Santa Cruz City Council
February 8, 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx Task 11.5 Assumptions:
• One (1) 1-hour virtual meeting with the City to define the Desalination alternative. • City will provide access to previous desalination studies. • One (1) desalination alternative will be considered as part of the screening effort. • No additional engineering analysis will be required desalination alternatives and this task is intended to summarize prior desalination studies conducted by the City. • Desalination alternatives will be summarized for use as inputs to the climate model, for those alternatives selected to be part of the recommended portfolio, as part of the analysis in Task

11.5. Task 11.5 Deliverable:
• Meeting agendas, supporting materials, and meeting notes (Electronic PDF). • WSAIP Admin Draft Section 7 – Desalination
Task 12 – Aquifer Storage and Recovery Technical Tasks
This task will expand on alternatives being developed by the City to assess the feasibility for Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) to replenish groundwater levels at the Mid County and Santa Margarita groundwater basins. This effort builds on the coordination that began as part of the Phase 2 RWFS under Task 4, providing planning and engineering support to develop and evaluate ASR alternatives.

Task 12.1 – Mid-County Groundwater Basin ASR
The City is in the process of running a MCGG groundwater model to support the piloting and feasibility of an ASR project for the Mid-County Groundwater Basin (MCGB). This task will build on the results from the ASR pilot studies conducted by the City and groundwater modeling results for assessing the feasibility of ASR alternatives to replenish levels in the MCGB. KJ will assume the use of existing facilities such as the Beltz four wells, Beltz 12 Water Treatment Plant, and Beltz Water Treatment Plant for ASR as indicated by the City. KJ will document the flows required for ASR injection and groundwater extraction to maintain groundwater basin levels, determine the additional infrastructure required to implement ASR alternatives and prepare cost estimates for additional facilities and operations of ASR systems.

Up to three (3) ASR alternatives are assumed:

1. ASR only, with 8 to 10 injection and extraction wells located in the City service area as directed by City.

2. ASR with the option to use some ASR wells for injection and extraction with purified water supply during dry years.

3. ASR wells combined with Seawater Intrusion barrier wells that would inject purified water to create a purified water barrier to prevent seawater intrusion into the groundwater basin.

18.14 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx KJ will coordinate with City staff to define the ASR alternatives and discuss outcomes from current modeling efforts. KJ will be provided with information related to assumed injection and extraction quantities, well locations and depths, available water quality data and other assumptions (as available) to support the evaluation of facilities to convey, inject, extract, and treat ASR flows. KJ will estimate infrastructure requirements, including facility capacities, conveyance alignments, well casing/equipment, treatment facilities, and will prepare cost estimates at Class 5 level (Table 1).

It is assumed that a description of the model assumptions, inputs, outputs, and other parameters will be provided by the MCGB groundwater modeling team in the form of a Technical Memorandum (TM) to be included in the WSAIP report. Prior modeling scope developed with the Mid-County Basin groundwater modeling team will be revisited to prioritize modeling efforts to support the analysis of the ASR alternatives. This task does not include budget performing additional groundwater model runs, as that work would be performed under a different contract.

Task 12.1 Assumptions:
• Four (4) 1-hour virtual meetings with the City and/or groundwater modeling team to refine the ASR alternatives in the MCGB and understand inputs/outputs from the groundwater model to use for the Climate Model and discuss groundwater model results. • MCGB groundwater modeling results (under a separate contract) will be documented in a TM or short report to be incorporated as an appendix to the WSAIP. • The groundwater modeler will provide KJ model output in a summary format to support the alternatives evaluation and climate vulnerability assessment. • KJ will not perform any groundwater modeling.
• It is assumed that there will be some iterations between KJ, the climate modeling team and the MCGB groundwater modeling team to refine the data and approach needed to assess the benefit of different ASR scenarios. For the purpose of this scope, KJ’s effort assumes three (3) iterations for each of the three (3) ASR alternatives to refine assumptions and parameters. • Climate modeling efforts and documentation are included under included as part of Task 9 and also discussed in Task 13.
• Effort associated with identifying, evaluating, and costing purified water facilities is included as part of Task 3.

Task 12.1 Deliverables:
• Meeting agendas, supporting materials, and meeting notes (Electronic PDF). • WSAIP Admin Draft Section 5 – Aquifer Storage and Recovery – MCGB

18.15 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx Task 12.2 – Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin ASR
This task will build on the alternatives being considered by the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA) for their Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) as well as available groundwater modeling results by the City, to assess the feasibility of ASR alternatives to manage groundwater levels at Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin (SMGB). KJ will evaluate facilities required to implement ASR in the SMGB, such as pump stations, conveyance pipelines, injection and extraction wells and groundwater treatment plants, and prepare cost estimates for facilities and operations of ASR systems. This task will document the flows required for ASR injection and groundwater extraction to maintain groundwater basin levels, as determined by the groundwater modeling being conducted under a separate contract.

KJ will coordinate with City staff to define the ASR alternatives and discuss outcomes from current modeling efforts. KJ will be provided with information related to assumed injection and extraction quantities, well locations and depths, available water quality data and other assumptions (as available) to support the evaluation of facilities to convey, inject, extract, and treat ASR flows. KJ will estimate infrastructure requirements, including; facility capacities, conveyance alignments, well casing/equipment, treatment facilities, and will prepare cost estimates at Class 5 level (see Table 1).

It is assumed that a description of the model assumptions, inputs, outputs, and other parameters will be provided by the SMGB groundwater modeling team in the form of a TM, or similar report, to be included in the WSAIP report. This task does not include budget performing additional groundwater model runs, as that work would be performed under a different contract.

Task 12.2 Assumptions:
• Four (4) 1-hour virtual meetings with the City ASR group and groundwater modeling team to refine the ASR alternatives in the SMGB, define inputs/outputs from groundwater model to use for the Climate Model, and discuss groundwater model results. • SMGWA groundwater modeling results (under a separate contract) will be documented in a TM or short report to be incorporated as an appendix to the WSAIP. • The groundwater modeler will provide KJ model output in a summary format to support the alternatives evaluation and climate vulnerability assessment. • KJ will not perform any groundwater modeling.
• It is assumed that there will be some iterations between KJ, the climate modeling team and the SMGB groundwater modeling team to refine the assumptions, approach and data sharing needed to assess the benefit of different ASR scenarios. For the purpose of this scope, KJ’s effort assumes three (3) iterations for each of the two (2) ASR alternatives to refine assumptions and parameters.
• Climate modeling efforts and documentation are included under included as part of Task 9. • Effort associated with identifying, evaluating, and costing purified water facilities is included as part of Task 3.

18.16 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx Task 12.2 Deliverables:
• Meeting agendas, supporting materials, and meeting notes (Electronic PDF). • WSAIP Admin Draft Section 5 – Aquifer Storage and Recovery – SMGB Task 13 – WSAIP Implementation Plan
Task 7.1 includes some effort for coordination and technical support by KJ for the work performed by Raucher and UMass under Tasks 8 and 9. This task is focused on further exploration and integration of the additional water supply augmentation alternatives being considered by the City to prepare a comprehensive WSAIP report and identify a phased approach to implementation.

Task 13.1 – Screening Approach - Threshold Metrics, Decision Criteria and Ranking KJ will refine the screening approach to incorporate threshold metrics and decision criteria to rank the alternative water supply projects. The screening approach will integrate metrics and criteria developed as part of the original Phase 2 RWFS scope, the Water Supply Advisory Committee (WSAC) reports, and the GSPs for the MCGB and SMGWB. KJ will engage in discussions with the City to determine an acceptable range of criteria (e.g., costs, environmental, social, engineering, and operational considerations) and weighting (as needed), incorporating the WSAC-specified threshold metrics (cost, yield, and timeliness).

Screening tables will be populated with quantitative and qualitative information from the evaluation to provide a transparent approach for scoring and weighting each alternative against the defined metrics and criteria. A sensitivity analysis will be performed to compare projects under different weighting themes in a similar approach that was successfully applied in the Phase 1 RWFS. The outcome of this task is to identify a preferred set of projects for the adaptive Water Supply Portfolio to be further developed in Task 13.3.

KJ will vet the criteria concepts with the City and come to alignment on metrics that can be applied across all of the City’s WSAC options. Workshop #2 (included in Task 10) will focus on discussing the decision criteria and thresholds. After Workshop #2, revisions and adjustments to the decision criteria will be incorporated and applied to the alternatives being evaluated.

Task 13.1 Assumptions:
• The development of threshold metrics, decision criteria and weighting themes will be developed under Task 8. Additional analysis required to integrate the criteria and findings to the WSAIP are considered under this scope.
• Detailed documentation may be included as a TM in an appendix to the WSAIP. • Re-envisioning of the decision criteria will be part of this effort.

18.17 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx Task 13.1 Deliverables:
• WSAIP Admin Draft Section 8 – Screening Approach – Threshold Metrics, Decision Criteria and Ranking
Task 13.2 – Supply Reliability and Climate Vulnerability Under Task 9, UMass is developing a climate model that will simulate future possible climate scenarios and how these scenarios may impact the City’s operations and water supply. This task will provide input to the climate model to simulate water supply conditions based on the implementation of the preferred alternatives identified through the screening approach in Task 13.1.

The input parameters for the climate model will be developed through coordination with the UMass team, City staff, KJ, GW modelers and other contractors as appropriate. The climate model will be used to simulate the benefit of implementing a phased combination of these water supply projects. It is assumed that the inputs to the climate model will be provided in a table format to the climate modeling team, which may include but not be limited to boundary conditions for timing and quantities for implementation of a portfolio of projects to fill the water supply gaps. For the purpose of this scope, KJ’s effort assumes up to four (4) iterations with the climate modeling team to refine the preferred portfolio.

The model results will be used to inform the City of a phased portfolio of projects that can be implemented to provide reliable water supply under different climate conditions. The model results will also be used to identify triggers for accelerating projects and off-ramps for delaying projects based on climatic conditions. Output from the model will be used to support the development of an adaptive water supply portfolio in Task 13.3 and to inform the WSAIP Report in Task 13.4.

It is assumed that the UMass report, submitted as part of Task 9, will be included as an appendix to the WSAIP report. KJ will summarize the application of the climate vulnerability work and outcomes, as it relates to development of the adaptive water supply portfolio, in Sections 8, 9 and 10, as appropriate.

Task 13.2 Assumptions:
• The development of a climate model for the City (Task 9) will be documented in a TM or report to be included as an appendix to the WSAIP.
• Coordination and integration of projects with the climate model will be part of this current scope of work.
• Continued coordination meetings with UMass to confirm inputs and outputs to support the development of an adaptive water supply portfolio will be conducted under Task 7.1.

Task 13.2 Deliverables:
• Update WSAIP Admin Draft Sections 8, as appropriate
• WSAIP Admin Draft Section 9 – Supply Reliability and Climate Vulnerability

18.18 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx Task 13.3 – Adaptive Water Supply Portfolio
Based on the findings of Task 13.2, a phased set of water supply alternatives will be identified to create an adaptive water supply portfolio for the City. KJ will coordinate with UMass and City staff to refine boundary conditions, input assumptions and output from the climate vulnerability model to confirm a preferred portfolio of projects to meet the City’s water supply gap through changing climatic conditions.

The adaptive water supply portfolio is intended to provide a road map for how different water supply augmentation alternatives would be implemented and provide information to allow the City to move forward with preliminary design and permitting in 2024. The road map will include a phased approach with identified off-ramps and triggers to accelerate or stall actions based on the effectiveness of operational modifications, new facilities, supply/demand management activities, transfers, and climate change over time. A flow chart will be developed to support decision making, for example, identifying that if condition A occurs then project B is on the critical path for implementation, but if condition C occurs then project D is on the critical path for implementation. UMass will provide guidance on offramps and triggers based on changes in precipitation and temperature from the climate model.

Costs will be revisited for the preferred projects in the adaptive water supply portfolio, integrating synergies between projects and incorporating escalation to the anticipated mid-point of construction based on the phasing plan.

A summary of grant and loan opportunities, applicable to the types of projects identified in the portfolio, will be summarized in this task with guidance on actions the City can take now in the future to prepare for and pursue funding opportunities. KJ will prepare a matrix to summarize available funding opportunities with details on the requirements applicable to each program, the process and level of effort to apply, and level of funding possible. This task does not include preparing grant/loan applications, however, if a near-term funding opportunity is identified, KJ could provide this support under Task 13.5 – WSAIP As-Requested Additional Services.

Cost estimates can be refined if needed for combined projects into one adaptive portfolio. Cost estimates will be refined at Class 5 level (see Table 1). Additional scope would be needed to support additional design efforts or updated costs to Class 4 level (see Table 1), to fast-track implementation and pursuit of funding.

Major efforts for this task, and associated assumptions are listed below:
• Develop one preferred adaptive water supply portfolio, which will include a plan layout of treatment facilities, identification conveyance alignments and facilities, and refinement of wells, if appropriate.
• Phasing for implementation will consider how the preferred projects would be phased to meet the City’s overall water supply goals.
• Refine costs, for the preferred projects to represent the integrated facilities, synergies, and phasing.

18.19 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx • Identify next steps for implementation to present to the Water Commission and City Council.

This may include preliminary design, permitting, piloting, funding, outreach, initiation of institutional agreements or other activities to support project implementation.

The outcomes of this task will be presented to at a City Commission or Joint Commission/City Council meeting in 2023 (Task 10.3).

Task 13.3 Assumptions:
• One (1) adaptive portfolio to be developed with phasing, off-ramps and triggers identified using the climate model.

Task 13.3 Deliverables:
• WSAIP Admin Draft Section 10 – Adaptive Water Supply Portfolio Task 13.4 –WSAIP Report
Work under all previous tasks will be compiled in a WSAIP Report. The Report will incorporate the final tables and figures deliverables developed under previous tasks and provide a description of the assumptions, criteria, and methodology for creating alternatives and performing calculations.

Background sections from previous studies will be referenced as needed and reports will be included as appendices.

An outline of the Report will be developed and shared with the City early in the project to solicit input and obtain agreement with our approach for reporting on this effort. The WSAIP Report submittals will include:
• Administrative draft sections for review by the City. • A draft Report of the compiled administrative draft sections, including responses to comments and an executive summary.
• A final Report for publication.

WSAIP Admin Draft Sections
The administrative draft section content will be developed in Tasks 5, 11, 12 and 13. This task includes QAQC efforts and administrative efforts to compile the document. The proposed WSAIP sections include:
• Section 1 – WSAC Background
• Section 2 – WSAIP Augmentation Concepts Overview
• Section 3 – Water Conservation
• Section 4 – In Lieu Water Exchanges and Transfers
• Section 5 – Aquifer Storage and Recovery

18.20 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx • Section 6 – Recycled Water
• Section 7 – Desalination
• Section 8 – Screening Approach – Threshold Metrics, Decision Criteria and Ranking • Section 9 – Supply Reliability and Climate Vulnerability • Section 10 – Adaptive Water Supply Portfolio
• Section 11 – Water Supply Portfolio Implementation
The WSAIP appendices proposed to be included are:

A. ASR TM
B. Groundwater Modeling TMs/studies (MCGB, SMGB)
C. RWFS Phase 2
D. Desalination TM
E. Climate Vulnerability TM
F. TBL/Decision Criteria TM
G. Supporting Materials (Intertie and Transfers, Water Conservation) Draft WSAIP Report
KJ will submit draft submittal documents for review and comment by the City’s PM prior to final document submittal. Any draft documents submitted for preliminary review will bear visual marking of “draft” status on each page. Draft documents must be submitted with sufficient time for review prior to final document submission. The City’s PM will determine how many days prior to final submission is required for review of each submittal. Draft documents submitted after this time may not receive full review and comment before final document submission.

Final WSAIP Report
KJ will submit final reports bearing the stamp, signature, and seal of an engineer licensed to practice in the state of California. The consultant will produce one hard copy and digital (PDF) copy of the Final WSAIP with any relevant supplemental information.

Task 13.4 Assumptions:
• The Admin Draft Sections, Draft and Final Reports will be submitted in electronic format (.doc, .pdf, .xls).
• Up to 5 hard copies of the Final Report can be provided upon request. • This task does not include formatting of TMs or studies performed under separate contracts. • KJ is not responsible for the completeness or accuracy of TMs or studies performed under separate contracts that are included in the Appendices.

Task 13.4 Deliverables:
• Admin Draft Sections (digital in word, excel and pdf)

18.21 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx • Draft WSAIP (digital in word and pdf)
• Final WSAIP (digital in pdf)
Task 13.5 – WSAIP As-Requested Additional Services
A specific scope of work for additional services would be developed collaboratively with the City’s PM and the proposed budget would be authorized on an as-needed basis. As-requested services may include, but not be limited to:
• Additional Meetings/Workshops
• Additional Design Efforts
• Additional Alternatives Evaluation
• Field Surveys/Geotech/Utility work
• Environmental Site Surveys
• Other As-needed Activities

18.22 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx Anticipated Project Schedule
Table 2: Status of Upcoming Work Task Deliverables
Deliverable
Anticipated
Start Date*
Anticipated
End Date Status
Executed Agreement Feb 2022
Notice to Proceed Feb 2022
Data Request Feb 2022
Kick-off Meeting Feb 2022
Commission Meeting #1 Mar 2022 WSAIP Water Supply Alternatives Commission Meeting #2 Jun 2022 WSAIP Alternative Screening Criteria Selection
Commission Meeting #3 Sep 2022 Alternative Screening and Climate Vulnerability
Commission Meeting #4 Dec 2022 WSAIP Alternative Raking and Selection for Adaptive Portfolio
Commission Meeting #5 Mar 2023 WSAIP Alternatives Scoring and Adaptive Portfolio Pathways
Commission Meeting #6 Jul 2023 Draft WSAIP report presentation Admin Draft WSAIP Sections:

Section 1 – WSAC Background Apr 2022
Summary tables/figures for these Sections
will be presented during calls/meetings.

Anticipated completion date is for Admin
Draft Sections. Draft and Final will be
included in the WSAIP submittals.

Section 2 – WSAIP Augmentation Concepts Overview Apr 2022 Section 3 – Water Conservation May 2022
Section 4 – In Lieu Water Exchanges and Transfers May 2022 Section 5 – Aquifer Storage and Recovery Jun 2022
Section 6 – Recycled Water Jun 2022
Section 7 – Desalination Jun 2022
Section 8 – Screening Approach – Threshold Metrics,
Decision Criteria and Ranking Aug 2022
Section 9 – Supply Reliability and Climate Vulnerability Oct 2022 Section 10 – Adaptive Water Supply Portfolio Feb 2023
Section 11 – Water Supply Portfolio Implementation Mar 2022 Draft WSAIP Jun 2023
Final WSAIP Nov 2023
* Actual dates to be confirmed upon NTP. Submittals for sections that are dependent on TMs and studies completed by others under separate contracts may be shifted if necessary.

18.23 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx Budget Modification
To date, project expenditures are within budget and generally track projected cash flow expenditures for the project. A summary of the original scope and budget modification for Amendment #1 is shown in Table 3. Amendment #2 did not include a budget modification. A detailed fee estimate for Amendment #3, by subtask, is included in Table 4.

Table 3: Summary of Budget
Tasks
Total
Est
Hours
Total KJ
Labor
Raucher
LLC
Casey
Brown,
HG
Total
Expenses
Total
Labor +
Sub +
Expenses
Task 1 – 2018 RWFPS Overview 35 $8,315 - - $105 $8,420
Task 2 – RW Regulatory Update 26 $5,870 - - $78 $5,948
Task 3 – Phase 2 Alternatives
Development and Analysis 427 $98,955 - - $6,231 $105,186 Task 4 – Coordination with ASR Project 46 $12,310 - - $138 $12,448 Task 5 – RWFPS Phase 2 236 $50,560 - - $1,030 $51,590
Task 6 – PM and Program Coordination 291 $71,410 - - $4,998 $76,408 ORIGINAL (Tasks 1 - 6) 1,061 $247,420 $0 $0 $12,580 $260,000 Task 7 – As-Requested Activities 232 $47,400 - - $1,961 $49,361 Task 8 - TBL Based Assessment - - $203,500 - $0 $203,500 Task 9 - Vulnerability Assessment and
Adaption Planning - - - $243,344 $0 $243,344
AMENDMENT # 1 (Tasks 7 - 9) 232 $47,400 $203,500 $243,344 $1,961 $496,205 Task 10 – WSAIP PM and Prog Coord. 248 $59,620 - - $7,700 $67,320 Task 11 – WSAIP Technical Tasks 241 $51,295 - - $4,400 $55,695 Task 12 – ASR Technical Tasks 488 $108,520 - - $2,200 $110,720 Task 13 – WSAIP Implementation Plan 528 $114,890 - - $1,375 $116,265 AMENDMENT # 3 (Tasks 10-13) 1,505 $334,325 $0 $0 $15,675 $350,000 Task 1 - 13 Total 2,798 $629,145 $203,500 $243,344 $30,216 $1,106,205

18.24 Heidi Luckenbach
Santa Cruz Water Department
27 January 2022

\\SFOCAD\Projects\PW-Proj\2016\1668007.01_SantaCruzRWFPS_Phase2\01-PreJobInfo\1.02_Amendments\Amendment No.2 WSAIP-ASR\SantaCruzWSAIP_LetterScope_FINAL_1.27.22.docx Closing
We look forward to continuing to work with you to support the City with the development of a WSAIP.

Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions on this proposal.

Very truly yours,

KENNEDY JENKS
Claudia Dawn Taffler, PE, LEED®

KJ Project Manager KJ Principal-in-Charge

18.25 Table 4: Detailed Fee Estimate
Proposal Fee Estimate
CLIENT Name:

PROJECT Description: Santa Cruz RWFPS - Phase 2 Amendment 3 Proposal/Job Number: 1668007*02 Date:

City of Santa Cruz Water Department
January 27, 2022
January 1, 2022 Rates KJ KJ KJ
+
eD,
C
rlie
Classification:

Project Assistant
Total
LaborODCsODCs
Markup
Total
Labor
Total
Expenses
Total Labor + Subs
Expenses
Eng-Sci-9
JeanD, MarkM, David F
Eng-Sci-8 DawnT, Steve
ToddR
Eng-Sci-7
WaltM, SachiI
Eng-Sci-6
Janet H, JamesB, Paul C
Eng-Sci-5
ClaudiaL
Eng-Sci-4
ConnorR
GIS
RachelR
Eng-Sci-3
MichaelM, Marina, Char
Hourly Rate: $310 $295 $275 $250 $225 $205 $145 $190 $135 Hours Fees Fees 10% Fees Task 10 – WSAIP Project Management and Program Coordination Task 10.1 Project Management and Coordination 6 24 30 $7,170 $0 $7,170 $0 $7,170 Task 10.2 Kickoff Meetings and Status Calls (1 -2hr in person + 36 -1hr calls) 26 42 68 $17,120 $1,000 $100 $17,120 $1,100 $18,220 Task 10.3 City Commission Presentations (6, 2-hr in person with PM + technical staf 6 18 6 36 66 $16,920 $6,000 $600 $16,920 $6,600 $23,520 Task 10.4 Monthly Reporting and Invoices (24 months) 36 24 60 $11,340 $0 $11,340 $0 $11,340 Task 10.5 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 10 6 8 24 $7,070 $0 $7,070 $0 $7,070 Task 10 - Subtotal 16 56 14 0 138 0 0 0 24 248 $59,620 $7,000 $700 $59,620 $7,700 $67,320 Task 11 – WSAIP Technical Tasks
Task 11.1 – Overview of Existing Supporting Documentation Review WSAC and Background Studies 4 8 12 $2,420 $0 $2,420 $0 $2,420 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 1 – WSAC Background 2 6 8 1 17 $3,595 $0 $3,595 $0 $3,595 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 2 – WSAIP Augmentation Concepts Overview 2 6 8 1 17 $3,595 $0 $3,595 $0 $3,595 Task 11.2 – Water Conservation
Review Existing Programs, Rates and Projections 4 2 8 14 $3,070 $0 $3,070 $0 $3,070 Meetings with City & Subs (2-1hr calls virtual) 2 2 4 8 $1,760 $2,000 $200 $1,760 $2,200 $3,960 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 3 – Water Conservation 4 2 8 1 15 $3,205 $0 $3,205 $0 $3,205 Task 11.3 – In Lieu Water Exchanges and Transfers
Meetings with SVWDF, SqCWD, City Operators (3-1hr calls virtual) 4 3 6 13 $2,915 $2,000 $200 $2,915 $2,200 $5,115 Identify Interties, capacities and operations 2 2 8 12 $2,570 $0 $2,570 $0 $2,570 Cost Estimates (Capital + O&M) - Level 5 2 2 6 10 $2,190 $0 $2,190 $0 $2,190 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 4 – In Lieu Water Exchanges and Transfers 4 4 12 1 21 $4,415 $0 $4,415 $0 $4,415 Task 11.4 – Recycled Water - Seawater Intrusion Barrier Sea Water Intrusion Alternative development (facility, maps, tables) 4 2 6 4 8 24 $5,130 $0 $5,130 $0 $5,130 Sea Water Instrusion Cost Estimate (Capital + O&M) - Level 5 2 4 2 4 12 $2,800 $0 $2,800 $0 $2,800 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 6 – Recycled Water 2 4 8 1 15 $3,145 $0 $3,145 $0 $3,145 Task 11.5 – Desalination
Meeting to Define Desalination Alternative (1-1hr) 1 2 2 5 $1,125 $0 $1,125 $0 $1,125 Define Desalination Alternative Facilities (Map/tables) 2 2 4 12 20 $3,900 $0 $3,900 $0 $3,900 Desalination Cost update (Capital + O&M) - Level 5 1 2 4 7 $1,555 $0 $1,555 $0 $1,555 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 7 – Desalination 2 4 12 1 19 $3,905 $0 $3,905 $0 $3,905 Task 11 - Subtotal 0 18 22 12 49 0 8 126 6 241 $51,295 $4,000 $400 $51,295 $4,400 $55,695 Task 12 – Aquifer Storage and Recovery Technical Tasks
Task 12.1 - Mid County Groundwater Basin ASR
Workshops (virtual) with GW Modeling Team/City ASR group (4 - 1 hr) 4 2 6 12 24 $5,540 $1,000 $100 $5,540 $1,100 $6,640 Develop ASR alternatives (up to 3: ASR, ASR/IPR, ASR/SW intrusion) 6 8 8 24 40 86 $19,570 $0 $19,570 $0 $19,570 Define ASR Facilities needed per alternative (Maps/Tables) 4 8 6 24 40 8 90 $19,640 $0 $19,640 $0 $19,640 Cost Estimates (Capital + O&M) - Level 5 2 6 2 12 22 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 5.1 – Mid County ASR 6 8 4 8 40 6 1 73 $15,975 $0 $15,975 $0 $15,975 Task 12.2 - SMGWB ASR
Workshops (virtual) with GW Modeling Team/City ASR group (4 - 1 hr) 4 2 6 12 24 $5,540 $1,000 $100 $5,540 $1,100 $6,640 Develop ASR alternatives (up to 2 assumed) 2 4 4 12 24 46 $10,310 $0 $10,310 $0 $10,310 Define ASR Facilities needed per alternative (Maps/Tables) 2 4 4 12 24 6 52 $11,180 $0 $11,180 $0 $11,180 Cost Estimates (Capital + O&M) - Level 5 2 4 2 12 20 $4,500 $0 $4,500 $0 $4,500 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 5.2 – SMGWB ASR 4 6 4 8 24 4 1 51 $11,265 $0 $11,265 $0 $11,265 Task 12 - Subtotal 0 36 42 40 104 240 24 0 2 488 $108,520 $2,000 $200 $108,520 $2,200 $110,720 Task 13 – WSAIP Implementation Plan
Task 13.1 – Screening Approach - Threshold Metrics, Decision Criteria and Ranking Define Consolidated Criteria WSAC/TBL plus/GSP/Climate 6 8 12 26 $5,850 $0 $5,850 $0 $5,850 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 8 – Thresholds and Decision Criteria 2 4 12 1 19 $3,905 $0 $3,905 $0 $3,905 Task 13.2 – Supply Reliability and Climate Vulnerability Alternative Comparison and Ranking (apply criteria for non-RW ) 4 24 12 40 $8,860 $0 $8,860 $0 $8,860 Review Climate Model results (heat maps) 24 12 36 $7,680 $0 $7,680 $0 $7,680 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 9 – Thresholds and Decision Criteria (off ramps) 2 12 8 1 23 $4,945 $0 $4,945 $0 $4,945 Task 13.3 – Adaptive Water Supply Portfolio
Define Adaptive portfolio objectives & boundaries 2 12 24 38 $7,850 $0 $7,850 $0 $7,850 Develo Adaptive portfolio Combination of Alternatives 4 12 4 24 44 $9,020 $0 $9,020 $0 $9,020 Develop triggers and off-ramps for recommended Portfolio 4 12 18 34 $7,300 $0 $7,300 $0 $7,300 Refine Costs Estimate (Capital + O&M) - Level 5 4 2 2 12 20 $4,470 $0 $4,470 $0 $4,470 Define Implementation plan for Adaptive Portfolio 4 6 12 6 28 $6,850 $0 $6,850 $0 $6,850 Define Regulatory Requirements for Adaptive Portfolio 4 2 2 8 $1,930 $0 $1,930 $0 $1,930 WSAIP Admin Draft Section 10 – Adaptive Water Supply Portfolio 4 2 8 16 1 31 $6,805 $0 $6,805 $0 $6,805 Task 13.4 – WSAIP Report
Admin WSAIP Draft Sections 2 4 8 2 16 $3,280 $0 $3,280 $0 $3,280 WSAIP Appendices 2 2 4 $650 $0 $650 $0 $650
Draft WSAIP Report 4 4 8 4 24 3 47 $9,765 $0 $9,765 $0 $9,765 Final WSAIP Report 4 8 12 3 27 $5,730 $1,250 $125 $5,730 $1,375 $7,105 Task 13.5 – WSAIP As-Requested Additional Services
WSAIP As-needed Activities 8 8 8 8 24 12 12 6 86 $20,000 $0 $20,000 $0 $20,000 Task 13 - Subtotal 24 50 12 10 176 12 8 216 20 528 $114,890 $1,250 $125 $114,890 $1,375 $116,265 Tasks 10-13 Total 40 160 90 62 467 252 40 342 52 1505 $334,325 $14,250 $1,425 $334,325 $15,675 $350,000

18.26 18.27
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-01

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ REPEALING CHAPTER 16.03 OF THE SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO RETROFIT

REQUIREMENT UPON SALE OF REAL PROPERTY
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz as follows:

Section 1. Chapter 16.03 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby repealed.

Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in force and take effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.

PASSED FOR PUBLICATION this 25th day of January, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Cummings, Brown, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

19.1 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-01
2 PASSED FOR FINAL ADOPTION this ____ day of ____, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
This is to certify that the above and
foregoing document is the original
of Ordinance No. 2022-01 and that
it has been published or posted in
accordance with the Charter of the
City of Santa Cruz.
________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

19.2 Proof of Publication
(2015 C.C.P.)
I, the undersigned, declare:

That I caused the attached legal notice/advertisement to be published in the Santa Cruz Good Times, a weekly newspaper published and circulated in the County of Santa Cruz, and adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of California in and for the County of Santa Cruz, under Proceeding No. 68833; and that the legal notice/advertisement was published in the above-named newspaper on the following date(s), to wit:

February 2, 2022
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

This 2nd day of February, 2021, Santa Cruz, California
____________________________
Julia Wood
Deputy City Clerk Administrator
Julia Wood

19.3 DECLARATION OF POSTING

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS.

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ )
On the 25th day of January 2022, I posted conspicuously in three public places within the City of Santa Cruz, Ordinance No. 2022-01, to wit:

1. City Hall: 809 Center Street: Bulletin Board outside Room 9/10

2. City Hall: Bulletin Board outside Council Chambers

3. The City of Santa Cruz website
The document, posted in its entirety, consists of pages 1—2.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 31st day of January, 2022, in Santa Cruz, California.
_______________________________
Julia Wood
Deputy City Clerk Administrator
Julia Wood

19.4 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 01/25/2022
AGENDA OF: 02/08/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Council
SUBJECT: Opposition to the Potential Adverse Abandonment Actions for Heavy Freight Rail Service on the Felton Branch Line and Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line (CN)
RECOMMENDATION: Direct the Mayor to notify the Santa Cruz Regional Transportation Commission that the Santa Cruz City Council opposes the potential adverse abandonment actions for heavy freight rail service on the Felton Branch Line and Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line.

BACKGROUND: Councilmembers may be aware that the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) received an informational report on February 3rd regarding the potential preservation of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line by railbanking, including potentially filing adverse abandonment actions for heavy freight rail on the Santa Cruz Branch Line and Felton Branch Line, and allowing for the termination of the Administrative, Coordination and License (ACL) Agreement with Saint Paul and Pacific Railway (SPPR).

Attached is a letter from the Roaring Camp Railroads indicating that this potential action threatens the future viability of the company’s operations. A copy of the Santa Cruz Regional Transportation Commission’s Agenda Report on the topic for the February 3rd Commission Meeting is also attached for the Council’s information.

Roaring Camp has been providing excursion passenger rail service from Felton to the Boardwalk for many years and is a strong contributor to the local economy. In addition, the company has operated freight along the rail line in the past and has expressed interest in preserving the ability to do so again in the future.

DISCUSSION: The RTC’s potential adverse abandonment actions for heavy freight rail on the Felton Branch Line and Santa Cruz Branch Line could threaten Roaring Camp’s ability to offer freight service in the future and undermine their overall viability as a rail operator. As a longstanding partner and important contributor to the local economy, we request that the City Council inform the RTC of its concerns associated with the potential adverse abandonment proposal and indicate its opposition at this time.

In addition to the information attached to this report, staff have also invited Guy Preston, RTC Executive Director, to make a presentation to the Council outlining the relevant background and potential actions under consideration by the RTC.

20.1 FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Submitted By:

Justin Cummings
Councilmember
Submitted By:

Sandy Brown
Councilmember
Submitted By:

Sonja Brunner
Mayor
ATTACHMENTS:

1. LETTER FROM ROARING CAMP RAILROADS.PDF

2. SANTA CRUZ REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT.PDF

20.2 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:

Jeanette Guire
[email protected], (831) 335-4484
ROARING CAMP REJECTS RTC’S PLAN TO FORCE ABANDONMENT OF RAIL LINE Regional Transportation Commission to consider plan that threatens Roaring Camp rail line, as well as future of rail transportation in Santa Cruz County FELTON, CA – JANUARY 19, 2022 – Roaring Camp, Inc. (Roaring Camp), operator of the Santa Cruz, Big Trees & Pacific Railway, today called upon the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) to reject at its Feb. 3, 2022, meeting the hostile attempt proposed by RTC staff to initiate a process that aims to force abandonment of the Felton Branch Rail Line. Forced abandonment of the line, which is wholly owned by Roaring Camp, would remove Roaring Camp’s right to utilize the rail line for freight use. Loss of the right to freight us would have a highly negative impact on Roaring Camp’s business and would represent the first step in a larger, special interests-fueled effort to end rail service in Santa Cruz County.

Roaring Camp released the following statement from CEO Melani Clark:
“Roaring Camp is strongly opposed to the RTC’s proposed action to pursue forced abandonment of the rail line we’ve owned and operated since 1984 because doing so will seriously harm our local, family-run, women-owned business, and our local economy. The RTC’s proposal represents an aggressive attack on our railroad and rail transportation in our county, fueled by special interests that are lobbying hard to end rail in Santa Cruz County. We encourage our community to join Roaring Camp in standing up against this poorly conceived, shortsighted move.

Roaring Camp’s diversified business operates in both North County and South County, and includes freight and tourist trains. Forced abandonment of the Felton Branch Rail Line will cause multiple adverse impacts for Roaring Camp, beginning with a permanent end to freight operations, which removes rail service as an option for local businesses.

Roaring Camp is under contract to provide freight service on the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line through an agreement reached with the freight operator in 2021, including in South County where we are currently seeing growth in our services for multiple local industries. However, due to inaction by the RTC to repair two bridges, currently freight service is prevented from running the full distance between Santa Cruz and Watsonville (and beyond). Responsibility for the lack of access to freight services for local businesses north of Watsonville rests with the RTC under its agreement with the freight operator. This unfortunate circumstance is holding back our community in terms of economic development that supports job and income growth, and as an important strategy in the fight against climate change – freight-by-rail accounts for only 2% of greenhouse gas emissions, compared to 24% coming from trucks on roadways, according to the U.S. EPA.

In North County, the threatened loss of Roaring Camp’s right to freight service is especially alarming as we look ahead to the rebuilding process in the wake of the CZU Lightning Complex fire that destroyed

20.3 approximately 900 homes in the Santa Cruz Mountains. Rail presents a critical advantage as we confront rising materials prices and trucking shortages, with freight rail serving as a dependable, cost-effective and greener alternative. Freight rail also represents a potential tool for our community as we consider how to prepare for future climate-related disasters that may require the need to deliver emergency water and emergency fire-fighting assets to the region.

Roaring Camp’s tourist train operations are also threatened by the RTC’s forced abandonment plans. Our tourist trains carry approximately 200,000 - 250,000 guests per year (pre-pandemic), with a very large portion of those guests staying in area hotels, contributing to the local economy and tax base. Our beach train operations that run from Felton to the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk remove approximately 9,000 cars off the road during busy summer months. Forced abandonment represents a serious overreach of local government and is a clear threat to our business including the more than 60 permanent employees who work for Roaring Camp, as well as many more seasonal employees.

But make no mistake, the RTC’s proposal goes well beyond impacting Roaring Camp; the proposal is clearly part of a larger scheme that will have permanent and deeply negative impacts for our entire county. Should the Felton Line be declared abandoned, Roaring Camp’s rail line will be the first domino to fall in a series of moves that would conclude with abandonment of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line (SCBRL) that runs the length of Santa Cruz County. Abandonment of the SCBRL will result in the permanent end to any possibility of passenger rail service for Santa Cruz County. The RTC’s potential aggressive action against Roaring Camp should serve as a major wake-up call for anyone who is interested in a future that includes both a rail and a trail system for our county. This isn’t just about Roaring Camp. It’s about our entire community and our future.

The RTC’s forced abandonment of the Felton Branch Rail Line also represents a breach of trust and a betrayal of a commitment. Roaring Camp was urged by local elected officials to give up its right of first refusal to purchase the Santa Cruz Branch Rail line from Union Pacific. My family was assured the rail line was an extremely important asset to the county, that the RTC had worked hard to line up funding from the state and that the sale to the RTC was for the benefit of the entire community. Roaring Camp was assured the line would be used for rail, thanks to funding from Proposition 116, which specifically calls for a commitment to rail service. In response, Roaring Camp cleared the way for the RTC to purchase the line.

Now, the RTC is targeting Roaring Camp’s Felton Branch Rail Line as the first step toward forced abandonment of the full Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line and a betrayal of a commitment made to future rail that was made to Roaring Camp, the people of Santa Cruz County and the State of California.

Roaring Camp has decades of history providing rail service in Santa Cruz County and we continue to be devoted to delivering quality transportation and recreation opportunities for local residents and businesses, as well as visitors. We look forward to engaging with our community in the fight to stop the RTC’s attempt to force abandonment of the Felton Branch Rail Line.”
ABOUT ROARING CAMP, INC.

Incorporated in 1958, privately held Roaring Camp, Inc. (Roaring Camp) operates two railroads, including the Redwood Forest Steam Train and the Santa Cruz Big Trees & Pacific Railway. Roaring Camp also owns the historic Felton Branch Rail Line, which is eight miles long and runs across a 1909 steel truss bridge and passes through a tunnel in Santa Cruz that was built in 1875. Norman Clark founded Roaring Camp and ran the business until his passing in 1985, after which his wife, Georgiana assumed ownership and management responsibilities. She was succeeded as CEO by Georgiana and Norman’s daughter, Melani Clark. Roaring Camp is a woman-owned business, with majority shareholders that include Melani Clark and her two sisters. Visit www.roaringcamp.com for more information. ###

20.4 AGENDA: February 3, 2022
TO: Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission FROM: Guy Preston, Executive Director
RE: Informational Report on the Potential Preservation of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line by Railbanking including Future Potential Adverse Abandonment Actions for Heavy Freight Rail Only & Termination of the ACL Agreement

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) consider this informational item, take public comment and advise Staff of any additional questions or information requests the Commission may have regarding the potential for preservation of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line (SCBRL) by railbanking, including potentially filing adverse abandonment actions for heavy freight rail only on the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line and the Felton Branch Line, and allowing for the termination of the Administrative, Coordination and License (ACL) Agreement with Saint Paul and Pacific Railway (SPPR). As this is an informational item only, there is no Commission action anticipated as part of this item.

BACKGROUND
On September 2, 2021, staff provided the Commission with an informational report (See Item #20) on preservation of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line (SCBRL).

The report discussed four uses of the corridor including:
• Freight Rail
• Recreational Passenger Rail
• Commuter Passenger Rail
• Multi-Use Bicycle and Pedestrian Trail (Coastal Rail Trail) The September report provided background information on our freight operator, Saint Paul and Pacific Railroad (SPPR) notifications to RTC of its intent to terminate the Administration, Coordination and License (ACL) Agreement and abandon freight rail service on the SCBRL. The Commission discussed three approaches to preservation of the SCBRL:

20.5 SCBRL Preservation Page 2
• Continued Freight and Recreational Rail Service
• A Public Private Partnership (P3)
• Railbanking
Negotiations with Roaring Camp Railroads
SPPR reached out to Roaring Camp as a potential operator and successor to the ACL Agreement. On June 28, 2020, Roaring Camp provided a letter (Attachment 1) to RTC expressing an interest in operating freight on the line, but listing terms in the ACL Agreement, which provided them cause for concern, including that “…we not be saddled with a significant maintenance obligation, particularly for catastrophic events, on a line that has modest prospects for generating substantial revenue.”
During 2021, RTC completed repairs on the SCBRL for Phase I (MP 0.0-MP

7.0) of the ACL Agreement at a cost of approximately $4.5 Million and estimated that the cost of completing the remaining “initial” repairs for Phase II (MP 7.0-31.58) of ACL Agreement would be between $48.7 Million - $63.7 Million.

RTC staff had subsequent discussions with Roaring Camp regarding the cost of maintaining the line and potentially assigning the ACL Agreement to them. In each of those meetings, Roaring Camp was unwilling to assume maintenance responsibilities on the SCBRL. They stated that they concur with SPPR in that the ACL Agreement “creates too large of a burden on the operator”. RTC subsequently discussed the option of railbanking the SCBRL in lieu of continuing freight rail on the SCBRL, with both SPPR and Roaring Camp. On March 18, 2021, Roaring Camp provided a letter (Attachment 2) stating they would oppose railbanking heavy freight on the SCBRL.

On November 4, 2021, staff provided the Commission with a report (see Item #19) on an unsolicited proposal by Roaring Camp and TIG/m to negotiate a public private partnership (P3) with the RTC to continue and expand freight and recreational rail service under a public private partnership (P3) arrangement. The proposal required RTC to perform the $48.7-$63.7 Million in “initial” repairs and that Roaring Camp would only be responsible for normal wear and tear, specifying that “structural damage that is not normal wear and tear, such as Acts of God, or pre-existing conditions” shall be funded by RTC, thus proposing that RTC’s financial responsibility for costly repairs needed for heavy freight service on the SCBRL increase to an even greater degree than some may contend exists in the existing ACL Agreement. Staff did not recommend entering such an

20.6 SCBRL Preservation Page 3
arrangement with Roaring Camp and TIG/m, and the Commission took no action.

Railbanking Framework and Applicability to the Regional Transportation Program, including the Coastal Rail Trail In recognizing the important interest in maintaining the nation’s network of railroad rights-of-way, the federal government incorporated provisions into the National Trails System Act (“Rails to Trails Act”), which are designed to prevent an interest in a railroad right-of-way from reverting under state law to an underlying fee owner when the right-of-way is held for use as a trail after a railroad discontinues service, and the trail sponsor agrees that the right-of-way will be held for future reactivation of freight rail service. The Rails to Trails Act provides an alternative to completely abandoning a railroad right-of-way by allowing a railroad to negotiate a trail use agreement with a prospective trail operator, while preserving the rail rightof-way for potential future freight re-activation.

In order to preserve a railroad right-of-way under the Rails to Trails Act, parties utilize a mechanism called “Railbanking.” Railbanking is a voluntary process whereby a freight railroad company and a trail agency enter into an agreement to use a rail corridor that has been approved for abandonment as a trail (or some other use, including commuter rail with trail) until some future time when the railroad might need the corridor again for freight rail service. Railbanking is specifically designed to address the common situation where, as is the case with the SCBRL, a rail corridor is held under several different ownership types along its length. These ownership differences are largely irrelevant while a corridor is in active railroad use and used only for railroad purposes. However, once a railroad decides to abandon a corridor, these ownership distinctions become important. Upon complete abandonment, under the law of some states (including California), a railroad may lose any rights to possess or transfer parcels of land within the corridor to which it merely held as an easement and whose use is limited to railroad purposes. Upon complete abandonment of railroad operations, even though the corridor may appear unchanged, it may no longer exist as a continuous right-of-way, and the fee owners of the underlying land regain full rights to the affected pieces of the corridor. Railbanking a corridor precludes complete abandonment, and railbanking preserves the railroad’s right to transfer all forms of ownership, including easements, to a trail group, which could be the RTC. Railbanking also permits an expanded use of the corridor, including the development of a trail and other potential uses.

RTC holds a mix of fee and easement ownership interests in the SCBRL.

RTC has more limited usage rights in the portions of the SCBRL where it only

20.7 SCBRL Preservation Page 4
holds easements for railroad purpose (Attachment 3). RTC is potentially subject to taking claims if RTC attempts to utilize those portions of the SCBRL in a manner that expands the stated purpose for those easements.

Railbanking is a method for constructing active use trails within existing freight easements that have these types of ownership constraints.

Railbanking does not require (or preclude) that the rail be removed, but it would allow the RTC to construct a trail in any configuration without needing to obtain additional property rights to build a trail within a railway easement.

After railbanking, any property owner claims that allege that the trail is not permitted in the railroad easement would be directed to the Federal Government, which has a process for addressing their financial claims.

Railbanking thereby provides protections to the RTC from potential financial liability associated with building an active transportation trail along rail easements, in any configuration. Note that the Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transportation (SMART) did not railbank freight and built a trail adjacent to their commuter rail project. SMART was recently sued by adjacent property owners for inverse condemnation.

If RTC were to railbank a portion of the line, RTC would be responsible for preserving the railbanked right-of-way for future re-activation of freight rail.

Preservation efforts allow for a trail, but one is not required. RTC could leave the rails in place, reconfigure the rail for rail and trail, and continue planning for future passenger rail service. RTC could choose to continue some freight service on the line while the line is railbanked, but it would not be required to do so. Railbanking increases local control of the corridor to make these decisions.

Railbanking would eliminate the need to contract with a freight operator and commuter rail and a trail could be prioritized over freight improvements.

RTC would no longer need to contract with a freight operator and could terminate the ACL Agreement with SPPR, as requested by SPPR.

Termination of the ACL Agreement would terminate the effectiveness of the provisions relevant to potential Phase II repairs north of MP 7.0. Note: RTC has completed the Phase I repairs representing the southernmost 7 miles of the line, including the 2017 storm damage related washouts and emergency repair to the trestle at MP 4.87 near Gallighan Slough.

RTC has also been working on the Phase II repairs. The repairs necessary to complete Phase II of the track include 25 of the 37 railroad bridges, 3 drainage cross culverts, at least 2 grade crossings, repairs to coastal erosion near Manresa State Beach, track repairs, and a significant capital maintenance effort along the 9 mile stretch of the north coast from MP 22 to MP 31. Staff prepared planning-level cost estimates of these necessary

20.8 SCBRL Preservation Page 5
repairs amount to $33.7 Million (2021$), excluding the Capitola Trestle. The replacement of the 150-foot-single span wrought iron bridge (MP 15.89c) over Soquel Creek is not recommended for freight loading, and the timber trestles of the Capitola Trestle warrant a complete rehabilitation at a minimum. The Capitola Trestle work alone represents another $15 Million - $30 Million of expenses. The ACL Agreement does not impose an absolute requirement on RTC to make the “initial” repairs noted above. Instead, the relevant language in Section 5.1 of the ACL Agreement states that if RTC does not make improvements to the section of the track north of MP 7 and through MP 31.39, SPPR’s obligation to provide transportation service (i.e. excursion train service as distinguished from mass transit or commuter service) is extended accordingly. It is possible that RTC might not be able to fund and complete the repairs prior to the expiration of the ACL Agreement in 2028.

The Measure D expenditure plan provides 8% of revenue (approximately $2 Million annually) for Rail Corridor infrastructure preservation and analysis of options, representing RTC’s only dedicated funding source for the preservation of the rail corridor. RTC staff has pursued grant funding for short line freight operations and continues to seek ways to leverage additional State and Federal government funds for repairs. RTC was successful on one grant application to leverage local funds to pay for repairs of the Pajaro railroad bridge in Watsonville (See Item #8 on today’s agenda), where there is freight traffic, but there are limited opportunities for future freight rail grants on a line with no freight service beyond Watsonville.

At this time staff believes that abandonment of the freight easement in association with termination of the ACL Agreement (at least as it applies north of Watsonville or MP 3.0) and railbanking will facilitate RTC’s ability to deliver a trail in conjunction with other regional priority projects specified in the RTC’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). These actions would:
1) eliminate ownership constraints related SCCRTC’s use of railroad easements for a trail;
2) eliminate, for the duration of railbanking, the need to complete expensive repairs on the SCBL that would be necessary for freight rail service, deferring the need to divert discretionary funds from other projects or implement a new dedicated local funding source to pay for the repairs;
3) preserve the rail corridor in a manner that would provide local control and flexibility on decision making, until such time that RTC or another

20.9 SCBRL Preservation Page 6
freight operator desired to and could finance the resumption of freight rail service; and,
4) provide an avenue for the current rail operator to exit the ACL Agreement and would avoid the need for SCCRTC to find another entity to assume the ACL Agreement over the portion of the line that is railbanked.

However, there are a number of other factors that the Commission should consider in determining whether and how to pursue railbanking on the SCBRL. These issues include:
i. that the process for railbanking would require the filing with the Surface Transportation Board of an application or request for exemption for authority to abandon (referred to herein for simplicity as a “Notice of Abandonment”);
ii. that SPPR continues to hold the freight easement on the SCBRL and has chosen not to follow through with filing their Notice of Abandonment even though SPPR still desires to terminate the ACL Agreement and extinguish their ownership of the freight easement;
iii. the Felton Line is also a freight rail line, and railbanking the SCBRL would effectively leave Roaring Camp’s potential freight operations as a stranded segment (i.e. not connected to the interstate freight system); and,
iv. Roaring Camp has voiced opposition to railbanking the RTC owned SCBRL.

Railbanking Process
An applicant submitting a request for abandonment authority to the STB must file an Environmental Report on the proposed action. This report is distinct to the abandonment process and notwithstanding the name of the report it is substantively different from either a standard NEPA or CEQA environmental analysis report. The report would include consultation with other agencies regarding the proposed action’s environmental effects.

Railway counsel does not believe that there would necessarily be any environmental objections that could/would be raised by any of the applicable agencies from the abandonment/cessation of the (non-existent) freight service. In addition to the Environmental Report, an applicant for abandonment authority must also file an Historic Report on the proposed

20.10 SCBRL Preservation Page 7
actions. The Historic Report is to be combined with the Environmental Report where, as here, one is required. Following the submission of the Environmental and Historic Report, the STB’s Office of Economic Analysis (“OEA”) will generally prepare an Environmental Assessment.

Along with the reports, a Notice of Abandonment would need to be filed with the STB. SPPR, as the holder of the freight easement, is the entity that would typically file the Notice of Abandonment. Subsequent to its initial indications, SPPR has indicated that it would not file the Notice of Abandonment considering Roaring Camp’s objections. Alternatively, RTC can file for Adverse Abandonment (see section below). In either case, RTC would want to request a railbanking order (a “notice of interim trail use (NITU)”), which is required to be submitted to the STB no more than 30- days after an application for an abandonment is filed with the STB, if there was action to move forward with abandonment proceedings.

Once a Notice of Abandonment has been filed, other potential railway operators, including Roaring Camp, could then make an Offer of Financial Assistance (“OFA”) to try to prevent abandonment or railbanking. An OFA would include the obligations to purchase the rail line at net liquidation value, and to assume the Freight Easement, the associated common carrier responsibilities, and the maintenance of the line. Due to the significant cost of work needed to restore freight on the line and no freight activity north of Watsonville, a viable OFA seems unlikely. The ability to generate revenue from recreational rail would not be considered in an OFA. In addition, any railroad making an OFA would also likely need to secure an ACL Agreement with RTC if it wants RTC’s assistance with the management of the right of way. Based on previous discussions with Roaring Camp, it does not appear likely that Roaring Camp and RTC would be able to mutually agree on terms for a new ACL Agreement as Roaring Camp has not been willing to assume the necessary repair and maintenance costs that are necessary to allow heavy freight service along the entire SCBRL.

If an OFA was not viable, Roaring Camp could still object to the abandonment of the SCBRL, as the Felton Line is technically a freight rail line, and an abandonment action would leave the Felton Line “stranded” (disconnected from the interstate freight network). This objection would likely necessitate a determination on whether freight service should also be abandoned on the Felton Line, before the STB might rule on the abandonment of the SCBRL.

Assuming the STB determines that both lines can be abandoned for heavy freight and considers the NITU for the SCBRL, then the RTC and the owner of the freight easement will have a period (initially a year) to negotiate a

20.11 SCBRL Preservation Page 8
railbanking agreement, but the timeline could be shorter if an agreement is reached. Under the NITU and the railbanking agreement, RTC could become the interim trail manager for the railbanked section of the SCBRL. RTC would need to assume financial liability to maintain the right-of-way and would have certain responsibilities to manage the property in a manner that does not preclude future potential reactivation of freight rail service. Once railbanked, RTC could construct a trail with or without the tracks being left on the property or some sort of transit service.

Adverse Abandonment
If an agreement with Roaring Camp and SPPR cannot be reached, it appears that RTC’s only method of railbanking the SCBRL would be to file for adverse abandonment. Adverse abandonment is a process when a person or entity that does not own the freight easement files a request with the STB to order to force the abandonment of freight services on a rail line. This process is typically initiated when there is no active freight service on a line (as is the case with the SCBRL past MP 3.0) and when the requesting party desires to have the freight line taken out of service so that the railroad right of way can be used for purposes other than freight service including railbanking.

The STB leans towards preserving rail service when there is a railroad that is making legitimate attempts to continue or restart freight operations and there is at least some reasonable chance for future freight rail service.

However, it is generally not enough for the railroad operator or the potential shipper to simply say they have an intent to ship freight by rail over the line.

Thus, the absence of freight service on the line even before the SCBRL went out of service will be relevant to the STB’s determination. Also, often when adverse abandonment is sought, the tracks are inoperable and costly to repair which makes it easier to make the necessary findings that service is unlikely to be restored.

Addressing Roaring Camp Objections
For RTC to be able to railbank the SCBRL, Roaring Camp’s objections must be addressed. It remains preferable to reach an agreement with Roaring Camp, before taking any action(s) with the STB. RTC has offered Roaring Camp a long-term lease of the portion of the SCBRL that Roaring Camp uses to ensure that they can continue to run their recreational service to the Boardwalk. RTC staff has also discussed the possibility with Roaring Camp of expanding recreational service to Davenport. Finally, RTC has discussed potential financial considerations to move Roaring Camp’s railroad equipment by truck. These considerations should allow Roaring Camp to continue and possibly expand their core recreational rail business, including

20.12 SCBRL Preservation Page 9
service to the Boardwalk on the SCBRL. Beyond Roaring Camp’s opposition to railbanking the RTC owned SCBRL, RTC has no interest in the Felton line and is not proposing that Roaring Camp stop serving the Boardwalk with their successful Beach Train, subject to RTC and Roaring Camp reaching agreement on a new agreement on mutually agreeable terms.

Although RTC could file for adverse abandonment and railbanking of the RTC owned SCBRL, allowing Roaring Camp’s objections to be settled as part of those proceedings, adverse abandonment and railbanking the SCBRL could be a long process due to Roaring Camp’s objections. Another potential approach would be for RTC to file for adverse abandonment of heavy freight only on the Felton Branch Line, as an initial step to railbanking the SCBRL.

A determination of abandonment of freight on the Felton line would be based on whether there are realistic expectations for profitable freight service on that line. Note that the STB does not regulate recreational rail and the RTC would only be seeking to gain clarification as to whether the Felton line’s current freight status can be used to stop railbanking of the SCBRL. This action could potentially provide the resolution of the stranded line argument, in advance and separate of potential subsequent actions to abandon and railbank the SCBRL and terminate the ACL Agreement.

In either case, an Environmental and Historic Report would ultimately need to be prepared, so it may be more straight forward and timely to address the Felton Line separately. Based on there not being any freight on the rail line and an assumption that Roaring Camp would not remove their rail facilities or change the recreational use of the line, the Environmental and Historic Report would likely not show any adverse environmental effects by removing federal protections of non-existing freight and the proceeding could potentially occur in advance of any future potential attempt to abandon and railbank the SCBRL.

Whether and if RTC chooses to file for adverse abandonment of the SCBRL or the Felton line, the disposition of freight on the Felton line needs to be addressed. Even if adverse abandonment of heavy freight is approved, Roaring Camp could continue their recreational service to the Boardwalk, under their existing trackage agreement or a new agreement with RTC.

That said, it would still be preferable to negotiate an agreement with Roaring Camp avoiding any adverse abandonment action. If the STB denies the abandonment of freight of the Felton Branch Line, railbanking of the SCBRL become much less likely or possible.

Cost of Abandonment and Railbanking

20.13 SCBRL Preservation Page 10
As estimated by legal counsel, the costs associated with the filing of an adverse abandonment action include the filing fee for an adverse abandonment application ($27,000), the filing fee for the petition for waivers ($2,200), the attorney’s fees to prepare the combined environmental and historic report ($5,000-$7,500), and preliminary attorney’s fees for preparation of the adverse abandonment application ($25,000-$30,000).

The total estimated cost of filing an adverse abandonment application totals $59,200-$66,700 per action. As RTC is a governmental agency, some or all the filing fees may be waived by the STB. As with other litigation, if the railroad were to vigorously oppose the application, there would likely be additional attorneys’ fees incurred by railway counsel that are difficult to estimate but would add additional costs.

As mentioned earlier, the Measure D-expenditure, approved by 2/3 of Santa Cruz County voters, provides 8% of for Rail Corridor infrastructure preservation and analysis of its future potential use to better serve Santa Cruz County residents and visitors. The Measure Revenues do not include funding for any new train/rail service. Since railbanking is a method of preserving the rail corridor, it would be possible to consider using Measure D funds (or potentially other RTC Discretionary funding) for the expenses associated with railbanking the corridor.

There have been questions as to whether RTC would need to pay back any of the funds used to purchase the rail line and make improvements in order to railbank the SCBRL. California voter approved Proposition 116 funds and STIP funds were used to purchase the line. RTC accepted State funds with conditions that: (1) RTC be responsible or initiating recreational passenger rail service, (2) RTC be responsible for hazardous waste clean-up, (3) RTC be responsible for continuing freight rail service for as long as would be required by the STB, and (4) in the case where RTC ceases to utilize the Branch Line for the original purpose as approved by the Commission, RTC commits to reimburse the State the greater of either the amount allocated or the then present fair market value as determined by the State.

RTC has met Condition 1 with continued Roaring Camp service and the Christmas train service initiated by Iowa Pacific, SPPR’s predecessor. RTC continues to monitor hazardous waste on the Corridor and provide any necessary clean up, as required by the County Department of Environmental Health Services (EHS). RTC has continued freight service on the SCBRL and if the STB were to approve either abandonment or railbanking of the SCBRL, STB will have determined that providing freight service will at least temporarily no longer be required. Finally, since railbanking provides for preserving the corridor for future freight rail service, RTC would not be considering an action to stop using the rail line for its intended purpose.

20.14 SCBRL Preservation Page 11
Railbanking Agreement
As mentioned earlier, in order to railbank the SCBRL, RTC would need to ultimately negotiate a railbanking agreement with the freight operator. The ACL Agreement requires that upon termination of the ACL Agreement, SPPR shall cooperate with the transfer or abandonment of Freight Service as requested by the Commission. The ACL Agreement includes provisions to provide for railbanking, in lieu of complete abandonment. The step of transferring the freight easement to RTC would allow RTC to negotiate the railbanking agreement on RTC’s own terms and have prioritization for any future potential request to re-activate freight on the SCBRL.

There are few requirements in the Rails to Trails Act or the STB regulation for the railbanking agreement. When the holder of the residual freight reactivation rights (the “residual operator”) and the trail sponsor enter into the railbanking agreement they must jointly notify the STB that an agreements has been reached, and certify to the STB that the agreement requires the trail sponsor to assume full responsibility for (1) managing the right-of-way, (2) any legal liability arising out of the transfer or use of the right-of-way (unless the user is immune from liability in which case it need only indemnify the railroad against any potential liability), and (3) the payment of any and all taxes that may be levied or assessed against the right-of-way. (The railbanking agreement does not get filed with the STB).

There are no other formal requirements for a railbanking agreement.

However, the residual operator and the trail sponsor are free to negotiate and include other contractual obligations in the railbanking agreement, including the notice to be given to reactivate rail service, the amount that would need to be paid to the trail sponsor for improvements and repairs made to the property, whether trail improvements need to be left in place (so long as they would not interfere with the reactivation of freight rail service), and what obligations, if any, the trail sponsor would have to maintain the property including leaving or removing the tracks on the property (and for what period of time).

Since a railbanking order requires that the right-of-way be preserved for future re-activation of heavy freight rail, it is implicit that any potentially removed tracks will need to be replaced by the freight railroad upon a federal re-activation order. However, the agreement could also be negotiated with provisions to allow for re-construction of the right-of-way for commuter rail service, prior to any subsequent potential re-activation of heaving freight, including timing and whether trail improvements could be left in place.

20.15 SCBRL Preservation Page 12
Taking No Action
RTC can choose to leave the ACL Agreement in place until its termination date of July 15, 2028, whether it is able to fund and complete the anticipated initial freight and recreational rail repairs specified in the ACL Agreement, or not. However, RTC and its partners are actively developing three project level EIRs for the Coastal Rail Trail: Segments 8-9, Segments 10-11, and Segment 12 (Segment 12 is included in the Highway 1 EIR between State Park Drive and Freedom Boulevard). The timely disposition of freight rail on the SCBRL is important in understanding key aspects of the Coastal Rail Trail design and whether additional property rights will need to be acquired. RTC and its partners plan to aggressively seek funding for these three trail projects in 2022 and understanding whether railbanking is feasible is needed to estimate the cost and feasibility of building a trail along the rail right-of-way in any configuration.

As discussed earlier, initial investigations have determined that there are multiple locations where RTC only owns an easement for railroad purposes and additional property rights will be needed to build a trail in any configuration, if the SCBRL is not railbanked. In order to build a trail, legal counsel has advised that additional property rights should be secured to avoid potential inverse condemnation actions, by property owners, such as those experienced by SMART. Inverse condemnation is the illegal taking of right-of-way and can result in substantial damage payments, including the property owner’s legal fees.

If RTC is unable to negotiate additional property rights with the underlying property owners of railroad easements, RTC could use the powers of eminent domain to acquire those rights; however, such actions will require a two-thirds vote of both the Commission and the local jurisdiction where the property is located (City Councils or County Boards of Supervisors). If RTC is unsuccessful in obtaining those rights, then a trail, in any configuration, across those railroad easements will become infeasible.

There are other project features that are also affected on the coastal rail trail, including sections of track that will need to be moved to fit a trail, whether fencing should be placed between the rail and the trail, and whether some major infrastructure improvements might be able to be deferred to control cost and position projects to be more competitive for grant funding.

If the RTC continues with the status quo until the ACL Agreement expires in 2028, the same circumstances that exist today will likely continue to exist.

Upon termination of the ACL Agreement, SPPR will need to cooperate with the transfer or abandonment of Freight Service as requested by the

20.16 SCBRL Preservation Page 13
Commission. However, RTC’s ability to railbank could still be stopped by the opposition of a potential stranded line and the dispute regarding funding repairs for heavy freight service will remain unresolved.

Attachments:
(1) Roaring Camp’s Letter to RTC on June 28, 2020
(2) Roaring Camp’s Letter to RTC on March 18, 2021
(3) SCBRL Easement Map

20.17 June 28, 2020
Mr. Luis Pavel Mendez
Deputy Director
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission
1523 Pacific Avenue
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Dear Luis:

Recently, Progressive Rail reached out to us regarding the potential change as operator on the Santa Cruz Branch Line. They informed us they are looking to assign the agreement to another operator and encouraged us to contact you. As you know, the Santa Cruz, Big Trees & Pacific Railroad, a subsidiary of Roaring Camp, has always had an interest in operating over the line. We are the only local railroad company that has operated in Santa Cruz County for over 57 years, making us a landmark. This gives Roaring Camp a strong advantage over many other operators. For instance we have a long established marketing program and our brand is strong, we have a large facility in Felton, our employees are locals, and being part of the community means we understand Santa Cruz better then outsiders. This gives us a competitive cost advantage over a new entry into the market.

We have consulted with our legal counsel and reviewed the existing Administration, Coordination and License Agreement (Agreement) to see if we would be willing to assume the obligations outlined in that document. Let me state from the outset that we are a local, family-owned business and cannot place ourselves in a position where we are exposed to a potentially unlimited financial obligation to maintain and repair a right-of-way that, over the past few years, has required substantial efforts to get ready for service. Nevertheless, we find this opportunity very exciting and we look forward to discussing it further with you.

We have prepared a list of the terms in the Agreement that cause us concern and which we would want to discuss with you as we explore the possibility of assuming the Agreement from Progressive Rail. This list is not exhaustive, and we may have additional questions as we become more familiar with the Agreement, but here are our principal concerns:

1. The obligations for maintenance are particularly not clear, especially with regard to potentially significant repairs. Under the Agreement, the Commission is obligated to maintain the segment north of MP 7.0, for the first three years following the grant of the license, which period ends on March 15, 2022.

20.18 At that point, according to Section 5.1, the Commission "shall have no further obligation to maintain or repair the Freight Easement Property or Railroad Facilities." It then becomes the 'Railway's" obligation to maintain and repair the line, pursuant to Section 5.2. Should it fail to perform needed repairs, however, the Commission may undertake them and bill the Railway for the actual cost, with that obligation secured by a $160,000 performance bond. Putting aside our concerns with how such an arrangement may work in practice given that the parties may differ as to when repairs are needed, we are confused by how the other provisions of Section 5.2 operate. Subsection 5.2.4, which seeks to limit the maintenance and repair obligation by specifying the failure to take some actions (such as tie replacement and other upgrades) as not being sufficient to trigger a default, is of particular import. This becomes even more confusing when the language of Subsection 5.5.3 in considered, which places certain repairs in a category that is more elective for the Railway, but with the limitation that the Railway must seek funding or place the segment of the line out of service, as may be mutually agreed by the parties. We anticipate that the Commission, which is obviously much more familiar with these terms, could explain these in a way the will address our concern that we not be saddled with a significant maintenance obligation, particularly for catastrophic events, on a line that has modest prospects for generating substantial revenue.

2. A second, and related issue, is the subject of abandonment. Based on the language in 5.5.3, the need for significant repairs could trigger an action to "suspend or abandon" service over all or a portion of the line, which would require mutual agreement. This provision does not specifically mention the formal abandonment procedure overseen by the federal Surface Transportation Board, which is addressed in Section 8.3. Of great concern is the potential application of the liquidated damages provision in Section 8.5. Taken together, Sections 5 and 8 appear to create a means for the Railway to avoid significant financial responsibilities in the event a catastrophic event disrupts the ability to operate the line. We would appreciate a frank discussion of the expectations of the Commission with regard to these issues, and perhaps some clarifications to these provisions to provide us with some comfort as to the scope of the potential financial obligation. This discussion should consider the likely scenario for the filing of an abandonment over part of this line, as well as the Commission's obligations to the California Transportation Commission.

3. We also have questions regarding the timing of certain obligations under the Agreement. Given the completion of the Unified Corridor Investment Study and the issuance of the license to Progressive to provide "Transportation Service," the deadlines in Section 2 become operative. We note that the deadline for submitting the "detailed plan describing the proposed Transportation Service" has been extended pursuant to the First Amendment to the Agreement, but that the other deadlines, such as the performance obligations in Section 2.4.1.3, have not. If we were to assume Progressive's role, given our late arrival on the scene, we would need more time to develop and implement a plan for operations.

4. One of the advantages that we have in the availability of our existing railroad maintenance facilities in Felton. The language in Section 6.3 requires the Commission to consent to the use of any facility outside of the Freight Easement. We would require that our use of that facility be approved as a part of any assumption arrangement.

5. We will need some time to develop a budget for the potential costs of maintenance and operations and the potential revenues from operations to determine the feasibility of taking over the Agreement.

20.19 6. The language regarding potential third-party operators is a bit complicated. We would want to discuss with the Commission its expectations for such operators, as they could complicate our ability to plan and operate service.

Roaring Camp has lent our services several times over the years to the various operators because we have a shared vision for the success of the corridor. Our philosophy has always been a strong commitment to helping whenever we can on the Santa Cruz Branch Line. As operator of the Santa Cruz Branch Line we believe we could help the SCCRTC create a viable option that can help bridge present operations with future goals.

We appreciate your consideration and would be available to meet and discuss these options at your convenience.

Best regards,
Melani Clark
CEO, Roaring Camp Inc.

20.20 20.21
|ÿ1
MP
6 MP
18 MP
15 MP
12 MP
9 MP
3 County of Santa Cruz
¹
0 0.75 1.5 3 Miles
Parcel extents are approximate based on valuation maps and acreage APTOS

WATSONVILLE

SANTA CAPITOLA
CRUZ
LIVE
OAK

RIO DEL MAR
RTC Fee ROW
Easement (highlighted)

20.22 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 01/25/2022
AGENDA OF: 02/08/2022
DEPARTMENT: Finance
SUBJECT: FY 2022 Budget Adjustments and Information on City’s Financial Status (FN)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution amending FY 2022 budget appropriations to all funds as listed in Exhibit A, in the amount of $5,911,511 including $1,453,813 to the General Fund, and a total appropriation of estimated revenues as listed in Exhibit A in the amount of $5,273,232 to all funds, including a net reduction of $5,758,501 to the General Fund. 2) Authorize the City Manager to allocate budgetary changes within the applicable funds and departments.
3) Receive an update on the City of Santa Cruz’s financial status.

BACKGROUND: Each year at the half-way point of the City's current fiscal year (FY), staff presents the City’s financial standing to the City Council and community. Additionally, budget changes are outlined as part of the normal course of the fiscal year, including: adjustments needed for administrative corrections and/or cleanup; items that are required as departments implement work plans in alignment with the City’s strategic goals; and items needed to respond to unanticipated needs. Finally, revenue estimates are also updated to reflect current conditions.

DISCUSSION: The following proposed FY 2022 budget adjustments are summarized by Fund and Department, a comprehensive list is included in Exhibit A.

General Fund (101)
City Manager’s Office:

Total General Fund Expenditure Adjustment: $216,861
As part of a revenue enhancing strategy, the City Manager’s Office (CMO) is exploring the use of citywide grant consulting services to bolster grant opportunities. The service supports citywide grant activities that the CMO coordinates across all departments as well as grant application services. The appropriation for FY 2022 would include $50,000 towards this effort.

21.1.1 The encampment behind the Santa Cruz Memorial Cemetery has grown extensively over the course of 12 months, requiring regular debris clean-up and habitat restoration to mitigate impacts to the environment and community. While this location has had historical unsanctioned camping and illegal dumping over the last 10 years, over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, the unsheltered population in this area has increased exponentially. Campers are using the surroundings to fortify structures and dispose of trash, resulting in extensive damage to the natural environment and habitats near and in the San Lorenzo River. The Public Works staff collaborates with Police and contractors to clear this area at least once per year heading into the winter season due to it being a high risk flood zone. The total estimated cost of the clean-up is $160,000, partially paid by grants. The request to augment the existing grant appropriations is $86,860.

One of the City’s Climate Action Program initiatives was the development of a Carbon Fund that would enhance the City’s ability to invest in carbon reducing projects that align with the goals of the plan. Annually, departments submit project proposals that are evaluated by the Sustainability Team, a cross-sector group of employees representing all City departments. This fiscal year, the Carbon Fund awarded a total of $43,000 toward carbon reducing projects as listed in Exhibit B.

The City Manager’s Office was awarded $10,000 toward professional services for the Climate and Energy Action Plan 2030 equity advisor.

On November 2, 2021, the City Council placed Measure A on a special election ballot, which increased appropriations going to the Cannabis Children’s Fund from 12.5% to 20.0% of cannabis sales tax receipts. The total cost of the special election was $241,612, and an appropriation of $70,000 is being requested to augment existing funding within the City Clerk’s budget.

Parks and Recreation Department:

Total General Fund Revenue Adjustment: $500,278
Total General Fund Expenditure Adjustment: $195,145
At time of FY 2022 budget adoption, the impact of the pandemic on Parks and Recreation classes and operations was still unknown, and a conservative approach was taken to estimate revenues and expenditures. Since then, more guidance has been received on how to safely mitigate and hold classes and activities. While some programs will see more activity such as the Junior Guard Program, others may not be held at all, such as the fall basketball program. The total estimated revenue adjustment is $500,278.

On the expenditure side, an adjustment of $35,000 for Electricity at the DeLaveaga Golf Course is requested to cover new utility account expenditures resulting from the installation of a new solar array. The added expenditures will be offset by revenues resulting from DeLaveaga operator payment, which is reflected in the revenue increase adjustment.

The added classes and programming will require an adjustment to pay for instructor time in the amount of $63,000. Programming includes Junior Life Guards and a new partnership with Santa Cruz City Schools to provide after school enrichment programs.

In FY 2020, Council approved an allocation of $75,000 for consulting services to evaluate the remediation options at the Pogonip Lower Meadow site for potential relocation of the Homeless

21.1.2 Garden Project. The study is being completed by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and continues regulatory consultation with the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health. To date, a total of $35,225 has been spent with an additional $15,775 in encumbrances.

Due to project delays, the remaining $24,000 was not programmed in FY 2022 and funds were returned back to the General Fund. An appropriation of $80,000 is being requested to develop a comprehensive site management plan. If approved, the additional appropriation would bring the total project allocation to $131,000 to date. Of note, future costs to remediate the contamination in the Lower Meadow is expected to be in excess of $1 million if the that area is to be used for farming. Parks and Recreation staff will return to the Council with a recommendation for acceptance of the final remediation plan.

In order to cover unanticipated costs in the Wharf Fund (104), a transfer of $3,355 is being requested from the Park’s General Fund equipment account. The appropriation will be used to purchase a Wharf Polaris, a submersible remote operated vehicle (ROV). The special equipment will facilitate staff to conduct sub-surface infrastructure safety inspections, as well as aid emergency rescue efforts at the Wharf. Presently, the only way to accomplish the task is for staff members to suit up and conduct the work underwater using compressed air.

Parks and Recreation were also recipients of the City’s FY 2022 Carbon Fund Project grants.

The proposed projects will upgrade pool lighting to LED, as well as the electric conversion of gas landscaping equipment. In total, both projects will receive a transfer of $20,500 from the Carbon Fund into the Parks and Recreation budget.

Planning and Community Development Department:

Total General Fund Revenue Adjustment: $600,000
Total General Fund Expenditure Adjustment: $605,000
The Planning and Community Development Department is appropriating two grants approved by Council in 2020. These include a (Local Early Action Planning) LEAP $300,000 grant utilized for professional services to develop the Housing Element Update and a Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) $300,000 grant used for professional services to develop the Downtown Plan Expansion.

Planning was also a recipient of a Carbon Fund Project grant in the amount of $5,000 for technical assistance in the second phase of the building electrification project.

Fire Department:

Total General Fund Revenue Adjustment: $150,881
Total General Fund Expenditure Adjustment: $233,881
Every year, the Fire Department participates in the California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System to provide resources for local, regional and statewide emergencies. Fire personnel time, equipment, and administrative costs are reimbursed through the California Fire Assistance Agreement, coordinated by the Office of Emergency Services (OES) and/or Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Fire Department is requesting to utilize reimbursements from strike team emergency response in the amount of $150,881.

21.1.3 On the expenditure side, $60,000 of the strike team reimbursement will be appropriated for engine maintenance to the reserve fire engine pumper. An appropriation of $50,881 will go toward additional Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) needed for new hires. The remaining $40,000 from strike team reimbursement will go toward assisting with the purchase of a new fire engine, a top 10 Capital Investment Program (CIP) project approved by Council at budget adoption.

During the course of the pandemic, Fire has been a resource to other departments, especially for distribution of supplies related to COVID testing. However, Fire personnel need for medical supplies has also increased at a higher rate than originally budgeted. Fire is requesting an additional medical supplies appropriation in the amount of $40,000, it is expected that this amount will be reimbursed by FEMA.

Every year, visitors and residents fall victim to sneaker wave activity in the beaches and cliffs; just last year at least two drownings were reported within a few weeks apart in Santa Cruz County. As a proactive measure, the Fire Department is collaborating with the City’s communication team to develop an ocean safety campaign in an effort to reduce drowning and cliff rescue incidents. This project would add an additional appropriation of $8,000.

As part of a FY 2021 one-time reduction solution, Fire deferred equipment replacement needs by reducing $20,000 in the equipment account. In FY 2022, departments were allowed to add back any one-time cuts to their budgets as revenues were projected to improve. In error, the $20,000 for equipment purchases was not included in the FY 2022 adopted budget. The appropriation is now needed to purchase personal watercraft equipment to perform water operation rescues.

Finally, Fire is requesting $15,000 for Tablet Command, a new incident management program software being implemented by Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 dispatching (SCR 9-1-1), for county inter-agency communication.

Non-Departmental
Total General Fund Expenditure Adjustment: $190,581
The Finance Department currently resides at 333 Front Street, a City owned asset known as the NIAC building. In error, the FY 2022 budget was not included and a prorated appropriation of $190,581 is being requested to pay rent for the Finance occupied space within the building.

American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA)
Total General Fund Revenue Adjustment: $(7,085,160)
At the time when the City received notice of its American Rescue Plan Act funding allocation, the Treasury Department had not finalized regulations on its use and accounting guidelines. The City created a budget account within the General Fund to receive and account for the appropriation. As more information became available on the funding’s parameters, the City created a new fund The American Rescue Plan Funding (292) to capture revenue and expenditures. This creates clear accounting and compliance with federal regulations associated with the appropriation. The General Fund adjustment moves the revenue budget of $7,085,160 to reflect actual revenue receipt in fund 292. While this may show as a reduction to the General

21.1.4 Fund by $7,085,160, ARPA funding continues to be available to support General Funded operational expenses.

This action does not change the Council’s appropriation made on December 14, 2021 of $4.2M to support the pro-rated homelessness response programs and infrastructure in FY 2022.

Other Funds:

Capital Investment Program Fund (311)
Total CIP Revenue Adjustments: $3,516,102
Total CIP Expenditure Adjustments: $3,600,590
Public Works Department:

Highlights of the revenue and expenditure CIP adjustments include:

The Chestnut Street Storm Drain Project, north of Laurel Street to Chestnut Street, is in poor condition and needs replacement. An assessment of the project was completed in phase one and was determined that all sections of the project needed replacement in order to avoid drain collapses and failing pavement conditions. This project was also identified as one of the City’s FY 2022 top 10 CIP priority projects which received General Fund appropriation of $500,000 from the $2M CIP project set-aside approved by Council (appropriated administratively).

Adjustments in this fund reflect revenue transfers of $1.6M from state grants, Measure D and Gas Tax funding into the project expenditures.

A request to adjust funding sources and amounts for the Monterey Bay Rail Trail project’s bike and pedestrian improvements reflect a net increase of $1,232,150 from State Capital Grants. A cost-neutral adjustment shifts appropriations from Gas Tax source to Measure D funding.

Finally, the West Cliff Drive Stabilization project proposes to place additional engineered rock protection as needed where areas have been damaged by King tides in recent years, and to prevent further damage to the West Cliff path. An appropriation of funds totaling $506,000 from FEMA, OES Disaster Relief and Gas tax is being requested to cover the next phase of the emergency project repairs to avoid failing bluff conditions along the West Cliff path.

Parks and Recreation:

Last year, the Parks and Recreation Department was awarded a $177,952 grant requiring a 20% City match to resurface the playground at Garfield Park. Both the grant and matching appropriation of $44,488 from the Parks and Recreation Tax Combined Fund (249), will be transferred to the CIP project.

Water Department Fund (711)
Total Water Fund Expenditure Adjustment: $72,019
The Water Department is requesting $68,000 in new appropriation for the Water Meter Shop to continue purchasing new water meters for new water service requests. Every year the Meter

21.1.5 Shop purchases about $340,000 in new and replacement meters. Due to an administrative error, $68,000, a portion of total needed to purchase water meters, was not included in the FY 2022 budget.

A $4,019 expenditure adjustment reflects the fund’s FY 2020 contribution toward Carbon Fund program, summarized below.

Parking Fund (741)
Total Parking Fund Revenue Adjustment: $7,500
Total Parking Fund Expenditure Adjustment: $8,122
The Transportation Demand Management Development project, managed by Public Works staff, and partially funded by the Parking Fund, was awarded a FY 2022 Carbon Fund project grant in the amount of $7,500 to use for professional services toward the project.

A $622 expenditure adjustment reflects the fund’s FY 2020 contribution toward the Carbon Fund program, summarized below.

Carbon Fund (133)
FY 2020 Carbon Fund Adjustment: $33,110
The Carbon Fund receives revenues from an annual fleet fuel surcharge, energy rebates, and renewable energy incentives to support carbon-reducing City projects. Fund transfers to the Carbon Fund were not included in the FY 2020 adopted budget. An administrative correction to transfer $33,110 from various funds is summarized in Exhibit A. For reference, a list of awarded projects is included in Exhibit C.

Other:

Budget Book Position Counts:

This fiscal year, the budget book layout changed to improve department summary information.

Authorized budgeted position counts were added within the department summary to give the reader a comprehensive overview of each City department. In previous years, authorized budgeted position counts were summarized citywide and included the Library. The Library is governed by its own board which sets strategic direction and oversight, therefore a department summary matching City department profiles, including authorized position counts, was not included in the budget book. Exhibit D lists FY 2022 authorized and budgeted positions, including Library. Edits to the budget book will reflect Library positions where appropriate (i.e.

Budget in Brief).

FISCAL IMPACT: The above recommendations will result in a FY 2022 total fund budget increase in the amount of $5,911,511 including $1,453,813 to the General Fund, and a total appropriation of estimated revenues as listed in Exhibit A in the amount of $5,273,232 to all funds, including a net reduction of $5,758,501 to the General Fund.

21.1.6 Prepared By:

Lupita Alamos
Budget Manager
Submitted By:

Bobby Magee
Interim Finance Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. EXHIBIT A - FY 2022 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS.PDF

2. EXHIBIT B - FY 2022 CARBON FUND PROJECTS.PDF

3. EXHIBIT C - FY 2020 CARBON FUND PROJECTS.PDF

4. EXHIBIT D FY 2022 PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATION.PDF

21.1.7 MID‐YEAR ADJUSTMENTS FY2021‐2022
Fund
Add/Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount One‐
time Annual
Revenue
Parks & Recreation101 Add 101‐30‐00‐0000‐46918 Damaged property recovery 1,746                     x101 Reduce 101‐30‐42‐3205‐44306 Sports (30,000)                  x101 Add 101‐30‐42‐3205‐44318 Recreation facility use fee 35,000                   x 101 Reduce 101‐30‐43‐3206‐44307 Youth Programs (17,000)                  x101 Add 101‐30‐43‐3206‐44318 Recreation facility use fee 25,000                   x101 Add 101‐30‐43‐3206‐44320 Marine Safety 116,500                 x101 Add 101‐30‐43‐3207‐44308 Teen Programs 458                         x 101 Reduce 101‐30‐43‐3207‐49205 Sales of surplus bicycles (1,500)                    x101 Reduce 101‐30‐42‐3208‐44309 Pool Programs (2,000)                    x101 Add 101‐30‐42‐3208‐46201 Rents ‐ real property 21,000                   x 101 Add 101‐30‐42‐3210‐46308 Donations ‐ Surfing Museum 2,500                     x101 Reduce 101‐30‐43‐3212‐46910 Louden Nelson seniors charges (2,000)                    x101 Reduce 101‐30‐43‐3212‐46910 Louden Nelson rentals (11,725)                  x101 Add 101‐30‐43‐3212‐46910 Miscellaneous operating revenue 3,314                     x101 Add 101‐30‐42‐3213‐44310 Other parks and rec service charges 34,256                   x101 Add 101‐30‐42‐3213‐44314 Civic Auditorium ‐ general revenues 111,933                 x101 Add 101‐30‐42‐3213‐44361 Civic Auditorium ‐ box office fees 38,764                   x101 Add 101‐30‐42‐3213‐46955 Concessions ‐ Civic Auditorium 9,000                     x101 Add 101‐30‐41‐0000‐44310 Other parks and rec service charges 2,500                     x101 Reduce 101‐10‐03‐1210‐42431 Special events‐application fee (10,000)                  x101 Reduce 101‐10‐03‐1210‐42432 Special events‐commercial use fee (10,000)                  x101 Reduce 101‐10‐03‐1210‐42434 Special events‐street closure (7,000)                    x101 Reduce 101‐10‐03‐1210‐42435 Special events‐alcohol fee (111)                       x 101 Add 101‐30‐40‐3101‐42431 Special events‐application fee 10,000                   x101 Add 101‐30‐40‐3101‐42432 Special events‐commercial use fee 10,000                   x101 Add 101‐30‐40‐3101‐42434 Special events‐street closure 12,000                   x101 Add 101‐30‐40‐3101‐46231 Park rentals 15,000                   x101 Add 101‐30‐45‐3131‐46201 Rents ‐ real property 6,644                     x101 Add 101‐30‐43‐3202‐44302 Special Events/brochure charges 38,000                   x101 Add 101‐30‐42‐3201‐44301 Classes 63,000                   x101 Add 101‐30‐45‐3131‐44310 Other parks and rec service charges 35,000                   x125 Add 125‐30‐41‐3151‐46918 Damaged property recovery 2,394                     X249 Add 249‐30‐00‐0000‐41955 Park/recreation facilities tax combined 200,000                 X 249 Add c302217 Garfield Park Playground 311‐00‐00‐0000‐49109 From Parks and Rec. Facilities Tax Fund 44,488   X 311 Add c302217 Garfield Park Playground 311‐30‐41‐9110‐43210 State operating grants and contributions 177,952 X Planning & Community Dev101 Add g502201 LEAP ‐ Housing Element Update  101‐50‐72‐1303‐43210 General Plan Services               300,000  X 101 Add g502101 REAP Downtown Plan Expansion 101‐50‐72‐1303‐43210 Planning Services               300,000  XPolice211 Add g202172 SLESF Personnel AB 1913 211‐20‐22‐2103‐43290                142,979  x

21.1.8 Fund
Add/Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount One‐
time Annual
Fire Department101 Add  P211601‐843‐5025‐0 Fire Fees Mutual Aide 101‐21‐31‐2206‐44244 Strike Team Revenue 150,881 x101 Add c212201 Fire Engine Type I Pumper 311‐00‐00‐0000‐49101 Transfer from General Fund 40,000 Public Works Department311 Reduce c401413 ‐ 151‐1041‐1096 MB Sanctuary Scenic Rail Trail 311‐40‐64‐9330‐43163 Federal Capital Grants ‐ HSIP (7,951,850) x311 New c401413 ‐ 152‐1041‐152 MB Sanctuary Scenic Rail Trail 311‐40‐64‐9330‐43259 State Capital Grants ‐ ATP Cycle 5 9,184,000 x311 Reduce c401413 ‐ 935‐5012‐0 MB Sanctuary Scenic Rail Trail 311‐00‐00‐0000‐49130 From Gas Tax (600,000) x 311 Add c401413 ‐ 954‐5019‐0 MB Sanctuary Scenic Rail Trail 311‐40‐64‐9330‐49169 Transfer from Measure D ‐ City 600,000 x 311 Add c401505 ‐152‐1067‐0 Chestnut Street Storm Drain Replacement 311‐40‐64‐9330‐43253 State Capital Grants ‐ STIP 1,000,000 x 311 Add c401505 ‐ 954‐5019‐0 Chestnut Street Storm Drain Replacement 311‐00‐00‐0000‐49169 Transfer from Measure D ‐ City 250,000 x 311 Add c401505 ‐935‐0‐0 Chestnut Street Storm Drain Replacement 311‐00‐00‐0000‐49130 Transfer from Gas Tax 350,000 x 311 Add e401707 ‐  250‐2270‐0163 4308 879 West Cliff Drive 311‐40‐64‐9340‐43191 FEMA Disaster Relief 366,000 x 311 Add e401707 ‐ 250‐2270‐0164 4308 879 West Cliff Drive 311‐40‐64‐9340‐43227 OES Disaster Relief 70,000 x 311 Add e401707 ‐ 935‐0‐0 4308 879 West Cliff Drive 311‐00‐00‐0000‐49130 Transfer from Gas Tax                  70,000  xCarbon Fund Transfers 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐49101 From General Fund (FY20)                 x 12,345 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐49103 From Equipment Fund (FY20)                   x 1,628 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐49110 From Water Fund (FY20)                   x 4,019 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐49111 From Wastewater Fund (FY20)                   x 1,224 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐49112 From Refuse Fund (FY20)                 x 12,767 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐49113 From Parking Fund (FY20)                       x 622 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐49130 From Gas Tax Fund (FY20)                       x 161 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐49149
From Clean Rivers, Beaches & Ocean Fund (FY20)   x 344
101 Add p302204‐999‐0‐0 Pool Lighting Upgrade to LED 101‐00‐00‐0000‐49167 Transfer from Carbon Fund 5,500 x 101 Add p302205‐999‐0‐0
Electric Conversion of Gas Landscaping Equipment 101‐00‐00‐0000‐49167 Transfer from Carbon Fund 15,000 x 101 Add p502206‐999‐0‐0
Building Electrification Technical Assistance Phase 2 101‐00‐00‐0000‐49167 Transfer from Carbon Fund 5,000 x 101 Add p101901‐999‐0‐0
Climate and Energy Action Plan 2030 Equity Advisor Compensation 101‐00‐00‐0000‐49167 Transfer from Carbon Fund 10,000 x 741 Add p402002‐999‐0‐0
Transportation Demand Mgmt. Development 741‐00‐00‐0000‐49167 Transfer from Carbon Fund 7,500 x American Rescue Plan Aact (ARPA)101 Reduce American Rescue Act 101‐00‐00‐0000‐43194 Federal American Rescue Plan Funding          (7,085,160) x 292 Add American Rescue Act 292‐00‐00‐0000‐43194 Federal American Rescue Plan Funding            7,085,160  x REVENUES GENERAL FUND 101 TOTAL          (5,756,107)
ALL OTHER FUNDS TOTAL          11,029,339
TOTAL 5,273,232
Expenditures

21.1.9 Fund
Add/Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount One‐
time Annual
City Manager's Office101 New Grant Writing Services 101‐10‐03‐1210‐52199 Prof Services                  50,000  x101 Add 101‐10‐00‐6103‐52157 Unsheltered encampment clean‐up                  86,861  x 101 Add Nov 2021 Special Election Costs 101‐10‐03‐1214‐52142 Election Services                  70,000  x101 Add p101901‐100‐2020‐0 Climate and Energy Action Plan 2030 Equity Advisor Compensation 101‐10‐03‐1217‐52199 Other professional & technical services 10,000 x Finance Department101 Add 101‐00‐00‐0000‐52261 NIAC Rent               190,581  xParks & Recreation101 Add 101‐30‐45‐3131‐53311 Electricity   x 35,000101 Add 101‐30‐42‐3201‐52199 Other Professional & Technical Services   x 63,000 101 Add m302001 Pogonip Lower Meadow Site Remediation 101‐30‐40‐3101‐54312 Maintenance ‐ Park improvements   x 80,000 101 Add p302204‐100‐2020‐0 Pool Lighting Upgrade to LED 101‐30‐42‐3208‐54202 Equipment purchases ‐ non capital 5,500 x 101 Add
p302205‐100‐2020‐0
Electric Conversion of Gas Landscaping Equipment 101‐30‐41‐3106‐57490 Other machinery and equipment 15,000 x
101 Reduce 101‐30‐45‐3131‐57404 Parks and playground equipment (3,355) x 104 Add 104‐30‐43‐3211‐57990 Other capital outlay 3,355 x 249 Add c302217 Garfield Park Playground 249‐00‐00‐0000‐59103 To General Capital Improvement Fund 44,488   x311 Add c302217 Garfield Park Playground 311‐30‐41‐9110‐57312 Park improvements 222,440 xPlanning & Community Dev101 Add g502201 LEAP ‐ Housing Element Update  101‐50‐72‐1303‐52156 General Plan Services               300,000  x 101 Add g502101 REAP Downtown Plan Expansion 101‐50‐72‐1303‐52140 Planning Services               300,000  x101 Add p502206‐100‐2020‐0 Building Electrification Technical Assistance Phase 2 101‐50‐72‐1303‐52140 Planning services 5,000 x Fire Department101 Add  e602001‐100‐2020‐0 Covid 19 Testing & Supplies 101‐21‐30‐2205‐53119 Medical Supplies                  40,000  x101 Add 101‐21‐31‐2202‐52241 Vehicle Maintenance Costs ‐ Outside                  60,000  x101 Add 101‐21‐31‐2202‐52199 Other Professional & Technical Services                  15,000  x101 Add 101‐21‐31‐2202‐53108 Safety Clothing & Equipment                  50,881  x101 Add 101‐21‐31‐2202‐52199 Other Professional & Technical Services                    8,000  x101 Add 101‐00‐00‐0000‐59103 Transfer to CIP                  40,000  x 101 Add 101‐21‐31‐2202‐54202 Equipment Purchases ‐ Non Capital                  20,000  x 311 Add C212201 Fire Engine Type I (Pierce) 311‐21‐00‐9620‐57402 CIP Project                  40,000  xPublic Works Department311 Add   c401413 ‐ 100‐2020‐0 MB Sanctuary Scenic Rail Trail 311‐40‐64‐9330‐57307 Pedestrian/bike systems            1,232,150  x 221 Reduce 221‐00‐00‐0000‐59103 Transfer to CIP              (600,000) x224 Add 224‐00‐00‐0000‐59103 Transfer to CIP               600,000  x311 Add c401505 ‐ 100‐2020‐0 Chestnut Street Storm Drain Replacement 311‐40‐64‐9340‐57311 Flood Control and Storm Drainage             1,600,000  x224 Add 224‐00‐00‐0000‐59103 Transfer to CIP 250,000 x 221 Add 221‐00‐00‐0000‐59103 Transfer to CIP 350,000 x
311 Add e401707 4308 879 West Cliff Drive 311‐40‐64‐9340‐57311 Flood Control and Storm Drainage               506,000  x 221 Add 221‐00‐00‐0000+‐59103 Transfer to CIP                  70,000  x

21.1.10 Fund
Add/Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount One‐
time Annual
Water Department711 Add 711‐70‐92‐7113‐54302 Maintenance ‐ water systems                  68,000  xParking Fund741 Add p402002‐100‐2020‐0 Transportation Demand Mgmt. Development 741‐40‐64‐7401‐52199 Other professional & technical services 7,500 x Carbon Fund Transfers 101 Add 101‐00‐00‐0000‐59138 To Carbon Reduction Fund (FY20)                 x 12,345 811 Add 811‐00‐00‐0000‐59138 To Carbon Reduction Fund (FY20)                   x 1,628 711 Add 711‐00‐00‐0000‐59138 To Carbon Reduction Fund (FY20)                   x 4,019 721 Add 721‐00‐00‐0000‐59138 To Carbon Reduction Fund (FY20)                   x 1,224 731 Add 731‐00‐00‐0000‐59138 To Carbon Reduction Fund (FY20)                 x 12,767 741 Add 741‐00‐00‐0000‐59138 To Carbon Reduction Fund (FY20)                       x 622 221 Add 221‐00‐00‐0000‐59138 To Carbon Reduction Fund (FY20)                       x 161 235 Add 235‐00‐00‐0000‐59138 To Carbon Reduction Fund (FY20)                       x 344 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐59101 Transfer to General Fund 35,500.00 x 133 Add 133‐00‐00‐0000‐59161 Transfer to Parking Fund 7,500.00 x EXPENDITURES GENERAL FUND 101 TOTAL 1,453,813
ALL OTHER FUNDS TOTAL 4,457,698
TOTAL 5,911,511NET GENERAL FUND (7,209,920)
NET OTHER FUNDS 6,571,641NET REV/EXP (638,279)
Fund Totals ‐ Revenues Fund Totals ‐ Expenditures101 (5,758,501) 101 1,453,813 125 2,394 104 3,355133 33,110 133 43,000.00
211 142,979 221 (179,839)
249 244,488 224 850,000292 7,085,160 235 344311 3,516,102 249 44,488741 7,500 311 3,600,590 5,273,232 711 72,019
721 1,224
731                                                                       12,767 741                                                                          8,122 811                                                                          1,628 5,911,511

21.1.11 21.1.12

21.1.13 21.1.14

21.1.15 Personnel Profile

AUTHORIZED POSITIONS

DEPARTMENT
/ Positions
FY 2021
Amended
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Change
from FY
2021
Amended
8/10/21
NS‐29,855
9/18/21
NS‐29,868
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Changes
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Total
City Manager
Administrative Assistant I/II          2.50           ‐            2.50 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.50 Assistant City Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Assistant to the City Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 City Clerk Administrator          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 City Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Communications Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Deputy City Clerk Administrator          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Deputy City Manager            ‐          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐               ‐                     1.00 Executive Assistant to the City Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Homeless Response Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Management Analyst          0.65           ‐            0.65 ‐               ‐                     0.65 Principal Management Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Records Coordinator          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Special Events Coordinator             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Climate Action and Sustainability  Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00

13.50        15.15          1.65 ‐            ‐               ‐                   15.15 Economic Development
Administrative Assistant II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Administrative Assistant III          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Arts Program Manager             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Business Liaison          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Development Manager          3.00          4.00           ‐            1.00 ‐               ‐                     4.00 Economic Development Coordinator I/II          0.50           ‐            0.50 ‐            ‐               ‐                     0.50 Economic Development Director          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Economic Development Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Housing and Community Development Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Housing Programs Specialist          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Management Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Principal Management Analyst          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Principal Planner             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐

13.50        14.50          1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                   14.50 Finance
Accountant I/II          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Accounting Assistant II          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Accounting Services Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Accounting Technician          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐                       (1.00)          2.00 Administrative Assistant III          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Assistant Director of Finance          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Buyer I/II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Director of Finance          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Finance Manager          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Management Analyst             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Payroll Technician          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Principal Management Analyst          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Purchasing Assistant          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐                       (1.00) ‐ Purchasing Manager             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐                        1.00          1.00 Revenue Collections Specialist          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Risk and Safety Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Senior Accountant          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Senior Payments Technician          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00

30.00        30.00 ‐            ‐            ‐                       (1.00)        29.00

21.1.16 Personnel Profile

AUTHORIZED POSITIONS

DEPARTMENT
/ Positions
FY 2021
Amended
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Change
from FY
2021
Amended
8/10/21
NS‐29,855
9/18/21
NS‐29,868
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Changes
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Total
Fire
Administrative Assistant I/II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Administrative Assistant III          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Chief of Fire Department          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Deputy Fire Marshal          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Fire Battalion Chief          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Fire Captain        16.00        16.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   16.00 Fire Division Chief          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Fire Engineer        15.00        15.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   15.00 Fire Prevention Inspector II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Fire Prevention Technician          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Firefighter (1)        22.00        22.00 ‐            ‐            ‐                        2.00        24.00 Marine Safety Officer          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Principal Mangement Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00

67.00        67.00 ‐                     2.00        69.00 Human Resources
Administrative Assistant I/II             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Administrative Assistant III          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Director of Human Resources          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Human Resources Analyst I/II          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Human Resources Technician          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Principal Human Resources Analyst          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00

11.00        11.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   11.00 Information Technology
Administrative Assistant III          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Assistant Director of Information Technology          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Business Systems Analyst II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Business Systems Analyst III (2)          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Director of Information Technology          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Information Technology Specialist I/II          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Information Technology Specialist III          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Information Technology Manager          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Network and Systems Administrator          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Programmer Analyst I/II          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Project Manager/Training Coordinator          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 SCADA Systems & Network Administrator          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Systems Coordinator          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00

21.00        21.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   21.00 Library
Accounting Assistant I          1.50           ‐            1.50 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.50 Administrative Assistant I/II          3.53        2.900       ‐            (0.630) ‐               ‐                     2.90 Assistant Director of Libraries          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Bookmobile Library Assistant          1.80          2.80         ‐            1.000 ‐               ‐                     2.80 Building Maintenance Worker I/II          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Courier/Driver           ‐            1.00       ‐            (1.000) ‐               ‐            ‐ Director of Libraries          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Information Technology Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Information Technology Specialist I/II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Information Technology Specialist III          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Librarian I/II        20.00        20.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   20.00 Librarian III          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00

21.1.17 Personnel Profile

AUTHORIZED POSITIONS

DEPARTMENT
/ Positions
FY 2021
Amended
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Change
from FY
2021
Amended
8/10/21
NS‐29,855
9/18/21
NS‐29,868
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Changes
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Total
Library (continued)
Library Assistant I           ‐            1.00       ‐            (1.000) ‐               ‐            ‐ Library Assistant II        31.50        35.38        3.880         ‐               ‐            1.000        36.38 Library Assistant III        10.00        10.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   10.00 Library Assistant IV          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Library Information  Specialist          5.00           ‐            5.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     5.00 Library Specialist          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Management Analyst            ‐          1.00        1.000 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Network & Systems Administrator          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Principal Management Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Programmer Analyst I/II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Service Field Crew Leader          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Systems Coordinator          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Volunteer Coordinator Assistant          0.50           ‐            0.50 ‐            ‐               ‐                     0.50

97.83      101.08        3.250        1.000 ‐               ‐                 102.08 Parks and Recreation              ‐
Accounting Assistant I          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Administrative Assistant I/II          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Associate Planner I/II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Auditorium Supervisor             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Box Office Representative          0.75          0.50          ‐            (0.25) ‐               ‐                     0.50 Building Maintenance Worker I/II          2.50           ‐            2.50 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.50 Chief Ranger             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Community Center Assistant             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Community Center Coordinator             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Construction Specialist           ‐            1.00          ‐            (1.00) ‐               ‐            ‐ Custodian          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Director of Parks and Recreation          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Facility Attendant          2.50          2.00          ‐            (0.50) ‐               ‐                     2.00 Field Supervisor          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Golf Course Superintendent          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Light Equipment Mechanic          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Office Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Parks Field Crew Leader          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Parks Maintenance Worker        28.00        28.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   28.00 Principal Management Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Ranger             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Ranger I/II             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Recreation Coordinator          5.00          5.50           ‐            0.50              ‐            0.50          6.00 Recreation Superintendent          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Recreation Supervisor          5.00           ‐            5.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     5.00 Senior Parks Maintenance Worker          7.00           ‐            7.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     7.00 Service Field Crew Leader          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Special Events Coordinator             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Superintendent of Parks          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Urban Forester          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Wharf Construction Crew Leader          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Wharf Construction Worker          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Wharf Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00

83.75        82.50         (1.25) ‐                        0.50        83.00

21.1.18 Personnel Profile

AUTHORIZED POSITIONS

DEPARTMENT
/ Positions
FY 2021
Amended
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Change
from FY
2021
Amended
8/10/21
NS‐29,855
9/18/21
NS‐29,868
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Changes
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Total
Planning and Community Development              ‐
Administrative Assistant I/II          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Administrative Assistant III          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Associate Planner I/II          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Asst Director of Planning and Comm Dev          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Building Inspector             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Chief Building Official          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Code Compliance Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Code Compliance Services Technician          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Code Compliance Specialist          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Deputy Building Official          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Director of Planning and Comm Dev           ‐            1.00          ‐            (1.00) ‐               ‐            ‐ Green Building Environmental Specialist          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Management Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Principal Management Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Principal Planner          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Records Coordinator          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Senior Building Inspector          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Senior Planner          5.00           ‐            5.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     5.00 Senior Plans Examiner          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Supervising Building Inspector          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Supervising Plans Examiner          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Transportation Planner             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐

34.00        33.00         (1.00) ‐            ‐               ‐                   33.00 Police              ‐
Administrative Assistant I/II            ‐          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐               ‐                     1.00 Administrative Assistant III          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Chief of Police          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Community Relations Specialist          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Community Service Officer I        13.00        13.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   13.00 Deputy Police Chief          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Police Crime Analyst             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Police Lieutenant          5.00           ‐            5.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     5.00 Police Officer  (3)        79.00        79.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   79.00 Police Payroll and Purchasing Clerk           ‐            1.00          ‐            (1.00) ‐               ‐            ‐ Police Property and Evidence Specialist          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Police Records Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Police Records Technician          7.00           ‐            7.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     7.00 Police Sergeant        15.00        15.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   15.00 Principal Management Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Ranger I/II             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Senior Police Property and Evidence Specialist          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Senior Police Records Technician          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Senior Ranger             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Victim Advocate          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 134.00      134.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                 134.00

21.1.19 Personnel Profile

AUTHORIZED POSITIONS

DEPARTMENT
/ Positions
FY 2021
Amended
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Change
from FY
2021
Amended
8/10/21
NS‐29,855
9/18/21
NS‐29,868
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Changes
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Total
Public Works              ‐
Accounting Assistant II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Administrative Assistant I/II          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Assistant Engineer I/II          6.00           ‐            6.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     6.00 Associate Planner I/II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Associate Professional Engineer          5.00           ‐            5.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     5.00 Asst Dir of Public Works/City Engineer          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Building Maintenance Worker II          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Chemist I/II          1.80           ‐            1.80 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.80 Community Relations Specialist          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Construction Specialist          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Custodian          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Director of Public Works          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Engineering Associate          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Engineering Technician          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Environmental Compliance Inspector          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Environmental Microbiologist III          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Environmental Programs Analyst I/II          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Equipment Mechanic I/II          7.00           ‐            7.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     7.00 Equipment Service Worker          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Facilities Maint and Energy Projects Coord          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Facilities Maintenance Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Field Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Garage Service Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Landfill Gate Attendant          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Lead Equipment Mechanic          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Management Analyst          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Office Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Parking Attendant          9.40           ‐            9.40 ‐            ‐               ‐                     9.40 Parking Control Maintenance Worker          7.00           ‐            7.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     7.00 Parking Enforcement Officer          7.00           ‐            7.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     7.00 Parking Facility Maintenance Assistant          9.70           ‐            9.70 ‐            ‐               ‐                     9.70 Parking Office Representative          3.50           ‐            3.50 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.50 Parking Office Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Parking Program Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Parking Services Supervisor          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Plant Mechanic          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Principal Management Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Public Works Operations Manager          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 QA/QC Laboratory Chemist          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Recycling Center Maintenance Mechanic          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Resource Recovery Equipment Operator          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Resource Recovery Supervisor          7.00           ‐            7.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     7.00 Resource Recovery Worker I/II        16.00        16.00 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   16.00 Senior Professional Engineer          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Senior Parking Services Worker          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Senior Resource Recovery Worker          5.00           ‐            5.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     5.00 Senior Service Maintenance Worker          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Senior Wastewater Collection Maint Tech          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Senior Wastewater Plant Operator III/IV          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Service Field Crew Leader          9.00           ‐            9.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     9.00 Service Maintenance Worker          8.00           ‐            8.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     8.00

21.1.20 Personnel Profile

AUTHORIZED POSITIONS

DEPARTMENT
/ Positions
FY 2021
Amended
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Change
from FY
2021
Amended
8/10/21
NS‐29,855
9/18/21
NS‐29,868
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Changes
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Total
Public Works (continued)
Solid Waste Worker        40.50        40.50 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                   40.50 Superintendent of Parking Services          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Supt of RR Disposal          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Supt of RR Collect Sweeping          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Transportation Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Transportation Coordinator          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Transportation Planner I/II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Utility Maintenance Technician          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Waste Reduction Assistant          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 WasteWater Collection Field Crew Leader          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 WasteWater Collection Maint Tech Trainee/I/II          6.00           ‐            6.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     6.00 WasteWater Collection Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 WasteWater Collection Mech Technician I/II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 WasteWater Facilities Electr/InstrTech I/II          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 WasteWater Facilities Electrical/Instr Sup          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 WasteWater Facilities Lead Mech Tech          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 WasteWater Facilities Mechanical Tech I/II          7.00           ‐            7.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     7.00 WasteWater Facilities Mech Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 WasteWater Lab/Envl Compliance Mgr          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 WasteWater Plant Operator II/III          9.00           ‐            9.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     9.00 Wastewater System Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 WasteWater Treatment Facility Opr Mgr          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Wastewater Treatment Operations Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Senior Envir Compliance Inspector             ‐            ‐ ‐               ‐            ‐ 257.90      257.90 ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐                 257.90 Water              ‐
Administrative Assistant I/II          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐                     2.00 Administrative Assistant III          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Assistant Engineer I/II          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Associate Planner I/II          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Associate Professional Engineer          4.75           ‐            4.75 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.75 Chief Ranger          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Community Relations Specialist          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Customer Service Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Deputy Water Director/Engineering Mgr          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Deputy Water Director/Operations Mgr          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Director of Water Department          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Engineering Associate          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Engineering Technician          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Environmental Microbiologist I/II/III          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Environmental Programs Analyst I/II          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Laboratory Technician          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Management Analyst          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Principal Management Analyst          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐                        1.00          2.00 Principal Planner          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Ranger I/II          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Ranger Assistant          3.50           ‐            3.50 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.50 Senior Electrician          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Senior Plant Maintenance Mechanic             ‐            ‐ ‐            ‐            ‐               ‐            ‐ Senior Professional Engineer          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Senior Ranger          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00

21.1.21 Personnel Profile

AUTHORIZED POSITIONS

DEPARTMENT
/ Positions
FY 2021
Amended
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Budget
FY 2022
Adopted
Change
from FY
2021
Amended
8/10/21
NS‐29,855
9/18/21
NS‐29,868
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Changes
FY 2022
Mid‐year
Total
Water (continued)
Senior Water Distribution Operator          6.00           ‐            6.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     6.00 Superintendent of Water Treatment and Prod          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Superintendent of Water Distribution          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Utility Account Specialist          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Utility Maintenance Technician          4.00           ‐            4.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     4.00 Utility Service Field Technician I/II          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Utility Service Representative I/II          6.00           ‐            6.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     6.00 Utility Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Chief Financial Officer          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Conservation Representative          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Water Distribution Crew Leader III/IV          6.00           ‐            6.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     6.00 Water Distribution Operator II/ III          9.00           ‐            9.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     9.00 Water Distribution Sup V Chief Distr Opr          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Facilities Electrical/Instr Tech II/III          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Facilities Field Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Facilities Mechanical Tech II/III          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Water Facilities Mechanical Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Meter Specialist          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Water Meter Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Meter Technician          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Quality Chemist I/II/III          2.00           ‐            2.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     2.00 Water Quality Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Resources Analyst          3.00           ‐            3.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     3.00 Water Resources Supervisor          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Treatment Operator II/III/IV          8.00           ‐            8.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     8.00 Water Treatment OIT II/III/IV          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Water Trtmt Sup IV/V‐Chief Plant Opr          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               ‐                     1.00 Watershed Compliance Manager          1.00           ‐            1.00 ‐            ‐               0 1.00 117.25      117.25 ‐            ‐            ‐                        1.00      118.25 Total Positions Authorized       880.73       884.38            3.65            1.00             0.50           2.00       887.88 (1) 3 Firefighters Unfunded
(2) The Business Systems Analyst III is funded by the Water Department. (3) In FY 2013, Police had a total of 71 funded Police Officer positions, and zero unfunded Police Officer positions. ∙ On April 9, 2013, Council approved 5 unfunded Police Officers (resolution NS‐28,627). ∙ On October 8, 2019, Council approved 3 unfunded Police Officers (resolution NS‐29,575).

The Police Department has a total of 79 Police Officer positions, of which 8 are unfunded.

21.1.22 FY 2022 Mid-Year
Update
Bobby Magee, Finance Director
February 8, 2022

21.1.23 Agenda
• Overall Outlook
• Revenue Trends and Risk
Factors
• FY 2022 Budget Adjustments
• FY 2023 Budget Outlook
• FY 2023 Budget Calendar

21.1.24 Overall Outlook
•Incremental recovery and
improvements
•Long-term uncertainty that
requires long-range financial
planning
•Significant capital and operational
unfunded needs

21.1.25 Revenue Trends and Risk Factors
•Mid-year revenue trends showed signs of recovery, particularly in sales tax •Overall FY 2022 General Fund revenues are projected to increase about 9% over FY 2019. However, may not be enough to keep up with inflation Potential risk factors:
•Economic impact of Omicron is still unknown
•Projected revenue dependent on Spring break tourism outcome •Interest rate increase expected in the spring
•Impacts of rising oil prices

21.1.26 General Fund Revenue Trends
- 5 10 15 20 25 30
Fees and Charges
Transient Occupancy Tax
Property Tax
Sales Tax
Millions
FY22 Projected
FY21 Actual
FY20 Actual
FY19 Actual

21.1.27 FY 2022 Budget
Adjustments

21.1.28 General Fund Adjustment Highlights
Adjustment Amount
Parks and Recreation
revenue
$500,278
Fire strike team
reimbursement
$150,881
Recreation
programming
$63,000
Pogonip Lower
Meadow remediation
$80,000
Adjustment Amount
Personal protective
equipment (PPE) for
Fire personnel
$50,881
Special election costs $70,000
SC Memorial clean-up $86,860
Medical supplies –
COVID
$40,000
Reserve fire engine
pumper maintenance
$60,000

21.1.29 Other Fund Adjustment Highlights
Adjustment Fund Amount
Matching grant for Garfield Park resurface P&R Tax Com (249)/CIP Fund (311)
$44,488
Water meters Water Fund (711) $68,000
FY 2022 Carbon Fund (133) projects:

Climate Action Plan 2030 equity advisor General Fund (101) $5,000 E-Bike incentives for employees Parking Fund (741) $7,500 Pool lighting upgrade to LED General Fund(101) $5,500
Building electrification technical assistance,
Phase II
General Fund (101) $10,000
Electric conversion of gas landscaping
equipment
General Fund (101) $15,000
FY 2022 Carbon Fund Project Total $43,000

21.1.30 Budget Outlook
FY 2023 Budget Strategy

21.1.31 Budget Projections
Assumptions:
• Updated actual and projected revenues
• Modest personnel growth
• ARPA funds reflected in FY21 & FY23
• Homelessness Phase I programs $4.2M ongoing
• $5M annually toward capital starting in FY23
• No new revenue sources
• No new programs and services
• No new personnel
• 2.5% inflation

21.1.32 FY 2023 Budget Strategy
•General Fund target reduction of about $2.5M
•Structural and one-time cuts focused on non-core programs and services •Pursue greater cost recovery
•Continue to identify Federal/State aid
•Work with legislative representatives to advocate for additional resources •Work with Council Ad Hoc Budget and Revenue Committee on new revenue sources •Develop a Long Range Financial Plan
•Develop strategy to address Capital Investment Program (CIP) needs

21.1.33 Budget Calendar
FY 2023 Budget Strategy

21.1.34 FY 2023 Operating and CIP Calendar
Milestone Target Date
Council Ad Hoc Budget and Revenue Committee
meetings
Ongoing meetings until December 2022
Operating and CIP budget prep:
-Department proposed budget solutions
-FY 2023 budget analysis
-CM recommended budget
February - May
CIP reviewed by commissions April - May
Budget public hearings May 24 - 25
Budget adoption June 14

21.1.35 Questions?

21.1.36 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 01/27/2022
AGENDA OF: 02/08/2022
DEPARTMENT: Human Resources
SUBJECT: Resolution Amending the City of Santa Cruz Personnel Complement and Classification and Compensation Plans for the Parks and Recreation, Finance, Fire and Water Departments - Budget Adjustment (HR) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution amending the Classification and Compensation Plans and the mid-year FY 2022 budget personnel complement by approving position changes in four city departments. 2) Resolution amending the FY 2022 budget to appropriate funds for the addition of a Principal Management Analyst within the Water Department.

BACKGROUND: There are staffing and position actions recommended by city departments to be approved by the City Council to the FY 2022 budget and which are expected to improve operational functions.

DISCUSSION: Departments have determined, through careful analysis and with the assistance of the Human Resources Department, that the recommendations listed below will improve their operations and will not increase costs to the General Fund. The departments are either adding or deleting positions.

1. PARKS AND RECREATION
Staffing Revision:

Building Maintenance Worker I Change from 1.0 FTE to .50 FTE City Council Resolution NS-29,868 September 2021 amended the FY 2022 Classification and Compensation Plan for Parks and Recreation by adding a half-time Recreation Coordinator position to assist with dedicated recreation coordination support. Per this action, the position was to be filled with an internal candidate with the understanding that at mid-year FY 2022 budget, the part time .50 FTE hours or position would be eliminated. Therefore staff recommends deleting .50 FTE hours (which is vacant) of a Building Maintenance Worker I position.

Office Supervisor Classification Job Title Change

21.2.1 After conducting a classification study for the Office Supervisor classification, Human Resources and the departments who use this classification recommend changing the job title from Office Supervisor to Administrative Services Supervisor which is more reflective of the department-wide use of this classification.

2. FINANCE
Staffing and Classification Revisions:

Purchasing Assistant 1.0 FTE Position Deletion
The Finance Department recommends deleting this position which has been vacant since 2018 and is a position which is no longer needed in the organization. The elimination of this position will help offset the request for a Purchasing Manager position.

Accounting Technician 1.0 FTE Position Deletion
The Finance Department recommends deleting this position which has been vacant since 2018 and is a position which is no longer needed in the organization. The elimination of this position will help offset the request for a Purchasing Manager position.

Purchasing Manager 1.0 FTE Position Addition
This position was eliminated in 2019 pursuant to a previous administration’s recommendation.

The duties and responsibilities have been taken on by other positions within Finance. A recent analysis has shown the elimination of the position has created a loss expertise once utilized to guide departments with their purchasing needs. Because of the City's decentralized purchasing model, greater strain has been placed on departments to navigate purchasing policies and processes. Without this level of expertise and oversight on purchasing activities, it opens the City for increased risk of violating state and federal regulations, in addition to our ordinance and policies.

The City is currently undergoing a procurement organizational assessment that will outline process improvements and policy updates. The Purchasing Manager will play an integral role in implementing the recommendations of the study to ensure the City is following all legal regulations, as well as improve customer service to City departments as it relates to purchasing.

3. FIRE
Staffing Revision:

Firefighter 2.0 FTE Unfunded Position Additions
Two unfunded position additions are recommended due to anticipated retirements within the Fire Department. In addition, the recruitment, on-boarding and academy/training process takes 10 months at a minimum before any new hire has an operational impact and can work in the capacity of a full-time firefighter. The Fire Department has had an increased amount of mandatory staffing needs and incurred overtime costs as a result of multiple open positions. The openings are due to regular anticipated retirements, disability retirements and leave of absences.

The additional positions will provide the opportunity and the flexibility to fill these positions when necessary and reduce the impact to standard staffing models throughout the year.

Therefore there are no anticipated cost increases to the Fire budget as a result of adding the two unfunded positions.

21.2.2 4. WATER
Staffing Revision:

Principal Management Analyst 1.0 FTE - Position Addition The Water Department is managing a large 10 to 15 year capital program in excess of $80M per year. Project management is increasingly complex with grants, low-interest loans, etc. The Water Department currently outsources a portion of capital program management related to scheduling, budgeting and cash flow management and the department wants to bring this into the department. This new position will join the existing principal management analyst with the tasks of: overseeing researching, applying for and managing loans and grants; monitoring capital and operational spending; overseeing the preparation and management of contracts; preparation of the annual budget documents; and other high-level duties of this nature.

FISCAL IMPACT: The recommended actions will not have a fiscal impact to the General Fund for the remainder of FY 2022. For the Water Department, the Principal Management Analyst position annual cost of approximately $189,550 will be funded through Water Enterprise fund 711 Water Operations with no impact to the General Fund.

Prepared By:

Cathy Bonino
Principal HR Analyst
Submitted By:

Lisa Murphy
HR Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION PLANS FOR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.DOCX

2. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.PDF

3. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUPERVISOR JOB DESCRIPTION.DOC

21.2.3 RESOLUTION NO. NSRESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING THE CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION PLANS – PARKS AND

RECREATION, FINANCE, FIRE AND WATER DEPARTMENTS
WHEREAS, staff has recommended certain modifications to the Classification and Compensation Plans.

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

That, effective February 19, 2022 the City of Santa Cruz Classification and Compensation Plans be modified to:

Class No. Activity Classification Title Salary (New Classifications)

PARKS AND

RECREATION
Change FTE
From:

Change FTE to:

Job title change
From:

Job title change
To:

FINANCE
Delete Position:

Delete Position:

Add Position:

FIRE
117-007
117-007
316-xxx
316-xxx
281-001
291-002
733-xxx
3211
3211
1241
1241
1241
Building Maintenance Worker I
(1.0 FTE)
Building Maintenance Worker I
(.50 FTE)
Office Supervisor
Administrative Services
Supervisor
Purchasing Assistant (1.0 FTE)
Accounting Technician
(1.0 FTE)
Purchasing Manager (1.0 FTE)

21.2.4 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of February, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: _______________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _____________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
Add Two (2) Two
Positions:

WATER
Add Position:
607-xxx
729-xxx
2202
7101
Firefighter (1.0 FTE x 2) -
unfunded
Principal Management Analyst
(1.0 FTE)

21.2.5 City of Santa Cruz

BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
3XUSRVH

ACCOUNT REVENUE EDEN ACCOUNT TITLE

TOTALREVENUE

ACCOUNT EXPENDITURE EDENACCOUNT TITLE

TOTAL EXPENDITURE
NET: $

REQUESTED BY

DEPARTMENT HEAD

APPROVAL

BUDGET/ACCOUNTING
5(9,(:('

FINANCE DIRECTOR

APPROVAL

CITYMANAGER

APPROVAL
&0)18VH2QO\

5HVR

%$5HI

352-(&7
352-(&7
$02817
$02817
)LVFDO<HDU

'DWH

&RXQFLO$SSURYDO
$GPLQLVWUDWLYH$SSURYDO
Clear Form
2022
01/28/2022
Water Department addition of a Principal Management Analyst for the FY 2022 Mid-year budget adjustment.
0 711-70-90-7101-51110 Regular full time 63,107
711-70-90-7101-51203 PERS unfunded liability 14,133
711-70-90-7101-51210 Group health insurance 14,240
711-70-90-7101-51221 Disability insurance 590
711-70-90-7101-51212 Group dental insurance 760
711-70-90-7101-51213 Vision insurance 115
711-70-90-7101-51214 Medicare insurance 925
711-70-90-7101-51230 Unemployment insurance 855
711-70-90-7101-51240 Workers' compensation 50
94,775
-94,775
Tracy
Cole
Digitally signed by Tracy Cole
DN: cn=Tracy Cole, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance
Department,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2022.01.28 16:19:41 -08'00'
Rosemar
y Menard
Digitally signed by Rosemary Menard
DN: cn=Rosemary Menard, o=Santa Cruz Water
Department, ou=Director,
[email protected], c=US
Date: 2022.01.31 16:26:09 -08'00'
Tracy
Cole
Digitally signed by Tracy Cole
DN: cn=Tracy Cole, o=City of Santa
Cruz, ou=Finance Department,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2022.01.31 16:36:33 -08'00'
Bobby
Magee
Digitally signed by Bobby Magee
DN: cn=Bobby Magee, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance,
[email protected]
m, c=US
Date: 2022.01.31 08:33:30 -08'00'

21.2.6 CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUPERVISOR
Reports to: Division Manager or Department Director
Supervises: Various administrative classes as assigned
Bargaining Unit: Supervisory

DESCRIPTION
Under general supervision manage, directs, coordinates, and performs the administrative workload of a large department including the development and maintenance of work systems and procedures.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS
This class differs from that of Administrative Assistant in that incumbents are regularly responsible for the coordination of the administrative workload in a large City department and the direct supervision of a sizeable staff of administrative workers.

TYPICAL DUTIES (May include, but are not limited to, those duties listed below.)  Manages, organizes and participates in administrative and support activities through the development, implementation and modification of procedures regulating daily operations and related support services.
 Designs, implements, revises as necessary and maintains business continuity that ensures efficient operations.
 Supervises assigned administrative staff, participates in staff selection, trains, monitors performance and provides feedback and coaching to employees; reviews and appraises work performance.
 Reviews and evaluates work methods and procedures, recommends changes in work processes, forms, and work flow to ensure efficient operations in accordance with policies and procedures.  Coordinates and reviews work assignments for supervised administrative personnel, including the completion of regular periodic work-assignment schedules and administrative support for advisory bodies.
 Independently composes correspondence and reports related to routine department business, updates records, compiles and retrieves data, produces spreadsheets and reports for staff by using software options and applications to generate customized data and information.  Assists in the preparation and monitoring of the administrative division budget and may assist with the departmental budget and controlling expenditures.  Coordinates the processing of purchase orders and invoices, and human resources related documents such as but not limited to personnel action forms, job requisitions and employee trainings.
 Prepares routine administrative reports by researching, assembling and summarizing information and data.

21.2.7 City of Santa Cruz
Administrative Services Supervisor
2  For the Parks and Recreation position, oversees the process for issuing department related permits. This includes, reviews, evaluates and approves requests for events within the City; coordinates the use of City facilities and logistics related to permit requests; develops conditions of use that provides event requirements, policies, and specific compliance information.  Coordinates departmental procedures to ensure compliance with the scheduling requirements of City ordinances, resolutions and interdepartmental procedures.  Develops and manages hard copy and electronic filing systems for various departmental records.  Oversees the utilization of information management systems by coordinating implementation, training staff in proper use and application, assisting problem resolution at the user level or contacting technical support, monitors operations to ensure that systems, methods and procedures are used correctly and efficiently.
 Oversees Department website content and ensures its accuracy and relevancy.  Oversees phone and office reception; responds to public inquiry and complaints, resolves or refers issues as appropriate.
 Coordinates the dissemination of Citywide and department informational materials for the public and City employees.
 Develops and coordinates department administrative systems, arranges meetings and itineraries, and works under pressure to prioritize a variety of tasks to ensure deadlines are met.  May survey constituents and customers on delivery of service and satisfaction.  Orders, issues and maintains departmental supplies and equipment; maintains inventory controls.  May perform any duties of the Administrative Assistant I/II or Administrative Assistant III.  Performs other related duties that may be reasonably expected as part of this classification.

WORKING CONDITIONS
Position requires prolonged sitting, standing, walking, reaching, twisting, turning, kneeling, bending, squatting and stooping in the performance of daily activities. The position also requires grasping, repetitive hand movement and fine coordination in using a computer keyboard and mouse. Additionally, the position requires far and near vision when reading and using a computer. Acute hearing is required when providing phone and personal service. The need to lift, drag and push files, paper and documents weighing up to 25 pounds is also required. Some of these requirements may be accommodated for otherwise qualified individuals requiring and requesting such accommodations.

21.2.8 City of Santa Cruz
Administrative Services Supervisor
3 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS
The minimum qualifications for Education, Experience, Knowledge, Skills and Abilities are the following:

Education and Experience:
 High school graduation or tested equivalent and four (4) years of increasingly responsible administrative experience, including one year of lead or supervisory responsibility; or
 Successful completion of two years of college-level course work in Business or Public Administration or a related field and two years of responsible general office experience including one year of lead or supervisory responsibility.
 Successful completion of City of Santa Cruz’s Employee and Leadership Development (formerly Supervisory Training) Program is accepted in lieu of the lead or supervisory experience.

Knowledge:
 Standard office procedures, practices and equipment;
 Proper grammar, spelling, punctuation and business correspondence format;  Policies and practices of effective supervision and performance management;  High proficiency with administrative software programs;  Principles of budget development and administration;
 Concepts of customer service, satisfaction, and experience.  Virtual communication tools and Microsoft Office software, including Outlook, Word, PowerPoint and Excel.

Skills:
 Type 45 words per minute or better;
 Read and write effectively, compose correspondence, assemble routine administrative reports and edit the work of others;
 Perform basic mathematical functions to effectively maintain budgets and process routine financial documents.

Abilities:
 Effectively organize, direct and review the work of other administrative staff.  Take technical information and terminology and distill/summarize into clear, key points and

21.2.9 City of Santa Cruz
Administrative Services Supervisor
4 action items.
 Maintain confidentiality of sensitive information.
 Learn and effectively use both city and proprietary department business software applications such as Eden Financial, Kronos timekeeping, Zoom administration, OnBase content platform, Tyler Eden payment system, PowerPoint and Department specific software platforms.  Communicate clearly and concisely, orally and in writing.  Establish and maintain effective working relations with City staff, City officials, outside agencies and the general public.
 Interpret, apply, document and explain applicable administrative and departmental policies and procedures.
 Understand and carry out oral and written directions.  Work independently in the absence of specific instruction.  Analyze situations appropriately and adopt effective courses of action.  Operate desktop and laptop computers, as well as conference room technology.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS
 Willingness to work some evenings and weekends as needed.

Classification No.: 316
Date of Issue: 5/08
Supersedes: 7/17
Update: 1/22
Career Ladder
 Administrative Services Supervisor
 Administrative Assistant III
 Administrative Assistant I/II

21.2.10 22.1

22.2 22.3

23.1 24.1

24.2 24.3

24.4 24.5

24.6