email electronic signalures. The use of digital signatures is intended to facilitate more efficient execution and delivery of signed documenb.
totut * Snnq4/
The American National Red Cross
Owner (Legq[,Jame)
b'{liiurLt/t--
(LegalName)
By (Signature)By (Signature)
@a(ararttu,
Name (Printed)
ACA u ,l\Aha (/
0ro
(Printed)
^s+4
o
Title Tifle
ffi\^6/'L5 jllo lenle
Date Datb
LOG Facility Use Agreement JT V.5.0 2023.02.16 4
173
Fot the Meeting of; 4pn16,2023
Agenda Item No.

H-r
CrrYoF SINGER
Rtr,PORT TO THE, CITY COUNCIL
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Joshua Rogers, Cify Engineer
Subject: Establishment of Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Attachment:

1. Resolution No.2o23-l+ including Exhibit 'A' (Fee Study) and Exhibit 68' (Rates) CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a'public hearing and, following its conclusion, adopt the attached resolution approving the Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Study and establishing a new groundwater recharge development impact fee.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SKGSA) is a joint powers authority comprised of the cities of Sanger, Kingsburg, Fowler and Parlier and the Del Rey Community Service District which was formed for the purpose of compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The SKGSA is responsible for ensuring that the groundwater use within its boundaries is balanced and sustainable. One primary tool included in the SKGSA's plan to combat the overuse of groundwater is to intentionally recharge the aquifer to offset groundwater pumping for municipal uses.

The establishment of a development impact fee to fund the acquisition and construction of groundwater recharge facilities will aid the SKGSA and the City of Sanger in its efforts to achieve groundwater sustainability.

Preoared bv: Ioshua Rosers Aooroved bv:

REVIEW: Ciry Manager: _ Finance: Ciw Attornev:

TYPE OF ITEM: COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION X
Consent
Info Item
Action Item
Department Report
Redevelopment Agency
X Public Headng
Matter Initiated by a Council Membet
Other
Continued to:
174
BACKGROUND:

In2020,the SKGSA submitted its Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to comply with the requirements of SGMA. In its GSP, the SKGSA identified Projects and Management Actions for mitigating groundwater extraction and moving towards sustainable groundwater use. The Projects focused mainly on groundwater recharge, and utilize the SKGSA's agreement with Consolidated Irrigation District to purchase surface water and recharge the aquifer. Management Actions focus primarily on the reduction of groundwater demand, including education/outreach, groundwater pumping restrictions, requiring new developments to prove sustainable water supply, etc.

Without restricting development, or placing the burden on new development to prove that they have their own water supply, the most feasible method of offsetting the increased water demand resulting from development within the SKGSA's member agencies is to continue to acquire and build facilities for groundwater recharge. In the GSP, more than nineteen different groundwater recharge projects were planned amongst the five member agencies. Four projects were identified within the City of Sanger.

Currently, two of these projects (the interconnection of the Jensen/Indianola and Kelly Basins to CID canals) have been completed, and a third (the North Sanger Recharge Basin) is in the works. Even with these projects, it is still anticipated that approximately 20-30 additional acres of basins are needed within the City of Sanger, with more needs throughout the other member agencies as well. The costs for a groundwater recharge facility are mostly made up of the land purchase cost and the earttrwork costs, although the costs for pipeline connections can be a factor depending on the proximity to a canal.

The GSA Fee Study.

In order to project and apply the costs incurred by the SKGSA and its member agencies to expand the groundwater recharge facility network to offset new development, the SGKSA commissioned Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group (P&P) in202l to prepare a study entitled "South Kings GSA Development Impact Fee" (SKGSA Study). In it, the costs estimated in the GSP to implement the groundwater recharge projects contemplated were allocated out over the anticipated new development areas of the member agencies. Since most of the member agencies already have their own established impact fee programs for other infrastructure types (i.e. water, sewer, storm drain, transportation, etc.) the intent ofthe SKGSA study was to provide a consistent methodology to calculate the fees per gross acre of the various development types, and then have each member agency adopt the appropriate ordinances or resolutions within their jurisdiction to collect the fees and implement projects.

In2022, California Assembly Bill (AB) 602 changed the ways that development impact fees are calculated, assessed and reported with respect to housing developments. It required that an agency who imposed a fee on a housing development through "a nexus study adopted afier July I, 2022, shall calculate afee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of the development."
Sanger's Development Impact Fee Study.

Sanger's current fee structure typically imposes development impact fees on residential development on a per unit (or per lot) basis. In order to establish the authority to assess and collect development impact fees for the purpose of constructing groundwater recharge facility projects to offset groundwater use, City Staff prepared the Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Study (Sanger DIF Study) included as Exhibit'A' to the attached resolution. In the Sanger DIF Study, the fees for residential development have been converted to a calculation based on the square footage of housing units. The fees for non-residential development will continue to be assessed and collected per gross acre of development. \\nasl\shared\Forms & Templates
175
It should be noted that the fees collected will fund the acquisition of land and all construction activitres associated with a groundwater recharge facility, but will not cover the costs ofthe purchase of swface water from CID or any other water purveyor. The water purchase costs are not one-time costs associated with new development but are ongoing, and must be funded through the water rates paid by City water customers, both current and future.

In accordance with the increased transparency provisions of AB 602,the notice for the public hearing was advertised for more than 30 days and the Sanger DIF Study was made available for review by any interested parLy at least 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing. As of the date of this writing, Staff has not received any comments on the study or proposed fees.

Staff recommends that following the close of the public hearing and Council deliberations the Sanger DIF Study including proposed fees be adopted.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The fees collected from new development will be used to construct groundwater recharge facilities to utilize surface water purchased from CID (and/or other future partners) to offset the use of groundwater for municipal purposes and to aid the City of Sanger and the SKGSA in its compliance with SGMA.

FISCAL IMPACT:

At current land use and buildout projections, the new fee could raise up to $8.5 million when the entire Sphere of Influence is developed. For comparison pu{poses, the 15.5-acre North Sanger Recharge Basin is anticipated to cost approximately $3 million on its own.

ALTERNATIVES:

There is no recommended alternative by Staff at this time ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

The fee will be effective sixty days after adoption of the proposed resolution. \\nasl\shared\Forms & Templates
176
ATTACHME,NT 1
\\nasl\shared\Forms & Templates
177
RESOLUTION NO. 2oz?tl

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANGER APPROVING THE

SANGER GROUNDWATER RECHARGE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT

FEE STUDY AND ESTABLISHING A NEW GROUNDWATER

RECHARGE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
WHEREAS, the City of Sanger is a member of the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SKGSA) and is tasked with compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater management Act (SGMA) and achieving groundwater sustainability by the year 2040; and
WHEREAS, in the implementation of their duties under SGMA, the SKGSA commissioned the preparation of a Development Impact Fee (SKGSA Study) to analyze the collection of fees to defray the costs of acquisition and construction of groundwater recharge facilities to offset groundwater pumping in the SKGSA: and WHEREAS, the intent of the SKGSA Study was to provide a cohesive framework for the analysis and assessment of fees throughout the SKGSA but that its member agencies would adopt the necessary resolutions or ordinances in order to implement and collect the fees as they processed development projects; and
WHEREAS, the Sanger City Council has the authority as stated in Sanger Municipal Code section 50-27(c) ooto adopt resolutions which set forth the specific amounts of the fees for each type of service facility in the various areas of the city, describe the benefit and impact areas on which the respective development fees are imposed, list the specific public improvements to be financed, describe the estimated costs of these respective facilities and describe the reasonable relationship between these fees and the various types of new developments."; and WHEREAS, Sanger City Staff has prepared the Sanger Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Study (Sanger Study) which not only provides the proper nexus study for the imposition and collection of fees within the City of Sanger but also complies with California Assembly Bill 602 by assessing the fees against residential development on the basis of the area of the housing unit; and
WHEREAS, the Sanger Study outlines the proposed impact fees to be used for land acquisition and construction costs for building facilities to recharge the groundwater aquifer and mitigate the impacts of continued use of groundwater for municipal purposes.

NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Sanger resolves as follows:

1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.

2. The Council approves the Sanger Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Study attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Exhibit 'A'. 178

3. The Council establishes groundwater recharge development impact fees as set forth in the Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Schedule attached as Exhibit 'B' to this Resolution and incorporated by reference.

4. The new fees as set forth in the Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Schedule are effective on the 60th day after adoption of the resolution. {. * {. * ,f rl. !F !h !F rl. 18 :k :t t :t rl.

The foregoing Resolution was considered by the City Council for the City of Sanger, California, at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 6th day of April, 2023, and approved by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN (RECUSAL):

ABSENT:

COLTNCIL MEMBERS:

COUNCIL MEMBERS:

COUNCILMEMBERS:

COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ATTEST:

Rebeca Padron, City Clerk
179

EXHIBIT'A'
Sanger Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Study 180

CITY OF SANGER

GROUNDWATER RECHARGE

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY

March 2023

181

BACKGROUND

In 2021 a study entitled “South Kings GSA Development Impact Fee” was prepared by Provost and Prichard Consulting Group (“SKGSA Study” and “P&P”, respectively) to aid the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SKGSA or GSA) in evaluating the costs, on a per acre basis, associated with groundwater recharge needs for future development in each of the five communities that comprise the GSA, including Del Rey Community Service District (CSD) and the cities of Fowler, Kingsburg, Parlier, and Sanger. Specifically, the study provided an analytical basis for the establishment of fees to be paid by developers to mitigate the impacts of groundwater extraction for water use associated with future development. The study was prepared for, and approved by, the GSA as a whole to ensure a consistent methodology throughout the GSA, with the intent that each member agency would adopt those specific ordinances and fees within their communities, and assume the primary responsibility for implementing the needed mitigation.

The study summarized assumptions and data from the South Kings GSA Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) that serve as the technical basis for the groundwater-related fee calculations, except when more recent data was available, in which case the updated information was noted.

In March of 2023, a Technical Memorandum was prepared by P&P as an Addendum to the SKGSA Study for the purpose of clarifying and revising the original study.

The SKGSA Study and March 2023 Technical Memorandum are attached hereto as Exhibit ‘A’ and are incorporated herein, and are being used as the foundation of this Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Study.

IMPACT FEE PURPOSE

The Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee will be used for land acquisition and construction costs for building facilities to recharge the groundwater aquifer and mitigate the impacts of continued use of groundwater for municipal purposes.

STATE LEGISLATION

California Assembly Bill (AB) 602 was passed on September 28, 2021 to change how cities and counties impose impact fees on housing. This legislation became effective January 1, 2022, with some provisions deferred to July 1, 2022.

Impact fees are subject to the Mitigation Fee Act (1987’s AB 1600) and must be justified with a “Nexus Study” demonstrating the relationship between a development project and the fee designed to mitigate its impact on a community’s infrastructure. AB 602 establishes new:

• transparency requirements such as requiring cities and counties to post impact fees to the web;
• standards for the nexus studies; and
• public comment procedures for new or increased impact fees.

182

New Transparency Requirements

On January 1, 2022, cities and counties must post the following information to the web:

• A current schedule of fees, exactions, and affordability requirements; • All zoning ordinances and development standards that apply to each parcel; • A list of all requirements for a development project; • The current and five previous annual fee reports covering AB 1600 fees as well as water and sewer connection fees; and
• An archive of impact fee nexus studies and cost of service studies performed since January 1, 2018.

New Nexus Fee Standards

Starting July 1, 2022 new nexus studies must provide for fees that are proportional to the square footage of new development unless the study establishes one of the following:

• Square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate impact fees for a project; • An alternative method of calculating the fee establishes a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden the development poses; and • Smaller developments will not be charged disproportionately.

AB 602 does not prevent a city or county from establishing different impact fees for different types of developments.

Nexus studies need to be updated every eight years.

New Public Comment Procedure

The Mitigation Fee Act requires cities and counties to mail notice of the time and place of a meeting regarding any new or increased impact fees at least 14 days before the meeting to any interested party who files a written request for notice. AB 602 would authorize any member of the public to submit evidence that a proposed impact fee violates the Mitigation Fee Act before these meetings. A city or county must consider all evidence submitted.

CURRENT CITY IMPACT FEE BASIS
The city’s current development impact fees are calculated per lot for single family residential and per unit for multi-family developments. Commercial and Industrial uses are assessed per acre of gross land area.

GROUNDWATER RECHARGE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
The impact fee s calculated in the SKGSA Study are based on gross acreage of development for all land uses. The amount of the fee will vary depending upon the land use. AB 602 states:
“A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportion ately to the square footage of proposed units of the development. A local 183

agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units of the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.” It also states that a nexus study is not required to comply with the above paragraph if the local agency makes a finding that includes all of the following:
(i) An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development project.
(ii) An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development. (iii) That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.

While AB 602 strives to assess housing developments by the square footage of each unit, it should be noted that this methodology requires many different assumptions, including the average home size for each land use category considered and the densities at which developers will propose their housing developments to meet City zoning requirements. The SKGSA Study included the following land use information for residential uses, which was taken from the Sanger 2035 General Plan:

Low Density Residential (LDR): Density range between 0.8 to 4.4 units per acre. Includes R-A (Rural Residential – 36,000 square foot minimum lot size) and R-1-10 (Single Family Residential – 10,000 square foot minimum lot size) zoning.

Medium-Low Density Residential (MLDR): Density range between 4.5 to 5.8 units per acre.

Includes R-1-7.5 (Single Family Residential, 7,500 minimum lot size) and R-1-10 (Single Family Residential, 10,000 square foot minimum lot size) zoning.

Medium Density Residential (MDR): Density range between 7.3 to 17.4 units per acre based off zoning. Zones included within this designation are R-1-6 (Single Family Residential, 6,000 square foot minimum lot size), RM-2.5 (Multi-Family Residential, one unit/2,500 square foot of lot), and T-P (Mobile Home Park).

Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR): Density range between 17.4 to 29 units per acre.

Zones included within this designation are RM-2.5 (Multi-Family Residential, one unit/2,500 square foot of lot RM-1.5 (Multi-Family Residential, one unit/1,500 square foot of lot), and T-P (Mobile Home Park).

High Density (HDR) Residential: Density range between 20 to 43.6 units per acre with 106 to 160 persons per acre. Includes RM-1.5 (High Density Multi-Family Residential – one unit/1,500 square foot of lot area) and RM-1.0 (High Density Multi-Family Residential – one unit/1,000 square foot of lot area) zoning.

RESIDENTIAL FEE CALCULATION

Using the aforementioned land use information, calculations have been prepared to project the number of units of residential development within undeveloped areas in the Sanger Sphere of 184

Influence, and to estimate the groundwater mitigation cost share to each square foot of residential building within this planning area. For this study, a “unit” is defined as a living unit or that portion of a building for use and occupancy as a residence by a single family. See Exhibit ‘B’ for these calculations.

In general, an assumed average density for each land use was selected, along with an average lot size which is compared to the allowable minimum and maximums within each land use category. The maximum lot coverage ratio range for each land use category, as specified by the City’s Zoning Ordinance, is noted. An assumed average residential building size for each land use category has been selected, based partly on discussions with developers, reviews of plans submitted by project applicants, and based on experience in the housing market. The associated lot coverage for the assumed building area and average lot size was then checked against those allowed by the Zoning Ordinance for compliance with City requirements.

Once the assumed average building size was confirmed, the fees developed by the SKGSA Study (as modified herein) are converted from an assessment per gross acre of development to per square footage of residential building.

NON-RESIDENTIAL FEE CALCULATION
The fee for non-residential developments will be assessed per gross acre of development as noted in the SGKSA study. Refer to Exhibit ‘C’ for the proposed fee table.

ANNUAL COST INFLATION
Per the recommendation of Section 3, “Methodology” of the SKGSA Study, a 3% annual cost adjustment is pr oposed to be applied to the initial cost projections in the Study for the 2022 and 2023 calendar years. The costs reflected in Exhibits B and C reflect this cost adjustment.

185

EXHIBIT ‘A’
SKGSA STUDY and TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

186

South Kings GSA

South Kings GSA Development
Impact Fee

October 2021

Prepared for:

South Kings GSA

Prepared by:

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
455 W. Fir Avenue, Fresno, CA 93611
187
188
South Kings GSA
Development Impact Fee Study

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 iii Table of Contents
1 Introduction and Background ........................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Study Outline ........................................................................................................................... 1-1 2 Existing and Projected Conditions ..................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Groundwater, Surface Water, and Land Use ........................................................................... 2-1

2.1.1 Land Use and Water Balance ....................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.2 Impacts to Groundwater with Changes in Land Use ................................................... 2-1

2.2 Population – Historic and Projected ........................................................................................ 2-2

2.2.1 Historic Population ...................................................................................................... 2-2

2.2.2 Projected Population ................................................................................................... 2-3

2.3 Water Demands ....................................................................................................................... 2-3

2.3.1 Historic Water Demands ............................................................................................. 2-3

2.3.2 Projected Water Demands .......................................................................................... 2-4

2.4 Recharge Requirements ........................................................................................................... 2-5

2.5 Land Use Characteristics .......................................................................................................... 2-5

2.5.1 Land Use Characteristics.............................................................................................. 2-5 3 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Basin Costs ............................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Water Supply Cost .................................................................................................................... 3-1 4 Del Rey Community Service District .................................................................................................. 4-1 5 City of Fowler .................................................................................................................................... 5-1 6 City of Kingsburg ............................................................................................................................... 6-1 7 City of Parlier ..................................................................................................................................... 7-1 8 City of Sanger .................................................................................................................................... 8-1

189
South Kings GSA
Development Impact Fee Study

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 iv List of Figures
Figure 2-1. Agricultural to Urban Land Use Conversion Impacts to Water Balance and Groundwater ... 2-2 Figure 2-2. Del Rey CSD Undeveloped Area .............................................................................................. 2-7 Figure 2-3. City of Fowler Undeveloped Area ........................................................................................... 2-8 Figure 2-4. City of Kingsburg Undeveloped Area ...................................................................................... 2-9 Figure 2-5. City of Parlier Undeveloped Area ......................................................................................... 2-10 Figure 2-6. City of Sanger Undeveloped Area ......................................................................................... 2-11 Figure 3-1. Methodology Steps ................................................................................................................. 3-1

List of Tables
Table 2-1. Historic Population (2000-2017) .............................................................................................. 2-2 Table 2-2. Projected Population (2020-2040, 5-Year Increments) ........................................................... 2-3 Table 2-3. Historic Water Demands (2001-2017) ..................................................................................... 2-4 Table 2-4. Projected Water Demands (2020-2040, 5-Year Increments)................................................... 2-5 Table 2-5. Summary of Developed and Undeveloped Area within SOIs ................................................... 2-6 Table 2-6. Summary of Land Use and Water Use Factors ....................................................................... 2-13 Table 3-1. Basin Cost per Community ....................................................................................................... 3-1 Table 4-1. Land Uses for Del Rey Undeveloped Area................................................................................ 4-1 Table 4-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Del Rey .................... 4-1 Table 5-1. Land Uses for Fowler Undeveloped Area ................................................................................. 5-1 Table 5-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Fowler ..................... 5-2 Table 6-1. Land Uses for Undeveloped Lands in Kingsburg ...................................................................... 6-1 Table 6-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Kingsburg ................. 6-2 Table 7-1. Land Uses for Undeveloped Areas in Parlier ............................................................................ 7-1 Table 7-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Parlier ...................... 7-2 Table 8-1. Land Uses for Undeveloped Lands in Sanger ........................................................................... 8-1 Table 8-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Sanger ..................... 8-2

190
South Kings GSA
Development Impact Fee Study

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 v
Abbreviations
ac/ac ......................................................................................................................................... acres per acre afy....................................................................................................................................... acre-feet per year afy/ac ................................................................................................................... acre-feet per year per acre CID ................................................................................................................. Consolidated Irrigation District CSD ..................................................................................................................... Community Services District gpcd ....................................................................................................................... gallons per capita per day gpd/ac ...................................................................................................................... gallons per day per acre GSA ......................................................................................................... Groundwater Sustainability Agency GSP .............................................................................................................. Groundwater Sustainability Plan SKGSA ................................................................................. South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency SOI ................................................................................................................................... Sphere of Influence sq ft ............................................................................................................................................... square feet UWMP ......................................................................................................... Urban Water Management Plan WUF..................................................................................................................................... Water Use Factor

191
Section One: Introduction
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 1-1 1 Introduction and Background
This study has been prepared to aid the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SKGSA or GSA) in evaluating the costs, on a per acre basis, associated with groundwater recharge needs for future development in each of the five communities that comprise the GSA, including Del Rey Community Service District (CSD) and the cities of Fowler, Kingsburg, Parlier, and Sanger. Specifically, the study will provide an analytical basis for the establishment of fees to be paid by developers to mitigate the impacts of groundwater extraction for water use associated with future development. With these fees the communities then assume the primary responsibility for implementing the needed mitigation.

This study summarizes assumptions and data from the South Kings GSA Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) that serve as the technical basis for the groundwater related fees, except when more recent data was available, in which case the updated information is noted.

Once developed, the communities will utilize this information to develop fees to be assessed to future development.

1.1 Study Outline
Section 1: Introduction and Background – the first section provides an explanation of the purpose of the study and expands upon the remaining sections of the study.

Section 2: Existing and Projected Conditions – the second section of the study restates the information presented in the GSP pertaining to historic water demands, projected water demands, anticipated groundwater recharge requirements, and summary of acreages of undeveloped area in each community. This information will be presented in summary but divided by community for clarity of use in later sections.

Section 3: Methodology – the third section presents the methodology of developing the cost (per acre) of developing recharge basins and the associated cost of surface water to be recharged in those basins.

The cost will be presented first, on average for all acreages across the GSA and secondly, on a land use basis. The purpose of the second approach is to understand that higher density land uses have a different water demand than lower density land uses and utilizing the land use designation will account for the difference in water demands and, ultimately, be the basis for the fee development.

Sections 4 through 8: Community Sections – the final sections will utilize the information presented in Sections 2 and 3 and develop costs and fees for each of the five communities.

192
Section Two: Existing and Projected Conditions
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 2-1 2 Existing and Projected Conditions
The GSP provides a robust discussion and analysis of water demands, impacts to groundwater levels and necessary mitigations related to those items, and the overall water balance for the area; this discussion is not repeated in this study. Reference is made to the GSP for a broader understanding of how future development will impact groundwater and the understood mitigation methods.

2.1 Groundwater, Surface Water, and Land Use

2.1.1 Land Use and Water Balance
In general, typically with the conversion of agricultural land use to urban land use, the following scenarios occur:
• Evapotranspiration and Consumption of water will decrease, • Usable Precipitation also decreases because of hardened surfaces and increased storm water runoff,
• Direct Recharge decreases because of piping or lining canals and ditches, • Deep Percolation decreases because of less surface area being irrigated and less water being applied,
• Surface Water use is typically eliminated as urban/industrial areas use groundwater almost exclusively,
• Significant quantities of Wastewater are generated and often exported outside of the city proper, and
• As Pumped Groundwater becomes the primary source of water for the urban/industrial area, it may or may not show an increase in use over the previously agricultural area depending largely upon the relative volumes of Surface Water and Pumped Groundwater used in the agricultural setting.

Changes to Inflow and Outflow to a groundwater basin occur very slowly, as the rate of water movement in the subsurface is extremely slow. Changes in land use can affect the movement of water into and out of a groundwater basin, but the slow movement of groundwater dampens the effect of these changes and renders the changes difficult to quantify without a great deal of modeling and analysis.

2.1.2 Impacts to Groundwater with Changes in Land Use
As mentioned above, the overall water balance for the Study Area is fully discussed and detailed in the GSP. However, it is important to note the changes to groundwater impacts as a result of changes in land use. Figure 2-1 illustrates the changes in how water moves in an agricultural area versus an urban area.

193
Section Two: Existing and Projected Conditions
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 2-2

Figure 2-1. Agricultural to Urban Land Use Conversion Impacts to Water Balance and Groundwater

2.2 Population – Historic and Projected

2.2.1 Historic Population
Historic populations from 2000 through 2017 have been provided below for each of the five communities within the GSA. These populations were used to analyze past water demand and help predict future demand in each of the communities.

Table 2-1. Historic Population (2000-2017)
Year Del Rey CSD Fowler Kingsburg Parlier Sanger
2000 950 3,979 9,199 11,145 18,931
2001 1,019 4,138 9,417 11,480 19,465
2002 1,088 4,297 9,635 11,815 19,999
2003 1,157 4,456 9,853 12,150 20,533
2004 1,226 4,615 10,071 12,485 21,067
2005 1,295 4,774 10,289 12,820 21,601
2006 1,364 4,933 10,507 13,155 22,135
2007 1,433 5,092 10,725 13,490 22,669
2008 1,502 5,251 10,943 13,825 23,203
2009 1,571 5,410 11,161 14,160 23,737
2010 1,639 5,570 11,382 14,494 24,270
2011 1,625 5,434 11,221 14,204 23,814
2012 1,455 5,655 11,345 14,439 24,120
2013 1,298 5,785 11,507 14,599 24,393
2014 1,489 5,908 11,582 14,750 24,587
2015 1,457 6,006 11,681 14,870 24,700
2016 1,531 6,083 11,716 14,953 24,741
2017 1,486 6,200 11,794 15,051 24,883
Source:

Population data obtained from the Census and American Community Survey, 5-year estimates for the relevant years. 194
Section Two: Existing and Projected Conditions
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 2-3

2.2.2 Projected Population
Populations projections were predicted using a few different methods. Del Rey CSD and the City of Fowler’s projected populations were predicted based on a 10-year average growth rate of 0.5% and 2%, respectively. Kingsburg was predicted based on the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and Sanger was based on the 2035 General Plan. Lastly, Parlier’s growth projections were estimated based on the Fresno County 2050 Growth Projection. Each community’s projected population is shown in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2. Projected Population (2020-2040, 5-Year Increments) Year Del Rey CSD Fowler Kingsburg Parlier Sanger
2020 1,508 6,579 13,700 15,870 27,337
2025 1,548 7,264 14,600 16,640 29,741
2030 1,588 8,019 15,400 17,350 32,357
2035 1,628 8,854 16,300 18,040 35,202
2040 1,668 9,776 17,000 18,700 38,298

2.3 Water Demands
The following subsections provide an understanding of the historic water demands of each community, projected water demands, and the related recharge requirement associated with both, based on land use characteristics. The five communities are solely reliant on groundwater for their water supply.

2.3.1 Historic Water Demands
Past water demands provided below were recorded by each of the communities. This data was used along with the predicted growth rates in the calculation of future water demands within each community. Historic water demands between the years 2001 to 2017 can be seen in Table 2-3.

195
Section Two: Existing and Projected Conditions
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 2-4 Table 2-3. Historic Water Demands (2001-2017)
Year Del Rey CSD Fowler Kingsburg Parlier Sanger
2001 - - - - 4,545
2002 254 - - - 4,771
2003 307 - 3,737 - 4,821
2004 334 - - - 5,362
2005 238 - 3,695 - 5,242
2006 168 - 4,024 - 5,469
2007 184 - - 3,645 6,095
2008 261 2,143 - 3,359 5,959
2009 327 1,931 - 3,184 5,604
2010 392 1,835 - 2,783 5,366
2011 404 1,984 5,977 2,340 5,393
2012 527 2,088 3,753 2,127 5,848
2013 587 2,227 3,938 2,132 6,275
2014 477 2,027 3,465 1,941 5,787
2015 437 1,698 2,627 1,801 5,177
2016 491 1,994 2,624 1,782 5,389
2017 464 1,869 2,621 1,944 5,188
Notes:

Units are in acre-feet per year (afy).

2.3.2 Projected Water Demands
Based on historic population growth and each community’s average per capita water demand derived from the water demands shown in Table 2-3, the following criteria were used for each community to develop projected water demands through 2040, the planning horizon of this study and the GSP.

• Del Rey CSD: 0.5% population growth, 262 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) • Fowler: 2% population growth, 310 gpcd
• Kingsburg: population growth per 2015 UWMP, 259 gpcd
• Parlier: population growth per Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections, 145 gpcd • Sanger: population growth per 2035 General Plan, 176 gpcd

196
Section Two: Existing and Projected Conditions
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 2-5 Table 2-4. Projected Water Demands (2020-2040, 5-Year Increments) Year Del Rey CSD Fowler Kingsburg Parlier Sanger
2020 443 2,282 3,975 2,569 5,389
2025 455 2,520 4,236 2,694 5,863
2030 466 2,782 4,468 2,809 6,379
2035 478 3,071 4,729 2,921 6,940
2040 490 3,391 4,932 3,027 7,550
Notes:

Units are in acre-feet per year.

2.4 Recharge Requirements
The GSA worked with and ultimately executed a surface water agreement with Consolidated Irrigation District (CID) that will provide surface water supplies for the GSA to use to recharge the groundwater aquifer in the future. The purpose of the groundwater recharge is to offset the groundwater extraction by each community. The agreement includes:
• provisions for the GSA to offset 42% of their groundwater extraction (i.e., if the community extracts 1000 afy, the recharge requirement would be 420 afy) • provisions up to a maximum amount of surface water supplies equal to 42% of the total 2040 projected water demands for all five communities
• a cost of the surface water supply of $395 per acre-foot through 2040

The assumed percolation rate for Sanger, Fowler, Kingsburg, and Parlier is 1.0 acre-feet per day per acre; the rate for Del Rey CSD is 0.5 acre-feet per day per acre. These were based on local knowledge in each of the communities and may need to be modified once performance data of recharge basins is further analyzed. Based on the required rate of recharge described above (42% of the groundwater extraction), the projected water demands for each community, and an assumed percolation rate for each community, recharge volumes were developed as shown in Tables 4-2, 5-2, 6-2, 7-2, and 8-2.

2.5 Land Use Characteristics

2.5.1 Land Use Characteristics
Land use characteristics were determined for each of the communities within the GSA. For purposes of this study, the term “undeveloped area” applies to all undeveloped areas within the City limits or District boundary and all areas between the City limits or District boundary and Sphere of Influence (SOI). A summary of the undeveloped area can be seen in Table 2-5 below and on Figures 2-2 through 2-

6. It is important to note that areas between the city and SOI limits for the City of Kingsburg that do not have an assigned land use have not been included in the calculations presented in Sections 4 through 8; additionally, land uses designated as agriculture for Del Rey CSD, Fowler, and Sanger have also not been included in the calculations.

197
Section Two: Existing and Projected Conditions
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group  October 2021 2-6 Table 2-5. Summary of Developed and Undeveloped Area within SOIs Community Total
Undeveloped Area
Agriculture
Designated Area
Area without Land
Use Designation
Adjusted
Undeveloped Area
Del Rey CSD 30.2 26.9 - 3.3
Fowler 3,382.1 - - 3382.1
Kingsburg 1,656.4 - 246.6 1409.8
Parlier 4,293.3 - - 4293.3
Sanger 3,696.6 522.8 - 3173.8
Totals 12,812.0 549.7 246.6 12,262.3
Notes:

Units are in acres.

Furthermore, land uses for the undeveloped areas for each community are discussed in Sections 4 through 8. These undeveloped areas were analyzed alongside water usage factors in the determination of the development impact fee for each respective community. As noted above, area without a land use designation and undeveloped agricultural land use are not included in this report since it will not be a part of the city’s ongoing demand.
198

E AMERICAN AVE

LINCOLN

E JEFFERSON AVE

INDIANOLA

S DEL REY AVE
0 400 800
Feet
º
Del Rey CSD
Figure 2-2
Land Use in Undeveloped Areas
General Plan Land Use
Medium Density Residential Reserve
Medium Density Residential
Medium-High Density Residential
Central Commercial
Central Commercial Business
Commercial
Limited Light Industrial Reserve
General Industrial Reserve
Industrial General
Industrial Limited
Agriculture
Public Park
School
Post Office
Sewer Treatment
Public Ponding Basin
Boundaries
Del Rey SOI
Undeveloped
10/5/2021 : G:\South Kings GSA - 2731\273120002 - On-Call Services\400 GIS\Map\LandUseReview\Del_ReyAcreage.mxd 199

DE WOLF

MANNING
CLOVIS
SOUTH
FOWLER

CLAYTON

GOLDEN STATE
WALTER

ARMSTRONG
LOCAN

SPRINGFIELD
PEACH

LINCOLN

LEONARD

JEFFERSON
KENNETH Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
º
City of Fowler
Figure 2-3
Land Use in Undeveloped Areas
Land Uses
Low Density Residential
Medium Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Medium High Density Residential
High Density Residential
Neighborhood Commercial
Community Commercial
General Commercial
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Parks and Open Space
Public Facilities
Boundaries
Fowler City Limits
Fowler SOI
10/5/2021 : G:\South Kings GSA - 2731\273120002 - On-Call Services\400 GIS\Map\LandUseReview\FowlerAcreages_v2.mxd 200

MOUNTAIN VIEW

CARUTHERS
KAMM
AMBER
BETHEL
CONEJO

CLARKSON
MADSEN

SIERRA ST
No GP Land Use Data
No GP Land Use Data
No GP Land Use Data
No GP Land Use Data
No GP Land Use Data
No GP Land Use Data
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
º
City of Kingsburg
Figure 2-4
Land Uses in Undeveloped Areas
General Plan Land Use
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Highway Commercial
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
RCO
Semi Public
Boundaries
Kingsburg City Limits
Kingsburg SOI
10/4/2021 : \\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\South Kings GSA - 2731\273120002 - On-Call Services\400 GIS\Map\LandUseReview\KingsburgAcreage.mxd 201

ZEDIKERNEWMARK

S MENDOCINO AVE

S ACADEMY AVE

MANNING

E SOUTH AVE
DINUBA
BETHEL

PARLIER
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
0 750 1,500
Feet
º
City of Parlier
Figure 2-5
Land Uses in Undeveloped Areas
General Plan Land Use
Low Density Residential
Medium Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Neighborhood Commercial
Community Commercial
General Commercial
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Parks & Open Space
Public Facilities
Boundaries
Parlier City Limits
Parlier SOI
10/4/2021 : \\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\South Kings GSA - 2731\273120002 - On-Call Services\400 GIS\Map\LandUseReview\ParlierAcreage.mxd 202
CHURCH

KINGS CANYON

ANNADALE

QUALITY

INDIANOLA
BUTLER

VENTURA
MCCALL
MADSEN

DEL REY

CALIFORNIA

RIVERBEND
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
º
City of Sanger
Figure 2-6
Land Use in Undeveloped Areas
General Plan Land Use
Residential - Low Density
Residential - Medium Low Density
Residential - Medium Density
Residential - Medium High Density
Residential - High Density
Commercial - Neighborhood
Commercial - General
Mixed Use - Retail
HC
Industrial - Light
Industrial - Heavy
Park / Open Space
Agricultural
SD
School - Elementary
School - Junior High
School - High School
Public Facility
Boundaries
Sanger City Limit
Sanger SOI
10/4/2021 : \\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\South Kings GSA - 2731\273120002 - On-Call Services\400 GIS\Map\LandUseReview\SangerAcreage.mxd 203
Section Two: Existing and Projected Conditions
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 2-12 A description of each of the land use types can be seen below and are based off the Sanger 2035 General Plan:

Low Density Residential: Typically has between 0.8 to 4.4 units per acre and includes R-A (Rural Residential – 36,000 sq ft minimum lot size) and R-1-10 (Single Family Residential – 10,000 sq ft minimum lot size) zoning. Future developments are required to connect to city utilities. In addition, it is important to note that the R-A zone allows types of livestock as well as other agricultural activities.

Medium-Low Density Residential: Maximum density of 4.5 to 5.8 units per acre, or 16 to 21 persons per acre. Includes R-1-7.5 (Single Family Residential, 7,500 minimum lot size) and R-1-10 (Single Family Residential, 10,000 sq ft minimum lot size). Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

Medium Density Residential: Typically, has a density of between 7.3 to 17.4 units per acre based off zoning. Zones included within this designation are R-1-6 (Single Family Residential, 6,000 sq ft minimum lot size), RM-2.5 (Multi-Family Residential, one unit/2,500 sq ft of lot), and T-P (Mobile Home Park). This land usually includes a mix of different units. Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

Medium-High Density Residential: This land use has a density of between 17.4 to 29 units per acre based off zoning. Zones included within this designation are R-1-6 (Single Family Residential, 6,000 sq ft minimum lot size), RM-2.5 (Multi-Family Residential, one unit/2,500 sq ft of lot), and T-P (Mobile Home Park). This land usually includes a mix of different units. This land use typically is home to larger apartment complexes. Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

High Density (Multi-Family) Residential: Typically has between 20 to 43.6 units per acre with 106 to 160 persons per acre and includes RM-1.5 (High Density Multi-Family Residential – one unit/1,500 sq ft of lot area) and RM-1.0 (High Density Multi-Family Residential – one unit/1,000 sq ft of lot area) zoning. This land is used for high density multiple family residential areas. Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

Light Commercial: This land use is typically home to smaller developments and are built to serve residents daily needs, such as grocery stores, cafes, and other uses. Zoning C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) related to this land use. Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

Heavy Commercial: Developments within this land use are usually large-scale shopping centers and provide commercial retail for the surrounding community. This land use utilizes C-2 (Community Commercial) zoning. Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

Light Industrial: This land use designation is for smaller scale industrial buildings and businesses where less noise, vibrations, or hazards occur on site. M-L (Light Manufacturing) zoning is used for this land use designation. Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

Heavy Industrial: Used for a wide variety of manufacturing or processing plants. Typically, there is a higher level of noise, odors, of vibration that are associated with these buildings. Heavy manufacturing zoning is used with this land use (M-2). Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

204
Section Two: Existing and Projected Conditions
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 2-13 Public Facilities: Contains facilities that are operated by public agencies. This includes city hall, post office, schools, and other county offices. RSC (Resource, Schools and Conservation) zoning is used under this land use designation. Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

Parks/Open Space: This land use will usually have little to no buildings, and is made up of parks, playing fields, and other recreational areas. Currently zoning for parks and recreational areas under this land use is RSC (Resource, Schools, and Conservation). Future developments are required to connect to city utilities.

Each land use correlates to a respective water use factor (WUF). These WUFs have been developed based on similar communities in the area and on the WUFs developed for Sanger, as a representative community for the GSA, and can be seen in Table 2-6 below. The land use types are taken from the Sanger 2035 General Plan, for consistency. It is important to note that some communities did not have the same land use names as Sanger. When this occurred, the land uses were placed under one of the Sanger land use categories most similar in use, and the corresponding WUF was selected.

Table 2-6. Summary of Land Use and Water Use Factors
Land Use
Comparison WUFs Selected Water
Use Factor Clovis Fresno Madera
Low Density Residential 2,200 3,400 2,250 2,300
Medium-Low Density Residential 2,100 3,400 2,250 2,400
Medium Density Residential 2,000 3,400 2,250 2,500
Medium-High Density Residential 2,900 3,400 2,250 2,600 High Density (Multi-Family) Residential 4,200 5,800 2,250 4,000 Light Commercial 2,600 1,800 1,000 2,200
Heavy Commercial 2,600 1,800 1,000 2,300
Light Industrial 900 1,800 1,000 2,000
Heavy Industrial 1,800 1,800 1,000 4,000
Public Facilities 1,200 1,800 1,000 1,800
Parks/ Open Space 2,700 2,700 400 2,400
Notes:

Units are in gallons per day per ac (gpd/ac)
205
Section Three: Methodology
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 3-1 3 Methodology
The process of developing a per acre cost to provide recharge water supplies to future development, based on land use characteristics, follows the following steps:

Figure 3-1. Methodology Steps
It is recommended the adopting agencies (cities or district) consider an annual fee increase of approximately three percent (3%) to stay consistent with current costs of construction for needed infrastructure.

3.1 Basin Costs
The basin cost per acre of basin varies with the communities based on several factors, including proximity to Consolidated Irrigation District (CID) facilities (i.e., further distance means more conveyance pipeline must be constructed), acreages of existing basins that can be converted to recharge basins within the community, and other factors noted in the GSP; these costs were updated in Spring 2021, based on current land acquisition costs and other construction costs. The cost is an average of the facilities identified in the GSP for each community, as shown in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1. Basin Cost per Community
Community Name Basin Cost
($/ac)
Del Rey CSD $141,375
City of Fowler $249,564
City of Kingsburg $198,947
City of Parlier $141,227
City of Sanger $182,153

3.2 Water Supply Cost
The cost for purchasing surface water from CID to deliver to recharge basins has not been included in the following fee calculations, as it is understood each community will account for that cost within their individual water rates rather than as a component of the development impact fee.

Step 1: Develop
water use demand
projections,
recharge needs
(for future
development),
and Undeveloped
Areas within each
community's SOI.

Step 2: Develop
per acre water
demand, based on
water use demand
projections and
density factors for
each land use
type.

Step 3: Develop
cost of
constructing
recharge facilities
needed for future
development,
based on land use
type.

Step 4: Develop
per-acre cost of
recharge facilities,
for future
development,
based on land use
type.
206
Section Four: Del Rey CSD
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 4-1 4 Del Rey Community Service District
The Del Rey CSD’s undeveloped area is shown in the table below by land use (not including agriculture designation). All the undeveloped area is planned to be industrial land use.

Table 4-1. Land Uses for Del Rey Undeveloped Area
Land Use Water Use Factor
(gpd/ac)
Water Use Factor
(afy/ac) [1]
Undeveloped Area
(acres)
General Industrial Reserve 3,000 3.36 0.61
Industrial General 3,000 3.36 0.05
Limited Light Industrial Reserve 2,000 2.24 2.64
Totals 2,200 (see below) 2.46 3.30
Notes:
[1] The Water Use Factor is converted from gpd/ac to afy/ac by dividing the gpd/ac by 325,851 gallons/af and then multiplying by 365 days per year; i.e., 3,000 / 325,851 x 365 = 3.36 afy/ac

Due to the small number of acres in each land use type, all undeveloped area was collected into one land use type with a modified WUF that was calculated by weighting the assigned WUFs noted in the table above for each land use type. General Industrial Reserve and Industrial Reserve fall between Light and Heavy and have therefore been assigned a WUF of 3,000 gpd/ac. The weight average used for the three industrial land use types shown in Del Rey CSD is 2,200 gpd/ac (2.46 afy/ac).

Table 4-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Del Rey Land Use
Demand
(afy) [1]
Recharge
Required [2]
(afy)
Basin Area per
Undeveloped Area
(ac/ac) [3]
Basin Fee per Acre
Undeveloped Area
($/ac) [4]
Industrial 8.1 3.4 0.013 $1,838
Notes:
[1] The Demand is calculated by multiplying the modified WUF (2,200 gpd/ac = 2.46 afy/ac) by the Undeveloped Area Acreage for that Land Use from Table 4-1 (i.e., for Low Density Residential - 2.46 afy/ac * 3.3 acres = 8.1 afy) [2] 42% of Demand per CID Agreement
[3] This value is determined by calculating the amount of recharge basin acreage needed to accomplish the recharge required, based on anticipated percolation rates discussed in Section 2.4 (Volume of Recharge Required / (frequency of water delivery * days per year * estimated percolation rate) = Basin Area Needed). Once the amount of recharge basin acreage needed is determined, it is then divided by the total undeveloped area (Table 5-1) to arrive at the Basin Area needed per Undeveloped Area. Frequency of water delivery = 4 years out of every 5; Number of days per year = 100; and Estimated percolation rate =

0.5 af/ac/day.
[4] This value is determined by multiplying the Basin Area per Undeveloped Area by the basin cost shown in Table 3-1.

207
Section Five: City of Fowler
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 5-1 5 City of Fowler
The City of Fowler’s undeveloped area is shown in the table below by land use. Most of the undeveloped area is planned to be residential or industrial land uses.

Table 5-1. Land Uses for Fowler Undeveloped Area
Land Use Water Use Factor
(gpd/ac)
Water Use Factor
(afy/ac) [1]
Undeveloped Area
(acres)
Demand (afy)
[2]
Low Residential 2300 2.58 535.37 1381.3
Medium Low Residential 2400 2.69 885.25 2381.3
Medium Residential 2500 2.80 393.51 1101.8
Medium High Residential 2600 2.91 112.19 326.5
High Residential 4000 4.48 43.96 197.0
Light Industrial 2000 2.24 288.27 645.7
Heavy Industrial 4000 4.48 911.45 4083.3
Neighborhood Commercial 2200 2.46 17.98 44.2
Community Commercial 2200 2.46 43.94 108.1
General Commercial 2300 2.58 65.10 168.0
Parks/Open Space 2400 2.69 30.21 81.3
Public Facilities 1800 2.02 54.88 110.9
Notes:
[1] The Water Use Factor is converted from gpd/ac to afy/ac by dividing the gpd/ac by 325,851 gallons/af and then multiplying by 365 days per year; i.e., 2,300 / 325,851 x 365 = 2.58 afy/ac [2] The Demand is calculated by multiplying the WUF by the Undeveloped Area Acreage for that Land Use from Table 5-1

The following table provides detail on how the acreages and WUFs were utilized to develop a per acre cost to construct basins to recharge the required offset of water demands.

208
Section Five: City of Fowler
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 5-2 Table 5-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Fowler Land Use
Demand
(afy) [1]
Required
Recharge
(afy) [2]
Basin Area per
Undeveloped Area
(ac/ac) [3]
Basin Fee per Acre
Undeveloped Area
($/ac) [4]
Low Residential 1381.3 580.1 0.014 $3,494
Medium Low Residential 2381.3 1000.1 0.014 $3,494
Medium Residential 1101.8 462.8 0.015 $3,743
Medium High Residential 326.5 137.1 0.015 $3,743
High Residential 197.0 82.7 0.024 $5,990
Light Industrial 645.7 271.2 0.012 $2,995
Heavy Industrial 4083.3 1715.0 0.024 $5,990
Neighborhood Commercial 44.2 18.6 0.013 $3,244
Community Commercial 108.1 45.4 0.013 $3,244
General Commercial 168.0 70.6 0.014 $3,494
Parks/Open Space 81.3 34.1 0.014 $3,494
Public Facilities 110.9 46.6 0.011 $2,745
Notes:
[1] The Demand is calculated by multiplying the WUF by the Undeveloped Area Acreage for that Land Use from Table 6-1 [2] 42% of Demand per CID Agreement
[3] This value is determined by calculating the amount of recharge basin acreage needed to accomplish the recharge required, based on anticipated percolation rates discussed in Section 2.4 (Volume of Recharge Required / (frequency of water delivery * days per year * estimated percolation rate) = Basin Area Needed). Once the amount of recharge basin acreage needed is determined, it is then divided by the total undeveloped area (Table 5-1) to arrive at the Basin Area needed per Undeveloped Area. Frequency of water delivery = 4 years out of every 5; Number of days per year = 100; and Estimated percolation rate = 1 af/ac/day.
[4] This value is determined by multiplying the Basin Area per Undeveloped Area by the basin cost shown in Table 3-1.

209
Section Six: City of Kingsburg
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 6-1 6 City of Kingsburg
The City of Kingsburg’s undeveloped area is shown in the table below by land use (not including areas without a land use designation). Most of the undeveloped area has a land use of Low Density Residential.

Table 6-1. Land Uses for Undeveloped Lands in Kingsburg Land Use Water Use
Factor (gpd/ac)
Water Use Factor
(afy/ac) [1]
Undeveloped
Area (acres)
Demand (afy)
[2]
Low Density Residential 2300 2.58 538.33 1388.9
Medium Density Residential 2500 2.80 135.81 380.3
Light Industrial 2000 2.24 356.17 797.8
Heavy Industrial 4000 4.48 79.61 356.7
Highway Commercial 2300 2.58 76.62 197.7
RCO [3] 1800 2.02 186.28 376.3
Semi-Public 1800 2.02 36.98 74.7
Notes:
[1] The Water Use Factor is converted from gpd/ac to afy/ac by dividing the gpd/ac by 325,851 gallons/af and then multiplying by 365 days per year; i.e., 2,300 / 325,851 x 365 = 2.58 afy/ac [2] The Demand is calculated by multiplying the WUF by the Undeveloped Area Acreage for that Land Use [3] Resource Conservation and Open Space District; WUF for Public Facilities it utilized

The following table provides detail on how the acreages and WUFs were utilized to develop a per acre cost to construct basins to recharge the required offset of water demands.

210
Section Six: City of Kingsburg
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 6-2 Table 6-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Kingsburg Land Use
Demand (afy)
[1]
Required
Recharge
(afy) [2]
Basin Area per
Undeveloped Area
(ac/ac) [3]
Basin Fee per Acre
Undeveloped Area
($/ac) [4]
Low Density Residential 1388.9 583.3 0.014 $2,785
Medium Density Residential 380.3 159.7 0.015 $2,984
Light Industrial 797.8 335.1 0.012 $2,387
Heavy Industrial 356.7 149.8 0.024 $4,775
Highway Commercial 197.7 83.0 0.014 $2,785
RCO 376.3 158.0 0.011 $2,188
Semi-Public 74.7 31.4 0.011 $2,188
Notes:
[1] The Demand is calculated by multiplying the WUF by the Undeveloped Area Acreage for that Land Use from Table 6-1 [2] 42% of Demand per CID Agreement
[3] This value is determined by calculating the amount of recharge basin acreage needed to accomplish the recharge required, based on anticipated percolation rates discussed in Section 2.4 (Volume of Recharge Required / (frequency of water delivery * days per year * estimated percolation rate) = Basin Area Needed). Once the amount of recharge basin acreage needed is determined, it is then divided by the total undeveloped area (Table 5-1) to arrive at the Basin Area needed per Undeveloped Area. Frequency of water delivery = 4 years out of every 5; Number of days per year = 100; and Estimated percolation rate = 1 af/ac/day.
[4] This value is determined by multiplying the Basin Area per Undeveloped Area by the basin cost shown in Table 3-1.

211
Section Seven: City of Parlier
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 7-1 7 City of Parlier
The City of Parlier’s undeveloped area is shown in the table below by land use. A large portion of the undeveloped area is planned to be Medium Low Density Residential.

Table 7-1. Land Uses for Undeveloped Areas in Parlier
Land Use Water Use
Factor (gpd/ac)
Water Use Factor
(afy/ac) [1]
Undeveloped
Area (acres)
Demand
(afy) [2]
Low Density Residential 2300 2.58 162.56 419.4
Medium Low Density Residential 2400 2.69 2160.85 5812.7 Medium Density Residential 2500 2.80 311.40 871.9
High Density Residential 4000 4.48 95.85 429.4
Light Industrial 2000 2.24 954.77 2138.7
Heavy Industrial 4000 4.48 189.92 850.8
Neighborhood Commercial 2200 2.46 24.36 59.9
Community Commercial 2200 2.46 66.05 162.5
General Commercial 2300 2.58 157.19 405.6
Park 2400 2.69 35.66 95.9
Public Facilities 1800 2.02 134.65 272.0
Notes:
[1] The Water Use Factor is converted from gpd/ac to afy/ac by dividing the gpd/ac by 325,851 gallons/af and then multiplying by 365 days per year; i.e., 2,300 / 325,851 x 365 = 2.58 afy/ac [2] The Demand is calculated by multiplying the WUF by the Undeveloped Area Acreage for that Land Use

The following table provides detail on how the acreages and WUFs were utilized to develop a per acre cost to construct basins to recharge the required offset of water demands.

212
Section Seven: City of Parlier
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 7-2

Table 7-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Parlier Land Use
Demand (afy)
[1]
Required
Recharge (afy)
[2]
Basin Area per
Undeveloped Area
(ac/ac) [3]
Basin Fee per Acre
Undeveloped Area
($/ac) [4]
Low Density Residential 419.4 176.2 0.014 $1,977
Medium Low Density Residential 5812.7 2441.3 0.014 $1,977 Medium Density Residential 871.9 366.2 0.015 $2,118
High Density Residential 429.4 180.4 0.024 $3,389
Light Industrial 2138.7 898.2 0.012 $1,695
Heavy Industrial 850.8 357.4 0.024 $3,389
Neighborhood Commercial 59.9 25.2 0.013 $1,836
Community Commercial 162.5 68.2 0.013 $1,836
General Commercial 405.6 170.3 0.014 $1,977
Park 95.9 40.3 0.006 $847
Public Facilities 272.0 114.2 0.011 $1,553
Notes:
[1] The Demand is calculated by multiplying the WUF by the Undeveloped Area Acreage for that Land Use from Table 7-1 [2] 42% of Demand per CID Agreement
[3] This value is determined by calculating the amount of recharge basin acreage needed to accomplish the recharge required, based on anticipated percolation rates discussed in Section 2.4 (Volume of Recharge Required / (frequency of water delivery * days per year * estimated percolation rate) = Basin Area Needed). Once the amount of recharge basin acreage needed is determined, it is then divided by the total undeveloped area (Table 5-1) to arrive at the Basin Area needed per Undeveloped Area. Frequency of water delivery = 4 years out of every 5; Number of days per year = 100; and Estimated percolation rate = 1 af/ac/day.
[4] This value is determined by multiplying the Basin Area per Undeveloped Area by the basin cost shown in Table 3-1.

213
Section Eight: City of Sanger
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 8-1 8 City of Sanger
The City of Sanger’s undeveloped area is shown in the table below by land use (not including agriculture designations). More than half the undeveloped area in Sanger is anticipated to be residential.

Table 8-1. Land Uses for Undeveloped Lands in Sanger
Land Use Water Use Factor
(gpd/ac)
Water Use Factor
(afy/ac) [1]
Undeveloped
Area (acres)
Demand
(afy) [2]
Low Density Residential 2300 2.58 110.74 285.7
Medium Low Density Residential 2400 2.69 828.79 2229.4
Medium Density Residential 2500 2.80 770.00 2156.0
Medium High Density Residential 2600 2.91 100.52 292.5
High Density Residential 4000 4.48 89.28 400.0
General Commercial 2300 2.58 146.41 377.7
Highway Commercial 2200 2.46 111.99 275.5
Neighborhood Commercial 2200 2.46 19.73 48.5
Heavy Industrial 4000 4.48 135.14 605.4
Light Industrial 2000 2.24 165.15 369.9
Mixed Use - Retail 4000 4.48 162.15 726.4
Park / Open Space 2400 2.69 279.85 752.8
Public Facility 1800 2.02 164.30 331.9
School 1800 2.02 89.79 181.4
Notes:
[1] The Water Use Factor is converted from gpd/ac to afy/ac by dividing the gpd/ac by 325,851 gallons/af and then multiplying by 365 days per year; i.e., 2,300 / 325,851 x 365 = 2.58 afy/ac [2] The Demand is calculated by multiplying the WUF by the Undeveloped Area Acreage for that Land Use

The following table provides detail on how the acreages and WUFs were utilized to develop a per acre cost to construct basins to recharge the required offset of water demands.

214
Section Eight: City of Sanger
Development Impact Fee Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • October 2021 8-2

Table 8-2. Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Sanger Land Use
Demand (afy)
[1]
Required
Recharge
(afy) [2]
Basin Area per
Undeveloped Area
(ac/ac) [3]
Basin Fee per Acre
Undeveloped Area
($/ac) [4]
Low Density Residential 285.7 120.0 0.014 $2,550
Medium Low Density Residential 2229.4 936.4 0.014 $2,550 Medium Density Residential 2156.0 905.5 0.015 $2,732
Medium High Density Residential 292.5 122.9 0.015 $2,732 High Density Residential 400.0 168.0 0.024 $4,372
General Commercial 377.7 158.6 0.014 $2,550
Highway Commercial 275.5 115.7 0.013 $2,368
Neighborhood Commercial 48.5 20.4 0.013 $2,368
Heavy Industrial 605.4 254.3 0.024 $4,372
Light Industrial 369.9 155.4 0.012 $2,186
Mixed Use - Retail 726.4 305.1 0.024 $4,372
Park / Open Space 752.8 316.2 0.014 $2,550
Public Facility 331.9 139.4 0.011 $2,004
School 181.4 76.2 0.011 $2,004
Notes:
[1] The Demand is calculated by multiplying the WUF by the Undeveloped Area Acreage for that Land Use from Table 8-1 [2] 42% of Demand per CID Agreement
[3] This value is determined by calculating the amount of recharge basin acreage needed to accomplish the recharge required, based on anticipated percolation rates discussed in Section 2.4 (Volume of Recharge Required / (frequency of water delivery * days per year * estimated percolation rate) = Basin Area Needed). Once the amount of recharge basin acreage needed is determined, it is then divided by the total undeveloped area (Table 5-1) to arrive at the Basin Area needed per Undeveloped Area. Frequency of water delivery = 4 years out of every 5; Number of days per year = 100; and Estimated percolation rate = 1 af/ac/day.
[4] This value is determined by multiplying the Basin Area per Undeveloped Area by the basin cost shown in Table 3-1.

215
455 W Fir Avenue
Clovis, CA 93611-0242
Tel: (559) 449-2700
Fax: (559) 449-2715
www.provostandpritchard.com
G:\South Kings GSA - 2731\273120002 - On-Call Services\200 Technical\DIF Study\2023 Update\2023_0321 Technical Memo.docx

Engineering  Surveying  Structural  Geostructural  Planning  Environmental  GIS  Construction Services  Hydrogeology  Consulting Clovis  Bakersfield  Visalia  Modesto  Los Banos  Chico  Sacramento  Sonora  San Luis Obispo  Boise, Idaho Technical Memorandum
To: South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency
From: Heather Bashian, PE
Subject: SKGSA, Development Impact Fee Study - Addendum Date: March 26, 2023
Background
In October 2021, the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SKGSA) adopted a Development Impact Fee Study (Study). The purpose of the Study was to aid the SKGSA in evaluating the costs, on a per acre basis, associated with groundwater recharge needs for future development in each of the five communities that comprise the SKGSA, including Del Rey Community Service District (CSD) and the cities of Fowler, Kingsburg, Parlier, and Sanger. Specifically, the study provided an analytical basis for the establishment of fees to be paid by developers to mitigate the impacts of groundwater extraction for water use associated with future development. With these fees the communities then assume the primary responsibility for implementing the needed mitigation.

This Technical Memorandum (TM) is an addendum to the Study and the purpose to the TM is to revise the Water Use Factor (WUF) associated with the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) land use and the associated fees. This revision only impacts the values for the cities of Sanger and Fowler; therefore, those are the only revised tables provided herein. All other components of the Study remain unchanged.

Additionally, the values in this TM are presented in 2021 dollars, where applicable, to remain consistent with the original Study. The three percent recommended annual fee increase (Section 3 of the Study) can be applied to these values as well as those in the Study and they will be consistent with one another.

Revised WUF
The information presented in Table 2-4 in the Study showed comparison with other nearby cities; however, while the title land uses match, the described land use for MHDR includes a dwelling unit per acre (du/ac) range of 17.4 to 29, which more closely aligns with the High Density Residential densities of the comparison communities, as illustrated in Table 1, below. This misalignment led to a selected WUF for MHDR in the Study being lower than appropriate for implementation purposes.

216
SKGSA – Development Impact Fee Study Amendment
G:\South Kings GSA - 2731\273120002 - On-Call Services\200 Technical\DIF Study\2023 Update\2023_0321 Technical Memo.docx

Table 1. Allowed Density Comparison
Land Use Allowed Densities (du/ac)
SKGSA Clovis Fresno Madera
Low Density Residential 0.8-4.4 2.1-4.0 1.0-3.5 2.1-7.0 Medium Low Density Residential 4.5-5.8 3.5-6.0
Medium Density Residential 7.3-17.4 4.1-7.0 5.0-12.0 7.1-15.0 Medium High Density Residential 17.4-29 7.1-15.0 12.0-16.0 High Density Residential 20.0-43.6 15.1-25.0 16.0-45.0 15.1-50 Very High Density Residential 25.1-43.0

For the purposes of this TM, a revised WUF for MHDR was calculated by taking the WUF for HDR (4,000 gallons per day per acre [gpd/ac]) and dividing it by the lowest allowed density in that land use (20.0 du/ac) to arrive at a value of 200 gpd/du. From there, the value was multiplied against the lowest allowed density within the MHDR (17.4 du/ac) to arrive at a rounded WUF of 3,500 gpd/ac.

Table 2. Revised WUFs
Land Use Revised WUF (gpd/ac)
Low Density Residential 2,300
Medium-Low Density Residential 2,400
Medium Density Residential 2,500
Medium-High Density Residential 3,500
High Density (Multi-Family) Residential 4,000
Light Commercial 2,200
Heavy Commercial 2,300
Light Industrial 2,000
Heavy Industrial 4,000
Public Facilities 1,800
Parks/ Open Space 2,400

Revised Tables – Chapters 5 and 8 (Cities of Fowler and Sanger) As a result of revising the MHDR WUF, Tables 5-1, 5-2, 8-1 and 8-2 in the Study require revision, also.

Those tables, revised as a result of this revised information, are shown below. Discussion of methodologies, and other assumptions are discussed in more detail in the Study and are not updated or revised as a result of this TM. The information in each table that is revised is shown in bold.

Conclusion
From the revised information presented in this TM, the cities of Sanger and Fowler can utilize the revised Basin Fee for MHDR for each city as a basis to develop their own implementation strategies for developer impact fees.

DRAFT
217
SKGSA – Development Impact Fee Study Amendment
G:\South Kings GSA - 2731\273120002 - On-Call Services\200 Technical\DIF Study\2023 Update\2023_0321 Technical Memo.docx

City of Fowler Revised Tables
Table 3. Revised Table 5-1 from Study: Land Uses for Undeveloped Lands in Fowler Land Use Water Use Factor
(gpd/ac)
Water Use Factor
(afy/ac)
Undeveloped Area
(acres)
Demand
(afy)
Low Residential 2300 2.58 535.37 1381.3
Medium Low Residential 2400 2.69 885.25 2381.3
Medium Residential 2500 2.80 393.51 1101.8
Medium High Residential 3500 3.92 112.19 439.8
High Residential 4000 4.48 43.96 197.0
Light Industrial 2000 2.24 288.27 645.7
Heavy Industrial 4000 4.48 911.45 4083.3
Neighborhood Commercial 2200 2.46 17.98 44.2
Community Commercial 2200 2.46 43.94 108.1
General Commercial 2300 2.58 65.10 168.0
Parks/Open Space 2400 2.69 30.21 81.3
Public Facilities 1800 2.02 54.88 110.9

Table 4. Revised Table 5-2 from Study: Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Fowler
Land Use
Demand
(afy)
Required
Recharge
(afy)
Basin Area per
Undeveloped Area
(ac/ac)
Basin Fee per Acre
Undeveloped Area
($/ac)
Low Residential 1381.3 580.1 0.014 $3,494
Medium Low Residential 2381.3 1000.1 0.014 $3,494
Medium Residential 1101.8 462.8 0.015 $3,743
Medium High Residential 439.8 184.7 0.021 $5,241
High Residential 197.0 82.7 0.024 $5,990
Light Industrial 645.7 271.2 0.012 $2,995
Heavy Industrial 4083.3 1715.0 0.024 $5,990
Neighborhood Commercial 44.2 18.6 0.013 $3,244
Community Commercial 108.1 45.4 0.013 $3,244
General Commercial 168.0 70.6 0.014 $3,494
Parks/Open Space 81.3 34.1 0.014 $3,494
Public Facilities 110.9 46.6 0.011 $2,745

DRAFT
218
SKGSA – Development Impact Fee Study Amendment
G:\South Kings GSA - 2731\273120002 - On-Call Services\200 Technical\DIF Study\2023 Update\2023_0321 Technical Memo.docx

City of Sanger Revised Tables
Table 5. Revised Table 8-1 from Study: Land Uses for Undeveloped Lands in Sanger Land Use Water Use Factor
(gpd/ac)
Water Use Factor
(afy/ac) [1]
Undeveloped
Area (acres)
Demand
(afy) [2]
Low Density Residential 2300 2.58 110.74 285.7
Medium Low Density Residential 2400 2.69 828.79 2229.4
Medium Density Residential 2500 2.80 770.00 2156.0
Medium High Density Residential 3500 3.92 100.52 394.0
High Density Residential 4000 4.48 89.28 400.0
General Commercial 2300 2.58 146.41 377.7
Highway Commercial 2200 2.46 111.99 275.5
Neighborhood Commercial 2200 2.46 19.73 48.5
Heavy Industrial 4000 4.48 135.14 605.4
Light Industrial 2000 2.24 165.15 369.9
Mixed Use - Retail 4000 4.48 162.15 726.4
Park / Open Space 2400 2.69 279.85 752.8
Public Facility 1800 2.02 164.30 331.9
School 1800 2.02 89.79 181.4
Table 5. Revised Table 8-2 from Study: Water Use Factor, Basin Area, and Basin Fee for Undeveloped Area in Sanger
Land Use
Demand (afy)
[1]
Required
Recharge
(afy) [2]
Basin Area per
Undeveloped Area
(ac/ac) [3]
Basin Fee per Acre
Undeveloped Area
($/ac) [4]
Low Density Residential 285.7 120.0 0.014 $2,550
Medium Low Density Residential 2229.4 936.4 0.014 $2,550 Medium Density Residential 2156.0 905.5 0.015 $2,732
Medium High Density Residential 394.0 165.5 0.021 $3,825 High Density Residential 400.0 168.0 0.024 $4,372
General Commercial 377.7 158.6 0.014 $2,550
Highway Commercial 275.5 115.7 0.013 $2,368
Neighborhood Commercial 48.5 20.4 0.013 $2,368
Heavy Industrial 605.4 254.3 0.024 $4,372
Light Industrial 369.9 155.4 0.012 $2,186
Mixed Use - Retail 726.4 305.1 0.024 $4,372
Park / Open Space 752.8 316.2 0.014 $2,550
Public Facility 331.9 139.4 0.011 $2,004
School 181.4 76.2 0.011 $2,004

DRAFT
219

EXHIBIT ‘B’

RESIDENTIAL FEE CALCULATION

220
Land Use Category Selected Density
(Unit/Acre) 1
Minimum Lot Size
(SF)
Maximum Lot Size
(SF)
Selected Average
Lot Size (SF)
Max Lot Coverage
Range (%)
Assumed Avg Home
Size (SF)
Coverage Ratio to
Avg Lot Size (%) Notes
LDR 0.8 10000 36000 15000 30-40% 3000 20% 2
MLDR 4.5 7500 10000 8000 40% 2500 31% 3
MDR 7.3 2500 6000 4500 40-45% 2000 44% 4
MHDR 17.4 1500 2500 2000 45-50% 1500 45% 5
HDR 20 1000 1500 1250 50-60% 1000 48% 5
Notes:
1 Lowest end of density range has currently been selected based on experience with typical development within the Valley. Higher values within General Plan may be used for future fee study updates.
2 Lower end of lot size range has been selected for future development. 3 Lower end of lot size range has been selected assuming developers will target the maximum lot count in their developments. 4 A hybrid lot size has been selected as this land use often contains a mix of various use categories to meet the density requirements. 5 An average lot size has been selected to accommodate smaller lots with higher densities (duplexes, triplexes). But multi-family projects on larger lots are also expected in this Land Use Category.

The Coverage Ratio to Average Lot Size assumes 60% of the floor area of multi-story units is located on the ground floor and determines the lot coverage.

Land Use Category Undeveloped
Acreage (Ac)
Selected Density
(Unit/Acre)
Fee Per Acre ($/Ac)
1 Total Cost Share for
Land Use
Total Units per Land
Use Category Cost Per Unit Assumed Avg Home
Size (SF)
Cost per Square
Foot of Unit
LDR 110.74 0.8 2,705$ 299,584$ 89 3,382$ 3000 1.13$ MLDR 828.79 4.5 2,705$ 2,242,121$ 3730 601$ 2500 0.24$ MDR 770 7.3 2,898$ 2,231,752$ 5621 397$ 2000 0.20$ MHDR 110.52 17.4 4,058$ 448,484$ 1923 233$ 1500 0.16$ HDR 89.28 20 4,638$ 414,103$ 1786 232$ 1000 0.23$ Notes:
1 Includes 3% escalation over SKGSA Study for years 2022 and 2023, per the recommendation of the Study 221

EXHIBIT ‘C’

GROUNDWATER RECHARGE IMPACT FEE TABLE

222
Land Use Category Fee Per Acre from
SKGSA Study
Proposed Fee Per
Acre 1
Fee Per SF of
Residential Building
Area 2
Low Density Residential 2,550$ 2,705$ 1.13$ Medium Low Density Residential 2,550$ 2,705$ 0.24$ Medium Density Residential 2,732$ 2,898$ 0.20$ Medium High Density Residential 3,825$ 4,058$ 0.16$ High Density Residential 4,372$ 4,638$ 0.23$ General Commercial 2,550$ 2,705$ Highway Commercial 2,368$ 2,512$ Neighborhood Commercial 2,368$ 2,512$ Heavy Industrial 4,372$ 4,638$ Light Industrial 2,186$ 2,319$ Mixed Use - Retail 4,372$ 4,638$ Park/Open Space 2,550$ 2,705$
Public Facility 2,004$ 2,126$
School 2,004$ 2,126$
Notes:
1 Includes 3% escalation over SKGSA Study for years 2022 and 2023, per the recommendation of the Study 2 All residential developments shall be assessed per square foot of building area 223

EXHIBIT'B'
Groundwater Recharge Development Impact Fee Schedule
Notes:

I Includes 30lo escalation over SKGSA Study for years2022 and2023,per the recommendation of the Study 2 All residential developments shall be assessed per square foot of building area Low DensiW Residential $ 2,550 2,705$ l.l3$
Medium Low Densi8 Residential $ 2,550 2,705$ $ 0.24
Medium Density Residential 2.732$ $ 2.898 0.20$
Medium Hieh Density Residential $ 3.825 $ 4.058 0.r6$
Hish Density Residential 4.372s 4.638s 0.23$
General Commercial $ 2.550 2.705$
Hiehway Commercial 2"368$ 2.512$
Neiehborhood Commercial 2.368$ 2.512$
Heaw Industrial 4.372$ 4,638$
Lisht Industrial 2.186s 2,319$
Mixed Use - Retail 4,372$ 4,638$
ParVOpen Space 2,550$ 2,705$
Public FaciliW 2.004$ 2.126$
School 2.004$ 2.126$
224

SANGE R
r-rB-----t
For the Meeting of: April 6,2023
Agenda Item No.: I -l

CITY OF SANGER

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
To:

From:

Subject:

Attachments:

CITY COUNCIL
Patrick Chaffee, Administrative S ervices Director
Citizen' s Oversight Committee
Measure S Gang/Drug Prevention/Intervention Services Grant Program Awards Grant Application Score Card
Public Hearing
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Other:

Continued to:

CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Citizen's Oversight Committee (COC) recommends the City Council select Set Free Church ($30,000), Sanger Young Life ($40,000), Boys and Girls Club ($20,000) and SAM Academy ($10,000) as the approved grant recipients for Measure S Gang Intervention/Prevention award and staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with each recipient.

DISCUSSION:

This is an update to the staff report presented at the March 16, 2023, City Council meeting. No action was taken at that meeting as two motions failed The City received four completed grant applications before the deadline. The complete applications were from Set Free Church, Sanger Young Life, the Boys & Girls Club, and SAM Academy. Each Application Review Committee (ARC) member scored all four applications. The scores were tabulated and discussed during ARC meetings on 211412023 and2l2ll2023.

The ARC decided to recommend to the Citizen's Oversight Committee the selection of Set Free Church, Sanger Young Life, the Boys & Girls Club and SAM Academy as the grant award recipients.

Because the combined request from Set Free Church ($80,000) Sanger Young Life ($50,000) Boys & Girls Club ($81,212) and SAM Academy ($45,000) exceeds the $100,000 budget amount for the grant program Prepared by: PatrLclz cha{fee Approved by:

REVIEW: City Manager: Finance: City Attorney:

TYPE OF ITEM: COMMITTEE ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION X
X
Consent
Informational Item
Action Item
Department Report
225
in 2023-2024, the ARC recommended $30,000 for Set Free Church, $40,000 for Sanger Young Life, $10,000 for SAM Academy, and $20,000 for the Boys & Girls Club. At the March 7,2023 meeting, the COC considered the recommendation, heard presentations from Set Free Church, Sanger Young Life, the Boys & Girls Club, and SAM Academy and voted unanimously to recommend the aforementioned awards.

During the presentations made as a part of the March 7 COC meeting, all four applicants fielded questions from the COC committee with responses from each summarized below:

Set Free Church specified the program inclusive with minors as young as 16 and parents would sign over custody so the program can take them to school and appointments. They also said that as they grow, they have a constant supply of available homes to house members of the program. In regards to measuring success, they spoke to around five calls a week and how a portion of those who they try to help leave the program and come back.

Sanger Young Live clarified that all kids are welcome to join their programs, and those that are at the highest risk are getting the extra focused attention. They commented that their niche is serving kids that don't have other things to do, and how they go through that population support the kids at the highest risk.

And since they are not a program explicitly provided by a school, they can provide additional services like giving rides and overnight housing.

SAM Academy said that they don't charge for their programs that are part of the Measure S Programs. They also specified that funds were also being requested on behalf of the Scouts programs for materials, uniforms and camp registrations.

Boys and Girls Club was not asked any questions, however it was noted that they have answered questions fielded in past presentations.

After the presentations concluded, Chairperson Reyna noted how valuable the applicant's organizations are to the City of Sanger and specifically addressed the concerns of making more grant funding available before passing an extension to the Measure S tax assessment through a renewal ballot initiative. The current sunset in place shedules all Measure S funding to expire in2028.

At the March 16,2023, regular Council meeting, staff presented a report and Grant Applicants then made presentations to Council. Counil Members Melendez and Mayor Pro Tem Martinez were absent. After Council deliberations, Council Member Hurtado motioned for increasing the award for SAM Academy by $10,000 and reducing the award for Sanger Young Life by $10,000. That motion did not pass. A further motion to approve the recommendation provided by the COC also did not pass. Consensus was reached to table the discussion until the April 6, 2023, Council meeting when the fulI Council would be present to vote.

On March 17,2023 the City Clerk forwarded a link to the recording for the March 16,2023, agenda item to Council Members Melendez and Martinez to view before the April 6,2023, meeting. At this meeting, the Council is asked to continue discussions and either confirm or amend the COC Measure S grant award recommendations.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The Citizen Oversight Committee makes a recommendation regarding the selection of grant recipients and grant allocation amounts to City Council. City Council considers the recommendation as it finalizes the City's budget.
226

ALTERNATIVES
a.) Allocate an equal amount to each qualifying organrzation; $25,000 each. b.) Allocate a pro-rata amount to each qualifying organization, based on request amount. c.) Reject the COC recommendation in its entirety and create a new award distribution.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Accept and adopt the COC recommendations for the FY 23-24 Measure S Gang Prevention/Intervention firnding, or modifr COC recommendation, to reject the recommendation in its entirety and create a new award distribution.
227
2023-2024 Measure S Grant Application Summary Score Sheet Prevention
lntervention
Youth ent
Decreasing potential acts of gang-related
violence and acts
Decreas anti-social behavior
lncreasing the number of service referrals
offered to Bang affected at-risk youth in areas
of counseling, mentoring, education,
employment training and job opportunities
and other assistance related programming.
lncreasing communication with and develop
collaboration between law enforcement,
parole, probation, and community partners
for implementing intervention or prevention
st es
Ensuring the program effectively prevents
gang involvement and makes lasting changes
t interventions.

Ensuring a quality program through the use of
sound practices and involvement of
nsible e and als.

Evaluating the program once delivered
through participant letters, surveys, degree of
community acceptance, and program
evaluations.
x X x x
X X X

X X X X
What is the focus of the proposed program?
Please mark with an "x" in all applicable lines
Set Free
Church
SangerYoung SAM Academy
Life
Boys & Girls
Club

9.3 8.7 4-7 7.7

9.3 9.3 7.3 9.0

7.7 8.3 4.0 8.0

9.3 8.3 3.7 8.7
Using a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the most
successful, how successful will the applicant be at
the following?
Set Free
Church
SangerYoung SAM Academy
Life
Boys & Girls
Club

9.0 8.7 4.0 7.7

8.0 9.3 8.0 8.7

6.0 8.7 5.3 8.3

10.0 9.3 5.0 8.1
Using a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the most Set Free
Church
SangerYoung SAM Academy
Life
Boys & Girls
Clubhow successfulwillthe applicant be at
following?
Benefiti the commu at la
228

8.0 9.3 8.0 8.7

8.0 9.7 5.7 9.0

9.3 9.3 6.3 9.0

7.7 8.3 6.7 8.3

8.0 9.0 5.3 8.7

8.3 9.0 5.7 8.7

10.0 8.7 7.3 7.7
ln the reviewers best judgment, how wellwillthe
applicant do at the following? Please use the 1-10
rating scale with 1"0 = best.

Set Free
Church
SangerYoung SAM Academy
Life
Boys & Girls
Club
De monstrates organ izationa I
effect and stabi
Demonstrates capability to deliver proposed
services.

Deliver a ua servrce.

Pursue realistic, attainable goals with sound
ance measures.

Collaboratively work with other organizations.

Utilize existing community services and
facilities.

Provide a unique service rather than
a service.

How will be served?
What is the level of requested grant funding?
What percentage is grant funding of total
on Measure S Fund
Funded as e and the
Lack collaborative effort(s) in providing services.

Demonstrate limited or insufficient experience in
d servrces
icate servtces.

Score
Rank
40 100 300 2L6
S so,ooo s 50,000 S 4s,ooo $ gt,ztz
Set Free
Church
SangerYoung SAM Academy
Life
Boys & Girls
Club
Demographics
X
Concerns - the City wishes to avoid the following
situations. Please indicate with an "x" these
conditions exist.

Set Free
Church
Sanger Young SAM Academy
Life
Boys & Girls
Club
128.0 134.0 87.0 L26.7
2 t 4 3
$ 30,000 $ 4o,ooo S ro,ooo S 2o,ooo
Recommendation - What dollar share of the
S100,000 in grant funding does the Application
Review Committee recommend?
Set Free
Church
SangerYoung SAM Academy
Life
Boys & Girls
Club
ARC Recommended Award
229
Fot the Meeting of: 4pn16,2023
Agenda Item No.: j - 2
CrrYoF SINGER

REPORT TO THE, CITY COUNCIL
To:

From:

Subject:

Mayor and City Council
Joshua Rogers, City Engineer
City of Sanger Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan
Attachments: Resolution No. 2oZ3 -lS
Five-Year CIP
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2olJ-t5 , which approves the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for fiscal years23l24 - 27128.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Staff has prepared an update to the City's Five-Year CIP and is seeking Council adoption to establish the framework for capital improvement planning for the fiscal years shown.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Sanger is currently operating under the 2035 General Plan, adopted in2020. The General Plan established the framework for development of the City including, among other things, the Circulation Element, which determined the planned improvements to accommodate the circulation needs of vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, transit, and goods movement, as well as other Elements affecting land use, infrastructure, parks/open space and safety. Subsequent to the General Plan Adoption, Staff has been preparing updates to the Utility Master Plans for the Domestic Water, Preoared bv: Ioshua Rosers Approved by:

RJ,VIEW: City Finance: Ciry Attorney: _
TYPE OF ITEM: COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION 1 2
x
X
Consent
Info Item
Action Item
Department Report
Redevelopment Agency
Public Hearing
Mattet Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to:
230
Wastewater (Sewer), and Storm Drain systems which are planned to meet the demands of new growth and development as outlined in the General Plan. The last Utility Master Plan Updates were prepared following adoption of the 2025 General Plan in the early 2000s. It is projected that these Utility Master Plan Updates will be recommended for adoption by the City Council by the end of the 2022123 fiscal year.

In its daily efforts, City staff works to ensure adherence to the City's adopted planning documents, both in review and approval of development applications, and in planning public works projects to be carried out by the City. Improvements which are deemed necessary to serve new development can become conditions of approval of those developments, and can be required to be completed by the developer prior to issuance of building permits or occupancies. Certain of these conditioned improvements, when "determined by the city to have supplemental size, length or capacity over that needed for the impacts of that development, and when such construction is necessary to ensure efficient and timely construction of the facilities network", become eligible for credit against development impact fees (DIF), or for reimbursement from impact fee reserves. When public works projects are planned by the City for completion, these are reviewed against the General Plan and applicable Master Plans for conformity to the approved documents, and are then incorporated into the Capital Improvement Plan within the budget in a given fiscal year.

In addition to the annual budgets, the City prepares Five-Year Capital Improvement Plans, which project the improvements in the upcoming five-year planning horizon which will be:

1. Needed to maintain the existing infrastructure network in a state of good repair;

2. Needed to accommodate existing and future demands on the systems; and

3. Anticipated to be able to be constructed with current and planned revenue sources within that planning horizon.

Attached is the City of Sanger Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan ("Plan") for fiscal years 2023124 through 2027128. The Plan includes capital projects within the following departments:
o Transportation
o Public Utilities - Water
o Public Utilities - Sewer
o Parks & Recreation
o General Government & Community Services; and
o Public Safety
The Transportation projects represent a combination of pavement rehabilitation projects (overlays, reconstructions), preventative maintenance projects (street sealing), operational improvements (traffic signals), and pedestrian improvements (sidewalk construction and ped safety improvements). These projects have been selected through a combination of methods, including, but not limited to:
o Analyzing the City's Pavement Management Program (PMP), utilizing the Streetsaver software program;
o Identi&ing those project segments which are eligible for federal aid based on the Califomia Road Systems maps, and planning accordingly;
o Referencing traffic counts and transportation models to focus improvements on higher- trafficked roads, when applicable;
o Referring to Citywide inventories of available and missing pedestrian facility connectivity and the recommendations of the Sanger Accessibility Master Plan and the Regional Active \\nasl\shared\Forms & Templates
231
Transportation Plan (ATP) for Fresno County; and
o Planning intersection improvements such as traffic signals where needed based on the Circulation Element and upon documentation that signal warrants have been met.

The Water and Sewer projects represent a combination of maintenance of the existing systems (sewer lift station reconstructions, wastewater treatment plant upgrades, etc.) and expansion to the existing systems (new water wells and tanks, constructing groundwater recharge facilities, and expanding sewer trunk pipeline systems to serve new growth areas, etc.). These improvement recommendations are based on approved planning documents like the Utility Master Plans, the Urban Water Management Plan, and the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SKGSA), of which Sanger is a member.

Similarly, the Parks & Recreation, General Government and Public Safety projects include both rehabs/retrofits, as well as expansions to existing facilities based on operational needs and approved planning documents (Regional ATP, City of Sanger Fire Station Remodel Feasibility Study and Bridging Documents, etc.).

The Plan was taken before the City Planning Commission at the March 23,2023 meeting, and the Commission adopted Resolution No. 2023-07, making a finding that the proposed Plan is in conformance to the General Plan, as is their role under California Government Code Section 65401.

Once adopted, the Plan will be used as the guideline for each year's capital improvement budget.

Projects will be advanced forward based on their place in the Plan, unless funding or new project opportunities or any further direction from the Council are to change, or if any unforeseen circumstances arise.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The projects included in the Plan have been developed through input from all City Departments and based on unfinished projects adopted with the last Five-Year CIP in 2020 and Staff believes the projects included meet the needs and goals of the City and its General Plan, and generally represent a program of improvement projects that align with available and attainable funding resources.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact from the adoption ofthe Plan.

ALTERNATIVES:

The Council may request revisions from Staff to add, subtract, or change the priority of projects included in the Plan. In this altemative, Staff would bring back an updated Plan for further Council review and adoption prior to the approval and adoption of the 23124 fiscal year's budget.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Staff will prepare the capital project list for the 23124 fiscal year budget using projects from the Plan.

Upon the completion of the 23124 fiscal year capital improvement program and prior to future budget preparations, Staff will use the Plan to propose each following year's capital improvement budget, subject to any changes or amendments to the Plan.
\\nas l\shared\Forms & Templates
232
ATTACHME,NT 1
\\nas l\shared\Forms & Templates
233
RESOLUTIONNo. 2o:3-Is

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANGER APPROVING THE FIVE-
YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR FISCAL YEARS 2023124
THROUGH2027I28
WHEREAS, in addition to its annual budgets, the City prepares Five-Year Capital Improvement Plans, which project the improvements in the upcoming five-year planning horizon which will be:

1. Needed to maintain the existing infrastructure network in a state of good repair;

2. Needed to accommodate existing and future demands on the systems; and

3. Anticipated to be able to be constructed with current and planned revenue sources within that planning horizon.

WHEREAS, City Staff has prepared a Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for the fiscal y ears 2023 124 tlxough 27 128 ("Plan") ; and
WHEREAS, the Sanger Planning Commission, at is meeting of March 23,2023 reviewed the Plan and through its Resolution No. 2023-07 made a finding of conformity to the General Plan under its authority stipulated by California Govemment Code 65401; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Sanger to approve the Plan for the purposes of capital improvement planning over the five year period specified.

NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Sanger resolves:

1. That the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for the fiscal years 2023124 through 2027128 is hereby approved.

2. This resolution is effective upon adoption.
* * * rF * :1. {< * {. rt r|< :t * * *,t
The foregoing Resolution was considered by the City Council for the City of Sanger, California, at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 6th day of April,2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN (RECUSAL)
ABSENT:

COUNCIL MEMBERS:

COUNCILMEMBERS:

COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ATTEST:

Rebeca Padron, City Clerk
234
ATTACHMENT2
\\nas I \shared\Fonns & Templates
235

CIW OF SANGER

FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IM PROVEM ENT PLAN
FY 2023/2024 - FY 2027 /2028
MARCH 2023
Prepared by:

Joshuo Rogers, P.E.

City Engineer
236

PROJECT ID

CITY OF SANGER
Five-Year Capital lmprovement Plan
P( 2023124 -FY 2027128

PROGRAM SUMMARY
Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Total s-Year Potential Funding LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
AHSC Grant
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTFT-3
1-4
T-5
T-5
T-8
T-9
T-10
1-72
T-13
T-L4
T-15
T-16
T-18
T-19
r-2r
r-22
r-23
T-25
T-26
T-2A
T-29
T-31
1-32
r-34
T-35
T-37
T-38
T-39
T
T-41
T-42
T-44
T-46
r-47
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
LTF
STBG,
550.000s
550_000s
300.000s
750.000s
650,000s
250.0005
250.000s
865.000s
50,000s
665.O00s
415,000s
400,000s
850,000s
S 1.2so.ooo
750,000s
S 1,ooo,ooo
425.000s
400,000s
500,000s
S ooo,ooo
550,0005
575.000s
325,000s
77S_000s
s 1.000.000
S 82s,ooo
800-000s
525,000s
475.OOOs
S 1.ooo-ooo
650,000s
500.oo0s
425,OOOs
230,000s
ao0-000s
635,000s
500,000s
300.000s
650,000s
35,000s

85.OO0s
250,000s
300.000s
100,000s
S 25o.ooo
S 275.ooo
s 50.000
S 760.000
S 785.ooo
s 570,000
s 4s0,000
S sgo,ooo
s 3s,000
S 85.ooo
S 60,000
s so.000
S 2o,ooo
195.000
200.000
40_000

25.000
300,000s
290.000s
450,000s
220,OOOs
385.000s
235,000s
205,0005
80,000s
65,000s
50-000s
50,000s

50.000s
50,000s
20 000s

40.000
s 2s0,000
S 42o,ooo
s 400,000
S 54o.ooo
S 745,ooo
S 760,000
S 2so.ooo
S 275.ooo
S z5o.ooo
s 47s,000
S Eso-ooo
S 5o,ooo
s 30,000
S 2s,ooo
25_000s

50.000s
S 60,000
20_000s
s 290.000
s 360.000
50,0005
S 75o.ooo
5 1,1so,ooo
s 500,000
3 3oo.ooo
S zso,ooo
S 49o.ooo
s s1s,00o
S 275,ooo
S 27s,ooo
s 80.000
s 40,000
S 1oo-ooo
S 60.000
5 3o,ooo

75.0003
s 50,000

20.o00s
550.000
300.000
50,000
555.000s
415,000s
400 000s
100,000s
100-o00s
550.000s
750,000s
500,000s
425.0005
100,000s
100 000s
50,000s

50.o00s
35,000s
80,000s
75-000s
100.000s
)
60,000s
20_0005
DEFERRED PAST 5 YEARS
DEFERRED PAST 5 YEARS
DEFERRED PAST 5 YEARS

DEFERRED PAST S YEARS
665.000

1.250.000

1.000.000
575.000
750_000
800.000
250.000
535.000
i 550.000
650.000
100.000
150.000
150,000
s 41s,000
S 4oo.ooo
S sso,ooo
5 8s0,000
S sso.ooo
750 000
S 3oo.ooo
s 425.000
S 4oo,ooo
s 600,000
S 600,000
s ss0,000
S 3zs,ooo
S 775.ooo
5 1.000.000
S 82s.ooo
s 650.000
S 625,000
S 47s.ooo
S 1.ooo.ooo
S sso,ooo
S Soo.ooo
s 425,000
S 260.000
S 23o.ooo
s 800,000
S 86s.ooo
s s00.000
300.000s
s 365.000
s 92s,000
S 2so,ooo
S 3oo.ooo
150.000s
S lso,ooo
West Ave - church toChurch Ave - West to OAvenue
Ave &toStreet
4th Street - Greenwood to West Ave
Almond Avenue Reconstruction - Bethel Ave to Greenwood Ave Bethel Avenue Reconstruction - Jensen Ave to City Limits 14th St - P St to Sanger Ave & Edgar Ave - P St to Academy Ave 2023 Street Sealing Proiect
West Avenue - 7th Street to 3rd street
J Street - Annadale to Edgar
5thStreet-LSttoJSt
Annadale Ave - Bethel to Post Av€
Jensen and lndianola Traffic sisnal
Bethel and Almond Traffic Signal
8th Street- FallerAve to Qualiw Ave
10th St. - Bethel to Post; Magnolia Ct -Bethel to Brehler; Brehler - loth to Annadale lndustrial Avenue Overlay - End to North Ave
N Street - 9th to Annadale Ave
Brehler Ave - 7th to 9th & Webster Ave - End to 130' East of Brehler Annadale Avenue Streetscape and AHSC Public lmprovements Jensen Avenue Reconstruction - Faller Ave to L St
2025 Street Sealing Proiect
Central Avenue - Academy Ave to City Limits
Geary Ave - Academy to Harrison Ave
7th Street- Academy Ave to P Street
Bethel Avenue - Annadale to North Ave
Eethel and North Traffic Signal
Greenwood & lensen Traffic Sisnal Modifications
Faller Avenue Reconstruction - Almond Ave to Annadale Ave Faller Avenue - Church Ave to 5th St
4th Street - Academy Ave to O 5t
Vine Street - Lyon to Brehler Ave
2027 Street Sealins Proiect
5th Street - Bethel Ave to Greenwood Ave
gth Street - Academy Ave to FallerAve
I Street - Annadale to Edgar Ave
O Street - 3rd to sth Street
Church Avenue Overlay - lndianola to Bethel Ave
K Street - Edgar to Cherry; Cherry Ave - K Street to j Street Church Avenue Reconstruction - I St to Harrison Ave
L Street - 7th to 10th Street; 10th Street - L to K Street ADA lmprovements - Various Locations
Sidewalk Repairs - Various Locations
Street Projects - Various Locations
Academv/N Street Allev - Jensen to 7th Street
Academy/N Street Alley - 7th to 8th Street
N Street/O Street Allev - 7th to 8th Street
Academy/N Street Alley - 5th Street to Jensen
FYFYF\I
T4A
Tmnsportotin Subtotol S 25,350,000 5,595,000 5,920,000 5,565,000 2,930p00 3,990,000 $ 24ooo,ooo LTF
237

PROGRAM SUMMARY
PROIECTID PROjECTTITTE
Public Uti titi6-W otet Subtotot
Eudret
Proposed
n 23124
Proposed Proposed
N 25126
Proposed
EV 76177
Proposed Total s-Year
fundinE
Potential Funding
Sourca
DWR Grant
G rant
DWSRF
DWSRF
DWR Grant
DIF
DIF
ARPA
Sewer
Sewer
Sewer
Sewer
Sewer Fund
Sewer Fund
Sewer Fund
Sewer
ARPA
DIF
s-1
s-4
s-5
s-6
s-7
5-8
w-1
w-2
w-3
W.4
w-5
w-6
w-7
w-9
w-10
w-11
w-12
s-10
5-11
s-12
s-14
s-15
s-17
PR-1
PR.2
PR-4
PR-5
PR.5
PR-7
PR-8
PR-9
24125 FY t7l)a
2s,9{r0,000s 8,0s0,000s 9,8s0,000s s,000,000 3,000,000 25,900,000 t7,675,OOO 5,350,000 5 1,300,000 5 1,500,000 I 3,375,000 S 5,050,000 15,575,000 DIF
DWR Grant,
635_000

2.700.000
3,550,000
290.000
850,000
2,700,000
375.000
850,000
3,800,000
3_500.oo0

2.650.000

4.OO0 000s 3-000.000
s 3.500-000
s 500.000
S 1.ooo.ooo
500.000
100.000
850.000
500,000
s 3,000.000
S 2,5oo,ooo
s 100.000
S 3oo.ooo
s 2,000,000
635_000
290.000

2.650-000
S 2.2oo.ooo
550,000s
750,000s
200,000s
27S.OOOs
500,0005
535.000
375.000
S 2,7oo,ooo
S 3.55o.ooo
S 290-ooo
S sso,ooo
S 2-7oo.ooo
S sso,ooo
S 3,8oo,ooo
S 3.5oo.ooo
S 2.Gso.ooo
3 4.ooo.ooo
Well 22 - Pump, Motor and Site lmprovements
Tombstone Territory Water Connection Project
Well 19 - Test Well
Well 19 - Drilline and Development
Well 19 - Pump, Motor and Site lmprovements
Well 28 - Test well
Well 28 - Drilling and Development
Well 28 - Pump, Motor and Site lmprovements
fank No. 4 Construction
North Sanger Groundwater Recharge Project
South Sanger Groundwater Recharge Project
Sewer Fund
750.000

1.200,000

2.300.DO0

1.100.000
1,200,000
1_200_000
350,000
1,250,000
775,OOO

1.200.000
750.000

1.100.000
200,000
300.000

1.000.000

1.O00.000
1-000.000
S 1.2oo.ooo
s 750.000
s 1,100,000
S 1.ooo-ooo
S 1.ooo.ooo
71S.OOOs
350,000s
S 1,2so,ooo
S 1,ooo,ooo
s 100.000
s 1.200.000
S 3oo,ooo
S 1.zoo.ooo
s 100,000

1.200.0005
750.O00s
S 2,3oo,ooo

1.100.000s
DEFERRED PAST 5 YEARS
s 7s0-000
s 1.100.000
S 750-ooo
S 1.ooo.ooo
s 1,200,000
S 2-3oo.ooo
S 1,2oo,ooo
S 1,2oo.ooo
s 3s0.000
s 1.2s0.000
S 77s,ooo
S 1.2oo.ooo
s 1.100.000
s 200,000
S 3oo.ooo
S 1.ooo.ooo
S 1,ooo,ooo
S 1-ooo.ooo
North/Greenwood Lift Station Reconstruction
MuscatAvenue 24" - Academy to Greenwood
Academy/Muscat Lift Station
Newmark Avenue 24" - North Ave to Muscat Alignment
lvluscat Avenue 24" - Greenwood to Bethel
Bethel Avenue 24" - Muscat to North
Quality Avenue 18" - Church Ave to 4th St
:alifornia Avenue 18" - Qualitv to Harrison Alisnment
Quality Avenue 18" - Church to California
California Avenue 15" - Harrison to Academy Avenue
Academy Avenue 15" - Quality to Woods Avenue
Academy Avenue 12" - Woods to State Route 180
Sewer Line Repair/Retlacement at Various Locations
Sewer Lift Station Telemetry
lndustrial Pond Sludge Removal/Oisposal
WWTP Anaerobic Disestor Rehabilitation
Church Avenue 12" - J St to QualityAve
Bethel Avenue 15" Parallel - Jensen to Church Avenue
850,000
2,000,000
850_000

1.250.000
200,000

1.700-000

1.250.000
400,000

5.000.000
1_200.000
750,000
400,000

2.500.000
500.000
500,000
2,500.000
200-000

2.000.000
900,000
850.0005
850,000
350-O00
5 850,000
s 400.000
s 2,000,000
5 8s0,000
S 1.25o.ooo
S 2oo.ooo
S 1,7oo,ooo
S 1.2so.ooo
S s.ooo.ooo
Southwest ReEional Park Land Acquisition
Southwest Regional Park Development
Cesar Chavez Park LishtinE Proiect
Fowler Switch Canal Bicvcle/Pedestrian Trail I mprovements - Bethel to Jensen Jensen Avenue Pedestrian Improvements - FS Canal to Bethel (excludes FS Canal Bridge) Jensen Avenue Pedestrian Crossing of Fowler Switch Canal Fowler Switch Canal Bicvcle/Pedestrian Trail lmprovements - Bethel to Greenwood Medrano Park lmprovements
Veterans Memorial Plaza -Phase 2 and 3 lmprovements
Ports, Rectedtion & Community Seruices Subtotot 13,s00,000 2,050,000 s 2,900,000 s 200,000 s 3,s00,000 s 4,8s0,000 $ 13,500,000 238

PROGRAM SUMMARY
PROJECT ID PROITCTTITLE Budset
Preposed
Ft 23124
Proposed
24125
Preposed
FY 25126
Proposed
Ft 26127
Proposed
w 2712A
Total s-Year
Fundins
Potential Fundint
So!re
G-1
G-2
G-3
GoErnment &
6ensa I Govqnme nt Subtotol 5 1,0s0,000 5 200,0009 250,0005 500,000 1p50,000 PS-1
PS-2 State Set-Aside
Public Solety Subtotql $ 17p00,000 1,500,000 8,000p00s s,s00,000s 1,s00,000 500,000 17,000,000 GF
GF
GF
200.000
250,000
600_000600.000
250,000
200,000lsCommunitv Cf,nter Roof
HallMain Lot
Civic Center Solar lnstallation

9.500.000

5.000.000

2.500.000500.000
500,000

1.000.000

2.500 000
2-000.000
1,000,000

5.000_000

2.000.000

1.000.000
500,000
s 2.500.000
s 9.s00.000
S 5,ooo,ooo
Police Station Expansion/lJpgrade
Fire Station Remodel
CommunicatiohsPublic
239

CTTY OF SANGER
Five-Year capital lmproyement Plan
FY 202tl24 -FY 2O2l2A
PROGRAM DESCRIPnON
PROEfrID PRO€CTITLE PROEfrIOCATIOil
T-1
PRdEfr D€SCRIPnON
ramps a5 neessaryto meet
existingdamagedoncreteinfrastrudure,wherenecessary. &nstrudcu$,tuterandsidwalkalon8westsidesouthofKstfrom stripin& cconstrud corner curb ramps as neesrary to meet ADAguidelines, replace existing damaged concrete infrastrudue, Rehabilitate existingasphalt paEment on local street, replaceeristing damaged @ncrete infrastrudure, where necessary tuhabilitateexistinEasphalt pawment on local street, rcconstrud@rner curb ramps as necessaryto meet ADA guidelinEs, replae existing damaEed concrete infrastrudure, where nee$ary
T-5
1-2
T-3
r-4
T-6
T-8
T-9
Rehabilitate e{stingasphalt pawment on colledor street, upgrade storft drainalefaciliti€s, reconstrud cornercurb ramps as necesaaryto meet ADA guidelines, replae disting dahaged oncrete infrastrudure, where necessary Repair damage and overleyexisting pavementon aderial itreet, re@nstaud rorner curb ranps as necessaryto meetADA guidelines, and install birycle lan€ striping in Ngand SBdiredions T-7 Rehabilitate existinEasphalt paEment on local street, reconstrud@rnercurb ramps as npcessaryto meet ADA guidelines, replace Biennial pavement preventative maintenance projedto include pavement patching crackfilling and streetsealing ofexisting 5treets Rehabilitate €xisting asphalt pavement oo local street aeconstrud corher curb ramps ai necessaryto meet ADA guidelincr. replace existing damaged concrete inftestrudure, where necessary Rehabilitate existingasphalt pavement on local str€el reconstrud cornercurb ramps ar necessaryto meetADAtuideliner, replace existin8 dahaged concpte infrastruduaq where hecessary
Rehabilftate existingasphalt pavement on local street reconstrud cornercurb ramps a5 necessaryto meetADAEuidelines, replaEe eristing damaged concr€te infrastrudure. where necelcary Rehabilitate existingasphah pavement on local street, up8radeeistingstorm drainage facilities, reconstrud cornercurb ramps as necessaryto meetADAguidelines. replace existinEdamaged concrete infiastructurq when necessary T-10
T-11
T-12
T-13
T-14
T-15
T-16
T-17
T-X8
T-19
T-20
r-27
T-22
6nst.uct new trafficsiEnal at intersection
Construct nw trafficsignal at htersection
Rehabilitateexisting asphalt pavement on colledor streel. reconstrud cornercurb ramps a9 n€cessaryto meetADAguidelines, replace existing damaged concrete infrastrudurq where necessary k.on strudion of locl street a nd expansion of storm drainage sFtem in Breh ler and Webster Awn! es. Anticipated as pad of a Cooparetive Agreement with land developer.
khabilitateeistingasphalt paEment on loc.l itreet, re.onstrud@rner curb ramps as necessaryto meet ADA guidelines, replace existing damaged @ncrete infrastrudure, where necessary Rehabilitate eistingasphalt pawment on local street, reconstrud@rner curb ramps as necessaryto meet ADA guidelines, repl.e @ncrete infrastrudure, where neessary
tuconstrudion of lo@l street a n d expansion of storm drainaEe system in Breh ler and Webster Avenues. Anticipated as pafr of a wfth land developer.
pedestrhn improEm€nts along Edgar Awnue from Sangerto PStreet. lnrtall bike route striping and signage atvarious other &habilitatedistingasphalt pawment on local street, reconstrud@rner curb ramps as necessaryb meet AOAguidelines, replace concrete infrastrudure, where neessary
KStreet beMeen hnadale and EdEarAve & Almond
Ave beileen KStreet and FallerAve
HillAve between Cnurch AE and enal Dr; Church Aw
betwe€n West Ave and O St & WestAw beween
7th Street between [yon and Hawley AE & Lyon Ave
be&een lensen Ave and WebsterSt
4th Strcet beReen Greenwood and West Ave
Almond Ave b€freen Bethel and creenwood Ave
Bethel AEnue beNeen lensen and City Umhs
l4thStreetand EdgarAenueatVarious locations
WestAre betueen 7th and 3rd StrePt
I Street bekeen Annadale and EdgarAve
5rh Street b.rween Land ist
Annadale Ave between Bethel and Post Aw
8th Street betu€en Fa'l€rand QualityAve
tun 5veel Deil€en &tnet and PostAve; Magnoxa ct
beileen Bethel and ErehlerAw & BrehlerAve
hatua.n lnrh (r 2ni ln^.n21. rl^
lndustrialAE beween south end and North Aw
NStreet between 9th 5t and Annadale Ave
BrehlerAE between 7th and 9th St & WebsterAve
Various [ocationsalongAnnadale, Edgarand Sanger
kStreet - AnnadaleAve to EdgarAre &Almond - Kto Faller
Hill Avenue -Church to canal; Church A€- WesttoO Str.et West Aw - Church to €nd;
7th Stcet - Lpn to HawleyAve & lpn Ave - Jensen to Webster 4th Street- Greenwood toWestAve
BethelAvenue Reconstrudion - Jensen Ave to City trmits
14th St - P St to Sanger Ak & Edgar Ave - P St to AcademyAv€ 2023 Street Sealing Projed
W$t Avenue - lh streetro 3rd strP.t
I Street- Annadaleto Edgar
5th slreet - L5t to J st
lensen.nd lndianola Traftic sunal
Bethel and Almond Trafficsignal
8th Street- FallerAv€ to QualityAE
10th St. - kthel to Post; Magnolia Ct-&thel to Brehler; Brehler 10th to Annadale
lndustrialAwnue Overlay- End to Nodh Ave
N Street- 9th toAnnadaleAve
Brehler Ave - 7th to Sh & WebsterAve- End to 130'East ofBrehler AnnadaleAvenue Streetscape and AHSC Public lmprovem€nts ,ensen Avenu€ konstruction - Faller Ave to LSt
2025 StreetS€aling Projed giennial pavement preventativ€ maihtenance projedto include pavement patchin& crackfilling and street5ealing ofexisting streeB 240

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
PRdEfrru
T-23
T-24
T-25
r-26
r-27
T-28
T-29
T-30
T-31
r-32
T-33
T-34
T-35
T-36
T-37
T-38
T-39
T-40
T-41
T-42
T43
r-4
T'45
T-ff
f-47

1."nu",ou."".
between A@demyand City Umits6€aryAw be&een Academy and Harilson Ave CentralAwnue beNeen Aedemyand City Limits
7th StEet betueen hdemvAEand PStreet
Bethel and North Avenue lnteEedion
Greenwood and Jensen Avenue lntersection
FallerAvenue between Almond and Annadale
FallerAvenue bween Church and 5th
4th Street beilecn Acad€my and O Street
r'ine Street betueen Lyon and BrehlerAvenue
ith Street between Beth€l and Greenwood Ave
)th Street beueen AGdemVand FallerAve
I Slreet betuepn Annadale and Edea. Ave
O Street betueen 3rd and sth strEet
Church Aw between lndianola and BethelAve
Kstreet beqeen [dgar and Cherryand CherryAve
betueen Kahd I Str..t
Church Ave between I st and Harrison AE
LStreet be$een 7th and 1Gh St and 1fth Street
betueen L and KSt
Various bcations
Academy/N Alley betueen Jensen and 7th St
AGdemy/N Allry between 7th and 8th St
N/O Alley beween 7th .nd 8th StRet
Academy/N Allry be&een 5th and lens€n
Central AEnue - Academy Aw to City UniE
GearyAve -A@demyto Harrison Ave
7th Streel AcademyAve to P Street
Bethel Avenue - Annadale to Nodh Av.

B€thel and Nofth Trafficsignal
FallerAvenue Reconstrudion - Alhond Ave to Annadale A€
F.llerAvenue - Church ave to sth st
Ith Street - AEademyAve to O St
r'ine Street- [yon to grehlerAve
2027 Street Sealing Projed
ith Street" BethelAve to Greenwood Ave
,th Street - AcademyAveto FallerAve
Street - Annadale to EdgarAve
I Streel- 3rd to sth Street
:hurch Avenue Overlay- lndianola to Bethel Aw
K Street - Edgar b Cherry; CherryAve - KStreet to I Street Church Avenue Reconstrudion - I Stb Harrison Aw
L Street - 7th to 10th Streeq 1fth Street - [ to K Street ADA lmprovementr - various Locations
Sidewaik Repairs -Various bdtions
Street Prcjeds - Various lo@tions
Academy/N StcetAlley - Jensen to 7th Street
Academv/N Steet Alley - 7th to Eth Street
N StreeVO Street Alley- 7th to 8th Street
with Fr6no Countyto re.onstrudanerial stret atCity/County Line.

Rehabilitate existinS.sphalt pavement on colledor street, re@nstrud corner curb ramps as ne@ssary to meet ADAguidelines, replace existingdamaged concrEte infrastrudure, where neessary and install storm drain facilities betueen NSt and PSt Repairdamage and overlayexisting pavementon anerial street, reconstrud comercurb ram!s as necessaryto meetADA n ew traffic signal et intersection. Anticipated to b€ inst.lled by d eveloper with im pad fee cimb ursement agreement lensenAvetoprovidEfordedicatedleftturnlanesinEBandWBdhstion. Reconstructtaffi.signaltoprovidefordedicated turn phasing
Rehabilitate eisting asphah pawment on colledor street, re@nstrud cornercurb rampr as necessaryto meetADAguidelines, existing damaEed concrete infrastrudure, where necessary khabilitaE eisting asphalt pa€ment on colledor street reconstrud corner curb rampr as necessaryto meet ADA guidelines, existing damaged concrete infaastrudure, where necessary eistingasphalt paEment on local street, reconstrud@aner curb ramps as necessaryto meet ADA guidelines, repbe damaged concrete infraBtrudure, where necessary
existingasphalt pavement on local street, aeconstrudaohercurb ramps as necessaryto meetADA guidelines, replace dahaged concrete infrastrudure, where neessary
pavement preventative maintenance projedto include pavement patchin& crackfillingand streetsealing ofexistingstreets exLtingasphalt pavehenton colledor street, reconstrud@rner curb ramps as necssaryto meetADAguidelines, eristing damaged @ncrete infrastrudure, where nec€ssary existingasphalt pavehenton colledor rtreet, reconstrud corner curb ramps as neessaryto meetADAguidelines, existing damaged @ncrete infrastrudure, where necessary existingasphalt pavementon local street reconstrud cornercuft ramps a! necessaryto meetADAEuidelines, replace dameged concrete infrastrudurq where necessry
existingasphalt pavementon local street, reconstrud cornercurb ramps as necessaryto meetADAguideline5, replaae damaged concrete inftastrudurq where necessary
diJtingasphBlt pa€ment on local steet, reconstrud cornercurb ramps as neces5aryto meetADAguidelinas, repbce damaged concrete infrastrudure, where neaessary
eristing asphah pavement on local strcet, reconstrud cornercurb ramps as necessaryto meetADAguidelines, replace damaged rcncrete infrastaudure, where necessary
parement on colledor street aeconstrud cornercurb rampr as necessaryto meetADAguidelines. concrete infrastrudurq where necessary
existing asphah pawmenr on local streel re.onstrud corner curb ramps as neessaryto meetADASuidelines, rcplace damaged concrete infaastrudure, wh€re necesserv
allocatior to make non-projed-related ADA imprdem€nts
allocation to make non-proied-related ridewalk imprMments allocation to make non-projed-related roadway paving mproEments T-48
241

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
PROECT ID PidECre
Plblic Utiliri.r - war.r
w10
w11
w-12
s-9
s-10
s-11
5-12
S13
s-14
s-15
$16
s-17
PRdE6DECNIMON
Drill and develop new produdion well
lnstall pump & motor on Well 2Z constructchlorination buildin& construdall site and fronta8e improvements forwell site Extend water pip€lines in Greenwood and CentElAvenues from City ofSangerto water 5ervie to unincorporated Drill and sampletertwell
Drilland d*lop new produdion well
lnstall pump & moto.on Well 19, consrud chlorin.tion buildin& @nstrud all site and frontage improvemenbforwell iite Drill and sample testwell
Drill and develop new produdion well
lnstall pump & motor on W.ll 28, construdchlorination building, construd all stre and frontage improvements forwell site second 7s0,0ff gallon water storage tank at existing she ofTank No. 3 new 15 acre groundw.ter recharge facility offof Fowler switch Gnal new grcundwater recharEefacilitvoff of C&(orother6nal
ns dupler, rubmeEible sewer pump station and ab.ndon existing lift station 24" diametersewertrunk line to serue new development in Nonhwest and Southwestgrwth areas new swer liftstation to 5erve nry d#lopment in Nodh, Nofthwest and Southwest growth areas 24" diametersewerlrunk lineto serue nw development in North, Nonheastand Southeastgrofrh areas 24" diemetersewertrunk line to sene ns development in North, Noilhwest and Southwert gromh areas 24" diamet€rsewertrunk lineto seru€ new development in North, Nodhwestand Southwest growth areas lS" diameters*ertrunk lineto serue newdevelopment in Nodh and Northeai Erosh ereas lS" diameterswertrunk line to s€rue new development in Nodh and Nodheastgromh area5 lS" diameter swertrunklin€ to s€rue newdevelopment in Nodh and Northeastgrofrh areas lS" diametersilertrunkline to serve new development in North and Nonheastgromh areas 12" d;ametersewer trunk line to serue new development in Nonh and Nodheastgromh areas equipmentto provide forSuperyisoryControl and Data Aquisition (SCADA).apabilities ateach existing and dispose ofexistin8 pond sludge from lined industrial wastewater ponds Digester
12" diameterrewertaunk lineto serue Nodheast area deElopment beveen California and Church Avenuer w-5
w-5
w2
w-3
s"6
s-7
s-8
s-1
s-2
s-3
s-4
s-5
lensen Avenue atthe FowlerSwitch Gnal
lens€n Avenue atthe FowlerSwitch Canal
Nodhwest @rner ofCentral and creenwood Ave
On Greenwood Avenue approx. V4 mile south of
On Greenwood Avenueappror. V4 mile south ot
On cre€nwood Avenue approx. V4 mile south of
0n A@demyAvenue, approx. O.1 mile nonh oI Butler
0n A€demyAvenug approx.0.1 mile no*h of Butler
Cn A.ademyAvenuq approx.0.1 mile nodh of Butler
Church Awnue and J Street
California Aw alignment, west ofAcademyAE
touth 5.nger- bcation TBD
Well 22 - Drillingand Development
Well 22 - Pump, Motorend Site lmprovements
TombstoneTerritoryWaterConnedion PrcjeC
Well 19 - Tesl Well
Well 19- Drillingand oevelopment
Well 19 - Psmp. Motorand Site lmpro€ments
Well28- TestWell
Well 28 - Drilling and Development
Well 28 - Pump, Motorand Sile lmprovements
Iank No.4Construdion
Nodh Sanger Groundwater Recharge Prc.ied
;outh Sanger Groundwater kcharge Projed
iouthwest corner of North and Greenwood AvE
Mus€tAw beween A@dehvand creenwood Ave
\ofrhwert corner of Academy and Mu scat Ave
NewmarkA€ between Nonh Av€ and MuscatAve
Alignment
MusctAve befueen creenwood and B€thel Aw
bthsl Ave betueen Muscat and North Ave
QualityAE beween Church and 4th Street
QualityAve between Church and California
California AE betueen Qualityand Harrison
California A€ betu€en Harrison and Academv
Academy Ave betueen Quality and Woods
AcademyAve between Woods and 5R 180
Domertic Wastewater Pla^t
Church Aw betueen I Street and qualityAve
&thel Ave betueenJenser and Church
North/Greenwood Lift Station Reconstrudion
Musct Awnue 24rr - A@demy to Greenwood
Academy/Muscet Lift Station
NilmarkAGnue 24" - Nodh Aveto MuscatAlignm€nt
MusctAvenue 24r'- Greenwood to Bethel
Bethel Avenue 24" - Mus.at to Nofrh
trualityawnue 18" - Church AEto 4th St
trualityAvenue 1E" - Church to California
:alifornia Avenue 18" - Qualfryto Harrison Alignment
Slifornia Avenue 15" - Harrison to AcademyA€nu€
qddemyAvenue 15" - Qualityto WoodsAvenue
AcadehyAvef,ue 12'r - Woods toState bute 18O
S€wer Une Repair/Replaement at Various Loetions
S4er Lift Station Telemetry
lndustrial Pond Sludge Removal/Disposal
WTP Anaerobic Digestor Rehabilitation
Church Arenue 12" -J Stto QualrtyAw
kthel Avenue 15" Parallel -lensen to church Avenues-f 15" diamet€rsewertrunklinelo serue new developmeftt ih Northwestgrofrh area 242
PROGRAM DESCRIPrlON
PR-1
PR-2
PR-3
PR.4
PR-5
PR.6
PR.7
PR-9
PR.8
G-1
G2
G-3
PS-1
PS-Z
P92
llnrbll landscape improEments in eisting park/ba5in, and install pedeatrian trail along east bankofMedrano Park- 8th Street and TuckerAE Medrano Easin be&een 9th Muscat AG alignment at bthel Ave alignment
MusdtAw alignment at BethelAve alignment
Fallerand FlorenceAvenues
Along FowlerSwitch Cenal betueen lensen and Bethel
lensen Av€nue east of FowlerSwitch Gnal Crossing
lensen Avenue.t FowlerSwitch Anal
Along FMlerSwitch Canel beveen Bethel and
memorial facililies, expan
Southwes Regional Park bnd Acquisition
Southw€st Regional Pa.k Dewlopment
Cesar Chaw2 Park Lighting Prcied
FowlerSwir.h Gnal Biqcle/tudestrian T.ail Improvements - Bethel ,ensen Av€nue Pedestrian lmprovements- FS Canal to B.thel (excludes FS Canal Brid8e)
lensen Av€nue Pedestrian Crossing of FowlerSwitch Canal Fowler Switch Canal Bi$le/Pedestrian Trail lmprovemenb - bthel Medrano Park lmprovemenB
Jeterans Memorial Plaza -Phas€ 2 and 3 lmprovemenB
purchase propertyforns l&acre regional park
Develop lG.cre regional park
lnstallspors lightingat.xistiogparkso@rfields
birycle & ppdestrian trail adjacent to Fdler Switch Can.l to @nnectJensen and Bethel A€nucs sidewalkalong north side oflensen Av€ where missing
pedestfian crossing of FdlerSwitch Gnal along nofth side ofJensen Awnue birycle & pedestrian trail adjacentto FowlerSwitch Canal to conned Bethel and Grcenwood Avenues parkinfrastrudurq trail lightins gazebo, and spofrs park Center Roof
eisting parking lot paving in Civic Cenrer main parking lot offof 7th Street solararraF and eledrical connedions at Cilicenter
remodel ofexisting Fire St.tion building in Fire Depadm€nt hmodel ofa Police aft storage area on the campus ofthe existing police headquafreG buildingto add storage capacity, rcldate exisfinA facilities b enlarge the locker CommunityCenter Roof
lco.runw ent", -
lcommunty &nter- 730 kcreation AveCity Hall Main Parking Lot Repairi lsanger
city Hall - 1700 7th street:idc &nter Solar ln5bllation Firc Depanment Headquaners
Police oepadment Headquaft ers
Polie Depadment H6adquadPrs
FireStation tumodel
Public Safu ty 6mmunications Center
Polie Station kpans:on/Up8rade
243
For the Meeting of: Apn16,2023
Agenda Item No. 3r-
CrrY oF SINGER
REPORT TO THE CIry COUNCIL
To:

From:

Subject:

Mayor and Councilmembers
John Mulligan, Public Works Director
Approve Award of Consulting Engineer Agreement for Community Development Block Grant Projects Services
Attachment:

1. Agreement
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award a Consulting Engineer Agreement for Community Block Grant Project Services to Yamabe & Horn Engineering, Inc.; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement on behalf of the City.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City is required to issue a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) every three years for Consulting Engineer Services for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) project services. On September 26,2022 City staff released the RFQ to nine engineering hrms. One firm replied to the RFQ with Statement of Qualifications. City staff reviewed the documents and interviewed a representative principal engineer from the firm. The RFQ is based solely upon qualifications. Yamabe & Horn Engineering, Inc. was the only respondent and is found to be qualified for the three-year services agreement. Staff also reviewed the fee schedule and found the fee amounts fair and acceptable.

Pteoared bv: lohn Mullisan Approved by:

REVIEW: City Finance: Citv Attornev:

TYPE OF ITEM: COUNCILACTION: APPROVED DENIED NOACTION
x
X
Consent
Info Item
Action Item
Depattment Report
Redevelopment Agency
Public Hearing
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to:
244
BACKGROUND:

The City of Sanger receives CDBG allocations annually and utilizes the funds for qualified projects within the City per the City Council's direction. Fresno County administers the program and follows the strict guidelines of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). One of the requirements is that the City, as an active recipient of the funds, must perform a search for a qualified consulting engineer by releasing an RFQ every three years. These services are outside of the regular contractual services provided by the City Engineer. It is noted that City Engineer Josh Rogers and members of Yamabe & Horn recused themselves from the RFP process including the development of the RFP, its issuance, and the review of the proposal received.

The City of Sanger issued a RFQ for Community Development Block Grant Projects Consulting Engineering Services for Fiscal Years 202212023,202312024,202412025 on Septemb er 26,2022. The RFQ first was reviewed and approved by the Community Development Division of the Fresno County Department of Public Works and Planning on September 12,2022.

The RFQ was sent to nine firms all located in the Central Valley on September 26,2022. Each hrm was given until October 18, 2022 to respond. The City received only one response and the firm met the required qualifi cations and experience.

City staff has reviewed the Statement of Qualifications of the responding firm and found that the firm meets all of the requirements and is qualified to provide the requested services. The firm of Yamabe & Hom Engineering, Inc. was selected as the most qualified and experienced for the role as Consulting Engineer for CDBG projects. The City has negotiated pricing and finds the pricing fair and acceptable.

The City then requested review of the process and the approval of Fresno County to enter into final contract negotiations and seek City Council approval of the contract which was completed January 17, 2023.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The city review process found Yamabe and Hom Engineering, Inc. to be qualified for the proposed serviced as outlined in the RFQ. The findings were verified and approved by the administering agency Fresno County.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The services provided under this agreement are all funded by the CDBG proceeds. The actual amount is determined on a project by project basis. In the event that the project that is approved by the City Council exceeds the CDBG allofrnent of funds, then the appropriate amount to be allocated to engineering services will be identified in the approved project estimates.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council can reject the staff s recommendation and direct Staff to recirculate another RFQ

LLOWING APPROVAL
The agreement will be executed, subject to the consultant providing the required insurance information. 245
AT'TACHME,NT 1
246

CITY OF SANGER

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Consultant Services Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into between the CITY OF SANGER, a Califomia general law city ("City") and Yamabe & Horn Engineering, Inc. ("Consultant"). This Agreement shall be effective on the date signed by City which shall occur after execution by Consultant ("Effective Date").

RECITALS
A. City has sought, by a Request for Proposals, to select a consultant to provide Consulting Engineer Services on CDBG projects every three years.

B. Consultant submitted a proposal for performing the requested Services and is engaged in the business of furnishing such services as a consultant and hereby warrants and represents that it is qualified, licensed, and professionally capable of performing the Services called for in the Request for Qualifications and this Agreement.

C. City has selected Consultant to perform the requested Services on the basis of Consultant's demonstrated competence and professional qualifi cations.

D. City desires to retain Consultant, and Consultant desires to provide City with the Services, on the terms and conditions as set forth in this Agreement.

NOW' THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual agreements herein, City and Consultant agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Scope of Services. Consultant shall perform, to the satisfaction of City in accordance with this Agreement, the Services described in the "Scope of Services" set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, and as may be revised by mutual agreement of the parties. Consultant warrants that it is qualified to perform the Services under this Agreement.

Consultant shall be familiar with and shall comply with all State and Federal laws and regulations applicable to the work to be performed under this Agreement.

2. Commencement of Services; Term of Agreement. Consultant shall commence the Services upon City's issuance of a written "Notice to Proceed" and shall continue with the Services until Consultant, as determined by City, has satisfactorily performed and completed the Services, or until such time as the Agreement is terminated by either party in accordance with this Agreement, whichever is earlier.
(a) Continuity of Personnel. Consultant shall make every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of Consultant's staff and subcontractors assigned to perform the Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall noti$ City of any changes in Consultant's staff and subcontractors assigned to perform the Services under this Agreement. (b) Additional Services. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to or outside of those set 1 247
forth in this Agreement or listed in Exhibit "A," unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager of City. Consultant shall be compensated for any such additional services in the amounts and in the manner agreed to by the City and Consultant.

3. Compensation for Services. City shall compensate Consultant for rendering the Services as follows:
(a) Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay Consultant per monthly invoice. Sole compensation for satisfactory performance of all services required or rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be in accordance with the Fee Schedule set forth in Exhibit '68" and incorporated herein by reference. Both parties agree that timing for completion shall be agreed upon between City and Consultant to meet the requirements of City (b) Each month Consultant shall invoice City for all work performed and expenses incurred during the preceding month. The invoice shall detail charges by the following categories: labor (by subcategory), travel, materials, equipment, supplies, and sub-consultant contracts. (c) City shall independently review each invoice submitted by the Consultant to determine whether the work performed and expenses incurred are in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. The invoiced amount shall be paid within 30 calendar days unless City disputes any charges or expenses. If any charges or expenses are disputed, City shall pay the undisputed amount, and notify Consultant of the nature and amount of the disputed charge or expense. The parties shall seek to resolve the disputed items(s) by mutual agreement.

4. Independent Contractor Status. Consultant and its subcontractors shall perform the Services as independent contractors and not as officers, employees, agents or volunteers of City. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed to create any contractual relationship between City and Consultant's employees or subcontractors, nor shall anything contained in this Agreement be deemed to give any third party, including but not limited to Consultant's employees or subcontractors, any claim or right of action against City.

5. Standard of Care. Consultant represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities necessary to properly perform the services required under this Agreement in a thorough, competent and professional manner. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of its ability, experience and talent, perform all services described herein. In meeting its obligations under this Agreement, Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing services similar to those required of Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant represents that to the extent Consultant utilizes subcontractors, such subcontractors are, and will be, qualified in their fields. Consultant also expressly represents that both Consultant and its subcontractors, if any, are now, and will be throughout their perforrnance of the Services under this Agreement, properly licensed or otherwise qualified and authorized to perform the Services required and contemplated by this Agreement.

Consultant and its subcontractors, if any, shall utilize the standard of care and skill customarily exercised by members of their profession, shall use reasonable diligence and best judgment while performing the Services, and shall comply with and keep themselves informed of all applicable laws and regulations.

6. Identitv of Subcontractors and Sub-Consultants. Consultant shall, before commencing any work under this Agreement, provide to City in writing: (a) the identity of all subcontractors and sub-consultants (collectively referred to as "subcontractors"), if any, Consultant intends to utilize in 2 248
Consultant's performance of this Agreement; and (b) a detailed description of the full scope of work to be provided by such subcontractors. Consultant shall only employ subcontractors pre-approved by City and in no event shall Consultant replace an approved subcontractor without the advance written permission of City, with the understanding that City's permission will not be unreasonably withheld.

Notwithstanding any other provisions in this Agreement, Consultant shall be liable to City for the performance of Consultant's subcontractors.

7. Subcontractor Provisions. Consultant shall include in its written agreements with its subcontractors, if any, provisions which: (a) impose upon the subcontractors the obligation to provide to City the same insurance and indemnity obligations that Consultant owes to City; (b) make clear that City intends to rely upon the reports, opinions, conclusions and other work product prepared and performed by subcontractors for Consultant; and (c) entitle City to impose upon subcontractors the assignment rights found elsewhere in this Agreement.
8 on Behalf of Ci Consultant shall not have any right, power, or authority to create any obligation, express or implied, or make representations on behalf of City except as may be expressly authorized in advance in writing from time to time by City and then only to the extent of such authorization.

9. Record Keeping: Reports. Consultant shall keep complete records showing the type of Services performed. Consultant shall be responsible and shall require its subcontractors to keep similar records. City shall be given reasonable access to the records of Consultant and its subcontractors for inspection and audit pu{poses. Consultant shall provide City with a working draft of all reports and five (5) copies of all final reports prepared by Consultant under this Agreement.

10. Ownership and Inspection of Documents. All data, tests, reports, documents, conclusions, opinions, recommendations and other work product generated by or produced for Consultant or its subcontractors in connection with the Services, regardless of the medium, including physical drawings and materials recorded on computer discs ("Work Product"), shall be and remain the property of City. City shall have the right to use, copy, modi$, and reuse the Work Product as it sees fit. Upon City's request, Consultant shall make available for inspection and copying all such Work Product and all Work Product shall be turned over to City promptly at City's request or upon termination of this Agreement, whichever occurs first. Consultant shall not release any Work Product to third parties not already presented to the Sanger City Council without prior written approval of the City Manager. This obligation shall survive termination of this Agreement and shall survive for four (4) years from the date of expiration or termination of this Agreement.

11. Confidentiality. All data, reports, conclusions, opinions, recommendations and other work product prepared and performed by and on behalf of Consultant in connection with the Services performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be kept confidential and shall be disclosed only to City, unless otherwise provided by law or expressly authorized by City. Consultant shall not disclose or permit the disclosure of any confidential information acquired during performance of the Services, except to its agents, employees, affiliates, and subcontractors who need such confidential information in order to properly perform their duties relative to this Agreement. Consultant shall also require its subcontractors to be bound to these confidentiality provisions.

12. City Name and Logo. Consultant shall not use City's name or insignia, photographs relating to the City projects for which Consultant's services are rendered, or any publicity pertaining to the Consultant's seryices under this Agreement in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of City. aJ
249

13. Conflicts of Interest. Consultant warrants that neither Consultant nor any of its employees have an interest, present or contemplated, in the Services. Consultant further warrants that neither Consultant nor any of its employees have real property, business interests or income that will be affected by the Services. Consultant covenants that no person having any such interest, whether an employee or subcontractor shall perform the Services under this Agreement. During the performance of the Services, Consultant shall not employ or retain the services of any person who is employed by the City or a member of any City Board or Commission. City understands and acknowledges that Consultant is, as of the date of execution of this Agreement, independently involved in the performance of non-related services for other governmental agencies and private parties. Consultant is unaware of any stated position of City relative to such projects. Any future position of City on such projects shall not be considered a conflict of interest for purposes of this section. City understands and acknowledges that Consultant will, perfonn non-related services for other governmental agencies and private parties following the completion of the Services under this Agreement, and any such future service shall not be considered a conflict of interest for purposes of this section.

14. Non-liability of Ofhcers and Employees. No officer or employee of City shall be personally liable to Consultant, or any successors in interest, in the event of a default or breach by City for any amount which may become due Consultant or its successor, or for any breach of any obligation under the terms of this Agreement.

15. City Right to Employ Other Consultants. This Agreement is non-exclusive with Consultant.

City reserves the right to employ other consultants in connection with the Services.

16. Termination of Agreement. This Agreement shall terminate upon completion of the Services, or earlier pursuant to the following.
a. Termination by City: Without Cause. This Agreement may be terminated by City at its discretion upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to Consultant. b. Termination by City or Consultant: For Cause. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon twenty (20) days prior written notice to the other party of a material breach, and a failure to cure within that time period.
c. to Consultant U In the event termination is not due to fault attributable to Consultant and provided all other conditions for payment have been met, Consultant shall be paid compensation for services performed prior to notice of termination. As to any phase partially performed but for which the applicable portion of Consultant's compensation has not become due, Consultant shall be paid the reasonable value of its services provided. However, in no event shall such payment when added to any other payment due under the applicable part of the work exceed the total compensation of such part as specified in Section 3 herein. In the event of termination due to Consultant's failure to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of City, City may withhold an amount that would otherwise be payable as an offset to City's damages caused by such failure.
d. Effect of Termination. Upon receipt of a termination notice (or completion of this Agreement), Consultant shall: (i) promptly discontinue all Services affected (unless the notice directs otherwise); and (ii) deliver or otherwise make available to the City, without additional compensation, all data, documents, procedures, reports, estimates, summaries, and such other information and 4 250
materials as may have been accumulated by the Consultant in performing this Agreement, whether completed or in process. Following the termination of this Agreement for any reason whatsoever, City shall have the right to utilize such information and other documents, or any other works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to physical drawings, data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer disks, or other writings prepared or caused to be prepared under this Agreement by Consultant. Consultant may not refuse to provide such writings or materials for any reason whatsoever.

17. Insurance. Consultant shall obtain and maintain in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement the insurance policies set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. All insurance policies shall be subject to City approval as to form and content.

Consultant shall provide City with copies of required certificates of insurance upon request.

18. Indemnitv and Defense. Consultant hereby agrees to indemnifu, defend and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against all claims, demands, causes of action, actions, damages, losses, expenses, and other liabilities, (including without limitation reasonable attorney fees and costs of litigation) of every nature arising out of the acts, elrors, or omissions constituting negligence, gross negligence, willful misconduct or fraud of Consultant or its subcontractors relating to the performance of Services described herein. Consultant's duty to defend and indemnifu City shall not extend to injuries or damages that are the result of City's sole negligence or willful misconduct.

Consultant's duty to defend shall immediately arise when a claim is asserted and/or a lawsuit is initiated against the City arising out of or occurring in connection with the acts, errors, or omissions constituting negligence, gross negligence, fraud or willful misconduct of Consultant or its subcontractors relating to the performance of Services described herein and regardless of whether others may owe the City a duty of defense andlor indemnity. Consultant and City agree that said indemnity and defense obligations shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement for any items specified herein that arose or occurred during the term of this Agreement for a period of two (2) years.

19. Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any duties or obligations hereunder shall be assignable by Consultant without the prior written consent of City. In the event of an assignment to which City has consented, the assignee shall agree in writing to personally assume and perform the covenants, obligations, and agreements herein contained. In addition, Consultant shall not assign the payment of any monies due Consultant from City under the terms of this Agreement to any other individual, corporation or entity. City retains the right to pay any and all monies due Consultant directly to Consultant.

20. Form and S of Notices. All notices required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered, or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid and retum receipt requested, or sent by email provided confirmation is received from the other party, addressed as follows:

Tim Chapa
City of Sanger
1700 7th Street
1700 7th Street
To Consultant: Josh Rogers
Yamabe & Horn
Engineering, Inc.
2985 Burl Avenue
5 To City:
251
Sanger, Cl^93637
Email : [email protected]. ca. us
Fresno, CA93727
Email : [email protected]
Notice shall be deemed effective on the date personally delivered or transmitted by facsimile, or if mailed, three (3) days after deposit of the same in the custody of the United States Postal Service.

21. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the attachments, represents the entire Agreement between City and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral with respect to the subject matter herein. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both City and Consultant.

22. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit ofthe parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.

23. Authority. The signatories to this Agreement warrant and represent that they have the legal right, power, and authority to execute this Agreement and bind their respective entities.

24. Severability. In the event any term or provision of this Agreement is declared to be invalid or illegal for any reason, this Agreement will remain in full force and effect and will be interpreted as though such invalid or illegal provision were not apart of this Agreement. The remaining provisions will be construed to preserve the intent and purpose of this Agreement and the parties will negotiate in good faith to modifu any invalidated provisions to preserve each party's anticipated benefits.

25. Applicable Law and Interpretation and Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The language of all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against either party. This Agreement is entered into by City and Consultant in the County of Fresno, California.

Consultant shall perform the Services required under this Agreement in the County of Fresno, California. Thus, in the event of litigation, venue shall only lie with the appropriate state or federal court in Fresno County.

26. Attorneys Fees. If either party is required to commence any proceeding or legal action to enforce or interpret any term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such proceeding or action shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorneys' fees and legal expenses.

27. Amendments and Waiver. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended in any way, and no provision shall be waived, except in writing signed by the parties hereto. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed, or shall constitute, a waiver of any other provision, whether or not similar, nor shall any such waiver constitute a continuing or subsequent waiver of the same provision. Failure of either party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of the right to compel enforcement of the remaining provisions of this Agreement.

28. Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to confer any rights upon any party not a signatory to this Agreement.

29. Execution in Counterparts This Agreement may be executed in counterparts such that the signatures may appear on separate signature pages. A copy or an original, with all signatures appended together, shall be deemed a fully executed Agreement. 6 252

30. Non-Discrimination. Consultant shall not discriminate on the basis of any protected class under federal or State law in the provision of the Services or with respect to any Consultant employees or applicants for employment. Consultant shall ensure that any subcontractors are bound to this provision. A protected class, includes, but is not necessarily limited to race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation,marital status, and disability.

31. Compliance with All Laws. In providing the services required under this Agreement, Consultant shall at all times comply with all applicable laws of the United States, the State of California, and with all applicable regulations promulgated by federal, state, regional, or local administrative and regulatory agencies, now in force and as they may be enacted, issued, or amended during the term of this Agreement.

Now, therefore, the City and Consultant have executed this Agreement on the date(s) set forth below

YAMABE & HORN
ENGINEERING, INC. CITY OF SANGER
By By
Josh Rogers, P.E. Tim Chapa, City Manager
Date: Date:

Attachments
Exhibit 664."
- Scope of Services (RFQ -9126122)
Exhibit ('B"
- Fee Schedule
Exhibit "C" - Insurance
7 253
EXHIBIT 66A''

SCOPE OF SERVICES
(RFQ -et26t22)
8 254
CIry OF SANGER

REQUEST FOR QUALI FICATIONS
Consulting Engineer Selection Process for
County of Fresno
Community Development Block Projects
F I SCAL YEARS 2022-2023, 2023-2024, 2024-2025
John Mulligan
Public Works Director
City of Sanger
ITOO 7rh Street
Sanger, CA 93657
DATE RELEASED - September 26,2022
255

CIW OF SANGER

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
CONSULTING ENGINEER: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROJECTS The City of Sanger is issuing this Request for Qualifications for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) project engineering services for Fiscal Years 2022-2023 through 2024-2025. The City will use annual CDBG funds for various applicable projects such as infrastructure, public facility improvements and special economic development.

The City of Sanger is requesting Statements of Qualifications from qualified engineering firms to perform the design including CEQA and NEPA compliance, bidding, construction review/inspection and federal aid administration services required to complete the projects in conformance with CDBG requirements and subject to State and Federal regulations and law. The City intends to select one (1) firm to provide contract services for a maximum period of three (3) years. Services are to include securing all necessary permits including CEQA and NEPA compliance, surveying, testing, preparation of plans and specifications, description of construction phasing plan, estimate of probable construction costs, preparation of bid documents, review of construction contract bids, recommendation for award, construction inspection, and review and construction administration.

The project(s) will be CDBG-funded with possible matching State and local funds and these services shall be in accordance with Federal, State, and localstandards and regulations.

The Statement of Qualifications will be evaluated based on the qualifications and experience of the engineering firm, and subject to negotiation of fair and reasonable compensation. Statement of Qualifications is to include:
' Firm name, contact person, address, telephone and fax numbers, and email address. - Type of organization (individual, partnership, or corporation). . Firm principal(s) and key personnel who will be responsible for the contract, their education, credentials and experience.
- Present staff - number and classification.
' List of relevant project experience in the past five years, including location and type of project. Provide the name and telephone number of a reference for each project listed. . List any previous relevant experience with the City of Sanger, ' lndicate familiarity with Community Development Block Grant funding procedures. - Current fee schedule in a sealed envelope.

RFQ-Consulting Engineer: Community Development Block Grant Projects l P a g e L 256
Final selection of the engineering firm is subject to approval by the County of Fresno. lnterested firms are encouraged to contact the City of Sanger Public Works Director, John Mulligan, by email to [email protected]. All questions or inquiries regarding the RFQ should be addressed in writing and must be sent by email to John Mulligan. Written responses to all questions will be provided to all firms who have received the proposal materials.

To be considered, responding firms must provide five (5) copies of the Statement of Qualifications and deliver no later than 4:00 PM on Tuesdav, October 18, 2022.

All responses to this RFQ shall be submitted to:

City of Sanger
17007th Street
Sanger, CA 93657
Attn: City Clerk
Email responses will not be accepted. Late responses will not be accepted or considered. The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals submitted.

All materials received become the property of the City of Sanger and may be subject to public records request.

The Citywill evaluate all RFQ's and make a selection of the top firm based upon the best response to the RFQ. The City, at its discretion, may elect to hold interviews. Proposers will be notified in writing of the date and time of interviews should one be scheduled. The City will notify the selected firm via letter. The City Councilwill approve the contract with the top firm at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting within sixty (60) calendar days after the proposal due date.

RFQ-Consulting Engineer: Community Development BlockGrant Projects I P a g e 2 257
EXHIBIT 558''

FEE SCHEDULE
9 258
YAMABE & HORN ENGINEERING, INC.

CIVIL ENGINEERS - LAND SURVEYORS
2985 N BurlAvenue, Suite 101, Fresno, CA93727
(559) 244-3123, FAX (559',1 244-3t2O
2022123 FEE SCHEDUTE
PRINCIPAL ENGINEER..

EXPERT WITNESS....
ctvlL ENGTNEER V...............

CIVIL ENGINEER IV.........

CIVIL ENGINEER III

CIVIL ENGINEER II

CIVIL ENGINEER I

PROJECT MANAGER II

PROJECT MANAGER I
ASSTSTANT ENGTNEER ilt ...............

ASSTSTANT ENGTNEER il ................

ASSTSTANT ENGTNEER I .................

LAND SURVEYOR II

LAND SURVEYOR I
cAD MANAGER...............

CAD DRAFTER II.......

CAD DRAFTER I

CLERICAL
2-PERSON SURVEY CREW PREVAILING WAGE
I-PERSON SURVEY CREW PREVAILING WAGE...

TRAVEL
...............S 130 per hour
...............S 125 per hour
...............S 140 per hour
...S r+s per hour
$ t75 per hour
S ZSS per hour
$ 155 per hour
$ 150 per hour
$ 130 per hour
5 115 per hour
$ 110 per hour
$ 100 per hour
ASSTSTANT SURVEYOR il.................

ASSTSTANT SURVEYOR 1..................

GlS TECHNICIAN
coNSTRUCflON MANAGER il ...........
coNSTRUCT|ON MANAGER I ................

PROJECT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR....

INSPECTOR II PREVAILING WAGE.....

INSPECTOR I PREVAILING WAGE.....
...............S rao
...............s 120
...............S us
...............S ros
...............s 110
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
per hour
S roo
s 13s
S rzs
Seo
5 reo
..............S rso
..............s 10s
""""......S gs
..................S es per hour
..................S 70 perhour
$ 250 per hour
$ 170 per hour
S0.SA per mile
PRINTING... Cost plus 10%
Fee schedule is effective through December 3L,2022 and may be adjusted each year after at a rate of 2to 5o/o,
Note: Prevailing wage rates are shown for Fresno County. The Prevailing Wage rates will vary depending on the County where the work is performed.
259
A.

EXHIBIT (C)'

INSURANCE
Insurance Requirements
i. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, including without limitation, blanket contractual liability. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. Consultant's general liability policies shall be endorsed using Insurance Services Office form CG 20I0 (or equivalent) to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, and agents shall be additional insureds under such policies. For construction projects, an endorsement providing completed operations coverage for the additional insured, ISO form CG 20 37 (or equivalent), is also required.
ii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies by Consultant shall not affect coverage provided by the City.
iii. Coverage shall state that Consultant insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insurer's liability.
iv. Coverage shall contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City.

Business Automobile Liability
i. Consultant shall provide auto liability coverage for owned, non-owned, and hired autos using ISP Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 0l (or equivalent) with a limit of no less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per accident.

Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability
i. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employers' Liability Insurance with limits of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000).

Consultant shall submit to City, along with the certificate of insurance, a waiver of subrogation endorsement in favor of City, its offlrcers, agents, employees, and volunteers.

D. All Coverages
i. Each insurance policy required by the agreement shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled, or reduced in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice has been given to the City, except that ten (10) days' prior written notice shall apply in the event of cancellation for nonpayment of premium. ii. All self-insurance, self-insured retentions, and deductibles must be declared and approved by the City.
iii. Evidence of Insurance - Prior to commencement of work, the Consultant shall furnish the City with certificates, additional insured endorsements, and waivers of subrogation evidencing compliance with the insurance requirements above. The Consultant must agree to provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies of requested by the City.
iv. Acceptability of Insurers - Insurance shall be placed with insurers admitted in the State of Califomia with an AM Best rating of A- VII or higher.

B
C
10 260
For the Meeting of: April 6, 2023
Agenda Item No.:
:I-i

CITY OF SANGER

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
To: Mayor and the City Council
From: John Mulligan, Public Works Director
Subject: Consideration of Water and Sewer Rate Study and Initiation of Proposition 218 Process
Attachments:

1. Existing and proposed water rates

2. Existing and proposed wastewater rates

3. Water and Sewer Rate Study Report (Draft)

4. Memorandum from AM Consulting Engineers

5. Resolution No. ,2..:,�.3-1 <o
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staffrecommends that the Council Adopt Resolution No;za:23-1 lo Accepting the Rate Study Relating to Water and Sewer Rates; Authorizing Required Actions Under Proposition 218; and Setting a Proposition 218 Public Hearing Date
To June 15, 2023 To Consider Rate Increases.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council
approved awarding the water and sewer rate study work to IGService on April 21, 2022. Work has been progressing over the months and is now complete. The rate study is included with this staff report.

Overall water revenue needs to be increased mainly to cover costs for compliance with the Sustainable Ground Water Management Act (SGMA). The proposed revenue increases are twenty percent in year one, ten percent in year two, then four percent for each year, three through five.

Prepared by: J oho Mullig'<ln Approved by: _________ _
REVIEW: City Manager: __ _ Finance: __ _ City Attorney: __ _ TYPE OF ITEM:

Consent
Info Item
_x_ Action Item
_x_ Department Report
Redevelopment Agency
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION
Public Hearing
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Other
Continued to: ___ _
261
Overall wastewater revenue needs to be increased to keep up with inflation and provide funding for an estimated $11.8 million in deferred maintenance and repair at the wastewater treatment plant. (See included memorandum from AM Consulting Engineers). The proposed revenue increases are four percent each year for five years.

The significant finding of the work is that for both water and wastewater, domestic (residential and commercial) revenue has been subsidizing industrial costs of service. The result is that industrial rates are increased much more than domestic. In fact, for wastewater, domestic rates are held mostly constant.

Existing and proposed water and wastewater rates are the first two attachments to this staff report.

BACKGROUND:

Water and wastewater (and refuse) are "enterprise funds" operated by the city. Accordingly, they are operated as businesses, such that revenue is adequate to cover expenses, and further, that general fund income is not diverted to keep enterprise funds whole. The City Council has the authority to adjust enterprise funds rates through the Proposition 218 process, whereas general fund increases typically come through a vote of the people to increase taxes. Proposition 218 requires that rates are set proportional to the cost to serve each customer class, that customers are sent notices with reasoning and the opportunity to protest, and that a rate hearing is set to count protests. The analysis in the rate study provides the city the reasoning needed to adjust rates.

The last water and wastewater rate changes for the city were over 15 years ago. Remarkably, revenue from the previous rates has been mostly adequate to cover expenses over the years; however, many deferred maintenance projects exist, especially at the wastewater plant. Further, for the water enterprise, compliance with SGMA is expensive, as discussed below.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Reasoning for the recommended rate changes is summarized below.

1. The proposed rates create revenue equity across customer classes.

2. Revenue must be increased for water primarily to cover SGMA costs, fully one-third of present revenue over each of the next five years.

3. Revenue from wastewater must be increased to keep up with inflation.

4. Industrial wastewater revenue must be increased to cover a cost component for $11.8 million in deferred maintenance and improvements (but not expansion).

5. Revenue from both water and wastewater must be adequate to cover expenses and meet bond covenant requirements, specifically the debt service coverage requirement that net revenue must be 20 percent higher than the annual debt service payments. (This is not projected to happen for water during FY23.)
FISCAL IMPACT:

Projected revenue, expenses, and fund balances for water and wastewater are shown on pages 29 and 34, respectively, of the attached rate study. The twenty percent increase in water revenue in the first year, FY23-24, increases overall water revenue $618,000, which is necessary to cover projected expenses and 262
assure compliance with bond covenants. The rate study identified inequities in how the rates are applied to the different classes. Therefore, in FY23-24 rates are adjusted to spread the volumetric charges equally to each class. For the FY23-24 the fixed rates will have no increase. However, the volumetric rates are adjusted twenty-nine percent for residential, twenty percent for schools, and one hundred sixty-one percent for industrials. There are no FY23-24 volumetric rates increases for multi-family or commercial. The remaining four years of the planning period will have a ten percent, four percent, four percent, and four percent adjustments to both volume and fixed charges for all classes.

The four percent increase for wastewater revenue in the first year increases revenue $210,000, again to cover expenses and assure compliance with bond covenants. This is achieved by not raising residential, multi-family, schools, or commercial and netting the difference against the rate increase to the industrials.

After the rates are adjusted in FY23-24 for industrials, there will be no increase to rates for the other classes until FY27/28 which will be four percent to cover inflation. The industrial rates will increase four percent each of the four remaining years of the planning period.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council may elect not to approve issuance of the rate notice, requesting one of more of the following steps.

1. Request staff for more information, as specified by City Council.

2. Request additional coordination with industrial customers.

3. Request adjustments to rate changes considering cost of service equity in doing so.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

With City Council approval, the plan is to send the Proposition 218-compliant notice by April 20th, separate from customer billing statements or shortly thereafter. This will allow at least 45 days before the proposed City Council rate hearing on Thursday June 15th as required by Proposition 218. The new rates are proposed to be effective for the billing cycle that is late June to late July, such that customers will receive their first bills with the revised rates in August. 263
ATTACHMENT 1
City of Sanger Water Rates and Charges
Current Rales
711/2023
Proposed Rates
7nn024 7t1t2025
't0% 40/o
$0.61
$1.01
$1.56
$1.56
$1.56
$1.02
$1.51
$1.02
$1.69
7hn026 7t1t2027
4o/o 4%Volumetric Rates ($/TG)
All Single-Family
UptoOTG
6to30TG
30 to 100 TG
100 to 500 TG
Abot€ 500 TG
Multi-Family (All Volumes)
(All Volumes)
Commercial (All Volumes)
lnd/Food Processing (All Volumes)
Fixed Monthly Charges ($/Mo)
Single-Family
Qualiling Low lncome
5/8 x3/4" meter
1" meter
All Other Customers
5/8 x3/4" meter
1" meter

1.5" meter
2" meter
3" tt/leter
4" l\reter
6" ltrleler
8" l\Ieter
E(isting Customers Without Meters
$0.6s
$1.05
$1.62
$1.62
$1.62
$1.06
$1.57
$1.06
$1.76
$0.66
$1.09
$1.68
$1.68
$1.68
$1.10
$1.63
$1.10
$1.83
Effective
7 t't t2010
$0.43
$0.71
$1.10
$1 .16
$1.29
$0.93
$1.14
$0.93
$0.s9
$ 10.19
$12.46
$24.27
$12.46
$24.27
$62.32
$99.69
$186.92
$31 1.53
$623.06
$1,090.34
$34.63
Percent
Change
29o/o
294/o
290k
0o/o
20%
0%
161%
New Rate
$0.55
$0.92
$1.42
$'l.42
$1.42
$0.93
$1.37
$0.93
$1.54
$10.19
$12.46
$24.27
$12.46
$24.27
$62.32
$99.69
$186.92
$311.53
$623.06
$1,090.34
0%
0o/o
0o/o
0o/o
0o/o
0%
0o/o
ta/o
0o/o
0%
0o/o
10%
$11.21
$ 13.71
$26.70
$ 13.71
$26.70
$68.55
$109.66
$205.61
$342.68
$685.37
$1 ,199.37
$11.66
$14.26
$27.77
$14.26
$27.77
$71,29
$114.05
$2 1 3.83
$356.39
$712.78
$'t,247.34
$12.13
$14.83
$28.88
$14.83
$28.88
$74.14
$1 18.61
$222.38
$370.65
$741 .29
$1 ,297.23
$0.6e
$1.13
$1.75
$1.75
$1.7s
$1.14
$1.70
$1"14
$1.90
$ 12.62
$15.42
$30.04
$15.42
$30.04
$77.11
$123.35
$231.28
$385.48
$770.94
$1 ,349.12
$38.09 $41 .90 $43.58 $45.32 $47.13
Notes:

Customers outside the citylimits were previouslycharged a premium forseMce. This additional charge is remoled in the proposed rates.

Thesingle-familytieredratesarepresentlyapplicabletoall customers,e)ceptthatabove500TGforindustrial is$0.51 perTG. Vvftere'Al Volumes" isindicatedforCurrentRates,thevaluesshownaretheaverageoftheexistingtieredrateschargedforeachcustomergroup. Tieredratesare elim inated, e)cept br single-fam ily.

The mim im um meter s ize presently instialled is 1 inch. The smaller 5/8" x 3/4" m eters are no longer installed.

Qualifying Low lncome customers recei\ie the first 6 TG ftee of charge, then pay beginning with the 6 - 30 TG rate. 264
City of Sanger Present and Proposed Senrer Rates
tuoposedTl'1127
Change Rr f\ronth
4o/o $37.32
4o/o $41.45
Mnirum
i/bnthly
$41.4s
$41.4s
$41.4s
$/IG
$3.78
$4.33
$4.89
4o/o
4%
40h
Er Student per lvlonth
Oo/o
Oo/o
$1.00
$1.4s
tit"
4%
4o/o
$2.502
$223.48
s335.97
lStes:
lndustrial rates are set based on polable w ater nEtered, w hich is 14 percent higher ihan ndered influent into the w astarv aler plant based on Fy21f22.

Proposed 7rl126
Change rer lbnlh
$3s.88
$39.86
ook
0%o
MnimJm
wlonthly
$39.86
$39.86
$39.86
$/IG
OYo
0o/o
Oo/o
$3.63
$4.16
$4.70
Fr Student per ltontl
Oo/o
o%
$1.00
$1.45
4Yo
4o/o
4o/o
$2.405
$214.88
$323.04
Proposed 7/1/25
Change Er Month
Oo/"
Oo/o
$35.88
$39.86
Mninum
lvbnthly
$39.86
$39.86
$39.86
$/TG
0%
Oo/o
0o/o
$3.63
$4.16
$4.70
fur Student per Month
io
Qo/o
$1.00
$1 .45
4Yo
4o/o
4o/"
$2.313
$206.62
$310.62
Proposed 711124
Change
Oo/o
Oo/o
rur ilbnth
$3s.88
$39.86
Mnimrm
libnthly
$39.86
$39.86
$39.86
$/TG
0%
Oo/o
OYo
$3.63
$4.16
$4.70
rur Student per tlronlh
Oo/o
Oo/o
$1.00
$1.45
4o/o
4%
4o/o
$2.224
$198.67
$298.67
Proposed Z1l23
Change hr lvbnth
$35.88
$39.86
0o/o
lYo
Mnirum
wbnthly
$39.86
$39.86
$39.86
$/TG
0o/o
Oo/o
Oo/o
$3.63
$4.16
$4.70
rer Sludent per Month
- Ended
- Ended
- $1.00
Qo/o $1.45
72Yo
298o/o
148Yo
Ended
$2.14
$191.03
$287.19
Present
Rr lvlonth
$35.88
$39.86
Mninum
It/bnthly
$39.86
$39.86
$39.86
$/TG
$3.63
$4.16
$4.70
F€r S'tudent per ll/bnth
$0.84
$1.08
New Rete
$1.4s
Vaiable
$1.241
$48.00
$116.00
Category of Service
All Single-Family fusidences and
Multi-Family per unit
0 - 6,000 gallons per rmnth
Above 6,000
Commercial
l.,iorral: 0 - 250 nE/l BOD
lvledium 251 - 500 nE/l BOD
Hgh: Above 500 ng/l BOD
Schools
K-12 without C#eteria
K-12with Cafeteria
EefiHtary Schods
Mddle and Hgh Schools
lndustrial Rates
Fixed i/bnthly Fee
F1ow, per TG ne,tered potable
BOQ per thousand lbs
Suspended Solids, per thousand lbs
DHH
Do
Ez!€
N
265
ATTACHMENT 3
266

Water and Wastewater Enterprise
Financial Analysis and Rate Study
For
City of Sanger

March 23, 2023

Draft

Dan Bergmann, P.E.

Principal

267
Water and W
astewater Enterprise Financial Analysis and Rate Study

for

City of Sanger

I. Summary ............................................................................................................................. 4 II. Purpose ............................................................................................................................... 5 III. Approach to Setting Rates ................................................................................................... 5 Water Rate Study ...................................................................................................................... 6 IV. Water Revenue, Expense, and Fund Balance ...................................................................... 6 V. Existing Water Rates ........................................................................................................... 7 VI. Water Volumes and Revenues by Customer Group ............................................................. 9 VII. Water Cost-of-Service Analysis .......................................................................................... 11 VIII. Water Rate Setting ............................................................................................................. 14 IX. Water Production vs Billed Water ....................................................................................... 16 X. Water Rate Comparisons ................................................................................................... 17 XI. Water Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 18 Wastewater Rate Study .......................................................................................................... 18 XII. Wastewater Revenue, Expense, and Fund Balance .......................................................... 18 XIII. Existing Wastewater Rates ................................................................................................ 19 XIV. Wastewater Volumes and Revenues by Customer Group .................................................. 20 XV. Wastewater Plant Deferred Maintenance and Capital Repair Needs .................................. 22 XVI. Wastewater Cost-of-Service Analysis ................................................................................ 23 XVII. Wastewater Rate Setting ............................................................................................ 25 XVIII. Wastewater Comparisons ........................................................................................... 26 XIX. Wastewater Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 27 ATTACHMENTS ....................................................................................................................... 28 A. Water Revenue, Expenses, and Fund Balance .......................................................... 29 B. Water Cost-of-Service Inputs ...................................................................................... 30 C. Water Revenue Requirement Allocation Table ........................................................... 31 D. Water R
ate Setting Detail: Fixed Monthly and Volumetric Rates ................................ 32 E. Water Rate Table Proposed ....................................................................................... 33 F. Wastewater Revenue, Expenses, and Fund Balance ................................................. 34 268
G. Wastew
ater Cost-of-Service Allocation: Domestic vs. Industrial ................................ 35 H. Wastewater Revenue Requirement Allocation Table .................................................. 36 I. Wastewater (Sewer) Proposed Rate Table ................................................................. 37 J. Wastewater Industrial Plant Improvements ................................................................. 38

269
I. Summary
Sanger’s water rates were last approved in 2005, and sewer (also “wastewater” in this study) rates in 2007. The existing rates for both utilities have been adequate to cover expenses for 15 years, but finally expenses have caught up with revenue such that rates need to be increased.

The biggest factor overall are the new costs to bring the city into compliance with the Sustainable Ground Management Act (SGMA). Over the next five years, SGMA costs will average $1 million per year, fully one- third of present revenue from water ratepayers. Additional increases are needed for both water and wastewater to keep up with inflation.

The work in this study follows cost-of-service (COS) methodology according to AWWA Manual M1, “Principles of Water Rates, Fees and Charge.” This is important for compliance with the requirements of California’s Proposition 218, such that each customer class pays its proportion of the cost to provide services, whether water or wastewater.

The most significant result of this study for both water and wastewater is the imbalance of revenue between domestic-side customers, both residential and commercial, and the industrial customers in Sanger. The COS results reveal that very large increases are needed for industrial customers, especially for wastewater treatment. Additionally, the industrial side of the wastewater plant has extensive deferred maintenance, resulting in additional needed revenue from industrial customers, after the COS adjustment. The deferred maintenance needs are detail ed in an attached memorandum from AM Consulting Engineers. This study does not include costs for expanding capacity to either the water or wastewater operations.

For water rates, this study recommends that tiered water rates are retained only for single-family residents, and flat rates are used for all other customers. The base monthly charges for water are maintained at the existing level, whereas the revenue increases needed are accomplished though increases to the volume component only. This is done to reward conservation and to shift the revenue balance somewhat from fixed charges to variable charges.

For wastewater rates, the existing rate structure is basically retained, such that residential customers continue to receive a slightly lower rate if water consumption is less than six thousand gallons (TG) per month. Industrial rates, after being increased, are also rebalanced such that more of the wastewater rate burden is associated with concentration of discharge, and less with volume, thereby rewarding industrial customers if they are able to reduce the concentration being delivered to the wastewater plant.

Considering the magnitude of COS increases to industrial customers, increased by maintenance needs at the plant, it is critical for city staff to coordinate this rate change process carefully with industrial customers.
270
II. Purpose
The purpose of this cost-of-service rate study is to evaluate the water and wastewater enterprise fund revenues, expenses, and fund balances to reset rates such that revenue is adequate for safe and reliable operation into the future. The approach to setting rates is outlined in this study.

This work complies with the requirements of California’s Proposition 218 when raising water and wastewater rates. In general, this means:
• A rate study is conducted to support the revenue needed for the enterprise fund. • Each customer group pays its proportionate share of costs. • Revenue from rates is used only for the specific fund’s purposes. • Customers are notified in writing of the rate increases, the reasons increases are needed, information about the rate hearing that will be held after 45 days, and that they may protest in writing.
• If more than 50 percent of customers (parcel owners) protest, the increase may not happen.

III. Approach to Setting Rates
This work is conducted in the following sequential steps:

1. Audited financials are reviewed to observe history of revenues, expenses, and changing fund balances.

2. Accounting reports are reviewed to bridge the time frame between the end of the last audit into the current fiscal year. The budget is reviewed for the current fiscal year and next fiscal year, when available.

3. Operating expense projections are developed for the next five years , referred to as the “planning period.”

4. Billing data is related for all billing cycles , including all customers f rom the most recent complete fiscal year. Billing data is reconciled to audited financial values and accounting reports to assure good data for rate setting.

5. Billing data is divided into appropriate customer classes to determine revenue collected from each customer class.

6. Cost-of-service modeling is done to assign overall costs between defined customer classes, based on system costs to serve each customer class. 271

7. A rate model is cons
tructed to achieve projected revenue needed b ased on the cost-of-service results. The r ate model demonstrates that established rates achieve the revenue needed for each customer class.

8. Reasonableness testing is done for specific customer usage profiles , comparing existing to proposed monthly and annual charges.

Water Rate Study
IV. Water Revenue, Expense, and Fund Balance
Revenues, expenses, and fund balances are shown in the table in Attachment A. The table shows historical audited data for FY18/19, FY19/20, FY20/21, and unaudited data for FY21/22 provided from trial balance reports. The values for FY 22/23 are based on data to date for this fiscal year and the budget for the year. The expense values for the five-year planning period, FY23/24 through FY27/28 are forecasted based on input from staff and reasonable estimates of inflation.

The revenue increases needed are determined by two factors. The first is adequate revenue after paying all operating costs to meet the debt service coverage requirement (net revenue available for debt service must be greater than 1.20 times the amount of debt service ). The second, that available cash maintains a reasonable level during the five -year planning period. The bottom section of the table shows allocations of total available cash, distinguishing restricted fund money for DBCP Carbon Replacement.

Focusing specifically on revenue, overall revenue from water rates over the past few years has been consistent at just over $3.0 million per year. Revenues from late fees decreased during Covid since the city was not charging late fees during that period. Revenues from interest also decreased with interest rates but is projected to increase as interest rates increase. Revenues from impact or development fees are excluded from rate planning.

Historically, water expenses were flat through 2017 allowing the existing rate structure to stay in place since 2010. After 2017, overall expenses began to increase, decreasing the amount of revenue remaining after debt service payments. During FY22/23, the combination of increasing costs and $582, 400 of payments for replacement groundwater have prevented the water enterprise from achieving the required debt service coverage.

Costs imposed by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), both for administration and to purchase groundwater recharge, are significant to the water enterprise.

Over the five -year planning period for rate setting, the average cost for SGMA compliance is projected to average approximately $1 million per year. This new cost component alone represents a 30 percent increase above existing revenue from current rates.

Other cost increases include $190,000 per year starting in FY23/24 to fund two water operators and a portion of a clerk position. Overall inflationary increases are set at four and five percent 272
over t
he five-year planning period. In Lieu Taxes are held constant at $103,000 per year. (In Lieu taxes and Utility User Taxes are not considered in this rate study).

The water enterprise has outstanding bond debt associated with the Series 2022A bond refinance, following the previous Series 2013 bonds . The principal amount of the bonds is $3,817,000, with payments until 2043. Annual bond payments are shown in Attachment A , averaging $240,000 per year during the rate study planning period. D ebt service is just six percent, which is relatively low, compared to revenue (increasing to $4 million per year), and especially when compared to the sewer enterprise addressed later in this report.

Available Cash is cash available and unrestricted for operating expenses. As of July 2022, total cash is approximately $6.5 million; however, of that total, approximately $3.6 million is restricted for DBCP Carbon Replacement, leaving approximately $2.9 million unrestricted. The DBCP fund amount decreases over the planning period based on already planned expenditures for carbon replacement. DBCP carbon replacement is not shown as an operating expense because associated costs are covered by the available restricted funds. Capital expenditures over the planning period are shown at $200,000 per year, a relatively low amount, to limit the rate increases required and maintain available cash.

Resolution No. 4427, dated August 1, 2013, sets the utility reserve funds at three months of operations costs. Accordingly , based on operating costs of $4 million per year , three months ’ operations would be $1 million in reserve. This is achieved presently with the $2.9 million, and projected balances going forward. The increase in revenue requirement is set to increase available cash over the five-year planning period.

Finally, the amount of revenue from rates is increased 20 percent in the first year, FY23/24, then 10 percent in the second year, and four percent each year for the last three. The larger increases are needed in the first two years to fully cover increasing expenses, driven by SGMA, and to achieve required debt service coverage. The remaining three increases are to keep up with projected inflation. These are minimum recommended increases to cover expenses and achieve debt service coverage. The debt service coverage ratios achieved in the revenue setting and expense projections are relatively tight. It will be prudent for staff to monitor expenses to assure debt service coverage is achieved.

V. Existing Water Rates
Sanger’s existing water rates were approved by Resolution No. 3761, on July 7, 2005. Pursuant to the Resolution, those rate were increased each year through FY 10/11 according to the Consumer Price Index. The result is that the existing rates have been in place for over 12 years without any further increases or modification.

Rates for monthly water sales consist of a fixed monthly base charge that increases with meter size, plus five-tiered volume of use rates that apply to all customers. The existing base charges 273
and tier
ed rates are shown in the tables below and illustrated in the bar chart. As a note, the city is no longer issuing 5/8” x 3/4” meters; however, smaller customers using them are allowed to continue to benefit from the associated lower base charge.

Monthly Water Base Charge
Meter Size (Inches) Base Rate
5/8 x 3/4 $12.46

1.0 $24.27

1.5 $62.32

2.0 $99.69

3.0 $186.92

4.0 $311.53

6.0 $623.06

8.0 $1,090.34

Water Quantity Tiers
Thousand Gallons per Month (TG)
Tiered Rates
$/TG
0 - 6 $0.43
6 - 30 $0.71
30 - 100 $1.10
100 - 500 $1.16
Above 500 $1.29
Above 500 (Industrial) $0.51

The existing rate structure allows a Utility User Tax (UUT) exemption and rate discount for qualifying low-income residents. Specifically, qualifying low-income residents do not pay the UUT and do not pay for the first six thousand gallons of water, presently valued at $2.58 per month, based on $0.43 per thousand gallons. Further, they pay $10.19 per month base charge, instead 274
of $12.46.

During FY21/22, approximately 530 residential customers benefited from these discounts.

The existing water rates specify a 25 percent premium for water service outside the city limits. As of June 2022, only two customers are on this rate. The existing water rates also specify rates for customers being served without meters, of which there are approximately seven customers.

VI. Water Volumes and Revenues by Customer Group
Annual revenue from rates and annual quantities are shown in the following two pie charts.

Revenue and quantities for single-family homes is the largest. Revenue from the industrial sector is proportionally low er than volume for the industrial sector , which is a result of 7 6 percent of volume metered to the industrial sector being above 500 TG per month and billed at $0.51 per TG.

Single-Family
$2,036,256
66%
Multi-Family
$250,199 8%
Schools
$236,079 8%
Com/Other
$301,085 10%
Industrial
$264,381 8%
Annual Water Revenue ($)
Single-Family
1,064,991 58%
Multi-Family
127,033 7%
Schools
119,659 7%
Com/Other
109,190 6%
Industrial
406,504 22%
Annual Water Volumes
(TG)
275
The bar chart
below shows the allocation of revenue from rates from each customer class, divided between base revenue and volume revenue. It is worth noting that customers range from 42 percent to 66 percent base revenue, except that the industrials are only 10 percent base revenue.

This is because a very large volume of water passes through industrial meters, relative to the meter size and monthly base rate. Conversely, when less water passes through meters relative to the meter cost, the base cost proportion increases, as with the other customers groups. In fact, 58 percent of overall revenue is from base monthly rates, more than half of overall revenue.

The table of water meters by customer type is shown below. Many single- family customers still have the smaller 5/8” x 3/4" meters. The table also shows that the large count of commercial meters, most of which are small er meters (detail shown in attachments). Finally, there are just nine industrial meters, of which usage is concentrated on a few of them.

Water Meters by Customer Type
As of June 2022

Single-Family 5/8" x 3/4" 3,000
Single-Family 1" 3,300
Single Family Total* 6,300
Multi-Family less than 6 units 177
Multi-Family 6 or more units 50
Multi-Family Total 227
Schools 53
Commercial/Other 395
Industrial 9
Total 6,984
* Allocation between meter sizes is estimated

66%
53%
42%
66%
10%
34%
47%
58%
34%
90%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Single-Family Multi-Family Schools Com/Other Industrial Base Revenue vs Volume Revenue
276
VII. Water Cost-of-Service Analysis
A cost-of-service analysis was done using a simplified AWWA approach, considering the small size of Sanger’s water system. The cost elements considered were 1) Volume costs allocated as a function of quantity metered, 2) Capacity costs allocated as a function of summer peaking demand, 3) SGMA costs specifically, as a function of quantity metered, and 4) Customer services and billing costs allocated as a function of customer count. Distribution costs were not separated because distribution and production functions are combined in the water system, not separated by distinct transmission pipelines. The cost functions allocated are based on FY23/24, the first year of the five-year planning period.

Sanger’s water customers had not previously been placed in rate classes or customer groups , except for the fifth -tier rate reduction for industrial customers. This study defines the five rate classes shown in the bar chart below, which are Single-Family, Multi- Family, Schools, Commercial/Other, and Industrial. The purpose for defining customer classes is to group customers with similar usage patterns , considering the size of the water system . The cost-of- service analysis then calculates the cost to serve each class and compares to existing revenue from customers in each defined class.

Regarding cost allocation, costs assigned for SGMA are allocated evenly based on volume consistent with the cost to the city for SGMA compliance. Costs for customer services and billing are weighted more to customers with lower water consumption compared to meter size.

Accordingly, higher customer services and billing cost (per unit metered) are assigned to single- family and commercial, and very low billing costs are assigned to industrials. Peak ing costs are weighted more heavily toward summer peaking customers such as single- family and schools, caused by summer irrigation demand. The remaining cost components not separated out are assigned to the volume-related area and based on volume only to each customer group.

Peaking costs are determined first by the percentage of annual water production that exceeds the system monthly average. For Sanger, this amount is 11 percent, as shown in the graph below.

Next, 11 percent of the total cost-of-service is classified as total peaking costs. The resultant amount is assigned to the customer classes based on summer peaking factors for each group.

The outcome is some additional costs are assigned to customers peaking in the summer , as those customers need more capacity in the water sy stem to meet their seasonal demand. The detail of the calculation is shown in Attachment 2.
277

The overall
results of the cost -of-service results are consistent between customer classes as described here.
• The average cost per TG for Single -Family is slightly higher than the proposed system average cost. It is higher because of the customer services and peaking cost allocations. • The average cost for Multi-Family is lower than Single-Family. This is primarily because Multi-Family has a lower peaking cost than Single-Family. • The cost for Schools is the highest. This is because of the summer peaking cost associated with irrigation.
• Commercial/Other is close to the average of the others (excepting Industrial). This is because Commercial/Other is a combination of all remaining customers, including many small commercial accounts.
• Industrial is significantly below the proposed system average. This is because Industrial has the lowest peaking cost, and very low relative customer service billing cost.

The results are illustrated in the bar chart and data table below, and the modeling calculations are shown in Attachments B and C.
0 50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
TG/Month
Monthly Average vs. Peaking Volumes
11% of system
volumes are
above the
monthly average
System monthly average
278

$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
Single-Family Multi-Family Schools Com/Other Industrial $/TG
Sanger Water Enterprise: Cost of Service vs Present Contribution by Group Cust Svcs & Billing
Peaking
Volume Related
Ground Water Recharge
(SGMA)
Proposed Average
Present By Group
Present Average FY22/23
279
The most s
ignificant finding from the cost -of-service analysis is that the existing revenue contribution per unit sold from the industrial customers is far below the other customer groups. This is because the fifth-tier rate for industrial use over 500 TG per month is discounted to $0.51 per TG. As stated above, 76 percent of industrial sales, most industrial water, has been for volumes over 500 TG per month. The present overall contribution from industrial customers is $0.65 per TG, which just 38 percent of the existing overall average sales rate of $1.69. This result not only reveals that industrial rates have been disproportionately low, but that other customer groups have been subsidizing the cost of service for industrial customers.

A second notable result is that the existing overall contribution from commercial c ustomers is shown significantly higher than the cost -of-service results. This is primarily because there are many commercial meters in proportion to the amount of water flowing through them, sometimes required to meet fire flow requirements.

Regarding single-family customers, though the overall revenue increase needed for the water enterprise is 20 percent, the amount assigned to single-family is just 10 percent in the first year.

This is because the cost -of-service result assign s more of the revenue increase burden to industrials. The same result also true for the other domestic-side rate classes in differing amounts.

VIII. Water Rate Setting
The goal of rate setting is to establish a combination of base rates and volume rates that reasonably achieve the cost-of-service revenue requirements for each rate class. The proposed rates over the five-year planning period are shown in Attachment E.

Tiered rates are maintained only for single-family customers. Tiered rates are sensible for single- family customers because they are more similar to each other than are customers in the other rate classes. Further, single- family homes are summer peaking due to irrigation demand .

Continuing to utilize increasing tiered rates benefits customers that conserve water for irrigation.

Further, the volumes in the existing tiers are appropriately set, as illustrated in the bar chart below.

Specifically, the first tier up to 6 TG covers inside use for most homes. The second tier up to 30 TG covers additional usage, which is mostly irrigation needs. Finally, the remaining tier above 30 TG is generally excessive, representing just eight percent of the bills issued but 24 percent of volume. This is a small number of customers using relatively large volumes of water. The existing rates for the tiers are set to benefit single-family customers for inside use where the first-tier rate is much less than the second tier. This rate spread is maintained in the proposed rates because the existing tiers are reasonable, and it avoids uneven cost increases to different single- family customers. The fourth and fifth tiers are eliminated because singl e-family homes should never exceed 100 TG in one month. (The data shown above 100 TG per month for single-family is either water leaks, misbill, or extreme water waste.)
280

One vol
ume rate is proposed for all other customer s, eliminating tiered rates except for single- family customers. A one volume rate is more logical for other customer groups because the size and nature of other customers varies extensively. For example, an apartment on one meter can be a few dwelling units, or it can be 40 dwelling units, causing the water demand to differ substantially regardless on conservation effort . The purpose of tiered rates is to encourage conservation, but some commercial businesses such as restaurants require water for food preparation and dish washing. Tiered rates could inadvertently benefit a smaller restaurant wasting water, while penalizing a larger restaurant conserving water , merely because the larger restaurant serves more customers. As a result, one volume rate is recommended, but a different volume rate from some customer classes.

The overall enterprise revenue increase needed for the FY23/24 planning year is 20 percent as detailed in Section IV. This increase can be achieved through adjustments to volume rates, adjustments to monthly service charges, and revenue shifting between customer clas ses to achieve cost-of-service reasonableness.

The proposed revised rates hold all monthly service charges as the same level. Instead of increasing monthly service charges, the entire increase is proposed to be achieved through the volume rate. This is because revenue from monthly service charges is already relatively high at 58 percent, and because placing the needed increase in the volume component will benefit customers with lower water usage, rewarding conservation. The result of assigning the needed 0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
2 4
6 8
10 12
14 16
18 20
22 24
26 28
30 32
34 36
38 40
42 44
46 48
50 52
54 56
58 60
70 80
999
Number of billing cycles
Monthly Volume Ranges (TG)
Single-Family Customer Water Consumption Distribution
Based on FY21/22 Single-Family Billing Data
76,000 Billing Cycles
Median Consumption is
11 TG per Month
Tier
1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tiers 4
and 5
281
revenue requi
rement to the volume component is that the contribution from the monthly service charges declines from 58 percent to 49 percent, still half of all revenue from rates.

Determination of the volumetric rate for each rate class is done in the t ables in Attachment D.

The first table shows the unadjusted volume rate calculations matching the cost-of-service results.

The first three volume rates for Single-Family, Multi-Family, and Schools are proposed in the rate schedule without adjustment and consistent with the cost -of-service results. The Volume rate shown for Single-Family is the weighted average rate of the tiers. However, the volume rates for Commercial/Other and Industrial are proposed to be adjusted as shown in the second table.

The second table in Attachment D shows the adjusted results shifting revenue from Commercial/Other to Industrial. This is done by setting the Commercial/Other volume rate equal to Multi-Family rate as a reasonable proxy rate considering that the cost-of-service volume rate for Commercial/Other is disproportionally low. The rational e is that Commercial/Other and Industrial both consist primarily of commerce activities within Sanger . Shifting some of the rate benefit to Industrial alleviates some of the very large increase being allocated to Industrial.

IX. Water Production vs Billed Water
Water production volumes were compared to billed volumes for FY21/22. The result shows 11 percent of measured production was not billed, as shown in the table below.

Produced Water vs Billed Water
Thousand Gallons
Production Billed Unbilled
Jul-21 226,078 212,934
Aug-21 249,659 216,553
Sep-21 236,768 198,993
Oct-21 209,278 144,568
Nov-21 172,046 139,110
Dec-21 126,068 110,374
Jan-22 111,090 109,029
Feb-22 116,333 97,110
Mar-22 116,940 118,943
Apr-22 139,659 139,864
May-22 157,772 153,866
Jun-22 196,996 186,033
2,058,687 1,827,377 231,310 11%

282
X. Water Rate Comparisons
Sanger’s water rates are relatively low compared to neighboring utilities, especially industrial rates as shown in the comparisons below. Even after the COS adjustments, Sanger’s rates are still relatively low, compared to others. One significant variable in the rate comparisons is how long it has been since other utilities have adjusted rates, and w hether costs for SGMA have been included in rates.

$0.00
$10.00
$20.00
$30.00
$40.00
$50.00
$60.00
$70.00
Single-Family Residential Water Cost Comparison
Median Customer at 11,000 Gallons / Month
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
Industrial Water Cost Comparison
28,500 Thousand Gallons / Month, 8" Meter
283
XI. Water Conclusion
The work of this study has thoroughly analyzed the financial statement s, rates, and revenue of Sanger’s water enterprise. The body of this study combined with the various attachments provide the supporting data and calculations confirm ing the results of the study. The recommended modified rate structure provides an improvement from the previous rate structure, specifically, more accurately allocating costs to provide service across reasonable defined rate classes.

Wastewater Rate Study
XII. Wastewater Revenue, Expense, and Fund Balance
Wastewater enterprise revenues, expenses, and fund balances are shown in Attachment F.

Similar to the water enterprise study, the table shows historical audited data for FY 18/19, FY19/20, FY20/21, and unaudited data for FY 21/22 provided from trial balance reports. The values for FY22/23 are based on data to date for this fiscal year and the budget for the year. The expense values for the five-year planning period, FY23/24 through FY27/28 are forecasted based on input from staff and reasonable estimates of inflation. The revenue increases needed are determined by two factors. First, adequate revenue after paying all operating costs to meet the debt service coverage requirement, which is net revenue available for debt service greater than

1.20 times the amount of debt service. Second, that available cash maintains a reasonable level during the five-year planning period.

Focusing specifically on revenue, overall revenue from wastewater rates over the past few years has been consistent at just over $5 .0 million per year. As with water, r evenues from late fees decreased during Covid since the city was not charging late fees during that period. Revenues from interest also decreased with interest rates but are projected to increase as interest rates increase. Revenues from impact or development fees are excluded from rate planning.

Overall wastewater revenue has been adequate through FY22/23; however , inflation aligned increases are needed each year during the five-year planning period. For FY23/24, an additional operator and a portion of a ut ility clerk have been added, at an incremental cost of $105,000 to Salaries and Benefits.

Compared to the water enterprise debt burden (approximately $240,000 per year) , the debt service burden on wastewater is much greater, at approximately $1.5 million per year through 2036 (Series A, $13,655,000 and Series B, $6,847,000), and then decreasing to approximately $435,000 per year through 2043 (Series B only). Even so, the wastewater enterprise has accumulated a healthy cash fund balance of over $9 million--far exceeding the city’s reserve policy. These funds will be useful for future treatment plant replacement, or potentially to repay bond debt.
284
XIII. Existing Wastewater Rates
Sanger’s existing wastewater rates were approved by Resolution No. 3952, on May 3, 2007.

Pursuant to the Resolution, those rates were increased each year through FY10/11 according to the Consumer Price Index. Again, similar to water, the existing wastewater rates have been in place for over 12 years without any further increases or modification.

Residential rates are tiered such that the fixed monthly rate for a single- family dwelling, or for multifamily per unit is $35.98, if water consumption does not exceed six TG per month per unit.

Above six TG, the ra te increases to $39.86. Historically, the intent has been to give residential customers with low water usage (and therefore lower wastewater discharge) the benefit of a lower wastewater rate.

All commercial customers pay $39.86 per month, plus a volume rate based on concentration of discharge as determined by Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), which is a measurement of the relative burden placed on the treatment plant for processing wastewater.

Classified Strength BOD (mg/L) Rate ($/TG)
“Low” 0 to 250 $3.63
“Medium” 251 to 500 $4.16
“High” Above 500 $4.70

Industrial customers are defined to have an excess in one or more of the following categories during any one of the previous 12 months.
• F low more than 150 TG per month of wastewater
• BOD in excess of 375 pounds
• Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in excess of 500 pounds
Defined industrial customers pay a volume rate based on a combination of volume, BOD, and TSS, as follows.

Volume: $1.241 per thousand gallons
BOD: $48 per thousand pounds
TSS: $116 per thousand pounds

Additionally, industrial users are charged a fixed monthly cost based on a formula combining volume, BOD, and TSS.

Schools pay wastewater rates based on the type of school and student count, as follows.

285
Type of School Rate per Student per Month
Kindergarten or Elementary School
without Cafeteria $0.84
Kindergarten or Elementary School
with Cafeteria $1.08
Junior High School or High School $1.45

XIV. Wastewater Volumes and Revenues by Customer Group
Volumes of influent into the domestic and industrial sides compared to existing revenues from domestic and industrial customers are shown in the pie charts below. It is meaningful to note that industrial customers contribute 35 percent of overall influent into the treatment plant while contributing 20 percent of overall revenue. Even so, industrial concentrations are much higher than domestic concentrations. For example, BOD for industrial influent averages approximately 1,700 mg/L and TSS averages 850 mg/L. In comparison, domestic influent averages 250 mg/L BOD, and similarly 250 mg/L TSS. Significantly, the BOD concentrations of industrial influent are almost seven times higher than domestic influent. Industrial customers are doing little or no pretreatment of concentrated wastewater discharge.

Regarding the domestic-side customer groups only, the revenue percentages closely follow the volume percentages, indicating consistency across customer classes. However, the cost -of- service analysis will evaluate the balance of revenue overall between the domestic and industrial sides to determine if one is subsidizing the other.

Industrial
Influent, 311,
35%
Domestic
Influent, 576,
65%
Wastewater Plant Influent: Domestic vs Industrial
(MG/Yr, FY21/22)
286

Industrial
$1,066,000
20%
Domestic
$4,180,000
80%
Wastewater Revenue: Domestic vs Industrial (FY21/22)
Single-Family,
404, 70%
Multi-Family,
95, 16%
Schools, 21, 4%
Commercial/Other, 56, 10%
Domestic Plant Influent: Customer Groups
(MG/Yr, FY21/22)
Single-Family
$2,940,000
70%
Multi-Family
$680,000 16%
Schools
$150,000 4%
Com/Other $410,000 10%
Domestic Plant Revenue: Customer Groups (FY21/22)
287
XV. Wastewater Plant Deferred Maintenance and Capital Repair Needs Sanger’s wastewater plant is divided into an industrial side and a domestic side with the exception that both processes share the same anaerobic digestor. A dedicated collection transmission line serves industrial customers, separate from the domestic collection system.

Regarding the industrial side of the facility, a t echnical memorandum has been prepared by AM Consulting Engineers identifying improvements that are necessary to continue handling current wastewater flows. The memorandum is included as Attachment J, at the end of the report. The memorandum identifies long-term maintenance and improvement needs for most components of the industrial treatment plant, as the plant has operated for many years without significant attention. The following summary list and Probable Improvem ent Cost are from the memorandum. See the memorandum for more detail.

Plant Component Probable Improvement Cost
Headworks $1,550,000
Primary Sedimentation $1,250,000
Primary Sludge Pump Station $165,000
Roughing Filter $230,000
Sludge Thickener (50%) $350,000
Anaerobic Digester (50%) $1,050,000
Aerated Treatment Pond $2,250,000
Storage Ponds $1,600,000
Subtotal $8,445,000
Contingency (15%) $1,266,000
Engineering, etc. (10%) $844,500
Construction Administration $1,266,750
Total $11,823,000

For the purpose of the cost-of-service model, if this amount were to be financed over 20 years at an estimated four percent annual interest rate, the annual cost burden to the industrial customers would be $869,957 per year.

Regarding the domestic side of the plant, improvements needed include the domestic share of the sludge thickener and anaerobic digester. The city’s 2006 master plan includes improvements such as an expanded headworks, new oxidation ditch, and additional disinfection such as a chlorine contact basin. Additionally, the plant controls system needs to be upgraded. However, based on information from city staff, it is possible that the domestic side of the plant may be fully replaced in the distant future. As a result, domestic side capital repair costs are not considered in resetting domestic rates in this study.
288
XVI. Wastewater Cost-of-Service Analysis
A cost-of-service analysis was done for wastewater customers, similar to water. The defined customer groups are the same. However, for wastewater, costs for operating the industrial side of the treatment plant are separated from the domestic side. This is necessary because the plants are mostly separate and because the concentrations of industrial influents are so much higher than domestic. Additionally, costs for operating and maintaining the collection system are assigned to domestic service and are not assigned to industrial customers. Details for functionalize of costs between the domestic side and industrial side are shown in Attachment G, and the detail for allocation of costs to customer classes is shown in Attachment H.

Generally, costs are assigned proportional to flow, which is 65 percent domestic and 35 percent industrial, after subtracting amounts allocated to the domestic collection system. If industrial and domestic treatment were combined, the cost assignment to industrial would need to be much greater because of the high concentration influent. In fact, the industrial BOD concentration is approximately seven times higher and the TSS concentration approximately three times higher.

However, the plants are separate, and further, the treatment standards for industrial are not as stringent as those for domestic.

After costs are separated between industrial and domestic, costs are further allocated to:
$0.00
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
$7.00
$8.00
$9.00$/TG
Sewer Enterprise: Cost of Service vs Present Contribution by Group Deferred Maintenance and
Capital Replacement Funding
Existing Debt Service
Operations and Maintenance
Present by Group
Present Average
289
• Operat
ions and Maintenance
• Existing Debt Service
• Deferred Maintenance and Capital Replacement Funding
Operations and maintenance include all expenses except existing or future replacement funding.

Existing debt consists of ongoing payments on recently refinanced bonds totaling $13.6 million.

The original 1996 bonds were issued for improvement to both the industrial and domestic plant operations as documented in the 2006 Master Plan. Accordingly, existing bond debt is assigned to both the domestic and industrial sides based on volume.

Before adding a cost component for deferred maintenance or future capital replacement, the cost- of-service results reveal a substantial increase to industrials needed and a decrease to domestic customers. In fact, the present industrial contribution per thousand gallons of influent falls short of the operations and maintenance component alone from the cost-of-service results. The results also show that domestic rates are reasonable compared to each other. The implied overall result, as with water rates, is not only that industrial rates have been disproportionately low, but that domestic customer groups have been subsidizing the cost of service for industrial customers.

Though the results imply an immediate decrease for residential customers, the approach proposed is to maintain domestic rates at their present level until the fifth year, the current rates being reasonable compared to nearby utilities, and to allow the surplus to be contributed toward either eventual domestic side plant replacement or repayment of debt. The domestic portion for deferred maintenance and capital funding of excess revenue as a result of not decreasing rates totals approximately $482 ,000 for FY23/24, then decreasing to zero by the fifth year . The alternative for domestic customers would be to decrease rates, but then increase them again to follow inflationary increases. This is avoided thereby providing ongoing rate stability.

The wastewater fund has accumulated a healthy fund balance over the years, presently totaling over $9 million. As the domestic side has been subsidizing the industrial side, it could be argued that the fund balance belongs to the domestic side; however, this fund balance could also be used to finance industrial-side deferred improvements, to essentially loan it to the industrial side, and thereby avoid some outside finance costs for the industrial deferred maintenance.

The cost component for deferred maintenance and capital replacement funding is shown in the cost-of-service model as an incremental cost. The value sh own is the debt service payment assuming the cost was funded over 20 years, as explained above. This value is significant because it is approximately half of the cost increase for industrial customers. 290

XVII. Wastewater Rate Setting
The goal of wastewater rate-setting is to establish rates that reasonably achieve the cost -of- service revenue requirements for each rate class. The proposed wastewater rates over the five- year planning period are shown in Attachment I.

As discussed in the cost-of-service section, and based current state of the wastewater enterprise, the recommendation is to hold domestic -side rates constant until the fifth year . This means maintaining the two- tier rate for single- family and mult i-family, and maintaining the same commercial rates. The only exception is to consolidate the elementary school rate to one rate from two since cafeteria food preparation has become centralized.

Industrial rates need to be increased substantially, first to achieve a cost-of-service balance with the domestic operation, and second to cover the extensive deferred maintenance described above. Both steps of increase are shown in the cost-of-service bar chart. The rates shown in the rate table are to achieve the cost-of-service balance only.

The rates shown in the table are based on based on potable metered water into industrial facilities.

A comparison analysis shows that metered water is 14 percent higher than influent into the wastewater plant. The result of using potable water to set rates is that they are 14 percent lower.

If effluent, outflow, measurement is used, rates should be adjusted upward accordingly.

Industrial wastewater rates are divided into components of Volume, BOD, TSS. Regarding BOD and TSS, customers with higher concentrations of discharge pay higher overall rates because of the relative additional burden placed on the treatment plant. This also means that industrial customers that pretreat waste can receive lower overall cos ts. The present proportions are 45 percent volume, 25 percent BOD, and 30 percent TSS. These have been adjusted to be 30 Total Single-Family Multi-Family Schools Com/Other Industrial Influent Domestic (TG/yr) 576,000 404,46 0 94,500 21,000 56,040 Influent Domestic % 100% 70% 16% 4% 10%
Influent Including Industrial (TG/yr) 887,000 404,460 94,500 21,000 56,040 311,000 Influent Combined % 100% 46% 11% 2% 6% 35%
Dom. Op. and Maint. $2,128,580 $1,494,662 $349,220 $77,604 $207,093 - Dom. Deferred Maintenance $586,294 $411,688 $96,189 $21,375 $57,041 - Bond Debt Service $1,514,707 $690,686 $161,375 $35,861 $95,698 $531,086 Ind. Op. and Maint. $1,226,420 - - - - $1,226,420 Revenue Requirement $5,456,000 $2,597,036 $606,784 $134,841 $359,833 $1,757,506 Revenue at Present Rates $5,246,000 $2,940,000 $680,000 $150,000 $410,000 $1,066,000 ($210,000) $342,964 $73,216 $15,159 $50,167 ($691,506)

4.00% -12% -11% -10% -12% 65%
Deferred Maintenance and
Capital Replacement Funding $1,351,464 $342,964 $73,216 $15,159 $50,167 $869,957 Total Revenue Requirement $6,807,464 $2,940 , 000 $680,000 $150,000 $410,000 $2,627,464 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,561,464)
0% 0% 0% 0% 146%
City of Sanger Sewer Enterprise Revenue Requirement Allocation Table Excess/(Deficiency) of Funds
Excess/(Deficiency) of Funds
291
percent v
olume, 40 percent BOD, and 30 percent TSS, consistent with the averages of utilities used in the comparison analysis. See the comparison below for volume, BOD, and TSS.

XVIII. Wastewater Comparisons
Sanger’s residential wastewater rates are slightly higher than most other utilities in the comparison below; however, industrial rates have been substantially lower, as discussed in thi s study. Accordingly, t he conclusions of the rate study are strongly supported by comparison analysis.

45%
30% 19% 19%
42%
24% 30% 21%
25%
40% 58% 48%
35%
50% 47%
45%
30% 30% 23% 33% 23% 26% 23% 34%
Sanger
Present
Sanger
Proposed
Reedley Visalia Tulare Parlier Hanford S-K-F
Industrial Wastewater Cost Component Weighting
TSS
BOD
Volume
$0.00
$10.00
$20.00
$30.00
$40.00
$50.00
$60.00
Hanford
Coalinga
Fresno
Lemoore
Selma-K-
F
Corcoran
Visalia
Sanger
Parlier
Tulare
Reedley
Residential Sewer Rate Comparison ($/Mo)
Sewer Storm
292

XIX. Wastewater Conclusion
The work of this wa stewater study has thoroughly analyzed the financial statements, rates, and revenue of Sanger’s wastewater enterprise. The body of this study combined with the various attachments provide the supporting data and calculations confirming the results of the study. The recommended modified rate structure provides an improvement from the previous rate structure, specifically, more accurately allocating costs to provide service across reasonabl y defined rate classes.
$80,000
$196,040
$0
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
Sanger
Present
Sanger
COS
Fresno Hanford Visalia Tulare Parlier S-K-F Reedley
Large Industrial Wastewater Treatment Monthly Comparison (For Concentrated Influent: 1,710 BOD and 852 TSS)
TSS
BOD
Volume
293

ATTACHMENTS

294
A. Water
Revenue, Expenses, and Fund Balance

1 2 3 4 5
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028
Audited Audited Audited Unaudited Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected G ross Revenues Potential Increases: 20% 10% 4% 4% 4%
Revenue from Rates $2,965,248 $3,115,049 $3,199,666 $3,033,038 $3,088,000 $3,706,000 $4,077,000 $4,240,000 $4,410,000 $4,586,000 Penalties & Installations 106,049 77,639 3,010 19,550 2,200 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Other (Excluding Impact Fees) 5,193 2,913 16,770 225,011 5,300 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Interest Income 166,832 159,095 34,351 1 36,100 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Total G ross Revenues $3,243,322 $3,354,696 $3,253,797 $3,277,600 $3,131,600 $3,841,000 $4,212,000 $4,375,000 $4,545,000 $4,721,000 Operating Expenses1
Inflation
Salaries and Benefits 2,3,4
$650,638 $633,040 $545,177 $544,093 $648,800 $871,000 $915,000 $961,000 $1,009,000 $1,059,000 5% Other Supplies and Services 85,896 73,967 97,521 107,324 85,000 88,000 92,000 96,000 100,000 104,000 4% Supplies and Chemicals (6122, 6129) 100,284 88,257 87,176 127,138 120,000 125,000 130,000 135,000 140,000 146,000 4% DBCP Carbon Replacement - 114,694 209,346 - - - - - - - Professional Services 136,690 165,719 183,349 237,141 193,700 201,000 209,000 217,000 226,000 235,000 4% Utilities: Electric & Gas 368,286 460,977 479,838 531,103 649,000 681,000 715,000 751,000 789,000 828,000 5% SGMA Including Administration - - - 541,527 582,400 805,000 1,034,000 1,065,000 1,097,000 1,130,000 Fees & Filings 409,610 44,494 290,963 49,335 301,700 314,000 327,000 340,000 354,000 368,000 4% Other General & Admin 156,664 60,305 72,814 75,000 80,000 84,000 88,000 92,000 97,000 102,000 5% Internal Admin & Indirect Cost Plan 646,200 372,500 333,099 227,600 227,600 239,000 251,000 264,000 277,000 291,000 5% Taxes in Lieu 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 Total Operating Expenses $2,657,268 $2,116,953 $2,402,283 $2,543,261 $2,991,200 $3,511,000 $3,864,000 $4,024,000 $4,192,000 $4,366,000 Revenues Available for Debt Service $586,054 $1,237,743 $851,514 $734,339 $140,400 $330,000 $348,000 $351,000 $353,000 $355,000 Bonds Debt Service $221,552 $225,653 $224,478 $223,152 $216,258 $240,664 $237,822 $238,948 $239,912 $241,717 Bonds Debt Service Coverage Ratio 2.65 5.49 3.79 3.29 0.65 1.37 1.46 1.47 1.47 1.47 Revenue after Debt Service $364,502 $1,012,090 $627,036 $511,187 -$75,858 $89,336 $110,178 $112,052 $113,088 $113,283 Capital Expenditures -$1,651,307 -$769,341 -$581,500 -$842,500 -$200,000 -$200,000 -$200,000 -$200,000 -$200,000 Adjust $687,581 -$545,008
Total Cash $7,220,925 $7,269,289 $6,581,976 $6,511,663 $5,593,305 $5,482,641 $5,392,819 $5,304,871 $5,217,959 $5,131,242 Restricted for BDCP Carbon Replacement -$3,600,000 -$3,445,000 -$3,284,000 -$3,117,000 -$2,943,000 -$2,762,000 -$2,574,000 Unrestricted Cash $7,220,925 $7,269,289 $6,581,976 $2,911,663 $2,148,305 $2,198,641 $2,275,819 $2,361,871 $2,455,959 $2,557,242 Must Equal $7,220,925 $7,269,289 $6,581,976
Major F acilities F ee Revenue $70,402 $74,047 $1,029,893 $53,721 $53,100 Notes:

City of Sanger Water Enterprise F und (611)
Revenues, Expenditures, and Fund Balance
(4) For FY21, Salaries and Benefits, the audited value of $577,978, includes $32,801 of PERS Credit GASB68 that was a non-cash transaction, similar to depreciation; therefore it is excluded. (1) Excludes depreciation and amortization
(2) For FY19, Salaries and Benefits, the audited value of $953,431 includes $302,793 of PERS Expense GASB68 that was a non-cash transaction, similar to depreciation; therefore it is excluded. (3) For FY20, Salaries and Benefits, the audited value of $523,758, includes $109,282 of PERS Credit GASB68 that was a non-cash transaction, similar to depreciation; therefore it is excluded.

F iscal Year Ending June 30,
(Operating Expenses above)
295
B. Water
Cost-of-Service Inputs

Allocations by Function to Customer Groups
Total SF Apt All Schools Com/Other Industrial
Volume
Treated Sales (TG/Yr) 1,827,377 1,064,991 127,033 119,659 109,190 406,504 Volume % 100% 58% 7% 7% 6% 22%
Capacity Peaking
Avg Mo (TG) 152,281 88,749 10,586 9,972 9,099 33,875
Peak Mo (TG) Aug 2021 216,553 132,898 13,799 18,993 11,829 39,034 Peaking Factor 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.9 1.3 1.2
Peaking - Average (TG) 64,272 44,149 3,213 9,021 2,730 5,159 Peak Capacity Allocation % 100% 69% 5% 14% 4% 8%
Capacity Peaking Costs
Percent Peaking 11%
Total COS from Rates $3,706,000
Capacity Cost Results $407,660 $407,660 $280,025 $20,379 $57,221 $17,315 $32,720 Sustainable Ground Water Management (SGMA)
Volume % (from above) 100% 58% 7% 7% 6% 22%
Four-Year Avg Cost $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $582,798 $69,517 $65,481 $59,752 $222,452 Allocated based on Volume
Customer Services and Billing Costs
Total SF Apt All Schools Com/Other Industrial
Customer Count 6,984 6,300 227 53 395 9
Customer % 90% 3% 1% 6% 0%
Multiplier 1 3 3 3 25
Weighted Count 8,550 6,300 681 159 1,185 225
Allocations % 100% 74% 8% 2% 14% 3%
Cust Svcs & Billing Cost $239,000 From Internal Admin and Indirect Cost Cust Svcs and Billing Results $239,000 $176,105 $19,036 $4,445 $33,125 $6,289 Volume Costs
Total SF Apt All Schools Com/Other Industrial
Total COS from Rates $3,706,000
Less Capacity ($407,660)
Less SGMA ($1,000,000)
Less Cust Svs & Billing ($239,000)
Balance to Volume $2,059,340
Volume % (from above) 100% 58% 7% 7% 6% 22%
Volume Results $2,059,340 $1,200,178 $143,158 $134,848 $123,050 $458,105 Water Cost-of-Service Inputs
Percent of monthly volumes (summer) greater than monthly system average 296
C. Water R
evenue Requirement Allocation Table

City of Sanger Water Enterprise Revenue Requirement Allocation Table (FY23/24) Total Single-Family Multi-Family Schools Com/Other Industrial Volume Related $2,059,340 $1,200,178 $143,158 $134,848 $123,050 $458,105 Ground Water Recharge (SGMA) $1,000,000 $582,798 $69,517 $65,481 $59,752 $222,452 Peaking $407,660 $280,025 $20,379 $57,221 $17,315 $32,720 Cust Svcs & Billing $239,000 $176,105 $19,036 $4,445 $33,125 $6,289 Revenue Requirement $3,706,000 $2,239,107 $252,090 $261,995 $233,242 $719,567 Adjustments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Adjusted Revenue Requirement $3,706,000 $2,239,107 $252,090 $261,995 $233,242 $719,567 Revenue at Present Rates $3,088,000 $2,036,256 $250,199 $236,079 $301,085 $264,381 Excess/(Deficency) of Funds ($618,000) ($202,851) ($1,891) ($25,916) $67,843 ($455,186) 20% 10% 1% 11% -23% 172%
Quantity Delivered (TG) 1,827,377 1,064,991 127,033 119,659 109,190 406,504 Average by Class ($/TG) $2.03 $2.10 $1.98 $2.19 $2.14 $1.77 Present Total by Class ($/TG) $1.91 $1.97 $1.97 $2.76 $0.65 Present Average FY22/23 $1.69 $1.69 $1.69 $1.69 $1.69 $1.69 Volume Related $1.13 $1.13 $1.13 $1.13 $1.13
Ground Water Recharge (SGMA) $0.55 $0.55 $0.55 $0.55 $0.55 Peaking $0.26 $0.16 $0.48 $0.16 $0.08
Cust Svcs & Billing $0.17 $0.15 $0.04 $0.30 $0.02
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Total by Class ($/TG) $2.10 $1.98 $2.19 $2.14 $1.77
Proposed Average $2.03 $2.03 $2.03 $2.03 $2.03 $2.03
Existing Rate Revenue Allocation Values
Total Single-Family Multi-Family Schools Com/Other Industrial Base Revenue $1,804,678 $1,348,379 $131,697 $99,237 $199,430 $25,936 Quantity Revenue $1,283,322 $687,877 $118,502 $136,843 $101,655 $238,445 Total Revenue $3,088,000 $2,036,256 $250,199 $236,079 $301,085 $264,381 Base Revenue % 58% 66% 53% 42% 66% 10%
Volume Revenue % 42% 34% 47% 58% 34% 90%
297
D. Water
Rate Setting Detail: Fixed Monthly and Volumetric Rates

Fixed Monthly
Billed
Volumes
(TG)
Current Avg.

Rate
Current Vol
$ Current Total
Resultant
Volumetric
Revenue
Combined
Total
Combined
Percent
Increase
% Fixed
Proposed
Overall
Average
Single-Family $1,348,379 1,064,991 $0.646 $687,877 $2,036,255 0.0% 1,348,379 29.0% $0.833 887,361 2,235,740 9.8% 60% $2.10 $2,239,107 -$3,367 0.2% $202,852 10% Multi-Family $131,697 127,033 $0.93 $118,502 $250,199 0.0% 131,697 0.0% $0.933 118,502 250,199 0.0% 53% $1.97 $252,090 -$1,891 0.8% $1,891 1% Schools $99,237 119,659 $1.14 $136,843 $236,079 0.0% 99,237 20.0% $1.37 164,211 263,448 11.6% 38% $2.20 $261,995 $1,453 -0.6% $25,915 11% Com/Other $199,430 109,190 $0.93 $101,655 $301,085 0.0% 199,430 -65.0% $0.33 35,579 235,009 -21.9% 85% $2.15 $233,242 $1,767 -0.8% -$67,843 -23% Industrial $25,936 406,504 $0.59 $238,445 $264,381 0.0% 25,936 190.0% $1.70 691,489 717,425 171.4% 4% $1.76 $719,567 -$2,141 0.3% $455,186 172% Total $1,804,678 1,827,377 1,283,322 $3,088,000 $1,804,678 $1,897,143 $3,701,821 49% $2.03 $3,706,000 -$4,179 0.1% $618,000 20% $1.04
Billed
Volumes
(TG)
Current Avg.

Rate
Resultant
Volumetric
Revenue
Volume
Subtotal
Volume
Revenue
from above
Deviation
Single-Family 1,064,991 $0.646 29% $0.83 887,138 $887,138 887,361 -$223 Multi-Family 127,033 $0.93 0% $0.93 118,141 $118,141 118,502 -$361 Schools 119,659 $1.14 20% $1.37 163,933 $163,933 164,211 -$279 Com/Other 109,190 $0.93 0% $0.93 101,547 $101,547 35,579 $65,967 Industrial 406,504 $0.59 163% $1.54 626,016 $626,016 691,489 -$65,473 1,827,377 $1,896,774 $1,896,774 $1,897,143 -$369
$1.04 0.0%
Increased Volumetric
Rate
To Match COS Model
Determination of Fixed Monthly and Volumetric Rates Consistent with Cost of Service Model Present Fixed and Volume Revenue Increases
Increased Volumetric
RateIncreased Fixed Monthly
Potential Adjustments to Cost of Service Rates
Sets Com/Other to the Multi-Family volume rate as a reasonable compromise, shifting Com/Other cost-of-service revenue to Industrial. 298
E. Water
Rate Table Proposed

7/1/2024 7/1/2025 7/1/2026 7/1/ 2027
Volumetric Rates ($/TG ) Effective
7/1/2010
Percent
Change New Rate 10% 4% 4% 4%
All Single-Family
Up to 6 TG $0.43 29% $0. 55 $0.61 $0.63 $0.66 $0.69
6 to 30 TG $0.71 29% $0.92 $1.01 $1.05 $1.09 $1.13
30 to 100 TG $1.10 29% $1.42 $1.56 $1.62 $1.68 $1.75
100 to 500 TG $1.16 - $1.42 $1.56 $1.62 $1.68 $1.75
Above 500 TG $1.29 - $1.42 $1.56 $1.62 $1.68 $1.75
Multi-Family (All Volumes) $0.93 0% $0.93 $1.02 $1.06 $1.10 $1.14 Schools (All Volumes) $1.14 20% $1.37 $1.51 $1.57 $1.63 $1.70 Commercial (All Volumes) $0.93 0% $0.93 $1.02 $1.06 $1.10 $1.14 Ind/Food Processing (All Volumes) $0.59 161% $1.54 $1.69 $1.76 $1.83 $1.90 Single-Family
Qualifying Low Income $10.19 0% $10.19 $11.21 $11.66 $12.13 $12.62 5/8 x 3/4" meter $12.46 0% $12.46 $13.71 $14.26 $14.83 $15.42 1" meter $24.27 0% $24.27 $26.70 $27.77 $28.88 $30.04
All Other Customers
5/8 x 3/4" meter $12.46 0% $12.46 $13.71 $14.26 $14.83 $15.42 1" meter $24.27 0% $24.27 $26.70 $27.77 $28.88 $30.04

1.5" meter $62.32 0% $62.32 $68.55 $71.29 $74.14 $77.11 2" meter $99.69 0% $99.69 $109.66 $114.05 $118.61 $123.35 3" Meter $186.92 0% $186.92 $205.61 $213.83 $222.38 $231.28 4" Meter $311.53 0% $311.53 $342.68 $356.39 $370.65 $385.48 6" Meter $623.06 0% $623.06 $685.37 $712.78 $741.29 $770.94 8" Meter $1,090.34 0% $1,090.34 $1,199.37 $1,247.34 $1,297.23 $1,349.12 Existing Customers Without Meters $34.63 10% $38.09 $41.90 $43.58 $45.32 $47.13 Notes:

Customers outside the city limits were previously charged a premium for service. This additional charge is removed in the proposed rates. 7/1/2023
Proposed Rates
City of Sanger Water Rates and Charges
Current Rates
The mimimum meter size presently installed is 1 inch. The smaller 5/8" x 3/4" meters are no longer installed.

Qualifying Low Income customers receive the first 6 TG free of charge, then pay beginning with the 6 - 30 TG rate.

The single-family tiered rates are presently applicable to all customers, except that above 500 TG for industrial is $0.51 per TG. Where "All Volumes" is indicated for Current Rates, the values shown are the average of the existing tiered rates charged for each customer group. Tiered rates are elimi nat
ed, except for single-family.

Fixed Monthly Charges ($/Mo)
299
F. Wastew
ater Revenue, Expenses, and Fund Balance

1 2 3 4 5
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028
Audited Audited Audited U naudited Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected G ross Revenues1
Increases: 4% 4% 4% 4% 4%
Revenue from Rates $5,120,347 $5,477,352 $5,269, 174 $5,246,000 $5,246,000 $5,456,000 $5,674,000 $5,901,000 $6,137,000 $6,382,000 Penalties and Misc 86,878 70,014 13,884 35,727 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Interest Earnings 116,078 140,859 36,041 2 90,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 Total Revenues $5,323,303 $5,688,225 $5,319,099 $5,281,729 $5,386,000 $5,686,000 $5,904,000 $6,131,000 $6,367,000 $6,612,000 Operation and Maintenance Costs2
Inflation
Salaries and benefits 3,4,5
$905,677 $938,474 $937,726 $851,229 $1,042,000 $1,199,000 $1,259,000 $1,322,000 $1,388,000 $1,457,000 5% Professional Services 221,526 231,828 318,852 177, 578 228,000 237,000 246,000 256,000 266,000 277,000 4% Utilities: Electric & Gas 745,052 569,450 635,967 775,753 943,000 990,000 1,040,000 1,092,000 1,147,000 1,204,000 5% Fees & Filings 61,573 71,606 160,571 144,411 156,000 162,000 168,000 175,000 182,000 189,000 4% Plant Chemicals 93,959 107,169 81,325 42,018 84,200 88,000 92,000 96,000 100,000 104,000 4% Supplies - Shop and Field 63,732 61,107 65,245 77,873 61,800 64,000 67,000 70,000 73,000 76,000 4% Vehicle Maint, Fuel, Insurance 33,563 34,218 50,532 31,494 41,100 43,000 45,000 47,000 49,000 51,000 4% Permit Sampling 24,260 33,109 46,946 27,448 37,400 39,000 41,000 43,000 45,000 47,000 4% Repair & Maint: Equipment 50,489 55,896 86,036 207,780 109,600 114,000 119,000 124,000 129,000 134,000 4% Other Supplies, Services, & General 132,583 104,524 47,137 208,984 200,000 208,000 216,000 225,000 234,000 243,000 4% Internal Admin & Indirect Cost Plan 659,200 473,400 419,324 321,900 321,900 338,000 355,000 373,000 392,000 412,000 5% Taxes in Lieu 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 Total Operating Expenses $3,094,614 $2,783,781 $2,952,661 $2,969,468 $3,328,000 $3,585,000 $3,751,000 $3,926,000 $4,108,000 $4,297,000 Revenues Available for Debt Service $2,228,689 $2,904,444 $2,366, 438 $2,312,261 $2,058,000 $2,101,000 $2,153,000 $2,205,000 $2,259,000 $2,315,000 Bond Debt Service $1,481,123 $1,540,923 $1,536, 762 $1,537,372 $1,553,118 $1,514,707 $1,461,342 $1,501,510 $1,505,905 $1,506,575 Debt Service Coverage Ratio 1.50 1.88 1.54 1. 50 1.33 1.39 1.47 1.47 1.50 1.54 Revenue after Debt Service $747,566 $1,363,521 $829,676 $774,889 $504,882 $586,294 $691,658 $703,490 $753,095 $808,426 Capital Expenditures 6 -$187,876 $0 -$239,840 -$336,242 -$205,300 -$500,000 -$1,900,000 -$500,000 -$500,000 -$500,000 Adjust $552,150 $12,090 $25,367
Cash and Investments $6,588,539 $7,964,150 $8,579, 353 $9,018,000 $9,317,582 $9,403,876 $8,195,533 $8,399,023 $8,652,118 $8,960,543 Major F acilities F ee Revenue $230,077 $251,470 $84,793 Not
es
(4) For FY20, Salaries and Benefits, the audited value of $987,400 includes $48,926 of PERS Expense GASB68 that was a non-cash transaction, similar to depreciation; therefore it is excluded from the debt service coverage calculations.
(2) Excludes depreciation and amortization
City of Sanger Sewer Enterprise F und (621)
Revenues, Expenditures, and Fund Balance
(3) For FY19, Salaries and Benefits, the audited value of $1,343,943 includes $438,266 of PERS Expense GASB68 that was a non-cash transaction, similar to depreciation; therefore it is excluded from the debt service coverage calculations.
(5) For FY21, Salaries and Benefits, the audited value of $1,370,687 includes $432,961 of PERS Expense GASB68 that was a non-cash transaction, similar to depreciation; therefore it is excluded from the debt service coverage calculations.
(1) Excludes impact fee revenue
F iscal Year Ending June 30,
(6) Capital expenditures are estimtated at $500,000 per year during the five-year planning period, except in FY25 includes an additional estimated $1,400,000 for the 50 percent cost of deferred maintainance for the domestic sludge thickener and Anaerobic Digester.
300
G. Wastew
ater Cost-of-Service Allocation: Domestic vs. Industrial

Wastewater Allocation of Cost Categories to F unctionalization Cost Categories F Y23/24
Target Achieved Domestic
Treatment
Collection
System
Billing/ Cust
Svcs Allocation Comments
Salaries and Benefits $1,199,000 $1,199, 000 $649,350 $200,000 $0 $349,650 65/35 Volume after collection Professional Services $237,000 $237,000 $141,050 $20,000 $0 $75,950 65/35 Volume… Utilities: Electric & Gas $990,000 $990,000 $392,000 $10,000 $0 $588,000 40/60 Pond Aeration Fees & Filings $162,000 $162,000 $105,300 $0 $0 $56,700 65/35 Volume Plant Chemicals $88,000 $88,000 $57,200 $0 $0 $30,800 65/35 Volume Supplies - Shop and Field $64,000 $64,000 $31,200 $16,000 $0 $16,800 65/35 Volume Vehicle Maint, Fuel, Insurance $43,000 $43,000 $13,760 $25,800 $0 $3,440 80/20 80% Domestic Permit Sampling $39,000 $39,000 $25,350 $0 $0 $13,650 65/35 Volume Repair & Maint: Equipment $114,000 $114,000 $61,100 $20,000 $0 $32,900 65/35 Volume Other Supplies, Services, & General $208,000 $208,000 $112,320 $35,200 $0 $60,480 65/35 Volume Billing Cust Svcs $338,000 $338,000 $0 $0 $326,000 $12,000 $1000/Mo Ind Int Adm & Indirect Svcs Taxes in Lieu $103,000 $103,000 $66,950 $0 $0 $36,050 65/35 100% Domestic Bond Debt Service $1,514,707 $1,514,707 $983,620 $0 $0 $531,086 65/ 35 Volume Contribution to Capital Repair $586,294 $586,294 $586,294 $0 $0 $0 100/0 Exc ess cash to Domestic Subtract other revenue -$230,000 -$230,000 -$180,000 $0 $0 - $50, 000 78/22 Late Fees to Domestic Total for Rate Setting $5,456,000 $5,456,000 $3,045,494 $327,000 $326,000 $1,757,506 $5,456,000 $1,757,506
Total Operating Expenses $3,585,000
Bond Debt Service $1,514,707
Excess Cash after debt svc $586,294
Other Revenue -$230,000
Total for Rate Setting $5,456,000
Domestic
$3,698,494
Industrial
Treatment
301
H. Wastew
ater Revenue Requirement Allocation Table

Total Single-Family Multi-F amily Schools Com/Other Industrial Influent Domestic (TG/yr) 576,000 404,460 94,500 21,000 56,040 Influent Domestic % 100% 70% 16% 4% 10%
Influent Including Industrial (TG/yr) 887,000 404,460 94,500 21,000 56,040 311,000 Influent Combined % 100% 46% 11% 2% 6% 35%
Dom. Op. and Maint. $2,128,580 $1,494,662 $349,220 $77,604 $207,093 - Dom. Deferred Maintenance $586,294 $411,688 $96,189 $21,375 $57,041 - Bond Debt Service $1,514,707 $690,686 $161,375 $35,861 $95,698 $531,086 Ind. Op. and Maint. $1,226,420 - - - - $1,226,420 Revenue Requirement $5,456,000 $2,597,036 $606,784 $134,841 $359,833 $1,757,506 Revenue at Present Rates $5,246,000 $2,940,000 $680,000 $150,000 $410,000 $1,066,000 ($210,000) $342,964 $73,216 $15,159 $50,167 ($691,506)

4.00% -12% -11% -10% -12% 65%
Deferred Maintenance and Capital
Replacement Funding $1,351,464 $342,964 $73,216 $15,159 $50, 167 $869,957 Total Revenue Requirement $6,807,464 $2,940,000 $680,000 $150,000 $410,000 $2,627,464 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,561,464)
0% 0% 0% 0% 146%
Present Totals $/TG Influent $5.91 $7.27 $7.20 $7.14 $7.32 $3.43 Proposed $/TG Influent
Operations and Maintenance $3.70 $3.70 $3.70 $3.70 $3.70 $3.94 Deferred Maintenance and Capital
Replacement Funding $1.02 $1.87 $1.79 $1.74 $1. 91 $2.80 Existing Debt Service $2.63 $1.71 $1.71 $1.71 $1.71 $1.71 $7.34 $7.27 $7.20 $7.14 $7.32 $8.45
City of Sanger Sewer Enterprise Revenue Requirement Allocation Table (FY23/24) Excess/(Deficiency) of Funds
Excess/(Deficiency) of Funds
302
I. Wastew
ater (Sewer) Proposed Rate Table

Change Change Change Change Change
0 - 6,000 gallons per month 0% 0% 0% 0% 4%
Above 6,000 0% 0% 0% 0% 4%
Commercial Minimum
Monthly $/TG Minimum
Monthly $/TG Minimum
Monthly $/TG Minimum
Monthly $/TG Minimum
Monthly $/TG Minimum
Monthly $/TG
Normal: 0 - 250 mg/l BOD $39.86 $3.63 0% $39.86 $3.63 0% $39.86 $3.63 0% $39.86 $3.63 0% $39.86 $3.63 4% $41.45 $3.78 Medium: 251 - 500 mg/l BOD $39.86 $4.16 0% $39.86 $4.16 0% $39.86 $4.16 0% $39.86 $4.16 0% $39.86 $4.16 4% $41.45 $4.33 High: Above 500 mg/l BOD $39.86 $4.70 0% $39.86 $4.70 0% $39.86 $4.70 0% $39.86 $4.70 0% $39.86 $4.70 4% $41.45 $4.89 Schools Per Student per Month Per Student per Month Per Student per Month Per Student per Month Per Student per Month K-12 w ithout Cafeteria - - - - -
K-12 w ith Cafeteria - - - - -
Elementary Schools - 0% 0% 0% 0%
Middle and High Schools 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Industrial Rates
Fixed Monthly Fee - - - - -
Flow , per TG metered potable 16% 4% 4% 4% 4%
BOD, per thousand lbs 167% 4% 4% 4% 4%
Suspended Solids, per thousand lbs 66% 4% 4% 4% 4%
Deferred Maintenance Surcharge, per
TG metered potable - 0% 0% 0% 0% $2.43New Rate $2.43 $2.43 $2.43 $2.43 $216.68
-
$1.678
$149.89
$225.34
-
$1.613
$144.13
-
$1.551
$138.58
$1.492
$133.25
$200.33
Ended -
-
-
$1.00
$1.45
City of Sanger Present and Proposed Sewer Rates
$1.45
-
-
$1.00
$1.45
$0.84
$1.08
New Rate
$1.45
Ended
Ended
Proposed 7/1/27
Per Student per Month
Per Month Per Month Per Month Per Month
$35.88
$39.86
$35.88
$39.86
$37.32
$41.45$39.86
Proposed 7/1/25 Proposed 7/1/26
N otes:

Industrial rates are set based on potable w ater metered, w hich is 14 percent higher than metered influent into the w astew ater plant based on FY21/22. $1.00
$1.45
$1.00
$1.45
$1.43
$128.13
$192.62
Variable
$1.241
$48.00
$116.00 $208.34
-
-
-
-
$1.00
Category of Service
$35.88$35.88
$39.86
Per MonthAll Single-Family Residences and
Multi-Family per unit
Present
Per Month
$35.88
$39.86
Proposed 7/1/23 Proposed 7/1/24
303
J. Wast
ewater Industrial Plant Improvements
The following attachment is “Technical Memorandum No. 2,” dated February 2, 2023, is prepared by Alfonso Manrique, PE, of AM Consulting Engineers Inc. The memorandum desc ribes improvements necessary to Sanger’s Industrial Wastewater Plant, including probable costs. 304
ATTACHMENT 4
305
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. 2
TO:

FROM:

SUBJEGT:

DATE: 21212023

JOHN MULLIGAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

ALFONSO MANRIQUE, PE
CITY OF SANGER \A/WTP - INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES
EVALUATION OF I\AM/TF
I. PURPOSE OF THIS TM
The purpose of this TM #2 is to conduct an evaluation of the existing lndustrial Wastewater Treatment Facility (l\ MrfF) and identifiT improvements that are necessary to continue handling current wastewater flows. l\AM/TFs included in this TM #2 include conveyance and treatment facilities.

II. BACKGROUND
The City of Sanger (City) provides sewer service to residents and businesses within its service area. A separate industrial sewer serves three major industrial dischargers in the City. The three major industrial dischargers include: Gibson Winery, Pitman Farms and lnitiative Foods. lnitiative foods stopped discharging in July 2016 due to a major fire at their production facility and is currently out of business.

Gibson Winery produces table and dessert wines and its discharge exhibits a seasonal nature with peak flows occurring from August to October. Pitman Farms processes poultry and its discharge also exhibits seasonal peaks. As indicated in TM #1, both Gibson \Mnery and Pitman Farms have progressively increased the volume of their discharges to the City's l\M /TF in the last few years.

III. IWWTF DESCRIPTION
The I\MA/TF consists of a screen, a grit tank, a primary clarifier, a roughing filter, a secondary clarifier, a mechanically aerated lagoon, a mechanically aerated storage lagoon, and three non- aerated storage lagoons. Treated effluent is discharged to 188 acres of farmland adjacent to the I\AM'TF.

III.1. INDUSTRIAL SEWER TRUNK MAIN
lndustrial wastewaterflows are conveyed by a gravity sewer main that begins as a 15" pipe at Pitman Farms and follows the Southern Pacific Railroad south until the intersection with North Avenue; then it increased in size to a 24" and turns east along North Avenue and goes east to approximately 500 ft east of Newmark Avenue and then turns south to the \AM/TP. The size of the industrial sewer main is 16"RCP pipe as it enters the |\AM/TF. The slope of the industrial sewer main is before Newmark Ave is approximately 0.0025. Beyond Newmark Avenue the slope of the industrial sewer main is unknown.

The industrial sewer main experienced an overflow coinciding with the 2016 peak monthly flows.

Assuming a minimum slope of 0.001, the hydraulic capacity of the industrial sewer main appears to be adequate to convey the peak daily flows. lt is recommended that the industrial sewer main be cleaned annually preferably ahead of the peak discharge months (August through October) to maintain adequate hydraulic capacity.
306
lf the industrial sewer main overflows again, the City should conduct a CCTV survey of the entire alignment to determine if the overflows are caused by a reduced hydraulic capacity (blockage) or by excessive discharge flows.

III.2. HEADWORKS
The existing l\M /TF headworks begin with a comminutor in parallel with manually cleaned bar screen with a 1 Tn" opening. The comminutor is currently out of service and the manually cleaned bar screen is the only solids removal process at the |\AM/TF. The manually cleaned bar screen primarily captures large grease balls and needs to be cleaned severaltimes a day. A mechanical bar screen is recommended to handle the increased discharge volume. A smaller opening (114" or 3/8") mechanically cleaned bar screen would reduce the loading into the l\ M/TF and improve the performance of downstream processes.

Following the screens, industrial wastewater flows into two aerated grit tanks in parallel. Grit is continuously removed from the bottom of the grit tanks using airlift pumps. Some of the grit tank piping and grit conveyance equipment is severely deteriorated and it should be replaced. ln addition, the concrete coating on the grit tanks is delaminating. The concrete tanks need to be taken out of service and recoated.

The pH of the raw industrial wastewater should be adjusted to be above 6. Adjustment of pH may take place at the I\MA/TF headworks or at the industrial discharger's facilities. The second option would be preferred to minimize corrosion of the industrial sewer main.

III.3. PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION
Wastewater flows from the headworks structure, through a Parshall Flume into Junction Box No.1 (JB #1). JB #1 allows to direct the flow into Primary Sedimentation Tank No. 2 (PST #2) or bypass PST #2 and convey wastewater into JB #7. Both junction boxes are showing signs of concrete deterioration and need to be recoated.

PST #2 is a circular concrete structure 45 ft in diameter and 8 ft deep. Table 1 lists the typical primary sedimentation recommended operating ranges in terms of hydraulic loading, detention time and weir loading and the current operating parameters in PST #2 based on the 2022 maximum month average and maximum day data.

Table I - PST #2 Operating Parameters
Parameter Recommended
Gurrent
Average Peak Day
Hydraulic Loading, gpd/sqft 800-1,200 553 924
Detention Time, h 1.5-2.5 2.s9 1.55
Weir Loading, gpd/ft 10,000'40,000 6,225 10,398
PST #2 appears to be working within the recommended operating parameters during the peak day flow and under its capacity during average flow conditions.

The age of the primary sedimentation tank is unknown. The 1971 construction documents indicate that the primary sedimentation tanks were already existing. Therefore, the structure is likely more than 50 years old. The concrete and steel structure above the water is showing signs of deterioration and should be rehabilitated. The longer detention times observed dudng average flow 2 307
conditions are likely creating septic conditions in the tank and are the source of odors and hydrogen sulfide corrosion.

It is recommended that PST #2 be drained, recoated and the clarifier mechanism replaced. A redundant primary clarifier is recommended if industrial peak monthly flows are expected to increase.

Primary sludge is pumped by two pumps located at the primary sludge pump station. The primary sludge pump station shared with the domestic plant and the cost of improvements should be shared between domestic and industrial users. lmprovements to the primary sludge pump station include replacing the primary sludge pumps and replacing the corroded access doors.

III.4. ROUGHING FILTER
Wastewater effluent from the primary sedimentation basin flows into JB #7. At JB #7, wastewater can be directed to flow into Wet Well Sump No. 3 of the lntermediate Pump Station (lPS) or the industrial effluent pump station. The IPS pumps wastewater into a roughing filter.

A roughing filter is a high rate trickling filter that is designed to adsorb peak biological loads that might upset future wastewater processes. Roughing filters are biological processes that are typically used as a pre-treatment step in combination with other downstream treatment processes.

Roughing filters typically remove between 40 and 85 percent of the incoming BOD. Downstream processes operate at more conventional loading rates. Table 2 lists the design characteristics of the existing roughing filter:

Table 2 - Roughing Filter Design Parameters
Parameter Value
Diameter 55ft
Depth 21.5 ft
Media Plastic Cross Flow
Ventilation Natural Draft
Maximum Recirculation 3:1
Recirculation Pumps 2
Recirculation Pumps Capacity 6.2 MGD
Table 3 lists the recommended operating range in terms of hydraulic loading and organic loading for roughing filters and the current operating loads based on the maximum month data.

Table 3 - Roughing Filter Operating Parameters
Parameter Recommended Gurrent
Average Peak Month
Hydraulic Loading, gpd/sqft 1,4004,200 370 618
Organic Loading, lbs BODs/ 103 cuft >100 243 528
Under average conditions, the roughing filter operates below the recommended hydraulic loading and is within the recommended organic loading. However, the average organic loading doubles during the peak month and the filter's ability to quickly respond to those loads is limited. 3 308
The City monitored the performance of the roughing filter from 2009 through 201 1 . Figure 1 shows the percentage of BOD removal observed across the roughing filter for each month. The historical removal percentages significantly drop during the months of September and October. The low pH of the incoming wastewater during those months, and the lack of adequate air flow are likely killing the attached biomass inside the roughing filter and negatively affecting its performance. ln the shortterm it is recommended that pH control be incorporated at each of the discharger's facilities to increase the pH of their discharge to at least 6 which will prevent the interference with biological treatment processes at the IWA/TF. lt is also recommended to install a forced aeration system in the roughing filter to ensure adequate oxygen supply year-round.

The roughing filter was out of service from 2015 to 2017 as a consequence of a failure in the rotary arm distributor. The rotary arm distributor was replaced in 2017and was placed back in operation.

The exterior fiberglass panels are showing signs of ageing and wear. Fiberglass fibers are delaminating and fasteners are missing. The exterior of the roughing filter needs to be rehabilitated by reinstalling fasteners and applying an exterior polyurethane coat.

The primary effluent pump station that pumps primary effluent into the roughing filter is also deteriorated. The wet well is deteriorated and the building that houses the pumps needs new HVAC and new doors.

III.5. SLUDGE THICKENER
Domestic and industrial primary sludge are pumped into a gravity sludge thickener. The gravity sludge thickener receives excessive amounts of grease (likely from the industrial wastewater) which creates a challenge for operators. The thickener mechanism needs to be retrofitted to include grease removal. Also, the effluent from the sludge thickener should be conveyed back to the industrial\ A /TP.

The cost of these improvements need to be shared between domestic and industrial users equally because the sludge thickener serves both customer classes. The improvement costs shown at the end of this TM reflects the industrial share of the total improvement costs.

III.6. ANAEROBIC DIGESTER
Primary and Secondary Sludge and pumped into an anaerobic digester. The anaerobic digester is not performing as intended. The gas sludge mixing system needs to be replaced and the sludge heating units are old and do not comply with air emission regulations. ln addition, some of the valves are seized and need to be replaced.

The anaerobic sludge digester needs to be cleaned and inspected. At a minimum the gas mixing system should be replaced with a new mechanical sludge mixing system and new sludge heaters should be provided. Valves and piping should be inspected and replaced as needed.

Finally, the building needs to be rehabilitated to address corrosion issues with the doors. The cost of these improvements need to be shared between domestic and industrial users equally because the anaerobic serves both customer classes. The improvement costs shown at the end of this TM reflects the industrial share of the total improvement costs. 4 309
..1.7. AERATED TREATMENT POND
The aerated treatment pond receives wastewater flow after the roughing filter. The aerated treatment pond is soil cement lined and was designed with internal partition baffles that divide the pond into three equally sized cells. Each cell has an approximate capacity of 2.25 MG. Each cell is aerated. The three cells combined have a surface area of approximately 4 acres and a depth of 12 ft. Table 4 contains the amount of aeration installed in each of the treatment cells:

Table 4 - Aeration Installed
Aerated Treatment Pond Cell Aeration lnstalled
Cell#1 4 units @ 60 HP each
Cell#2 4 units @ 40 HP each
Cell#3 4 units @ 30 HP each
The aerated treatment pond is intended to remain full at all times. Aeration requirements vary depending on the industrial waste load. Aerators can be shut down during the low-loading season.

The internal baffle dividing Cell# 1 and Cell#2 broke and has been removed.

The aerated treatment pond is designed as a complete-mix. Solids are intended to be suspended at alltimes. Typically, effluents from complete-mix aerated lagoons contain elevated concentrations of suspended solids and must be removed by settling before the final discharge. Wastewater flows leaving the aerated treatment pond are settled at four storage ponds. Further description of the storage ponds is included in the following sections.

Accumulated solids in the aerated pond need to be removed by dredging. The liner also needs to be inspected and repaired as needed.

III.8. STORAGE PONDS
The I\MA/TF storage ponds are located south to the domestic emergency effluent storage pond and extend south to approximately the Channel Road alignment. There are four storage ponds. The first storage pond is aerated with six (6) - 20 HP floating surface aerators and the remaining three storage ponds are unaerated. The aeration in Storage Pond No. 1 is not for treatment but rather to keep the effluent fresh and relatively odor free.

All four storage ponds are lined with a high-density polyethylene (HPDE) liner to prevent erosion and ensure berm wall integrity. ln addition, Storage Ponds No. 1,2, and 3 have an 18-inch gravity overflow line. Table 5 lists the capacity of each storage pond in MG.

Table 5 - Storage Pond Gapacities
Storage Pond No. Volume (MG)
1 16.3
2 21.5
3 20.5
4 17.9
The level of aeration in Storage Pond No. 1 is approximately 7.3 HP/MG and is not sufficient to provide enough oxygen during peak months. ln partially mixed aerated lagoons, the aeration demand should be capable of providing at last 1.5 lbs of oxygen per lb of BOD. Assuming a 5 310
maximum daily flow of 1.39 MGD, a maximum BOD of 2,450 mg/l and an 80 percent BOD removal in the roughing filter and aerated pond, the amount of BOD flowing in storage pond No. 1 is approximately 5,680 lbs/d. The mechanical aerators should be capable of supplying 8,520 lbs of oxygen. Using a typical oxygen transfer of 2.0 lbs of oxygen per HP per hour, the amount of aeration needed in Storage Pond No. 1 to handle the peak daily loads would be approximately 180 HP.

Therefore, additional aeration is recommended at Storage Pond No. 1 to handle the daily peak loads. The level of aeration at any given time would be adjusted to match the loads at the |\AM/TF.

Horizontal brush type floating aerators are recommended for this application to improve the distribution of incoming wastewater throughout the pond surface. Horizontal brush aerators also provide higher oxygen transfer rates and are accessible from the shore for maintenance.

IV. IWWTF IMPROVEMENTS
Based on the analysis presented in this TM #2 it appears that most of the unit processes at the l\M /TF are operating within recommended ranges even at peak flows. However, some of the unit processes require improvements. The following is a list of recommended improvements:

IV.1. HEADWORKSIMPROVEMENTS
The following are the recommended headworks improvements:

1. pH Adjustment

2. New Mechanical Bar Screen

3. Grit RemovalTank Recoating

4. Grit Piping

5. Grit Conveyor
IV.2. PRIMARYSEDIMENTATIONIMPROVEMENTS
The following are the recommended primary sedimentation improvements:

1. Recoat existing primary clarifier tank.

2. New Primary Clarifier mechanism.

IV.3. PRIMARY SLUDGE PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENTS
The following are the recommended improvements to the primary sludge pump station:

1. New Primary Sludge Pumps.

2. Rehabilitation of primary sludge pump building.

IV.4. ROUGHING FILTER
The following are the recommended improvements to the roughing filter:
1 . Rehabilitate filter exterior (painting, add missing fasteners, etc. . . . ).

2. Rehabilitate concrete wet well.

IV.s. SLUDGE THICKENER
The following are the recommended improvements to the Sludge Thickener:

1. lnstall new sludge thickener mechanism.
b
311
IV.6. ANAEROBIC DIGESTER
The following are the recommended improvements to the Anaerobic digester:

1. Empty, clean and inspect digester.

2. lnstall new mixing system.

3. lnstall new sludge heaters.

IV.7. AERATED TREATMENT POND
The following are the recommended improvements to the Aerated Treatment Pond:

1. Remove accumulated solids.

2. Replace HDPE Liner.

IV.8. STORAGE PONDS
The following are the recommended improvements to the Storage Ponds:

1. lncrease Aeration

2. Remove accumulated solids.

V. IMPROVEMENT COSTS
Table 5 contain opinions of probable construction costs for the recommended improvements:

Table 5 - Opinions of Probable Gonstruction Gosts
lmprovement Descrlption Estimated Gost
Headworks
pH Adjustment $100,000.00
New Mechanical Bar Screen $600,000.00
Grit Removal Tank Recoating $450,000.00
Grit Piping $'150,000.00
Grit Conveyor $250,000.00
Primary Sedimentation
Primary Clarifi er Concrete recoating $500,000.00
Primary Clarifi er Mechanism $750,000.00
Primary Sludge Pump Station
New Primary Pumps $140,000.00
Building Rehabilitation $25,000.00
Roughing Filter
Rehab Exterior $80,000.00
Rehab Concrete wet well $150,000.00
Sludge Thickener (50% lndustrial Share)
New Sludge Thickener Mechanism $350,000.00
Anaerobic Digester (50% lndustrial Share)
7 312
Table 5 - Opinions of Probable Construction Costs
lmprovement Description Estlmated Cost
Empty, clean & inspect digester $250,000.00
New mixing system $450,000.00
New sludge heaters $350,000.00
Aerated Treatment Pond
Remove Solids $1,250,000.00
Replace Liner $1,000,000.00
Storage Ponds
lncrease Aeration $850,000.00
Remove Solids $750,000.00
Subtotal $8,445,000.00
Contingency (15%) $1,266,750.00
Engineering, Surveying, Environmental (1 0%) $844,500.00 Construction Adm inistration $1,266,750.00
Total $11,823,000.00
I
313
ATTACHMENT 5
314
RESoLUTIoN No. 3o Z3-/ a

A RESOLUTION OF' THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER,

CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE RATE STUDY RELATING TO WATER

AND SEWER RATES, AUTHORIZING REQUIRED ACTIONS UNDER
PROPOSITION 218; AND SETTING A PROPOSITION 218 PUBLIC

HEARING DATE TO CONSIDER RATE INCREASES
WHEREAS' the City of Sanger engaged IGService, a firm with expertise in the analysis of costs relating to utilities to conduct arate study of the City's municipal water and sewer utilities; and
WHEREAS, the Council has received a Water and Sewer Financial Analysis and Rate Study report from IGService at this Council meeting of April 6, 2023, and heard from staff and members of the public on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the Council wishes to proceed with the Proposition 218 Process relating to proposed rate increases for water and sewer; and
WHEREAS, rates may not be modified until the Proposition 218 process is concluded and a public hearing is held.

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAI\GER hereby resolves as follows:

1. The above recitals are true and correct.

2. The Council accepts the final report from IGService relating to proposed rate increases for water and sewer rates.

3. Staff is directed and authorizedto take required actions under Proposition 218 including but not limited to preparation and mailing of required 45-day notices to rate payers.

4. A public hearing shall be held in accordance with the requirements of Proposition 218.

5. The date for the public hearing on the proposed rate increases is hereby set for June 15, 2023, at 6 PM in the Sanger Council Chamber.

6. Staff are directed to take all actions necessary to effectuate the Proposition 218 process and to ensure an open, transparent, and lawful process regarding the proposed rate increases.

7. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption. 315
,1.*r*,t rf{.*
AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN
ABSENT:

COUNCILMEMBERS:

Rebeca Padron, City Clerk
316
For the Meeting of:

Agenda Item No.:
4pn76,2023
7-sCrrY oF SINGER

RE,PORT TO THE CITY COIJNCIL
To:

From:

Subject:

Mayor and Councilmembers
David Brletic, Community Development Director
Ordinance No. 2023-02, implementation of Tnning Amendment No. 2022-04 2035 Sanger General Plan for a total of 346 parcels within the City (identif,red in Staff Report Attachment "A") (ZoningMap Update).

Attachments: (1) Ordinance No. 2023-02 (including Exhibit A) (2) March 16,2023 Staff Report to City Council (including Attachment A) CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None known.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council waive the full reading and introduce Ordinance No. 2023-02, amending the City of Sanger Zoning Map, to achieve compliance with 2035 Sanger General Plan, rezoning real property for a total of 346 parcels within the City.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On March 16,2023, Council conducted the public hearing and introduced Ordinance No. 2023-02. After the public hearing it was discovered that the proposed ordinance and the depiction of parcels in Attachment A to the Staff Report inadvertently included one extra parcel. The proposed Ordinance No. 2023-02 has been corrected to impact 346 parcels not347 parcels within the City Limits of the City of Sanger, totaling approximately 251.0 acres (reduced 252.3). A list of all APNs proposed to be rezoned is included as Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 2023-02. Because of this clerical correction, the ordinance needs to be introduced again and if introduced will be presented for adoption at the next Council meeting. Ordinance No. 2023-02 brings the Zoning Map into compliance with the 2035 Sanger General Plan.

Prepared by: David Brletic Approved by:

REVIEW: City Manager: Finance: City Attotney:

TYPE OF ITEM:

X
X
Consent
Informational Item
Action Item
Department Report
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED NO ACTION
Public Hearing
Mattet Initiated by a Council Member
Continued to:
317
BACKGROUND:

The City of Sanger adopted the 2035 General Plan in 2020. The 2035 General Plan applies to all property within the City Limits and the Sphere of Influence. The General Plan Update process involved identiffing properties within the City that did not have zoning consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan Update process also considered some changes to the General Plan requested by property owners. Some properties may have existing, legal, non-conforming uses on site, and where possible, a change in General Plan may have been considered. This process will help to reduce the number of non-conforming uses within the City Limits. Some non-conforming uses may conflict with the purpose of the General Plan designation.

Where this occurs, changes may not have been possible to address the non-conforming use.

The diagram below shows all properties proposed for change in zone designation to be consistent with the 2035 General Plan. Zoning consistency with the 2035 General Plan is necessary to allow change of use and/or development of the properties affected. The application for Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment No. 2022-04 has been prepared and submitted by City Staff. The application is for the purpose of bringing properties into zoning consistency with the 2035 General Plan.

The City of Sanger Planning Commission recommends adoption of Ordinance No. 2023-02. Planning Commission recommendation is contained in attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-03, adopted February 23, 2023.

Parcels to be rezoned for comnliance with 2035 General Plan. The 346 parcels highlighted in red.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Ordinance No. 2023-02 brings the Zoning Map into compliance with the 2035 Sanger General Plan as required by state law.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No fiscal impact.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to introduce Ordinance No. 2023-02.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

If introduced, Ordinance No. 2023-02 will be placed on the next meeting's agenda for adoption. 318
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-02

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANGER ADOPTING CHANGE OF ZONING ORDINANCE MAP AMENDMENT NO. 22-04,AMENDING THE OFFICTAL ZONE MAP FOR 346 SPECIFIED ZONE DISTRICTS CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 252.3 ACRES WITHIN THE CITY TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS ADOPTED BY THE 2035 GENERAL PLAN; AND ADOPT A FINDING OF' CONSISTENCY WITH THE 2035 GENERAL PLAN AND
ENVTRONMENTAL TMPACT REPORT (ErR) (SCH #2018031047).

WHEREAS, the City recently updated its 2035 General Plan, which applies to all property within the City's jurisdiction and sphere of influence; and WHEREAS, there are properties within the City that do not have zoning consistent with the General Plan. As a result, prior to any future development being able to develop on those sites each of these properties would need to be rezoned to be consistent with the General Plan. This would result in additional expense and time for each property owner to individually process a rezone) and to perform the required environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, to save time and money for property owners, City Staff is proposing a free "city-wide" consolidated rezone for non-compliant properties at no cost to the subject properties.

To do so, City Staff has submitted aZoning Ordinance Map Amendment No. 22-04 for a change of zoning district amendment for all of the non-compliant properties to bring them into zoning consistency with the 2035 General Plan as mandated by Government Code Section 65860; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Sanger did conduct apublic meeting in the Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, on February 23'd,2023,to consider Zoning AmendmentNo.2022-04, submitted by City Staff, to rezone real property for a total of 347 parcels within the City to be consistent with the General Plan designations adopted by the 2035 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning for all parcels achieves consistency between the Zoning Map and the adopted 2035 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City has conducted an environmental analysis of the project as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has been determined to be a project that is consistent with the 2035 General Plan and EIR certified by the City for the General Plan; and WHEREAS, a Finding of Consistency with the General Plan Environmental Impact Report is proposed to be adopted for the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the staff report prepared for Zoning Amendment No. 2022-04, and conducted a hearing with an opportunity for public testimony offered regarding the request to change the zoning designations; and 01236.0105/853138.1
319
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve Zoning Amendment No. 22-04 and adopt a Finding of Consistency consistent with the requirements of CEQA; and
WHEREA$ the City Council of the City of Sanger conducted a public hearing on March 16,2023, in the Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, to consider ZoningAmendmentNo.2022-04 andthe associated Finding of Consistency and introduced the ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public meeting on April _,2023, in the Council Chambers of the Sanger City Hall in Sanger, California, to consider ZoningAmendment No. 2022-04 andthe associated Finding of Consistency and introduced the corrected ordinance with the deletion of one APN; and
WHEREAS, as all legal pre-requisites thereto have been satisfied, the City Council now desires to approve Zoning Amendment No. 22-04 and adopt a Finding of Consistency consistent with the requirements of CEQA.

The City Council of the City of Sanger does ordain as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds that all of the facts set forth in the recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein.

Section 2. CEQA. The City Council finds the project is consistent with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047) certified by the City for the 2035 General Plan. The 2035 General Plan and its EIR specifically contemplated change of zone designations for properties whose land use designations were changed under the 2035 General Plan, and identified such actions as being subject to streamlining under CEQA based on consistency with those documents. The impacts associated with the proposed rezone were previously analyzed in the EIR. The City Council further find that there is no substantial new evidence in the record that this project may have additional significant impacts that were not analyzed as significant adverse effects in the EIR. Additionally, there is no substantial new evidence of potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts that were not discussed in the EIR, and no potentially significant adverse effects peculiar to the project. Finally, the City Council finds that there are no previously identified significant effects, which as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, that have a more severe adverse impact than assessed in the EIR.

Section 3 CEQA Approval and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Based on the foregoing, the City Council adopts the Finding of Consistency prepared for the project, including the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as the project will not result in any significant, adverse, environmental impacts greater than that assessed by the EIR with the mitigation imposed by the EIR. The City of Sanger Community Development Department 01236.0105/853138.1
320
located at 1700 7th Street, Sanger, CA,93657, is designated as the custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision is based. The City Councils authorize the Director, or designee, to execute and file with the Fresno County Clerk, as appropriate, a Notice of Determination for approval of the project.

Section 4. ZoningAmendment Consistency. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Sanger General Plan. In this regard, the City Council finds that public necessity, convenience, general welfare, or good zoning practices justiff adoption of Zone AmendmentNo.2022-04. Specihcally, the change of zoning amendments are consistent with the General Plan goals and policies, any operative plan, or adopted policy, and specifically implements the planned land uses in the General Plan. (See also General Plan p. 2-38.) The changes are also consistent with the purpose of the Development Code to promote the growth of the City in an orderly and sustainable manner, and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare. The change is also necessary for good zoning practices to achieve the balance of land uses desired by the City and to provide sites for needed retail, commercial, and public facilities, consistent with the General Plan including the Master Plan.

Section 5. Approval. The City Council adopts this ordinance approving a Finding of Consistency with the City General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopting ZoningAmendment 2022-04 as set forth in Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance.

Section 6. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, or applications of this Ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.

Section 7.
day after its adoption
Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the thirty-first (31st) Section 8 Publication. The City Clerk is authorized to cause this ordinance or a summary of this ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Sanger, within fifteen days after its adoption. If a summary of the ordinance is published, the City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of the full text of the proposed ordinance to be posted at City Hall at least five days prior to the meeting at which the ordinance is adopted and again after the meeting at which it is adopted.

The foregoing ordinance was introduced ut u ,"gutuJ il;t of the City Council of the City of Sanger held on _, 2023, and was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on
01236.010s/8s3138.1
2023, by the following vote:
321
AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:

COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

Rebeca Padron
City Clerk
Frank Gonzalez, Mayor
City of Sanger
01236.010s/8s3138.1
322
a-. n rr f,\ tl i.-
APN
31s490135
3 I 549008S
3 1 5490205
3 I s490 145
3 1 549012S
3 l 5490095
31549015S
3 I 54901 95
315490185
3 1549007S
31549010S
3154901 ls
31549021S
31502129
3 I 505066
31517409U
3r517408U
31517401
3l5t74lt
31516055
315174t0
31516059
31516056
3t516057
31s16058
3 I s 16036
32004t037
31517406
3 I 506054
3 I s06001
31s06042
3 l s06002s
315071t9
3 I 506055S
315071 18
31507101
315071t6
31507117
31506029
3 I 506033
Exhibit A
Accessors Parcel Numbers to be Rezoned
Zoning Ordinance Amendmen t 2022-04 ZoningMap Update
Propos ed Zone District (By Parcel Number)
Existing
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-t-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-l-6
M-L
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-t-6
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
C-M
Proposed
R-l-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-t-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-l
R-l
R-l
RM-2.5
RSC & RM-I.5
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
R-l-6
-7.5
-7.5
-7.5
c-4
c-4
01236.010s/853119.1
323
3200
3r506032
3 I 506007
3 l s0601 6
31506015
32006206
32001 148U
32001r47s
32006103
32006106
32006105
32006
32001
32001
3200t
32004
1 l0s
r49
l43S
1057
r04
l07s
020
02t
015
017
019
C-M
R-l-6
C-M
C-M
RM-1.5
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
c-2
c-2
c-2
c-2
c-2
R-1-6
R-l-6
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
31704049
31706138
31706rt9
31706tt5
3t708304
31708302
3t706212
31706215
31706125
3r706124
31706128
3 17083 I I
3 1708303
31708312
31708209
31706209
3t706204
31706130
3 I 70830 I
31708314
317061 18
3t706123
31708r03
31708102
31706114
31708202
31708201
31708101
R-1-6
R-1-6 & RM-l.5
R-1-6
R-l-6
RM-2.5
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
RM-1.5
RM-1.5
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C.P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
I
I
I
I
1 I
31 3l
3l
31 3l
72 72
72 72
72 01236.010s/8s3119.1
324
31708212
31706132
31708215
31706120
3 I 70830s
3t70613t
31706214
31706217
31706203
31706t21
31706129
3170620r
31706139
31706113
31706208
31706219
31706126
3r706rt7
31706202
31706t27
3t708211
31706216
3r706218
3t706210
31706t16
31708313
31706226
31706224
317082t0
31706207
31706133
31706211
3 l 708208
31706206
317062t3
317082t3
31708310
31708419
31708104
31708407
31708415U
3t708207
31708205
31708409
31708406
31708416U
31708417U
31708414
3 I 708408
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.s
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
c-4
C-P
RM-1.5
c-4
C-P
c-l
RM-1.5
RM-1.s
c-4
c-4
C-P
RM-1.5
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
c-3
c-3
c-3
c-3
c-3
c-3
c-3
c-3
c-3
c-3
c-3
c-3
01236.010s/8s3119.1
325
31708306 C-P C-3
31708307 C-P C-3
31708413T C-4 C-3
31708420 C-4 C-3
31708309 C-P C-3
31708308U C-P C-3
31708206 C-l C-3
31707306 RM-2.5 C-P
31707208 C-2 C-P
3tstt6r2 c-l c-2
31511604 C-l C-2
31709208 C-l c-2
3t709711 C-P C-2
31709712 C-P C-2
31709209 C-l C-2
31709107 c-l C-2
31709203 C-l C-2
31709103 c-l c-2
31709710 c-P c-2
31709701 C-l C-2
3t509206 R-1-6 C-P
3150920s R-l-6 c-P
3l5l0lsl c-4 c-P
31510143 RM-l RM-l & C-P
31510165 C-4 C-2 &C-P
31502122T C-2 C-4
31504058 C-2 C-4
3ls02t26s c-2 c-4
31s02t34 c-2 c-4
3r502r3s c-2 c-4
31502136 C-2 C-4
31502124 C-2 C-4
31s04040 c-2 c-4
31504051 C-2 C-4
31504041 c-2 c-4
31504039 C-2 C-4
31504042 C-2 C-4
31512218 RM-l RM-2.5
315t2217 RM-l RM-2.5
31709301 c-P R-1-6
31709307 C-P R-l-6
31709602 R-l-6 C-P
31713212T C-3 RSC
3l7t32ttT C-3 RSC
31710307T C-3 RSC
320011195 M-L C-4
32001l21s M-L C-4
32001I l7s M-L C-4
01236.010s/8s3119.1
326
32001 I 53S
32001 l52S
32001 154S
3201s305s
32015305S
320091 15S
320091 165
320091 175
32001 l38s
3201 s 1 057
320151047
320151067
32015t07
32015103
320r 5 l 08
32024004
32024006
32024007
32024005
32024003
32024009
32024008
32017211
32017206
32017210
32017209
32017208
32017207
3200rr28u
320011255
32001t27s
32017r04
315122t7
3Ist22t8
32003073
32001 l30s
32017r03
3r7t22t7
31712204
31712205
31714213
317t22t2
3t714102
31714123
317t4103
3t7t4t0l
3r712208
3t712209
31712211
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M-L
M.L
M-L
c-4
RM-2.5
c-4
R-1-6
RM-2.5
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.s
M-L
M-L
M-L
C-M
RM-I
RM-1
C-M
L-M
C-M
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
RSC
RSC
RSC
RM-2.5
RSC
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.s
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
c-4
c-4
c-4
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
01236.0105/8s3119.1
327
31712206
3t7t4tt5
3l7l4tt3
3r714107
3r7t4106
3t7t42
317142
317122
317122
317122
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
RM-2.5
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
R-l-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-t-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-1-7.5
R-l-7.5
R-1-7.5
c-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C.P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
R-l-6
R-l-6
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-l-10
R-l-10
R-1-10
ll
t6
l8
t3
t4
31714104
3171220t
317142t2
31712219
317122t0
31712215
31714210
31714209
31712207
3l7l4lt2
317t4105
31714114
31714t21
31sl0l l3
31s10114
315101 l6
315101 15
32219r13
322t9122
32219107
32219t08
32219115
32219101
32219103
32219110
32219r02
32219104
32219t23
322t910s
32219t12
32219117
322t9r25
32219t09
32219121
322t9tt8
322191t4
32219124
32219111
32219t06
R-l-10
R-1-10
R-l-10
R-1-10
R-l-10
R-l-10
R-1-10
R-l-10
R-l-10
R-l-10
R-l-10
R-l-10
R-1-10
R-1-10
R-l-10
R-l-10
R-1-10
l-10
1-10
R-
R-
01236.010s/8s3119.1
328
32219116
322030s3
33209020
33209021
32s060t3
32s03078
32503001
33204201
33219036
33219003
33219002
3t720s03
32206207
322t0410
32206221
32206208
32206206
32210409
32206211
32206202
32210403
322t0408
32206220
32210404
32504008
32504011
32210405
322t0407
32210406
32506003
32504030
32504009
3220620t
32206203
32s04007
32s04006
32210402
32506002
32s04010
32206205
32210401
32206210
32206204
32210412
322t0411
32s04032
32s0403t
32506001
325040277
R-l-7.5
R-1-6
R-1-6
R-t-6
M-L
M-L
M-L
c-2
c-2
c-2
c-2
RM-2.5
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
R-l-10
R-l-10
R-l-10
R-1-10
c-4
M-H
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
c-4
C-P
C-P
C-P
C.P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C.P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
C-P
01236.0105/8s3119.1
329
32s04012
32504028
32504002
3221220t
32212206
322t2205
32212209
32212208
322r2212
32212210
322122t1
322t2202
32212207
c-4
c-4
c-4
RM-1.5
RM-l.s
RM-1.5
RM-1.5
RM-1.5
RM-1.5
RM-1.5
RM-1.5
RM-1.5
RM-l.5
C-P
C-P
C-P
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
I
1 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RM-
RM-
RM-
01236.0105/853119.1
330
vicinity Diagram of Propos ed zone District changes
FrT t
I
.:
"rt
I
I
n
I
01236.0105/8531 19.1
331
For the Meeting of: Match 76,2023
Agenda ItemNo.: {J- |
CrrY oF SINGER

RE,PORT TO THE, CITY COUNCIL
To:

From:

Subject:

Mayor and Councilmembers
David Brletic, Community Development Director
Zoning Amendment No. 2022-04 and Finding of Consistency with the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the 2035 General Plan for a total of 347 parcels within the City (identified in Staff Report Attachment "A") (Zoning Map Update).

Attachments: (1) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-03 (2) CEQA Finding of Consistency.
(3) First Reading Ordinance No, 2023- o\
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

None know.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing and then (i) adopt a Finding of Consistency with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2018031047) prepared for the General Plan; (ii) waive full reading of ordinance, and (iii) introduce Ordinance NEilj,>approving Zoning Amendment No. 2022-04, amendingthe Zoning Map to rezone real property for a total of 347 parcels within the City to be consistent with the 2035 General Plan.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The proposed rezone will impact 347 parcels within the City Limits of the City of Sanger, totaling approximately 252.3 acres. A list of all APNs proposed to be rezoned is included as Attachment A to drdinun." NPJTthe City of Sanger has conducted an environmental analysis of the proposed pre-zoning and it has been-cletermined to be consistent with the 2035 General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #201803 |}47)certified by the City for the General Plan. Ordinance }G:-:ftings the Zoiing Map into compliance with the 2035 General Plan.

Ptepated by: David Brletic Approved by:

REVIEW: City Manager: 6 Finance: City Attomey:

TYPE OF ITEM:

Consent
Informational Item
Action Item
Department Report
COUNCTLACTION: APPROVED DENIED NOACTION
X Public Hearing
Matter Initiated by a Council Member
Other:

Continued to:
332
BACKGROUND:

The City of Sanger adopted the 2035 General Plan in 2020. The 2035 General Plan applies to all property within the City Limits and the Sphere of Influence. The General Plan Update process involved identifring properties within the City that did not have zoning consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan Update process also considered some changes to the General Plan requested by property owners. Some properties may have existing, legal, non-conforming uses on site, and where possible, a change in General Plan may have been considered. This process will help to reduce the number of non-conforming uses within the City Limits. Some non-conforming uses may conflict with the purpose of the General Plan designation.

Sanger City CouncilApril 6, 2023

Sanger City Council
April 6, 2023