Santa Cruz City Council
June 23, 2026

EVALUATION CRITERIA
Criteria Scoring Method Weight (Points)
Adherence to RFP Requirements 0-100 Points 5 (5% of Total) Description:

To be considered responsive, the proposal shall include the information detailed in this section. The proposer must provide information in the proposal in the same order as shown below. The proposal shall be separated into the subheadings referenced below. Failure to provide this information may result in a proposal being considered non-responsive to requirements.

Proposal Format
Proposals should be organized as follows:
 Cost Proposal: Provide a comprehensive cost proposal uploaded separately in the Procurement Portal.  Written Technical Proposal
 Optional Appendices or Exhibits: Proposers may include sample project information, sample reports, peer review reports, letters of recommendation, or other exhibits that may assist the City in favorably evaluating the proposal. Do not include generic marketing materials.
 Proposals will be deemed non-responsive and removed from further consideration if the Proposal is not received in accordance with the terms of this RFP or the Proposer does not meet the basic minimum qualifications and proposal requirements set forth in this RFP.

Proposals shall be typed, as concisely as possible, and shall not include any unnecessary promotional material. The Proposer shall provide the information required in this Evaluation Criteria section and comply with the maximum page limitations provided for each subsection of the proposal. The RFP Required Submittal Documents do not count toward applicable section page limits.

Resumes, if requested, shall be included as a separate attachment. Number every page sequentially beginning with the cover page, including any text, charts and graphic pages, including attachments and exhibits. If used, narrative pages shall be used sparingly and only where required to convey related information that cannot be accommodated. The proposal shall use Arial or a similar, easily readable font. A minimum of 11-point font size and 1.25-line spacing is required for text. Narrow or condensed fonts are not permitted. Font restrictions do not apply to attachments. Different size fonts will be allowed for headings, charts, tables, and graphics and must be easily readable.

24.4 EVALUATION TABULATION
RFP No. RFP No. WT-0264
On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

EVALUATION TABULATION
Request For Proposal - On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

Criteria Scoring Method Weight (Points)
Firm Background Information 0-100 Points 5 (5% of Total) Description:

This section must include the following (maximum 2 pages):

A. Legal name, addresses, telephone numbers of the principal office (national headquarters) and local office. Include the same information if services will be provided from additional locations.

B. Year established and history.

C. Business entity status (i.e., partnership, corporation, LLC).

D. Indicate if Proposer has defaulted in its performance of an agreement or project during the past five (5) years which has led the other party to terminate the agreement and if so, the identity of the parties involved and the circumstances of the default or termination.

E. Respond to the following:

1. Explain any pending litigation, liens, or claims involving your organization.

2. Has your company filed for bankruptcy in the last ten (10) years? F. Provide information about your company regarding environmental conservation practices or objectives, Green Business certifications, alternative fuel service vehicles, superior employee benefit policies, or other applicable policies that align with Sub-Section Environmental Conservation and Sustainable Living in Section Process Instructions.

Criteria Scoring Method Weight (Points)
Firm Qualifications, Expertise, and Experience 0-100 Points 5 (5% of Total) Description:

24.5 EVALUATION TABULATION
RFP No. RFP No. WT-0264
On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

EVALUATION TABULATION
Request For Proposal - On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

In this section (maximum 5 pages), include the following:

A. Describe the Proposer’s qualifications and experience working on similar, relevant, or related projects that were completed, as outlined in Section Preliminary Scope of Services.

B. Describe how the Proposer (or Proposers if submitting a jointly prepared proposal) is organized to provide the required services as outlined in Section Preliminary Scope of Services.

C. If utilizing any subconsultants and/or subcontractors, describe their qualifications working on similar, relevant, or related projects that were completed, as outlined in Section Preliminary Scope of Services.

D. Provide a list of all services Proposer has performed for the City in the past three (3) years, include a description of the services, date of engagement(s), members of the proposed team that performed the services. Indicate if Proposer served as the prime contractor or as a subcontractor.

Criteria Scoring Method Weight (Points)
Team Qualifications, Expertise, and Experience 0-100 Points 10 (10% of Total) Description:

In this section (maximum 5 pages), include the following:

A. Provide the names, qualifications, certifications, and relevant technical experience of personnel and subcontractors of the proposed project team who will perform the services described in Section Preliminary Scope of Services. Include details about their experience with similar projects with comparable magnitude.

B. Provide resumes for each member of the proposed project team and include the qualifications and experience suited to the proposed assignment. Include resumes as a separate attachment.

If awarded the contract, the Proposer shall make every effort to ensure that the staff resources identified in the proposal will be available for the Project. If staff identified in the proposal are not available, the City reserves the right to review and approve alternate personnel.

24.6 EVALUATION TABULATION
RFP No. RFP No. WT-0264
On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

EVALUATION TABULATION
Request For Proposal - On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

Criteria Scoring Method Weight (Points)
Technical Approach and Work Plan 0-100 Points 20 (20% of Total) Description:

A. Technical Approach: Describe your approach to completing Section Preliminary Scope of Services. Identify deliverables and key decision points. Provide comments regarding the proposed Section Preliminary Scope of Services. This may be used as an opportunity to expand upon your team’s specific experience and expertise, and to outline any changes you believe would help achieve the Project’s goals and objectives.

B. Work Plan: The work plan shall reflect your understanding of the services applicable to the RFP and your experience and creativity in anticipating and addressing the challenges that may be encountered in providing the services outlined in Section Preliminary Scope of Services.

The work plan shall include a process for delivery of the range of services outlined in Section Preliminary Scope of Services. To the extent possible, the proposal shall reflect the roles and responsibilities of team members in the major tasks outlined in the Section Preliminary Scope of Services and strategies to accommodate the staffing needs for each task order. As appropriate, include tools and techniques you could use in addressing challenges and delivering services outlined in Section Preliminary Scope of Services.

Proposers shall address all major tasks outlined in Section Preliminary Scope of Services and as appropriate, suggest supplemental tasks/sub-tasks for incorporation into the final Section Preliminary Scope of Services.

Criteria Scoring Method Weight (Points)
Cost Proposal 0-100 Points 50 (50% of Total)
Description:

Cost/Pricing is a factor in this selection. Proposers must complete and submit a Cost Proposal. It is the Proposer’s responsibility to state all costs to provide the services outlined in Section Preliminary Scope of Services. Costs shall include, but not be limited to, direct labor, overhead, fringe benefits, profit, subcontractors, other direct costs (ODC) such as materials, supplies, taxes, and travel. A Proposer’s failure to submit a Cost Proposal will deem the submittal non-responsive.

Include the Cost Proposal with the Electronic Response.

The price will be evaluated in the following manner:

24.7 EVALUATION TABULATION
RFP No. RFP No. WT-0264
On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

EVALUATION TABULATION
Request For Proposal - On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

This portion of the proposal will be evaluated based on the reasonableness of the proposed costs. Costs will be evaluated as compared to costs the City or other comparable public agencies have paid for similar services and with the industry’s standard and customary costs for the services.

Criteria Scoring Method Weight (Points)
References 0-100 Points 5 (5% of Total)
Description:

In this section (maximum 5 pages), provide the following:

A. Three (3) Client References that provide former clients and representative projects undertaken in the last five (5) years which demonstrate relevant experience with the Project.

B. For each project identified above, provide a project description, project costs, dates of engagement, project owner, and member(s) of the proposed team for this RFP that participated in the project, including any subcontractors that worked on the project.

C. For each reference, provide the name of the agency/firm, and contact person’s name, title, address, phone number, and email address. Please ensure that the contact information is accurate for each reference.

The City reserves the right to:
 Check as many references that the City deems necessary.  Assess a Proposer’s past performance.
 Contact references that the City determines are representative projects demonstrating experience relevant to this RFP.  Check any other reference(s) that might be indicated through the specified contacts or that result from communication with other entities involved with similar projects.
 Include other industry sources and users of similar services known to the City.  Contact client references for only shortlisted Proposers.

24.8 EVALUATION TABULATION
RFP No. RFP No. WT-0264
On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

EVALUATION TABULATION
Request For Proposal - On-call Paving Services and Asphalt Repairs

It is the responsibility of the Proposer to ensure the client reference contact person is available and willing to provide a reference within the timeframe stated in this section. The client reference score/weight shall have no bearing on any other evaluation criteria.

AGGREGATE SCORES SUMMARY
Vendor Chris Coburn Evanda Goad Hugo Rivera Total Score (Max Score 100)
Granite Construction
Company

99.3 100 100 99.75
Betz Works Inc. 81.5 82 82 81.83
QA Constructors 36.5 37 37 36.83

VENDOR SCORES BY EVALUATION CRITERIA
Vendor Adherence to
RFP
Requirements
0-100 Points
5 Points (5%)
Firm
Background
Information
0-100 Points
5 Points (5%)
Firm
Qualifications,
Expertise, and
Experience
0-100 Points
5 Points (5%)
Team
Qualifications,
Expertise, and
Experience
0-100 Points
10 Points (10%)
Technical
Approach and
Work Plan
0-100 Points
20 Points (20%)
Cost Proposal
0-100 Points
50 Points (50%)
References
0-100 Points
5 Points (5%)
Total Score
(Max Score 100)
Granite
Construction
Company
100 100 95 100 100 100 100 99.75
Betz Works Inc. 88.3 98.3 70 90 25 100 100 81.83
QA Constructors 68.3 90 78.3 0 0 50 0 36.83

24.9 Construction Contract 1

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
This Construction Contract (“Contract”) is entered into and effective this 1/9/2026 day of January, 2026, by and between the CITY OF SANTA CRUZ (“City”), and GRANITE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (“Contractor”) referred to herein individually as a “Party” and collectively as “the Parties.”
WHEREAS, City issued a Request for Proposal seeking qualified contractors to provide on-call paving services for asphalt and concrete repairs throughout the City and surrounding areas within the County of Santa Cruz served by the City’s Water Department. Work will be assigned on an as-needed basis and may include saw cutting, removal and disposal of existing pavement, subgrade preparation, base rock replacement, and paving with commercial-grade hot mix asphalt.

Typical tasks also include cleaning and tacking edges with SS1 oil, ensuring proper compaction through appropriate lift placement, and restoring any road striping per City/County of Santa Cruz specifications. The goal is to maintain safe, functional roadways through timely, high-quality repairs performed in coordination with various City departments.

WHEREAS, City agrees to hire Contractor for on-call paving services for asphalt and concrete repairs (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, Contractor represents that it has the required license, expertise, means, and ability to perform said work as outlined in the scope of work within its proposal, which is attached as Exhibit “A” to this Contract;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of each other’s mutual promises, and incorporating the above Recitals, the Parties hereto agree as follows:

1. Term of Contract. The term of this Contract will be from the effective date for one year, terminating on December 31, 2026. The Parties have the option to renew for one-year successive terms up to three years effective on the anniversary of the effective date with an amendment to this Contract based on the mutual agreement of the Parties. If either Party does not intend to renew this Contract, they shall provide notice of non-renewal at least sixty days prior to the end of the then-current term.

2. Scope of Work and Work Schedule. Contractor will perform the work consistent with the scope of work as defined and described in the Scope or Work attached hereto as Exhibit A, in accordance with the plans and specifications referenced in Exhibit B, incorporated herein. Contractor represents and warrants that Contractor: (i) is fully experienced and properly qualified to perform the class of work and service provided for herein, (ii) has the financial capability required for the performance of the work and services, and (iii) is properly equipped and organized to perform the work and services in a competent, timely, and proper manner, in accordance with the requirements of this Contract. Contractor shall supply all necessary labor, tools, materials, supplies, and equipment to perform the required work.

24.10 Construction Contract 2
Contractor shall commence work on an on-call basis. Contractor shall begin assigned work within twelve (12) calendar days from the date the City issues a request for service, weather permitting, and complete the work based on an agreed upon work schedule. All time limits agreed to by the Parties are of the essence.

2.1 Change in Scope of Work or Work Schedule.
(a) Any change in the scope of work to be done, method of performance, nature of materials or price thereof, work schedule changing the number of working days, or to any other matter materially affecting the performance or nature of the services will not be paid for or accepted unless such change, addition or deletion is approved in advance by the City, in a written Contract Change Order. (b) The changes will be set forth in written Contract Change Orders which specify the work to be done in connection with the changes, the basis of compensation for the work, and any adjustments to the work schedule or work completion date. Such Change Orders shall be approved by the City. Upon receipt of an approved Contract Change Order, or of a written authorization from the City setting forth a description of the change and agreed upon changes in contract price, the Contractor shall proceed with the work so ordered.
(c) In the absence of an approved Contract Change Order or written authorization, the Contractor shall not be entitled to payment for any changed or extra work or any adjustment to the work schedule or work completion date. (d) When the changes increase or decrease the cost of the work, an adjustment of the Contract price will be made as set forth in the Change Order. Contractor shall receive compensation at the fees and rates previously agreed upon in writing. (e) Contractor shall not be entitled to an adjustment in the compensation or work schedule for delay, disruption, or interference caused by or within the control of Contractor. Delay, disruption, and interference attributable to and within the control of a subcontractor or supplier shall be deemed to be within the control of contractor.
(f) If the provisions of any bond require notice to be given to a surety of any change affecting the general scope of work or the provisions of the Contract (including, but not limited to, compensation or work schedule), the giving of any such notice will be Contractor’s responsibility. The amount of each applicable bond will be adjusted to reflect the effect of any such change.

3. Authorized Representatives. The authorized representatives shall be individuals with the necessary authority to direct work within the scope of this Contract and shall serve as the principal point of contact for the Project for each respective party.

3.1 City. City designates the following individual(s) as CITY’s authorized representative(s): Heidi Luckenbach. Only City’s authorized representative(s) is authorized to approve changes to this Contract on behalf of the City.

24.11 Construction Contract 3

3.2 Contractor. Contractor designates the following individual(s) as Contractor’s authorized representative(s): Brian Hussar. Only Contractor’s authorized representative(s) is authorized to approve changes to this Contract on behalf of Contractor.

4. Hours of Work. All work will be performed during regular working hours between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. No work will be done between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., nor on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays except with the permission of the City, or except in case of an emergency.

5. Failure to Complete Work on Time (Liquidated Damages).

All time limits stated in the Contract Documents are of the essence. If the work is not completed by Contractor in the time specified for each on-call project, or within any period of extension authorized by City, it is understood that City will suffer damage; and it being impracticable and infeasible to determine the amount of the actual damage, it is agreed that Contractor will pay City, as fixed and liquidated damages, and not as a penalty, the sum of 100 dollars ($100.00) for each calendar day of delay until the work is completed and accepted, provided, however, that Contractor will not be charged liquidated damages because of any delays in the completion of the work due to unforeseeable causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of Contractor.

6. Licenses; Standard of Care; Quality Materials.

6.1 Contractor represents and agrees that all personnel engaged by Contractor in performing work and services are and shall be fully qualified and are authorized or permitted under state and local law to perform such work and services. Contractor represents and warrants to the City that it has all required licenses and qualifications to perform the work and services required under this Contract, and will furnish satisfactory proof to City upon request.

6.2 The materials and equipment furnished and used shall be new and unused and of the highest commercial quality currently available. The materials and equipment shall be manufactured, handled, and used in a workmanlike manner to ensure completed work in accordance with the work specifications.

6.3 Contractor shall perform the work and services under this Contract in a skillful and competent manner. Contractor shall be responsible to the City for any errors or omissions in the performance of work pursuant to this Contract. Should any errors caused by Contractor be found in such work and services, Contractor shall correct the errors at no additional charge to the City by redoing the work and agree to fulfill any and all warranty obligations for the work pursuant to Section 17 of this Contract.

7. Permits. Permits and/or regulatory approvals required by governmental authorities will be obtained by Contractor at Contractor’s expense, except as otherwise agreed to by the City.

24.12 Construction Contract 4

8. Compensation/Contract Price.

8.1 Lump Sum/Budget Limit. City will pay Contractor, for actual and complete performance of the work and services at the rates and fees set forth in the Proposal detailed in Exhibit A, attached to this Contract. Contractor will not be reimbursed for any costs or expenses at any rates that exceed the rates set forth in Exhibit A, unless agreed to by City through a Change Order. The total fees for the scope of work shall not exceed the following contract amount: $200,000 per year. Such contract amount shall be considered the full compensation for all personnel, materials, supplies, and equipment used by Contractor in the scope of work.

8.2 Retention. For projects larger than $25,000, City may retain out of any payment due the Contractor up to 5% of the value of the work done and 20% of the value of the materials so estimated to have been furnished and delivered and unused. Under no circumstances shall any provision of this section be construed to limit the ability of City to withhold 150% of the value of any disputed amount of work from the final payment, as provided for Public Contract Code section 7107(c). In the event of a good faith dispute, nothing in this section shall be construed to require a public entity to pay for work that is not approved or accepted in accordance with the proper plans or specifications.

8.3 Final Payment. After completion of each work assignment, the Contractor shall provide the final invoice of the work done and all payments due under the Contract, which show any deductions or amounts retained, if applicable. The amount determined due, less any retained amount, is payable 30 days after the completion and acceptance of the work in the manner provided by law and until after the Contractor has furnished the City a release by all claims by the Contractor and its subcontractors against City arising by virtue of the Contract, except such claims in definite amounts as the Contractor may specifically exempt from the operation of the release. City shall pay the retention amount to Contractor within 60 days after completion of the work pursuant to Public Contract Code §7107. The making of a final payment will not constitute a waiver by City of claims or rights against Contractor.

9. Acceptability of Work. City’s authorized representative shall decide all questions which may arise as to the quality or acceptability of materials furnished and work performed and as to the manner of performance and rate or progress of the work. When the authorized representative has made the final inspection and determines that the Contract has been completed in all respects in accordance with the specifications and requirements, s\he will recommend that the work be formally accepted. Acceptance of the work shall not waive City’s rights and remedies related to the work.

10. Site Conditions and Safety.
(a) During the course of performing the scope of work under this Contract, the security and safety of the work area/site and construction materials and equipment will be

24.13 Construction Contract 5
Contractor’s sole responsibility. Contractor shall at its sole cost and expense, ensure that the work site is properly maintained as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property in accordance with applicable legal and safety requirements, that all necessary barriers or signage to deter unauthorized entry and to protect the public are in place, such as notifying, warning, and protecting the public of any dangerous conditions on the property related to the work, installing a secure construction fence, security surveillance and patrol, and other reasonable measures, and as further requested by City to protect public health and safety during the course of the work. (b) No material or equipment shall be stored where it will interfere with the safe passage of public traffic or the traffic of City or any other adjacent jurisdiction; and at the end of each day’s work and at other times when construction operations are suspended for any reason, Contractor shall remove all equipment and other obstructions from that portion of the roadway open for use by public traffic, the City, and other adjacent jurisdiction.

Spillage resulting from hauling operations along or across any public traveled way shall be removed promptly.
(c) Contractor shall not unreasonably interfere with the public’s use of the public right-ofway to the extent the public right-of-way is usable and accessible during the course of performing the Work. When Contractor’s operations require one-way traffic or creates a condition hazardous to public traffic, Contractor shall provide and station competent flaggers whose sole duties shall consist of directing the movement of public traffic through or around the work, and as further required to comply with applicable traffic rules of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). (d) Contractor shall exercise due care to avoid damage to existing improvements, utility facilities, and adjacent property. The fact that any pipe or underground facility is not shown on the drawings shall not relieve the Contractor of responsibility or ascertaining the existence of any underground improvements or facilities which may be subject to damage by reason of the work.
(e) In carrying out its work, Contractor shall at all times, exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed, and be in compliance with all federal, state and local statutory and regulatory requirements including State of California, Division of Industrial Safety (Cal/OSHA) regulations, and the U.S. Department of Transportation Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act (as applicable). Safety precautions as applicable shall include instructions in accident prevention for all employees and the public, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection, ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching & shoring, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries or damage to public or private property. (f) Contractor agrees to keep the construction site and other areas related to the work in a neat and sanitary condition as reasonably possible at all times. All waste, rubbish, other debris, and any excess excavated material shall be removed from the work site in a manner that conforms to all applicable state, federal, and local laws and regulations. If

24.14 Construction Contract 6
dust problems should occur, dust control will be provided by the Contractor in a manner approved by the City at no additional expense to the City. At the start of the project, if applicable, Contractor will place filter fabric in all storm drain inlets in the project area so as to prevent soil particles from entering. If applicable, trench dewatering must be conducted so as to minimize sediment from entering storm drains in compliance with state laws.
(g) Upon completion of the work, Contractor shall leave the City property and public rightof-way in a clean and orderly condition and except for the work under this Contract, shall restore or replace in-kind any improvements or landscaping damaged by Contractor, including any public property impacted by the work.in this Contract. The cost of such repairs shall be borne by the Contractor and may be deducted from any monies due or to become due the Contractor under the Contract. In the event Contractor fails to carry out its obligations pursuant to this Section, the City shall have the right to make any corrections or repair any damages caused by Contractor and Contractor shall be responsible to pay the City all costs, including City administrative staff time, arising therefrom within thirty (30) days of the date of an invoice therefor. (h) Any loss or damage to Contractor’s materials and equipment in the work area is Contractor’s sole responsibility, and the City shall not have any liability for any such loss or damage. Contractor is also solely responsible for any personal injury or property damage related to Contractor’s activities on or outside of City property, on private property, and in the public right-of way under this Contract, except to the extent caused by City’s gross negligence or willful misconduct.

11. Hazardous Materials.
(a) Contractor shall not engage in any activity on, under, or about the City property, public right-of-way, or work site that violates any Federal, State or local laws, rules or regulations pertaining to hazardous, toxic or infectious substances or materials (“Hazardous Substances” or “Hazardous Materials”), and shall promptly, at Contractor’s expense, take all investigatory and/or remedial action required or ordered for clean-up of any contamination of the City property, public right-of-way, work site, or affected area of the elements surrounding the same created, released, or exacerbated by Contractor.

For the purposes of this Contract, the term “Hazardous Substances” or “Hazardous Materials” shall mean any substance or material which is capable of posing a risk of injury to health, safety or property, including all those materials and substances designated as hazardous or toxic by any federal, state or local law, ordinance, rule, regulation or policy, including but not limited to, all of those materials and substances defined as “Toxic Materials” in Sections 66680 through 66685 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, Division 4, Chapter 30, as the same shall be amended from time to time, or any other materials requiring remediation under federal, state or local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations or policies. (b) If Contractor encounters, uncovers, or reveals the presence of Hazardous Materials at the work site or in any way related to the work, which removal or remediation is not

24.15 Construction Contract 7
expressly identified in the Contract as being within the scope of the work, or if Contractor or anyone for whom Contractor is responsible for the release, the presence or exacerbating the presence of Hazardous Materials, then Contractor shall immediately:
(1) secure or otherwise isolate such condition; (2) stop all work in connection with such condition and in any area affected thereby; and (3) notify City within 24 hours of Contractor’s knowledge of the presence of the Hazardous Materials. (c) If Contractor or anyone for whom Contractor is responsible for the release, the presence or exacerbating the presence of Hazardous Materials, Contractor is responsible for its remediation in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. If Contractor fails to do so within a reasonable period of time, then City may remove and remediate the Hazardous Materials Condition, and impose a set-off against payments to account for the associated costs, including administrative fees..
(d) To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents from any and all costs, claims, expenses, penalties and attorney’s fees and costs arising out of a breach by Contractor of the subsection (a) above, including, but not limited to, the investigation, remediation and abatement of any contamination therein involved where the contamination was caused, released, or exacerbated by the acts or omissions of Contractor, its employees, subcontractors, suppliers, or agents or by anyone who was acting under Contractor’s authority or control.

i. The obligations of the Contractor under this Section 11 of the Contract shall survive expiration or termination of this Contract to the fullest extent permitted by law.
ii. Contractor is only exempt from this indemnity obligation to the extent that the Hazardous Materials were not created or released, or the presence of the Hazardous Materials was not exacerbated by the acts of omissions of Contractor, its employees, subcontractors, suppliers, agents, or by anyone who was acting under Contractor’s authority or control.

12. Access for Inspection.

Contractor shall at all times maintain proper, safe, and secure facilities and provide safe access for inspection by City, its employees, or agents, to all parts of the work, as is reasonably possible. Nothing in this Contract is intended or shall be construed to limit in any way access by City to the work area at all reasonable times during the duration of this Contract, or the right of entry or inspection that City, its employees, agents, or any other governmental agency may have by operation of law. All work done and all materials furnished shall be subject to City’s inspection and approval. The right of general supervision shall not make the Contractor an agent of City and the liability of the Contractor for all damages to persons or to public or private property arising from the execution of the work shall not be reduced or waived because of such general supervision. The day-to-day inspection performed by the various inspectors employed by the City shall not constitute

24.16 Construction Contract 8
approval or ratification of work improperly done by the Contractor.

13. Indemnification.
(a) To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, and employees from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, damages, or expenses, (including attorney’s fees and costs) arising in any way related to the obligations or performance of this Contract by the Contractor, Contractor’s employees, subcontractors, or agents, except where caused by the sole or active negligence, or willful misconduct of the City.

Contractor’s obligation under this Section 13 of the Contract to defend shall arise regardless of any claim or assertion that City and its related parties caused or contributed to any claims. The obligations of the Contractor under this Section 13 of the Contract shall survive expiration or termination of this Contract to the fullest extent permitted by law.
(b) Contractor shall require its subcontractors to agree to the indemnification obligations stated in this Section 13 to the same extent and under the same terms and conditions as Contractor is required to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its officials, officers and employees, as stated herein.

14. Insurance. Contractor agrees to procure and maintain the insurance coverages and limits, as required by City prior to the commencement of work, as specified in Exhibit C.

15. Subcontractors.
(a) Except as provided in the scope of work or unless with the prior written approval of the City, Contractor shall not enter into any subcontract with any other party for purposes of providing any work or services covered by this Contract. Any subcontractors used on this public work project must be registered with the DIR in compliance with Labor Code sections 1771.1 and 1725.5, and Contractor shall provide proof of registration thereof. (b) In the event that Contractor employs any subcontractor, sub-tier contractor, or any person or entity involved for, with, or on behalf of Contractor in the performance of this Contract under Contractor’s control or authority (“subcontractor”), it shall be the Contractor’s responsibility to require and confirm that each subcontractor meets the minimum insurance requirements specified in Exhibit C. Contractor shall require all subcontractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements to name the City as an additional insured under the liability insurance policies prior to commencing any work, and will provide proof of compliance to the City. (c) Subcontractors are to be bound to Contractor and to City in the same manner and to the same extent as the Contractor is bound to City under this Contract. Contractor shall be responsible to the City for the performance of any and all subcontractors who perform work under this Contract and any acts of negligence on their part. Contractor is solely responsible for all payments due to any subcontractor.

24.17 Construction Contract 9

16. California Air Resources Board (CARB). Contractor agrees as follows:
a. Contractor and Subcontractors shall maintain compliance with CARB requirements for certificate of reported compliance regarding in-use off-road diesel-fueled fleets regulation as stated in California Code of Regulations, Title 13 § 2449 et seq. Non-compliant vehicles are not permitted onsite unless and until Contractor provides City with a valid Certificate of Reported compliance.
b. Contractor must provide a statement verifying whether they comply or whether they are exempt from the regulation concurrently with the execution hereof. If in-use off-road diesel-fueled fleets regulation is applicable to the project, the Contractor shall submit a CARB’s Certificate of Reported Compliance (Certificate), attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit D, for vehicles subject to Cal. Code Regs., Title 13 § 2449 et seq.. c. Contractor is solely liable for all costs associated with compliance of all regulations imposed by CARB including, without limitation, Title 13 and all pending amendments, as well as all penalties, fines, damages, or costs associated with violations or failures to comply with these regulations. Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and authorized volunteers free and harmless from any claims, liabilities, costs, penalties, or interest arising from failure to comply with the aforementioned regulations.

17. Bonds/Security for Work – [Applicable only when the work costs are in excess of $25,000]: It is agreed that Contractor shall furnish, concurrently with the execution hereof, cash, bond or other security authorized by the regulations of the City, naming the City as the beneficiary or loss payee, as set forth below:

16.1 Labor and Material Bond and Performance Bond. City also requires:
1) a Labor and Material Bond in the amount of 100% of the estimated cost of the work to ensure payment to all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, suppliers, and materialmen performing work or supplying materials (attached hereto as Exhibit E), and
2) a Performance Bond in the amount of 100% of the estimated cost of the work to ensure faithful performance of the work (attached hereto as Exhibit F). If the Performance Bond provides for a one-year warranty to assure responsibility for the repair, replacement or reconstruction of the work or facilities during the year following completion and acceptance by the City, a separate Maintenance Bond is not necessary.

16.2 Form of Security. Bonds shall be duly executed by a responsible corporate surety, authorized to issue such bonds in the State of California and secured through an authorized agent with an office in California.

24.18 Construction Contract 10
The surety on each of said above bonds or other form of security (collectively, “Security”), and the form thereof shall be satisfactory to the City. If Contractor seeks to replace any Security instrument with another Security instrument, the replacement shall: (1) comply with all the requirements for Security in this Contract; (2) be provided by Contractor to City; and (3) upon its written acceptance by the City, be deemed a part of this Contract. Upon the City’s acceptance of a replacement Security, the former Security may be released by the City upon Contractor’s written request.

16.3 Release of Security. City may withhold from any security to be released pursuant to this Section amounts sufficient to cover City’s costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney’s fees, incurred as a result of a breach or an event of default. The City shall release the Performance Bond and Labor and Materials Bond amounts remaining after withholding, if any, as follows:
i. At three (3) months from the date of acceptance of the completed work, and after all deficiencies have been corrected and in the absence of any claim against such Security, whichever is later, City shall release 100% of the Labor and Materials Bond attributable to the accepted work. If claims against the Labor and Material Bond have been filed, such Security shall be reduced to an amount equal to the total amount claimed by all claimants for whom liens have been filed and of which notice has been given to City. The balance of the Security shall be released upon settlement or release of all claims and obligations for which the Security was given. ii. Upon acceptance by City of the completed work, the City shall release the Performance Bond in an amount equal to 90% of the value of the accepted work. The remaining 10% of the Performance Bond shall remain in effect to guarantee the repair and replacement of defective equipment, materials and work, discovered within one (1) year after final payment has been accepted by the Contractor and Contractor has paid to the City all damages sustained by it on account of such defects. After one (1) year from the date of acceptance of the completed work or after satisfaction of the one (1) year warranty period, whichever is later, and after any deficiencies have been corrected and in the absence of any claim against such Security, the City shall release the remaining 10% of the Performance Bond.

18. Warranty of Work and Correction Guaranty. Contractor guarantees and warrants the work under this Contract, and agrees to correct any deficiencies and defects in materials, equipment, supplies and workmanship; and Contractor agrees to remedy any damages arising from faulty or defective materials, equipment, or work at no cost to the City for a period of one (1) year after City’s acceptance of the work or the work’s completion, whichever is later. A longer warranty period may apply where the supplier or manufacturer of the equipment or material provides a longer guaranty period. During the one year warranty or other applicable time period, Contractor at its sole cost and expense agrees to promptly make all needed repairs or replacements arising out of defective materials,

24.19 Construction Contract 11
equipment, or workmanship. City is hereby authorized to make such repairs if, within 10 business days after delivery of a notice in writing to the Contractor or its agent, the Contractor neglects to commence or undertake with due diligence the aforesaid repairs, replacements, or reconstruction; provided, however, that in case of an emergency where, in City’s reasonable discretion, delay would cause serious loss or damage, repairs may be made without notice being sent to the Contractor. In the event that the City is required to perform the repair work during the warranty period, Contractor shall pay all costs, losses, and damages arising out of or relating to such repair, removal, replacement, or reconstruction plus the City’s overhead fee of an additional 15% of all costs incurred by the City. This warranty provision does not affect or limit the City’s remedies in law or equity, including but not limited to, applicable statutes of limitations relating to defective work and breach of this Contract.

19. Title to Improvements.

Title to, and ownership of, all improvements constructed hereunder by Contractor shall vest absolutely in the City, upon completion and acceptance of such improvements by the City.

20. State Labor Code.

20.1 Prevailing Wages. This project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). Contractor will be responsible for verifying compliance with all prevailing wage laws and regulations for all subcontractors. Pursuant to Section 1774 of the Labor Code, the Contractor and any subcontractors shall pay not less than the specified prevailing rates of wages to workers performing work and services under this Contract. If the Contract is federally-funded, the Contractor and any subcontractors shall not pay less than the higher of these rates or the rates determined by the United States Department of Labor. Pursuant to Section 1775 of the Labor Code, the Contractor and any subcontractors, shall, as a penalty to the City, forfeit the prescribed amounts per calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker paid less than the prevailing wage rates. The Contractor is responsible for posting job site notices as prescribed by regulation pursuant to Labor Code section 1771.4(a)(2). The Contractor and each subcontractor, if any, must be registered with the DIR pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5 and section 1771.1. The Contractor and each subcontractor, if any, must submit electronic certified payroll records at regular intervals (weekly, biweekly, or monthly), to the Labor Commissioner pursuant to Labor Code 1771.4.

Payroll records will contain all the information required pursuant to Labor Code Section 1776 and be signed under penalty of perjury.

20.2 Apprentices. Apprentices shall be employed on the work under this Contract in accordance with Labor Code Section 1777.5. The Contractor is responsible for compliance with Labor Code Section 1777.5 for all apprenticeable occupations whether employed directly or through subcontractors.

20.3 Contractors’ Duties Concerning Labor Code Compliance. As required by Labor Code 1775(b)(1), Labor Code Sections 1771, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813 and 1815 are required to be included in the contract between the Contractor and subcontractors. The Contractor agrees to comply with these sections and all remaining provisions of the

24.20 Construction Contract 12
Labor Code.

20.4 Hours of Labor. Pursuant to Section 1810 of the Labor Code, 8 hours of labor shall constitute a legal day’s work. Pursuant to Section 1813 of the Labor Code, the Contractor and any subcontractors, shall, as a penalty to the City, forfeit the prescribed amount per calendar day for each worker required or permitted to work more than 8 hours in any 1 calendar day and 40 hours in any 1 calendar week without being compensated in accordance with Section 1815. Contractor shall include terms in its subcontracts as required to make this paragraph effective as to each Subcontractor. Upon written request, Contractor shall withhold penalties forfeited by a Subcontractor pursuant to Labor Code section 1813 and this paragraph from payments due to such Subcontractor and remit such penalties withheld to the City.

20.5 Failure to Comply with Prevailing Wage. Any failure of Contractor and/or its subconsultant to comply with the above requirements relating to a public work project shall constitute a breach of this Contract that excuses the City’s performance of this Contract at the City’s sole and absolute option and shall be at the sole risk of Contractor. Contractor on behalf of itself and any subcontractor, agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, liabilities, losses, costs, expenses, attorney’s fees, damages, expenses, fines, financial consequences, interest, and penalties, of any kind or nature, arising from or relating to any failure (or alleged failure) of the Contractor and any subcontractor to pay prevailing wages or to otherwise comply with the requirements of prevailing wage law relating to a public work.

21. Business License Tax. Contractor agrees that Contractor, its subcontractors and/or agents (if any) will comply with all applicable federal, state, and local licensing requirements and agrees to provide proof of a current City of Santa Cruz Business Tax Certificate if:
• Contractor, its subcontractor(s) and agent(s) or its business is/are located in the City of Santa Cruz;
• Will perform actual work in the City of Santa Cruz for 6 or more days annually; or • Will use company vehicles to deliver within the City of Santa Cruz for 6 or more days annually.

For additional information and licensing requirements, view the City’s Business Licenses and Permits webpage or call the Revenue and Taxation division at 831/420-5070

22. Compliance with Laws. All activities of Contractor will be carried out in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations, including applicable ordinances and resolutions. City, and its officials, officers, and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity by reason of the failure of the Contractor to comply with this paragraph.

23. Storm Water Requirements. To the extent applicable to the Scope of Work under this Agreement, Consultant, Consultant’s employees, subcontractors, and agents are required to abide by the applicable City of Santa Cruz Storm Water Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the duration of the work. The City’s mandatory Storm Water BMPs, which are

24.21 Construction Contract 13
listed according to the type of work, operations, or business, are located on the City website at: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/publicworks/stormwater/best-management-practices

24. Equal Employment Opportunity. Contractor agrees to refrain from discriminatory employment practices on the basis of race, religious creed (including religious dress and grooming practices), color, national origin (including language use restrictions), ancestry, religion, disability (mental and physical), medical condition, sex, gender (including gender identity and gender expression), physical characteristics, marital status, age, sexual orientation, genetic information (including family health history and genetic test results), organizational affiliation, and military or veteran status, or any other consideration made unlawful by local, state or federal law, regarding any employee of, or applicant for employment with, such Contractor.

25. Event of Default and Notice. If Contractor (i) refuses or fails to proceed with the work with such diligence as will insure its completion within the time specified, including any extensions, (ii) fails to obtain completion of said work or improvement within such time, (iii) if the Contractor should be adjudicated as bankrupt, (iv) if Contractor should make a general assignment for the benefit of Contractor’s creditors, (v) if a receiver should be appointed in the event of Contractor’s insolvency, or (vi) if Contractor, or any of its subcontractors, agents, or employees should violate any of the provisions of this Contract, such occurrence or action shall constitute a “Default” under the Contract, and constitute cause for termination. City may serve written notice upon Contractor and it’s surety of the event of Default under this Contract. City shall have the right, subject to this Section, to draw upon or use the appropriate security to do or cause to be done acts required of Contractor that Contractor has failed to perform or to otherwise mitigate City’s damages in the event of Default by Contractor. City’s right to draw upon or use the Security is in addition to any other remedy available to City. The Parties acknowledge that the estimated costs and surety amounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction of the work and, therefore, City’s damages reimbursable by Contractor for Contractor’s Default shall be all of the actual costs of completing the required work, or severable improvement thereof, regardless of whether the City’s costs of completion exceeds the amount of the surety amounts. City also is entitled to recover all associated costs of enforcing the terms of this Contract including City administrative costs for staff time, consultant fees, court fees, and attorneys’ fees and costs.

26. Termination.
(a) City may terminate this Contract at any time, with or without cause, in its sole discretion, by giving written notice to Contractor at least ten (10) calendar days prior to such termination. City may, at its option, allow Contractor to cure its failure to perform within 10 business days (or longer period authorized in writing by City) from the date of the City’s termination notice. The termination shall be become effective if Contractor has not cured within the specified time period to the City’s satisfaction. (b) Contractor may terminate this Contract for cause by providing written notice of intent to terminate not less than thirty (30) calendar days prior to an effective termination date.

24.22 Construction Contract 14
Contractor may terminate for cause if the City fails to cure a material default in performance within a period of thirty (30) calendar days (or such longer period agreed to by Contractor), from the date of the Contractor’s written termination notice specifying the default in performance.
(c) Upon notice of termination by either the City or Contractor, Contractor will immediately act to not incur any additional obligations, costs or expenses, except as may be reasonably necessary to terminate its activities. City’s only obligation to Contractor will be payment for work authorized by and received to the satisfaction of the City up to and including the effective date of termination less any amounts withheld by the City for any expenses or damages sustained by City related to Contractor’s acts or omissions under the Contract.
(d) In the event of Contractor’s failure to perform pursuant to the Contract, the City reserves the right to obtain services elsewhere and Contractor will be liable for the difference between the Contract costs set forth in the terminated Contract and the actual full cost to the City to complete the Project. When exercising any rights or remedies under this paragraph, the City shall not be required to obtain the lowest price for the work performed.
(e) Subject to the terms and operation of any applicable performance bond, if the City has terminated the Contract for cause, it may exclude Contractor from the work site, take possession of the work, incorporate in the work all materials and equipment stored at the site or for which the City has paid Contractor but which are stored elsewhere, and complete the work as the City may deem expedient.
(f) Termination of the Contract pursuant to this Section shall not relieve Contractor of any liability to the City for additional costs, expenses, or damages sustained by the City due to failure of Contractor to perform pursuant to the Contract. City reserves all remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of Contractor’s obligations under this Contract, or failure to pay the City any damages due or penalties assessed within the time prescribed. City may withhold any payments to Contractor for the purpose of set off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from Contractor is determined. After the effective date of termination, Contractor will have no further claims against the City under the Contract. City shall not be liable for costs incurred by Contractor or its subcontractor(s) after receipt of a notice of termination No other compensation will be payable to Contractor for any loss of anticipated profits on unperformed services or other economic loss arising out of or resulting from such termination.

27. Dispute Resolution. The Parties agree to attempt in good faith to resolve through negotiation any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or relating to this Contract.

Either party may initiate negotiations by providing written notice in letter form to the other party, setting forth the subject of the dispute and the relief requested. Promptly upon such notification, the Parties shall meet at a mutually agreeable time and place in order to exchange relevant information and perspective, and to attempt to resolve the

24.23 Construction Contract 15
dispute. In the event that no resolution is achieved, and if, but only if, the parties mutually agree, then prior to pursuing formal legal action, the parties shall make a good faith effort to resolve the dispute by non-binding mediation or negotiations between representatives with decision-making power, who, to the extent possible, shall not have had substantive involvement in the matters of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved by these negotiations, the matter will be handled as the parties may agree or, otherwise as allowed by applicable law. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, nothing contained in this Contract shall impair the parties’ right to immediately pursue any and all legal remedies which may be available should there be a default in the terms of this Contract, and a failure to cure said default after notice as required under this Contract. If required by statute (e.g. applicable statute of limitation) to perfect or preserve a claim, either party may file the required notice of claim and/or commence litigation. To the extent that the Project involves or qualifies as a public works project, the Parties agree to comply with Public Contract Code sections 9204(e) and 20104-20104.6, but without waiving the requirements of the California Tort Claims Act, Gov’t Code section 800 et seq. unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties.

28. Contractor’s Records. City shall have the right to access and review records of Contractor and subcontractors related to the work on this Project for at least three years (or longer as otherwise specified) after issuance of final payment under this Contract.

When state or federal funds are involved in the Project’s funding or financing, the state or federal government shall have the same rights of access and examination as the City under this provision.

29. Independent Contractor. Contractor represents that it has or will secure at its own expense all personnel, materials, and related services required to perform the services under this Contract. Contractor (and its employees, agents, representatives, and subcontractor(s)), in the performance of this Contract, shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers or employees or agents of the City. Contractor, not the City, shall have exclusive and complete control over its employees and subcontractors, and shall determine the method of performing the services hereunder. City, however, retains the right to require that work performed by Contractor meet specific standards consistent with the requirements of this Contract without regard to the manner and means of accomplishment thereof.

30. Contractor Not an Agent. Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of the City in any capacity pursuant to this Contract to bind the City to any obligation whatsoever.

31. Conflict of Interest. Contractor agrees to comply with conflict of interest laws in performing the work and services under this Contract. Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of services required to be performed under this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that it is aware of and agrees to comply with the provisions of the Political Reform Act, Section 1090 of the Government Code, and the City’s conflict of interest code. Contractor will immediately advise the City if Contractor learns of a conflicting financial interest of Contractor’s during the term of this Contract.

24.24 Construction Contract 16

32. Legal Remedies. Either Party shall be entitled to all remedies afforded by law or in equity to enforce their respective rights under this Contract. No right or remedy in this Contract are intended to be exclusive of any other right or remedy, but every such right or remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to and not a limitation of any duties, obligations, rights and remedies otherwise imposed or available by law, in equity or in the Contract.

33. Assignment and Successors. Contractor shall not assign any portion of the work required by this Contract nor otherwise assign or transfer any interests in it without prior written approval of City, which may be withheld or delayed in City’s sole and absolute discretion. This Contract will be binding on the heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns of the Parties named herein.

34. Amendment. Except as otherwise provided in this Contract, neither this Contract nor any provision hereof may be waived, modified, amended, or discharged, or terminated except by an instrument in writing signed by the Parties, and then only to the extent set forth in such writing.

35. Force Majeure. Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligation hereunder to the extent that the performance of any such obligation, except the payment of money, is prevented or delayed by an act of God, natural disaster, pandemic, acts of terrorism, war, by a strike, lockout or other labor difficulty, or other peril, which is beyond the reasonable control of the affected party and without the negligence of the respective Parties. Each party hereto shall give notice promptly to the other of the nature and extent of any Force Majeure claimed to delay, hinder or prevent performance of the services under this Contract. Each Party will, however, make all reasonable efforts to remove or eliminate such a cause of delay or default and will, upon the cessation of the cause, diligently pursue performance of its obligations in this Contract. In the event either Party is prevented or delayed in the performance of its respective obligation by reason of such Force Majeure, there may be an equitable adjustment of the schedule only.

36. Governing Law and Venue. This Contract shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The Parties hereby agree that any action or proceeding to enforce any provision of this Contract shall be brought only in the appropriate state or federal court located in Santa Cruz County, California.

37. Notices. Any notice, approval, consent, waiver or other communication required or permitted to be given or to be served upon either Party in connection with this Contract shall be in writing. In addition to providing a courtesy notice via email, such notice shall be personally served, or sent by reputable overnight delivery service, such as Federal Express, or sent by priority U.S. mail, and notice shall be deemed given: (a) if personally served, when delivered to the Party to whom such notice is addressed; (b) if sent by reputable overnight delivery service, such as Federal Express, when delivered, (c) if sent by priority U.S. mail, notice shall be deemed delivered on the fifth business day after deposited with the U.S. Postal Service. Such notices shall be addressed to the Party to whom such notice is to be given at the Party’s address set forth below or as such party shall

24.25 Construction Contract 17
otherwise direct in writing to the other Party delivered or sent in accordance with this Section.

If to City: City of Santa Cruz
Attention: Heidi Luckenbach
Telephone: (831) 420- 5214
Email: [email protected]
If to Contractor: Granite Construction Company
Attention: Brian Hussar
Address: 580 West Beach Street, Watsonville CA
95076
Telephone: (408) 327-7086
Email: [email protected]

A Party must provide written notice to the other of any changes to the above information.

38. Cumulative Rights; Waiver. The rights created under this Contract or by law or equity, shall be cumulative and may be exercised at any time and from time to time. No failure by either Party to exercise, and no delay in exercising any rights, shall be construed or deemed to be a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise by either Party preclude any other or future exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right. Any waiver of any provision or of any breach of any provision of this Contract must be in writing, and any waiver by either Party of any breach of any provision of this Contract shall not operate as or be construed to be a waiver of any other breach of that provision or of any breach of any other provision of this Contract. The failure of either Party to insist upon strict adherence to any term of this Contract on one or more occasions shall not be considered or construed or deemed a waiver of any provision or any breach of any provision of this Contract or deprive that Party of the right thereafter to insist upon strict adherence to that term or provision or any other term or provision of this Contract. No delay or omission on the part of either Party in exercising any right under this Contract shall operate as a waiver of any such right or any other right under this Contract.

39. Interpretation. Each party acknowledges that it has reviewed this Contract and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Contract.

40. Severability. If any provision of this Contract is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, such provision shall be deemed to be served or deleted from this Contract and the balance of this Contract shall remain in full force and effect notwithstanding such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability.

41. Time. Time is of the essence for each provision of this Contract.

24.26 Construction Contract 18

42. Entire Contract. This Contract, together with Exhibits and/or attachments and any agreements provided for herein, constitute the entire understanding between the Parties with respect to the matters set forth herein, and they supersede all prior or contemporaneous understandings or agreements between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, whether oral or written. In the case of any conflict, the terms of this Contract shall control.

43. Counterparts. This Contract may be executed in counterparts, which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. Electronic, facsimile and scanned pdf signatures and copies of this Contract shall be accepted as originals.

44. Warranty of Authority. The signatories to this Contract warrant and represent that each is authorized to execute this Contract and that their respective signatures serve to legally obligate their respective representatives, agents, successors and assigns to comply with the provisions of this Contract.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

24.27 1/9/2026

24.28 Granite Construction Company
List of Officers
Larkin, Kyle T.

President
Executive Chief Officer
Woolsey, Staci M.

Executive Vice President
Chief Financial Officer
Assistant Secretary
Dowd, Brian R.

Senior Vice President
Construction
Assistant Secretary
Estes, Bradly J.

Senior Vice President
Materials
Assistant Secretary
Gruber, Timothy W.

Senior Vice President
Human Resources
Assistant Secretary
Hall, M. Craig
Senior Vice President
General Counsel
Corporate Compliance Officer
Secretary
Tatusko, Michael G.

Senior Vice President
Construction
Assistant Secretary
Williams, Bradley J.

Senior Vice President
Construction
Assistant Secretary
Prettol, Nicole E.

Vice President
Corporate Controller
Assistant Secretary
Barker, Michael W.

Vice President
Investor Relations
Blackburn, Nicholas B.

Vice President
Tax
Assistant Secretary
Nickerson, James D.

Vice President
Assistant Secretary
Brock, Andrew C.

Senior Vice President
Strategy & Corporate Developement
Assistant Secretary
Jack, Malcom
Senior Vice President
Chief Technology Officer
Assistant Secretary
Name Present Office Position
Updated December 2025 Page 1 of 1

24.29 24.30
EXHIBIT 1

AUTHORIZED SIGNERS
Granite Construction Company
Coastal Region
Bay Area/Monterey Bay Area/North Coast Area

AUTHORIZED SIGNERS
Brent Fogg, VP Coastal Region
Ian Firth, District VP
Chelsea M. Alameda, Sr. Operations Finance Manager
Justin Ingram, Region/Division Project Executive
Pennington B. Shortes, Regional Project Executive
John G. Boies, Chief Estimator III
Matthew J. Storm, Construction Manager
Brian D. Hussar, Construction Manager
Darren L. Hiatt, Construction Manager
Patrick K. Amaris, Private Works Manager
Terry D. Richards, Senior Estimator

ATTESTORS
Brent Fogg, VP Coastal Region
Ian Firth, District VP
Chelsea M. Alameda, Sr. Operations Finance Manager
Justin Ingram, Region/Division Project Executive
Pennington B. Shortes, Regional Project Executive
John Boies, Chief Estimator III
Matthew J. Storm, Construction Manager
Brian D. Hussar, Construction Manager
Darren L. Hiatt, Construction Manager
Patrick K. Amaris, Private Works Manager
Jason Woelbing, Operations Finance Manager
Terry D. Richards, Senior Estimator
Patricia A. Arnett, Estimating Assistant
Jenni McKenzie, Subcontracts Admin
Elizabeth Mello, Estimating Assistant

24.31 EXHIBIT 2

AUTHORIZED SIGNERS
Granite Construction Company

AUTHORIZED SIGNERS
Kyle T. Larkin, President & CEO
Staci M. Woolsey, Executive Vice President
Brian R. Dowd, Senior Vice President
Michael G. Tatusko, Senior Vice President
Bradley J. Williams, Senior Vice President
Bradley J. Estes, Senior Vice President

24.32 Construction Contract 20
EXHIBIT “A”
Scope of Work/Fee Schedule
I. SCOPE OF WORK

6.1. Project Objectives
The City of Santa Cruz is seeking qualified and experienced contractors to provide on-call paving services for the repair and restoration of asphalt and concrete surfaces throughout the City/County. This contract is intended to support timely and high-quality repairs in response to maintenance needs, utility cuts, or roadway degradation, ensuring safety and functionality of public infrastructure.

The scope of work generally includes, but is not limited to:
o Saw cutting, removal, and hauling of existing asphalt and/or concrete; o Subgrade inspection, compaction, and replacement of up to 6” of base rock; o Surface preparation including cleaning and tacking with SS1 oil; o Installation of commercial-grade hot mix asphalt in lifts (minimum 3”) to match existing grade and achieve proper compaction;
o Replacement or application of road striping in compliance with all applicable City/County specifications.

This contract is designed to provide as-needed services on a task order basis, with varying project sizes and response times depending on operational needs. Our goal is to partner with a reliable contractor who demonstrates responsiveness, quality workmanship, and a thorough understanding of paving industry standards and local specifications.

6.2. Minimum Qualifications
• Licensing & Registration
o Possess a valid and active California State Contractor’s License: Class A (General Engineering) or C-12 (Earthwork and Paving).
o Be registered as a Public Works Contractor with the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) at the time of bid submission and throughout the contract term. o Hold all required business licenses and permits to operate within the City of Santa Cruz. • Experience
o Demonstrated experience performing similar asphalt and concrete repair and paving projects within the past three (3) years.
o Experience working with government institutions

24.33 Construction Contract 21
o Experience must include saw cutting and removal of pavement, subgrade preparation, base rock replacement, asphalt paving using commercial-grade hot mix, and striping in accordance with local agency specifications.
• Equipment & Staffing
o Possess or have access to all equipment necessary to complete the scope of work, including (but not limited to) paving machines, rollers, saws, and hauling equipment. o Maintain sufficient qualified personnel trained in paving operations and traffic control. • Compliance & Staffing
o Demonstrate a history of regulatory compliance, including adherence to Cal/OSHA standards.
o Have an established safety program and provide evidence of a satisfactory safety record.
• Availability
o Ability to provide on-call response as requested, including availability to perform work seven (7) days a week, and respond to urgent or time-sensitive work orders.

6.3. Work Requirements
The work should, at a minimum, include the following:

The Contractor shall furnish all labor, materials, equipment, transportation, tools, traffic control, disposal, and incidentals necessary to perform the following typical tasks:
• Saw cut, remove, and dispose of existing asphalt or concrete. • Inspect subgrade and verify compaction; remove and replace up to six (6) inches of base rock, moisture condition, and re-compact as needed.
• Clean edges and apply tack coat (SS1 oil or equivalent) prior to paving. • Install and compact commercial-grade hot mix asphalt in lifts to match adjacent grades, with a minimum thickness of three (3) inches.
• Match new paving to existing grade, alignment, and slope, ensuring smooth transitions. • Install or replace any appurtenances, such as water meter boxes, gate valve boxes, storm drain lids as needed.
• Replace or install pavement markings and striping in accordance with applicable City and County specifications.
• Perform temporary and permanent traffic control per Caltrans or City of Santa Cruz standards.

6.4. Work Locations
Work may be assigned at any location within:
• City of Santa Cruz limits

24.34 Construction Contract 22
• Surrounding areas within Santa Cruz County served by City departments

6.5. Work Schedule and Response Time
• The Contractor shall begin assigned work within timeframe and no later than twelve (12) calendar days from the date the City issues a request for service, weather permitting. • Delays due to inclement weather must be promptly communicated and may be approved by the City on a case-by-case basis.
• In some cases, emergency or time-sensitive work may require an expedited response. The Contractor must be capable of responding to such requests within 24 to 48 hours if directed by the City.

6.6. Materials and Standards
All work and materials shall meet or exceed:
• City of Santa Cruz Standard Paving Details
• Applicable Santa Cruz County standards and Encroachment Permits (if required)

6.7. Permits and Traffic Control
l
• Contractor is responsible for obtaining all required encroachment permits, if not provided by the City. Please reference attachments A, B and C that outline City and County standards. • Contractor shall provide traffic control plans and implement traffic safety measures as required, and local agency standards. Please reference attachments A, B, and C.

6.8. Resident Notification Requirement
• The selected Contractor shall be responsible for notifying all residents and businesses directly impacted by paving activities. Written notice must be delivered no less than seven (7) calendar days in advance of any work that may affect access, parking, or traffic in front of or adjacent to a residence or business.

6.9. Inspection and Acceptance
• All work is subject to inspection by City representatives. • The City reserves the right to reject work that does not meet contract specifications or quality standards.
• Final acceptance will be based on conformance with the scope, workmanship, and cleanup of the work area.

6.10 Clean up and Disposal
Contractor must remove all construction debris and waste material from the job site at the end of each workday.
• Disposal must comply with local, state, and federal regulations.

24.35 Construction Contract 23
• Work areas must be restored to clean, safe, and finished condition prior to project closeout.

6.11. Payment and Measurement
• Work will be performed on a unit price or time and materials basis, as specified in fee schedule.
• Quantities provided in the proposal documents are estimates only and do not guarantee a minimum or maximum amount of work.

6.12. Safety Requirements
All work performed under this contract shall be conducted in accordance with the standards customarily adhered to by an experienced and competent provider of the goods and/or services called for under this Contract using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by reputable providers of such goods and/or services. All work will be performed in a safe manner and shall comply with all safety provisions and regulations. Contractor shall abide by all CAL/OSHA requirements, including the labeling of containers. Contractors who have ten (10) or more employees shall have an injury/illness program as required by OSHA. The City reserves the right to issue restraint or cease and desist orders to Contractor when unsafe or harmful.

6.13. Damage
Contractor will be responsible for any damage to City property during the performance of this contract.

In the event that there is damage to City property, the Contractor will immediately report the incident to the City in writing. Any such damage will be repaired or replaced with same by the Contractor at his/her expense and to the satisfaction of the City.

6.14. Contractor’s Employee Conduct
Contractor will agree to remove any employee whose conduct is improper, inappropriate, or offensive as determined by the City. A removed employee(s) is not to work on City premises without the written consent of the City. Contractor will remove any employee from working in, or delivering to, City facilities who is convicted of a felony during his/her employment.

6.15. Exclusions
Excluded from this specification are all items purchased separately on other City contracts.

24.36 Construction Contract 24
II. FEE SCHEDULE

24.37 24.38

24.39 24.40

24.41 24.42
Construction Contract 25
EXHIBIT “B”
Technical Specifications
A. SPECIFICATIONS
It is expressly agreed and understood by the Contractor that the Standard Specifications consists of the documents on file at the Water Department of the City of Santa Cruz and incorporated herein by reference, entitled:
1) City of Santa Cruz: Water Department Standard Specifications (December 2009 Revision) (“2009 City Standard Specifications”);
2) City of Santa Cruz Department of Public Works, Department of Parks and Recreation, and Water Department 2002 Standard Specifications (“2002 City Specifications
3) Standard Plans and Specifications of the State of California, Department of Transportation, dated 2018, (“State Specifications”);
4) State of California /Caltrans: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) (2014 Revision 6);
5) Pacific Gas and Electric Company Electric & Gas Service Requirements (”Greenbook” 2016 Revision).

Where conflicts arise between the City Standard Specifications (2002 and 2009) and the State Specifications, the City Standard Specifications (2002 and 2009) shall control and apply.

Where conflicts arise between the City Standard Specifications (2002 and 2009) and the Construction Contract, the Construction Contract shall control and apply.

B. TECHNICAL APPROACH
Technical Approach
a. Intake and Scope Confirmation
•Provide multiple emergency contacts with a priority list to ensure contact can be made with a Granite representative on-demand.
• Within 4 hours (emergency) or 24 hours (routine) of task order: log request, assign Project Manager, confirm access/permits, utility locates (USA), and preliminary equipment/staffing needs.
• Issue a written work order confirmation with scope, expected mobilization date, and preliminary costs for T&M or unit-price tasks.
b. Site Assessment and Prework
• Perform site inspection before mobilization to verify limits, pavement condition, subgrade evidence of contamination or drainage issues, and appurtenances. • Produce and submit site-specific Traffic Control Plan (TCP) and resident notification plan for City review prior to non-emergency work.

24.43 Construction Contract 26
c. Removal and Subgrade Preparation
• Saw cut full depth at neat, vertical edges; remove and legally dispose of excavated pavement and roadbed.
• Inspect subgrade; perform compaction testing (nuclear or sand cone) when requested.

Replace and compact up to 6" base rock in compacted lifts to meet specified relative compaction.
d. Asphalt Placement and Compaction
• Clean mating surfaces and apply SS1 or approved tack oil. Place hot-mix asphalt in lifts, min 3" or as specified. Knock down and compact placed lifts, perform density testing when requested. e. Appurtenances and Striping
• Adjust or reinstall boxes and lids to final grade; coordinate with City for access needs. Replace pavement markings per City/County specifications using approved materials and methods. f. Acceptance and Closeout
• Hold punch-list inspection with City representative; correct deficiencies. Deliver as-built report, photos, compaction/test results, and disposal receipts, if requested, with final invoice.

3. Work Plan and Schedule (task-order workflow)
a. Task Order Receipt - log and triage (0–4 hours emergency; 0–24 hours routine). • Construction Manager Brian Hussar or Area Superintendent Ronald Murphy will be the primary initial points of contact for the Task Order. They will triage the order to determine the project manager, foreman, and crew to complete the given task.
b. Mobilization - assemble crew, equipment, and respective subcontractors (24–48 hours emergency; within 12 calendar days routine). Notify asphalt plant to determine current production or coordinate plant startup.
• Ron Murphy and assigned project manager and foreman will dispatch the crew and equipment, coordinate with the asphalt plant, and contact any necessary subcontractors. • Subcontractors Granite frequently uses, and carries master agreements with, have performed work on multiple projects for the City and are familiar with the standard plans and specifications.

5. Suggested Sub Tasks
a. Emergency asphalt services sometimes require removal and replacement of existing concrete curb & gutter.
b. Trench paving sometimes requires removal of existing cold mix which can be done with a small excavator or skip loader rather than a grinder. Alternate crew or sub task specifically for trench restoration may be beneficial.
c. Smaller patches, especially those over 4” deep may be more effectively removed with min-excavators or
backhoes after being saw cut. A sub task with alternate crews may be beneficial.

4. Organization, Staffing, and Equipment
a. Project Roles
• Initial Point of Contact: 24 hour designated contact. • Project Manager (single point of contact): schedule, invoicing, coordination, daily reports. This will be Granite’s assigned Project Manager.
• Site Supervisor: on-site quality, safety, production, coordination. This will be Granite’s assigned Foreman.
• Administrative Support: permits, notifications, documentation, certified payroll. b. Minimum Response Crew for Emergencies

24.44 Construction Contract 27
• Project Lead, Site Supervisor, 1 saw crew, 1 paver team (paver + 1–2 rollers), 2 laborers/flaggers. c. Core Equipment (available or subcontracted)
• Asphalt paver, vibratory and pneumatic rollers, dump trucks, pavement saws, skid steer or backhoe, tack pot, grinder, compressor & jackhammer, traffic control devices.

5. Safety, Compliance, and Quality Assurance
a. Safety and Regulatory Compliance
• Maintain Cal/OSHA-compliant safety program; conduct daily toolbox talks & Take-5’s for safety, production, and quality; enforce PPE standards.
• Ensure public protection including traffic control spreads which follow applicable standards. • DIR active registration and prevailing wage compliance for public works; certified payroll upon request.
• Provide Certificates of Insurance and submit performance and payment bonds when required. b. Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC)
• Pre-task meeting; documented tolerances and test plan, if required. • Field QC: verified lift thickness, roller pass tracking, density tests as required. • Nonconformance protocol: stop work, document, corrective action plan, City approval prior to rework.
c. Environmental and Disposal Practices
•Comply with local, state, federal disposal regulations; provide disposal receipts. • Use best practices to reduce emissions and material waste; note any alternative fuel vehicles or green practices in submittal.

24.45 Construction Contract 28
EXHIBIT “C”
Insurance Requirements
Contractor and its Subcontractor(s) shall procure and maintain insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property and otherwise which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work under this Contract and the results of that work by Contractor, its employees, subcontractors, and agents.

A. CERTIFICATE REQUIREMENTS
The City will be issued a Certificate of Insurance (a Memorandum of Understanding will not be accepted) with the following minimum requirements:
• Certificate(s) will show current policy number(s) and effective dates, • Coverage and policy limits will meet, or exceed, requirements below, • The Certificate Holder will be City of Santa Cruz, Risk Management, 1200 Pacific Avenue, Suite 290, Santa Cruz, CA 95060,
• Certificate will be signed by an authorized representative, • An endorsement, if required below, will be provided to show the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers as additional insureds, and
• Coverages must be maintained during the term of the Agreement with the City, unless a longer duration is required as specified below.

B. MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMITS OF INSURANCE
Contractor acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. If Contractor maintains broader insurance coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown below, the City of Santa Cruz requires and shall be entitled to the broader insurance coverage and/or higher limits maintained by Contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City of Santa Cruz.

Contractor shall procure and maintain insurance coverage during the term of the Contract as follows:

1. Commercial General Liability Insurance. (CGL): $2,000,000 PER OCCURRENCE; $5,000,000 AGGREGATE. Proof of coverage for $2 Million per occurrence and $5 Million in the aggregate, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury, personal and advertising injury will be provided on Insurance Services Office (ISO) Form CG 00 01 covering CGL.

2. Professional Liability (Errors And Omissions): $2,000,000 PER OCCURRENCE OR CLAIM, $2,000,000 AGGREGATE. Contractor will maintain insurance appropriate to Contractor’s profession; with limit no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate. Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after date of completion of the services under this

24.46 Construction Contract 29
Agreement. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed and not replaced with another claimsmade policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date or start of work date, Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of three (3) years after completion of the contract of work.

3. Automobile Liability Insurance. Proof of coverage for not less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage provided on ISO Form Number CA 00 01 covering any auto (Code 1), or if Contractor has no owned autos, hired, (Code 8) and non-owned autos (Code 9).

4. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance. Worker’s Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California with statutory limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance for all employees in workplaces involved in this Contract in the amount of, at least, $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. The Certificate of Insurance shall include waiver of subrogation endorsement in favor of the City for all work performed by the Contractor and its employees.
(Not required if Contractor provides written verification it has no employees) - If Contractor has no employees, Contractor shall complete and sign a Workers’ Compensation Exemption Declaration and Release of Liability.

5. Contractors’ Pollution Liability and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability (CPL) with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence or claim, and $4,000,000 policy aggregate. a. If the services involve lead-based paint or asbestos identification / remediation, the Pollution Liability shall not contain lead-based paint or asbestos exclusions. If the services involve mold identification / remediation, the Pollution Liability shall not contain a mold exclusion and the definition of “Pollution” shall include microbial matter including mold. b. The Automobile Liability policy shall be endorsed to include Transportation Pollution Liability insurance, covering hazardous materials to be transported by Contractor pursuant to the Contract. This coverage may also be provided on the Contractors Pollution Liability policy.

6. Builder’s Risk (Course of Construction) insurance utilizing an “All Risk” (Special Perils) coverage form, with limits equal to the completed value of the project and no coinsurance penalty provisions. Such coverage shall name City as a loss payee.

7. Other Requirements.
a. Additional Insured Endorsement. The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL, CPL, and automobile insurance (if transporting hazardous materials) policies with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of Contractor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage will be provided in the form of an endorsement to Contractor’s insurance at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85, or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10 CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 (if a later

24.47 Construction Contract 30
edition is used).
b. Primary Insurance. For any claims related to this Contract, Contractor’s insurance shall be primary and non-contributory as respects City, its officials, officers, and employees, individually and collectively. Any insurance, self-insurance, or other coverage maintained by the City, its officials, officers, or employees shall be in excess of Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute to it.
c. Waiver of Subrogation. Contractor hereby grants to the City a waiver of any right to subrogation, except as otherwise not applicable, which any insurer of said Contractor may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss, including attorney’s fees under such insurance. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to effectuate this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
d. Notice of Cancellation. The policies specified above are to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after prior written notice to the City. e. Self-Insured Retentions. Any self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. City may require Contractor to provide proof of ability to pay losses and related expenses.
f. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers having a current A.M.

Best rating of no less than A-VII or equivalent or as otherwise approved by CITY. g. Subcontractors. Contractor shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Contractor shall ensure that City is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors. h. Excess Liability/Umbrella Insurance Policies.

Contractor may use excess liability/umbrella policies to meet the required liability limits on the condition that they provide all of the insurance coverages required herein, including, but not limited to, primary and non-contributory, additional insured, Self-Insured Retentions (SIRs), indemnity, and defense requirements. The excess liability/umbrella insurance policies shall be provided on a true “following form” or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying CGL insurance. No insurance policies maintained by the additional insureds, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the Contractor’s primary and excess liability policies are exhausted.
i. Claims Made Policies. If any of the required policies provide coverage on a claimsmade basis:

1. The Retroactive Date must be shown and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.

24.48 Construction Contract 31

2. Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.

3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.
j. Verification of Coverage. Contractor will furnish the City with original Certificates of Insurance including all required amendatory endorsements (or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause) and a copy of the Declarations and Endorsement Page of the CGL, CPL, and automobile Policies listing all policy endorsements to be approved by the City before work commences.

However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning will not waive the Contractor’s obligation to provide them. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time. k. Special Risks or Circumstances. City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

24.49 24.50

24.51 24.52
Construction Contract 34
EXHIBIT “E”

LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz, a municipal corporation in the County of Santa Cruz, State of California, and __________________, hereinafter designated as the "Principal," entered into a contract identified as Construction Contract dated ___________ for work on the ____________________ project described in the contract document hereby referenced and made a part hereof;
WHEREAS, said Principal is required under the terms of said contract to furnish a Labor and Material Bond, the surety of this bond will pay the same to the extent hereinafter set forth; and NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal, and a corporation
organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Santa Cruz in the sum of ___________________________________________________dollars ($________) such sum being not less than one hundred percent (100%) of the estimated contract cost of the work, lawful money of the United States of America, to be paid to the City of Santa Cruz, for the payment of which sum, well and truly to be made, we hereby bind ourselves, our heirs, administrators, executors, successors and assign jointly and severally.

THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if said Principal or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall fail to pay for any materials, provisions, vendor supplies, or equipment as provided in the contract documents, upon, for, or about the performance of the work contracted to be done, or for any work or waiver thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to work or labor performed by any such claimant, or fails to pay any of the persons authorized under Civil Code Section 9100 to assert a claim against a payment bond, or fails to pay for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the Franchise Tax Board for the wages of employees of the Principal or his/her subcontractor pursuant to Section 18806 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or fails to pay for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the Employment Development Department from the wages of employees of the principal and all subcontractors with respect to such work and labor that the surety or sureties will pay for the same, in an amount not exceeding the sum specified in this bond, and also, in case suit is brought upon the bond, will pay, in addition to the face amount hereof, a reasonable attorney's fee, to be fixed by the Court.

The condition of this obligation is such that its terms inure to the benefit of any of the persons and entities authorized in Civil Code Section 9100 to assert a claim against a payment bond so as to give a right of action to such persons or entities or their assigns in any suit brought upon or action to enforce liability on the bond.

The surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the contract or to the work to be performed thereunder shall in any manner affect its obligation upon this bond, and it does hereby explicitly waive notice of

24.53 Construction Contract 35
any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the contract or to the work to be performed thereunder, and further explicitly hereby waives its rights under Civil Code Section 2819.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above parties have executed this instrument under their seals this_____ day of____________________, 20__, and duly signed by its undersigned representation, pursuant to authority of its governing body.

PRINCIPAL:

Firm name:

Printed name:

Signature: Date:

Title:

SURETY:

Firm name:

Printed name:

Signature: Date:

Title:

Notice to Surety:

Address:______________________________________________________________________ Contact Person: ________________________________________________________________ Email: _________________________ Phone No.:_________________________________ I hereby approve the form of the within bond.

Office of the City Attorney Date
(Note: Signatures of those executing for the Principal and Surety must include a Notary Acknowledgement.)

24.54 Construction Contract 36

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
County of _____________________ )
On before me, ,
(insert name and title of the officer)
personally appeared ____________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature ______________________________ (Seal)
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

24.55 Construction Contract 37

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
County of _____________________ )
On before me, ,
(insert name and title of the officer)
personally appeared ____________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature ______________________________ (Seal)
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

24.56 Construction Contract 38
EXHIBIT “F”

FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz, a municipal corporation in the County of Santa Cruz, State of California, and ________________ hereinafter designated as “Principal” have entered into a contract identified as Contractor Agreement, dated _____________, whereby Principal agrees to install and complete the work on the _______________ project described in the contract document hereby referenced and made a part hereof:

WHEREAS, said Principal is required under the terms of said contract with the City of Santa Cruz to furnish security for the faithful performance of said contract; and NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Principal, and a corporation
organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of , as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Santa Cruz, in the sum of ($ ), such sum being not less than one hundred percent (100%) of the estimated contract cost of the work, lawful money of the United States of America, to be paid to the City of Santa Cruz, for payment of which sum, well and truly to be paid, we hereby jointly and severally bind ourselves, our heirs, administrators, executors, successors and assigns, by these presents;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the above bound Principal, its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns will in all things abide by and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions in the said agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or her part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to the true intent and meaning, and will indemnify and save harmless the City of Santa Cruz, its officers and agents, and employees, as therein stipulated, then this obligation will become null and void, otherwise it will be and remain in full force and effect.

As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefore, there will be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the City of Santa Cruz.

As a condition precedent to the satisfactory completion of the said contract, an obligation in the amount of ($ ), being not less than ten percent (10%) of the estimated contract cost, will remain in force for a period of one (1) year after the official acceptance of said work, during which time if the Principal, its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns will fail to make full, complete and satisfactory repairs and replacements or totally protect the City of Santa Cruz from loss or damage made evident during said period of one (1) year from the date of official acceptance of said work and resulting from or caused by defective materials or faulty workmanship in the prosecution of the work done, the above obligation in the sum of ($ ) shall remain in full force and effect, otherwise the obligation shall be discharged.

However, notwithstanding any other provisions of this paragraph, the obligation for the surety hereunder will continue so long as any obligation of the Principal remains.

24.57 Construction Contract 39
The surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the contract or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications shall in any manner affect this obligation upon this bond, and it does hereby explicitly waive notice of any such changes, extensions of time, alterations, or additions to the terms of the contract or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications, and it further explicitly hereby waives its rights under California Civil Code §2819.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this instrument under their seals this day of , 20__, and duly signed by its undersigned representative, pursuant to the authority of its governing body.

PRINCIPAL:

Firm name:

Printed name:

Signature: Date:

Title:

SURETY:

Firm name:

Printed name:

Signature: Date:

Title:

Notice to Surety:

Address: _________________________________________________________________________ Contact Person: ____________________________________________________________________ Email: _________________________ Phone No.:__________________________________ I hereby approve the form of the within bond.

Office of the City Attorney Date

24.58 Construction Contract 40
(Note: Signatures of those executing for the Principal and Surety must include a Notary Acknowledgement.)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
County of _____________________ )
On before me, ,
(insert name and title of the officer)
personally appeared ____________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature ______________________________ (Seal)
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

24.59 Construction Contract 41

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
County of _____________________ )
On before me, ,
(insert name and title of the officer)
personally appeared ____________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature ______________________________ (Seal)
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

24.60 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 06/04/2026
AGENDA OF: 06/23/2026
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Contract Amendment to Professional Services Agreement to Errol L.

Montgomery & Associates, Inc. For Groundwater Modeling Services in the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (WT)
LOCATION: County
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract amendment, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, with Errol L. Montgomery & Associates (Oakland, CA) for groundwater modeling in the Mid-County groundwater basin, and authorize the Water Director to execute future contract amendments within the approved project budget.

BACKGROUND: The City of Santa Cruz (City) is a participating agency of the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency (MGA), which is responsible for the development and implementation of the approved Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Santa Cruz MidCounty Groundwater Basin (MCGB). The GSP includes a variety of projects and management actions that are designed to achieve sustainability for the groundwater basin by 2040 as required under California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

In 2025, the Santa Cruz Mid-County Regional Water Optimization Study (Optimization Study) that included groundwater modeling of various projects within the MCGB was finalized. The Optimization Study was a collaborative effort between the City and Soquel Creek Water District (SqCWD) that relied on groundwater modeling to evaluate technical and institutional pathways to optimize planned projects, existing facilities and infrastructure, along with water resources for regional benefit while supporting long-term groundwater sustainability and climate resilience.

The Optimization Study only considered pathways and projects within the MCGB; however, the Water Supply Augmentation Implementation Plan (WSAIP), which is a City-only led effort, was finalized in March 2026 and considers additional projects with Scotts Valley Water District (SVWD) in the adjacent Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin that were not included in the Optimization Study. The WSAIP incorporates findings from previous reports, modeling work from other studies (such as the Optimization Study), while at the same time exploring and identifying various opportunities to increase water supply reliability, including transfers and exchanges, groundwater banking, recycled water, and desalination.

25.1 The Water Department has been engaged in water supply planning and groundwater management efforts for many years and has worked on groundwater modeling with Errol L.

Montgomery & Associates, Inc. (aka Montgomery & Associates or M&A) and formerly HydroMetrics Water Resources Inc. (acquired by M&A in 2018) since 2016. Following a competitive selection process in 2020, M&A was selected by the MGA to continue serving as the groundwater modeling consultant and was also selected to provide groundwater modeling support for the Optimization Study. In the last decade, M&A has acquired a unique and specialized knowledge of the model code and local datasets, thus making M&A the most qualified to continue performing these specialized services.

DISCUSSION: In September of 2025, the City executed a contract with M&A in the amount of $77,300 for M&A to evaluate the feasibility, water supply benefits, and sustainability effects of the City’s current and potential future ASR projects in the MCGB under updated planning assumptions that differ from those evaluated in the Optimization Study as noted above. The resulting evaluation indicated that additional refinement of the simulated alternatives would allow for a better understanding of the benefits from the ASR project that not only helps meet the City’s water supply reliability goal but also helps achieve MCGB sustainability.

M&A’s proposed fee for this expanded scope of work is a not-to-exceed amount of $90,700.Award of a new contract amendment has been reviewed by the Purchasing Manager, who is supportive of the non-competitive award as authorized in SCMC Section 3.08.150.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) DETERMINATION: The proposed Council action is not a “project” under CEQA because the proposed modeling services will not cause a physical change in the environment directly or indirectly.

HEALTH IN ALL POLICIES (HiAP): This contract aligns with the goals of the City’s HiAP framework, specifically the pillars of sustainability and public health. With respect to sustainability, the results of this groundwater modeling work will further inform the development and implementation of aquifer storage and recovery projects in the Mid-County groundwater basin to optimize the City’s water supply portfolio and restore the health of the basin.

FISCAL IMPACT:

1. The recommendation in this report impacts the General Fund: No

2. This recommendation requires a budget adjustment: No

3. The recommendation creates an on-going expenditure commitment: No FISCAL IMPACT DESCRIPTION: The total contract value, including this $90,700 contract amendment, is $168,000. Funds are available in the Water Department’s FY 2026 Capital Investment Program budget within project c701705, Water Supply Augmentation.

Prepared By:

Isidro Rivera
Deputy Water
Director/Engineering Manager
Submitted By:

Heidi Luckenbach
Water Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. DRAFT CONTRACT AMENDMENT.PDF

25.2 City of Santa Cruz First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement for Groundwater Modeling Services
June 2026 Page 1

FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ERROL L. MONTGOMERY & ASSOCIATES, INC.

THIS FIRST AMENDMENT (“First Amendment”), effective as of _________, 2026 (“effective date”) to the PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT dated September 17, 2025, is made by and between the CITY OF SANTA CRUZ (“City”) and Errol L. Montgomery & Associates, Inc. (“Consultant”). City and Consultant may be referred to individually as a “Party” and collectively, as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
WHEREAS, City and Consultant have previously entered into that certain Professional Services Agreement (“Agreement”) dated September 17, 2025, incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, City and Consultant desire to enter into this First Amendment to the Agreement to revise the Scope of Work, Fee Schedule, Work Schedule, or to otherwise amend the Agreement for additional groundwater modeling services for Aquifer Storage and Recovery in the Santa Cruz MidCounty Groundwater Basin in the amount of $90,700.00, as specified herein.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between the Parties to incorporate the above Recitals hereto, and that the Parties agree to the following:

1. Exhibit A: Scope of Work of the Agreement is hereby amended to revise the prior Scope of Work in Exhibit A of the Agreement with the amended Scope of Work as specified on pages 1 through 3 of Consultant’s letter dated May 8, 2026, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A-1 and incorporated herein.

2. Exhibit B: Fee Schedule of the Agreement is hereby amended to revise the prior budget amount in Exhibit B of the Agreement with the amended Fee Schedule, as specified on page 2 of Consultant’s letter dated May 8, 2026, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A-1 and incorporated herein. The new not to exceed budget amount is in the amount of $168,00.00. This new amount is within the council approved project budget.

3. Exhibit C: Work Schedule of the Agreement is hereby amended to revise the prior Work Schedule in Exhibit C of the Agreement with the amended Work Schedule, as specified on page 2 of Consultant’s letter dated May 8, 2026, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A-1 and incorporated herein.

4. Except as amended by this First Amendment, all other applicable terms and conditions of the original Agreement and attachments shall remain in full force and effect. The terms of this First Amendment shall control if any conflict exists.

Draft

25.3 City of Santa Cruz First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement for Groundwater Modeling Services
June 2026 Page 2

5. Each party acknowledges that it has reviewed this First Amendment and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this First Amendment.

6. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality of any provision(s) of this First Amendment shall not render the other provisions unenforceable, invalid or illegal.

7. The Parties may execute this First Amendment in two or more counterparts, which shall, in the aggregate, be deemed an original but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. A scanned, electronic, facsimile or other copy of a party’s signature shall be accepted and valid as an original.

8. The signatories to this First Amendment warrant and represent that each is authorized to execute this First Amendment and that their respective signatures serve to legally obligate their respective representatives, agents, successors and assigns to comply with the provisions of this First Amendment.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
Draft

25.4 City of Santa Cruz First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement for Groundwater Modeling Services
June 2026 Page 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Consultant have executed this First Amendment effective as of the date first written above.

Approved As To Form:

By: __________________________ Date: ___________
Office of the City Attorney
CONSULTANT: ERROL L. MONTGOMERY & ASSOCIATES, INC.

By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Printed: _______________________ Title: ______________________ By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Printed: _______________________ Title: ________________ Signature Requirements for Business Entity:
a. Corporation – 2 officer signatures required (one from each group, unless person signing holds officer positions in both Group 1 and 2):

Group 1: Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board, President, or Vice President Group 2: Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer, Assistant Treasurer

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Matt Huffaker, City Manager

WATER DEPARTMENT
By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Heidi Luckenbach, Water Director
Technical Review By:

By: __________________________ Date: ___________
Isidro Rivera, P.E., Deputy Water Director/Engineering Manager Draft

25.5 City of Santa Cruz First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement for Groundwater Modeling Services
June 2026 Page 4
EXHIBIT A-1
Draft

25.6 May 8, 2026
Mr. Isidro Rivera
Deputy Director/Engineering Manager
City of Santa Cruz Water Department
212 Locust St., Suite C
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
SUBJECT: DRAFT SCOPE AND BUDGET FOR ADDITIONAL

GROUNDWATER MODELING OF CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AQUIFER

STORAGE AND RECOVERY IN THE SANTA CRUZ MID-COUNTY BASIN Dear Mr. Rivera:

We have been pleased to provide groundwater modeling services for the City of Santa Cruz (City) Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) project in the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (Basin) under the contract executed September 17, 2025 (Contract). The Contract covers scope described as Tasks 1-3 of the Contract’s Exhibit A. We have completed Task 2 of the Contract to prepare and evaluate simulations for 4 Optimization Study variations using September 2024 output of the Santa Cruz Water Supply Model (SCWSM) under R1270 climate.

We are currently using remaining budget under the Contract to simulate variations of Optimization Study Alternatives A and B with updated SCWSM output. This work is being conducted instead of scope for Task 3 of the Contract for documenting simulations using September 2024 output of SCWSM.

Evaluation of the simulations prepared under Task 2 indicates additional refinement of Alternatives A and B, or development of other strategies, may improve supply benefits from the ASR project while achieving sustainability consistent with the Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan. This letter provides scope and budget to develop, simulate, and evaluate additional scenarios using updated output from the Santa Cruz Water Supply Model (SCWSM) under R1270 climate.

Exhibit A of the Contract refers to 5 tasks, although Tasks 4 and 5 were deemed optional and not approved as part of the Contract. As Tasks 4 and 5 may be approved in the future, this scope is listed as Tasks 6-8.

Exhibit A-1

25.7 DRAFT FOR CLIENT REVIEW
2 TASK 6. EVALUATE SCENARIOS WITH WATER ALLOCATION MODEL M&A will modify the water allocation model that distributes flows to ASR and transfers to implement up to 4 scenarios that refine Optimization Study alternatives or implement new strategies. M&A will then test the scenarios with the water allocation model to show the potential water supply outcomes of implementing the strategies. M&A will hold 3 online meetings with City staff to plan scenarios and review results of the water allocation models.

TASK 7. SIMULATE 4 SCENARIOS
Using output from the water allocation model, M&A will prepare, simulate, and evaluate the 4 scenarios with the Mid-County Basin GSFLOW groundwater model. M&A will present results to the City staff in 2 online meetings.

TASK 8. PREPARE DOCUMENTATION AND PRESENT AT WATER

COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
M&A will document assumptions and results of the simulations for the 4 scenarios conducted under Task 7. The report will include graphs and statistics describing water supply during storage and recovery periods and simulated projected scenario groundwater levels of GSP representative monitoring points and other key wells, similar to what has been documented for the Optimization Study.

M&A will also prepare a PowerPoint presentation and present the model results at a Water Commission or City Council meeting.

BUDGET AND COST ESTIMATE
Table 1 includes a cost estimate for Tasks 6 through 8.

SCHEDULE
Task 6 requires a total of 5 weeks to complete and present water allocation results to the City.

After water allocation results are reviewed, model simulations for 1 scenario can be completed in a 2 week period for presentation at up to 4 bi-weekly online meetings with the City under Task 7.

Task 8 will require 1 month to prepare a draft of the report and at least 2 weeks to prepare a Water Commission or City Council presentation.

M&A looks forward to continuing our support of your water supply planning efforts.

25.8 DRAFT FOR CLIENT REVIEW
3 Sincerely,

MONTGOMERY & ASSOCIATES
Cameron Tana, P.E.

Principal Hydrologist
Patrick Wickham, P.G., C.Hg.

Hydrogeologist
cc: Heidi Luckenbach, City of Santa Cruz Water Department Jillian Brown, HDR, Inc

25.9 Table 1 Level of Effort and Cost Estimate for Scope Tasks
Lead
Groundwater
Modeler Scientist 2
Technical
Editor
Expenses
including
Outside
Expert +
10%
Markup TOTALS
Rates $203 $154 $88 Hours ($) ($)
Task 6: Develop and Evaluate 4 Scenarios with Water Allocation Model
Develop ASR Scenarios 8 4 0 16 $0 $3,332
Modify Water Allocation Model for Scenarios 16 4 0 24 $0 $4,956 Evaluate Scenarios with Water Allocation Model Using Updated SCWSM Output 4 16 0 24 $0 $4,368
3 Online Meetings 6 12 0 24 $0 $4,704
Subtotal Task 6 34 36 0 88 $0 $17,400
Task 7: Simulate 4 Scenarios
Prepare Model Simulations of 4 Scenarios 16 40 0 66 $0 $12,138 Post-Process and Evaluate Model Results 24 48 0 84 $0 $15,540 4 Online Meetings 16 12 0 36 $0 $7,280
Subtotal Task 7 56 100 0 186 $0 $35,000
Task 8: Prepare Documentation and Present at Water Commission or City Council Meeting
Draft Model Report 40 80 6 136 $0 $23,698
Final Model Report 16 20 4 45 $0 $8,045
Present at 1 Water Commission Meeting (in-person) 8 8 2 30 $200 $6,508 Subtotal Task 8 64 108 12 211 $200 $38,300
Total for Tasks 6-8 154 244 12 485 $200 $90,700

25.10 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 06/04/2026
AGENDA OF: 06/23/2026
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Contract Amendment Service Order 12, Change Order 1 with HDR, Inc. for Capital Program Management Services (WT)
LOCATION: None
RECOMMENDATION: Motion authorizing the City Manager to execute Contract Amendment Service Order 12, Change Order 1 with HDR, Inc. in the amount of $8,745,255 and in a form to be approved by the City Attorney.

BACKGROUND: The City of City of Santa Cruz Water Department continues to implement a large and complex capital improvement program to enhance water system resiliency and improve long-term water supply reliability. The program has and will continue to affect nearly every aspect of the City’s water system, including diversions, pipelines, storage tanks, treatment facilities, and supplemental water supply infrastructure. Work in Fiscal Year 2027 is expected to occur on the following key projects:
 Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant (GHWTP) Facility Improvements Project (FIP) to ensure continued treatment and delivery of high-quality drinking water that meets or exceeds all regulatory standards. In addition, the project modernizes the facility to meet current codes and industry standards and supports current and future water supply augmentation. Construction is planned to begin in early 2027 and continue through 2032.  Newell Creek Pipeline Replacement Project (Felton Booster Pump Station to Sims Road) will ensure continued reliability of water supply from Loch Lomond Reservoir to the GHWTP by replacing a portion of the transmission main that is nearing the end of its useful life, and experiencing an increased frequency of breaks due to corrosion and land movement along its alignment through the active geology of the Santa Cruz Mountains.

The project is currently under construction and anticipated to be complete in early 2027.  Ongoing evaluation, selection, and construction of supplemental water supplies as directed by the Securing Our Water Future policy including Aquafer Storage and Recovery (ASR) projects and water transfer projects with neighboring agencies.

Supplemental water supply projects that are in planning, design or construction in FY 2027 include Beltz 8 ASR Upgrades (currently in construction), Beltz 9 ASR Upgrades (currently in design), piloting of ASR at the Beltz 10 well site and the Regional Drought

26.1 Resiliency Improvement Project – Intertie I with Scotts Valley Water District (currently in construction).

In 2017, the Department recognized the need for increased support to successfully implement this complex capital program. Because the work would exceed staff capacity a program management model to augment Department staff was adopted to help successfully deliver the work.

After a qualifications-based procurement process, HDR, Inc. (HDR) was selected to provide program management services for the Water Department. In December 2017, City Council authorized a renewable five-year Master Services Agreement (MSA) for program management services with HDR. On June 28, 2022, City Council authorized an extension of the MSA for an additional five years, which extended the term of the MSA through June 30, 2027.

DISCUSSION: Staff recommends approval of Service Order No. 12 (SO 12) to cover all program management activities planned for Fiscal Year (FY 2027). Notable HDR services/staffing resources planned for FY 2027 include:
 Providing project management, environmental compliance, and construction management services through the completion of construction of the Concrete Tanks Replacement Project that is expected in the fall of 2026.
 Providing project management, technical support, construction management, and environmental compliance and inspection services on the Newell Creek Pipeline Replacement Project, Regional Drought Resiliency Project – Intertie 1, the University Tank 4 Rehab/Replacement Project, and the Beltz 8 ASR Upgrade Project.  Providing an operations and maintenance (O&M) liaison to focus on the GHWTP FIP.

This role supports O&M staff and coordinates the planning, design, and execution of projects for the capital program.
 Technical support of the Water Supply Augmentation Implementation Plan and the projects that are part of the overall Water Supply Augmentation Program by providing project management and technical support.
 Supporting ongoing scheduling, cost forecasting, budgeting, and cash flow estimates through project controls support.
 Supporting ongoing program activities by updating workflow policies and procedures, managing program resources, facilitating staff and workforce development training, conducting program review meetings, and managing the program management contract.

SO12 provides a detailed approach to direct the work of HDR in an efficient, clear, and transparent manner, and includes clearly identified assumptions and deliverables. To summarize, the work performed in FY 2026 as well as the work planned in FY 2027 under SO12, City and HDR staff have jointly developed an Annual Work Plan. In addition to a summary of projects, resources, and planned activities over the next fiscal year; the Work Plan includes the schedule and fee for each project managed under this service order. The program management services

26.2 contract is funded through the respective capital projects which are financed by a combination of grants, pay-as-you-go, and debt.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) DETERMINATION: The proposed Council action is not a “project” under CEQA because the support services contemplated will not cause a physical change in the environment directly or indirectly.

HEALTH IN ALL POLICIES (HiAP): The continued program management services for the capital program align with the public health pillar of the City’s HiAP initiative by supporting the Water Department’s work in ensuring the reliability of the public drinking water supply by improving infrastructure integrity and reliability.

FISCAL IMPACT:

1. The recommendation in this report impacts the General Fund: No

2. This recommendation requires a budget adjustment: No

3. The recommendation creates an on-going expenditure commitment: No FISCAL IMPACT DESCRIPTION: The cost for SO12 is $8,745,255. Funds needed for FY 2027 are available in the Water Department’s FY 2027 Capital Investment Program budget.

Prepared By:

Isidro Rivera
Deputy Water
Director/Engineering Manager
Submitted By:

Heidi Luckenbach
Water Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. CONTRACT AMENDMENT SERVICE ORDER NO. 12.PDF

2. FISCAL YEAR 2027 - ANNUAL WORK PLAN.PDF

26.3 City of Santa Cruz Amendment to Master Services Agreement for Program Management Services
Service Order 12, Change Order 1
June 2026 Page 1

AMENDMENT TO MASTER SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ WATER DEPARTMENT
SERVICE ORDER 12, CHANGE ORDER 1
THIS AMENDMENT to the Master Services Agreement, Service Order 12, Change Order I ("SO-12, CO-I"), dated ________________, 2026 (the "Effective Date"), is made by and between the CITY OF SANTA CRUZ ("City") and HDR, Inc. ("Consultant"). City and Consultant may be referred to individually as a "Party" and collectively, as the "Parties."

RECITALS
WHEREAS, City and Consultant have previously entered into that certain Professional Services Agreement, also known as the Master Services Agreement ("MSA") dated July 5, 2022, incorporated herein by this reference; and MSA, including for Service Orders 8, 9, 10, and 11; and WHEREAS, City and Consultant desire to enter into this SO-12, CO-1 to further amend the MSA with regard to Service Order 12, as specified herein.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between the Parties to incorporate the above Recitals hereto, and agree as follows:

1. Exhibit A: Scope of Work of the MSA is hereby amended to revise the tasks for Service Order 12, deleting Task 1, and adding Tasks 2 through 6, per the attached 53-page scope of work titled "Service Order No 12 - Program Activities (FY 2027)" dated May 26, 2026, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A-1 to SO-12, CO-1 and incorporated herein.

2. Exhibit B: Fee Schedule of the MSA is hereby amended to add additional fees for Service Order 12 Tasks 2 through 6 as provided in the one-page table titled "Estimated Work Effort and Fee Estimate", which is attached hereto as Exhibit B-1 to SO-12, CO-1 and incorporated herein. This table presents a breakdown of the total fees for all Fiscal Year 2027 Services. The authorized total fee for Fiscal Year 2027 services is not to exceed $8,745,255. This new amount is within the council approved overall project budget.

3. Exhibit C: Work Schedule of the MSA is hereby amended to add the work schedule for Service Order 12 Tasks 2 through 6, per the three-page schedule titled "Level 3 - z0l Detail Schedule", which is attached hereto as Exhibit C-1 to SO-12, CO-l and incorporated herein.

DRAFT

26.4 City of Santa Cruz Amendment to Master Services Agreement for Program Management Services
Service Order 12, Change Order 1
June 2026 Page 2

4. Except as amended by this SO-12, CO-1, all other applicable terms and conditions of the MSA and attachments and other prior amendments shall remain in full force and effect. The terms of this SO-12, CO-1 shall control if any conflict exists.

5. Each Party acknowledges that it has reviewed this SO-12, CO-1 and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this SO-12, CO-1.

6. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality of any provision(s) of this SO-12, CO-1 shall not render the other provisions unenforceable, invalid or illegal.

7. The Parties may execute this SO-12, CO-1 in two or more counterparts, which shall, in the aggregate, be deemed an original but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. A scanned, electronic, facsimile or other copy of a party’s signature shall be accepted and valid as an original.

8. The signatories to this SO-12, CO-1 warrant and represent that each is authorized to execute this SO-12, CO-1 and that their respective signatures serve to legally obligate their respective representatives, agents, successors and assigns to comply with the provisions of this SO-12, CO-1.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
DRAFT

26.5 City of Santa Cruz Amendment to Master Services Agreement for Program Management Services
Service Order 12, Change Order 1
June 2026 Page 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Consultant have executed this SO-12, CO-1 as of the Effective Date above.

Approved As To Form:

By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Office of the City Attorney
CONSULTANT: HDR, INC.

By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Printed: _______________________ Title: ______________________ By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Printed: _______________________ Title: ______________________ Corporation – 2 officer signatures required (one from each group, unless person signing holds officer positions in both Group 1 and 2):

Group 1: Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board, President, or Vice President Group 2: Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer, Assistant Treasurer CITY OF SANTA CRUZ WATER DEPARTMENT:

By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Heidi Luckenbach, P.E., Water Director
Technical Review By:

By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Isidro Rivera, P.E. Deputy Water Director / Engineering Manager CITY OF SANTA CRUZ:

By: __________________________ Date: ________________
Matt Huffaker, City Manager
DRAFT

26.6 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

SCOPE OF WORK
Service Order 12: Program Activities (FY 2027)
The City of Santa Cruz Water Department (City) has taken a program management approach to implementing its Capital Improvement Program (Program). It has contracted with HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR), under a Master Services Agreement (MSA), to provide Program management services.

This service order (SO) falls under the MSA and covers ongoing Program activities and Program deliverables that will occur in fiscal year 2027 (FY27) (July 1, 2026–June 30, 2027). Unless specifically noted, it is assumed that the scope and fee refer to work planned for completion in FY27.

As with all service orders, this service order follows the structure of the MSA in terms of major tasks:
• Task 1: Program Mobilization (complete—not used)
• Task 2: Design and Planning Management
• Task 3: Program Administration
• Task 4: Planning and Engineering
• Task 5: Construction Management
• Task 6: Program Support
The tasks of the MSA were created to allow the Program to transition from the initial stages of defining the Program projects, structure and procedures, through the planning and design of capital projects and department processes and protocols, and finally to project construction and startup of almost two dozen capital projects. Each service order uses tasks from the MSA as appropriate with the expectation that the planning and administrative tasks will be used less over time with design and construction tasks being used more in the future.

26.7 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Task 1: Program Mobilization (not used)
Task 1 will no longer be used. Program mobilization was completed in June 2018 as part of SO 1.

26.8 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Task 2: Design and Planning Management; Project
Staff Augmentation
Task 2 covers coordination and management of planning and design activities. As an integrated team, HDR and staff work with the project teams to continuously improve, adapt and consistently apply the established project management tools to capital projects. This includes the planning and design activities of outside consultants, as well as designs prepared by City staff. For the purposes of estimating the labor requirements for this task, HDR assumes that it will provide or support design and planning management services as indicated on the design and planning management project activity matrix shown in Table 1.

This task also covers staff augmentation to support project management throughout each project phase.

Design and planning management teams may include a package manager, project manager(s) (PM), project engineer(s), technical advisors, operations and maintenance (O&M) lead, O&M liaison, and environmental lead (EL), and may be composed of either City or HDR staff. Construction management (CM) support is described in Task 5.

The package manager’s role includes, but is not limited to:
• Oversight of PMs for projects within their package.
• Coordination and information transfer across projects within the package, as well as with other packages. Identification and facilitation of resolution on overlaps and interfaces between adjacent projects.

The PM’s role includes, but is not limited to:
• Coordination and implementation of activities A through F, as applicable to the project type and phase.
• Leadership of project reporting efforts to Program controls and department leadership.

The project engineer’s role is to support the PM in project activities. Typical tasks may include performing technical analyses, responding to data requests from the design consultant, coordinating and scheduling meetings, and maintaining the project’s document management via SharePoint.

The O&M lead coordinates the necessary and appropriate level of input for the operations staff on a project. O&M lead roles may include meeting participation, review of deliverables and coordination with site visits or on-site construction activities.

The Environmental Lead (EL) coordinates the environmental planning and permitting process for a project. This role is scoped in Subtask 6.1.

26.9 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Task 2 consists of the following general and project-specific subtasks:
• Task 2: 0.0 General Planning and Design Administration • Task 2: 2.2.1 Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill • Task 2: 2.4 Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz–Scotts Valley
• Task 2: 3.1 Water Supply Augmentation
• Task 2: 3.3 ASR Planning
• Task 2: 3.3.1 ASR Mid-County Existing Infrastructure (Beltz 12 Upgrades for ASR) • Task 2: 3.3.3 Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR
• Task 2: 3.3.4 Beltz 9 Upgrades for ASR
• Task 2: 4.3 Graham Hill WTP Concrete Tanks Replacement • Task 2: 4.4 Graham Hill WTP Facility Improvements Project • Task 2: 4.7 Beltz 12 Well Ammonia Removal
• Task 2: 4.8 Beltz WTP Upgrades
• Task 2 – NCIP.002 Main Replacement-Engineering
• Task 2 – 6.3 Pasatiempo Tanks Replacement
Each project subtask may include the following key activities. The number of projects and expected durations are noted accordingly.
• Activity A: Support collaborative delivery method implementation (one project; 12-month duration)
• Activity B: Select final design consultants (one project assumed during FY27) • Activity C: Monitor project progress and changes (14 projects, up to 12-month duration); note that construction and environmental phases of projects, as applicable, are supported and tracked under Task 5 and Subtask 6.1 support.
• Activity D: Review reports, plans and specifications (three design submittals and six planning deliverables; 12-month duration)
• Activity E: No projects are planned to be in the bidding process during FY27 • Activity F: Cost estimate support (Two projects assumed during FY27) For the purposes of defining scope and labor requirements for this task, it is assumed that the projects managed are/will be delivered through a design-bid-build delivery method, except for Project 4.4 (GHWTP Facility Improvements Project), which is delivered through a progressive design-build delivery method.

26.10 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Table 1. Design and Planning Management Key Activities by Project Task and Staff Augmentation No. Project Name
Duration in
FY27
(Months) PE/PM Augmentation
Activity A
Delivery Methods
Support
Activity B
Select Final Design
Consultants
Activity C
Monitor Project Progress and
Changes
(all project phases)
Activity D
Review Plans and Specs
(#)
Activity D
Review Planning Reports,
Memos (#)
Activity E
Facilitate Bidding
Process
Activity F
Cost Est.

Support

2.2.1 Newell Creek Pipeline
Felton/Graham Hill 12
PM at 0.27 FTE
Water/Wastewater EIT at 0.08 FTE
Sr Mechanical Engineer 0.27 FTE


2.4 Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz–Scotts
Valley 6 PM at 0.15 FTESr Electrical Engineer 0.02 FTE 

3.1 Water Supply Augmentation 12 Tech Advisor at 0.5 FTE Water Supply Engineer at 0.94 FTE   (2)

3.3 ASR Planning 12
Engineer at 0.1 FTE
Water Project Engineer 0.51 FTE
Water/Wastewater EIT at 0.51 FTE
Tech Advisor at 0.07 FTE
 

3.3.1 Beltz 8 & 12 Design with Beltz 12
Upgrades 6
PM Support at 0.1 FTE
Engineer at 0.04 FTE
Senior Electrical Engineer 0.01 FTE


3.3.3 Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR 12 Water/Wastewater EIT at 0.34 FTE Senior Electrical Engineer 0.03 FTE 

3.3.4 Beltz 9 Upgrades for ASR 12
Water Project Engineer at 0.44 FTE
Water/Wastewater EIT at 0.44 FTE
Senior Electrical Engineer at 0.08 FTE
Junior Electrical Engineer at 0.08 FTE
  (10%, 50%, 100%)  (2)

4.3 GHWTP Concrete Tanks
Replacement 6 PM 0.18 FTEO&M Liaison 0.1 FTE 

4.4 GHWTP Facility Improvements
Project 12
PM at 1 FTE
Senior PE at 0.51 FTE
Water/Wastewater EIT at 1 FTE
O&M Liaison at 0.49 FTE
Technical Advisors 0.1 FTE
Senior Electrical Engineer at 0.14 FTE
Sr. Controls Systems Specialist 0.1 FTE
Architect 0.07 FTE
Stormwater Advisor 0.05 FTE
Senior Structural Engineer 0.05 FTE
Design Build Advisor 0.05 FTE
  

4.7 Beltz 12 Well Ammonia Removal 6
PM at 0.05 FTE
Technical Advisor at 0.03 FTE
Senior Electrical Engineer at 0.01 FTE


4.8 Beltz WTP Upgrades 12
PM at 0.31 FTE
Senior PE at 0.09 FTE
Engineer at 0.2 FTE
 
NCIP.002 Main Replacements-Engineering 12 Senior Mechanical Engineer at 0.14 FTE 

6.3 Pasatiempo Tanks Replacement 9
Senior Electrical Engineer at 0.03 FTE
Project Manager at 0.03 FTE
Estimator at 0.03 FTE
Senior Mechanical Engineer at 0.08 FTE
  

26.11 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Task 2: 0.0 General Program Planning and Design Support Activities This subtask covers planning- and design-phase support and management activities that are generally Program-wide in nature or are not affiliated with a specific project. When not provided by designated City staff, the scope of the planning lead and design management lead positions are included in this task. During FY27, the planning lead, Isidro Rivera, and design management lead, Lewis Kay, filled roles as described in the Introduction section of the Program Management Plan (PgMP) provided by the City.

HDR will provide general planning and design phase project support, which may include the activities described below:
• Development of (not yet scoped) technical evaluations, such as the assessment of current and future operations costs, project management scopes and levels of effort (LOEs) for projects or tasks not previously defined in the FY work plan • Design review and input on projects, including project cost estimate (PCE) review support or schedule support for projects not previously identified or budgeted in Table 1, such as in preparation for deliverable or Stage Gate review
• Engagement in monthly Program PM or staff meetings and/or trainings, especially for PM support staff engaged in multiple Program projects
• Cross-project engagement and coordination (e.g., review meetings, follow-up actions). • Miscellaneous as-needed tasks on behalf of the City to support planning or design progression of projects (i.e., traffic study, department generator assessment, systems design criteria, decision-making support)
• Coordination with O&M liaison
• Other general, non-scoped support tasks, as requested by City staff and approved by City leadership
• Electrical site visits by HDR electrical engineers
O&M liaison support: Support the implementation of the Project Delivery Model for various planning, design and construction projects focusing on the interaction and information transfer between Operations (or specifically Production Section), the Engineering Group and the design engineers. One objective of the O&M liaison is to support the City’s O&M needs during these projects, while streamlining deliverable reviews. The O&M liaison will apply their familiarity with City O&M standards and preferences and prepare and execute deliverable reviews with O&M staff.

Another objective of this role is to facilitate development of operations plans related to planned outages, construction-phase operational risk mitigation, and startup and commissioning. Where project-specific support needs are defined, time for O&M liaison support is identified in Table 1.

Electrical, instrumentation and controls (EI&C) support: At the request of the City and in response to the City being understaffed in the area of EI&C, HDR will provide general support to the Production Section during FY27. This EI&C support role is in addition to the technical review of project deliverables that are budgeted within the project-specific tasks. The City’s needs may increase for the GHWTP FIP, at which time the need for an amendment will be reassessed. Support will be provided through monthly on-site visits, as required and interim follow-on actions support.

Activities for EI&C support may include:
• Support: GE Intellisys maintenance contract/arc flash for main electrical building • Support: Utility pole relocation reviews
• Support: Review arc flash studies, and update completed studies to account for new site upgrades

26.12 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

• Support: Tait Wells MCC enclosure improvement
• Support: Felton Booster Pump Station power quality assessment • Training: Coordination with Electrical and I&C groups during Design and Construction Phases of a Project
Brief descriptions of these activities are described below:

GE Intellisys:

HDR scope includes: 1) submittal reviews, 2) coordination with City’s electrical and SCADA staff, and 3) documentation to support the City with the update of the Automatic Throwover System’s CPU and the installation of the Duplex HMI.

Total estimated coordination visits: 1
Utility pole relocation reviews:

HDR will provide limited design review and coordination with PG&E and local utilities to relocate the utility pole in front of GHWTP and provide reporting to the City.

Total estimated coordination visits: 1
Review arc flash studies:

HDR will update existing models to account for electrical modifications to the site(s), analyze and prepare arc flash reports, and provide arc flash labels, if needed. In Fiscal Year 2027, updates to Arc Flash reports may include Felton Booster, Felton Diversion, and Coast Pump Station sites.

Total estimated coordination visits: 1
Felton Booster Pump Station power quality analysis:

HDR will be available to provide the City and Schneider with Pump 3 electrical support, as needed.

Total estimated coordination visits: 1
Training: Coordination with Electrical and I&C groups during Design and Construction Phases of a Project:

HDR will provide staff training on P&IDs and Asset Tagging and Electrical/I&C Construction Coordination, if needed.

Design and Planning Management Key Activities
This section describes each of the key activities that may occur during FY27 for a specific project, as indicated by Table 1. The LOE is dependent upon HDR’s role on each project.

Activity A: Support Best Value Delivery Methods Implementation HDR will support the City’s evaluation of project delivery methods for the projects noted in Table 1. If a collaborative delivery method is selected, HDR will assist the City in procuring the collaborative delivery team. Support activities include the following:

1. Project Delivery Evaluations - evaluation of delivery methods when opportunities or needs arise

2. Collaborative Delivery Procurement - when a collaborative delivery method is selected, supporting the City with collaborative delivery procurement processes and documents from

26.13 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

market soundings through RFQ/RFP development and ultimate selection and on-boarding of the collaborative delivery team.

Deliverables:

1. Project Delivery Analysis memo(s)

2. Procurement documents (as needed)
a. Market Sounding documents
b. RFQ and/or RFP documents
c. Evaluation materials
Assumptions:

1. The FIP project team will support collaborative delivery method implementation during the construction phase of the project as the FIP project has moved beyond the project delivery analysis and evaluation phases noted above.

Activity B: Select Final Design (or other) Consultants
In alignment with City procurement policies and procedures, the Program’s procurement guidelines, and together with the integrated team involved with the specific project, HDR will assist the City in selecting design (or other) consultant(s) by leading or assisting with the following, as appropriate per project:

1. Conduct a meeting with City staff to confirm the recommended process for selecting the final design consultants.

2. Prepare draft Request(s) for Proposals (RFP[s]) for retaining final design consultants for each solicitation and submit to the City for its review and approval.

3. Conduct pre-proposal meetings for each proposed final design contract. Record attendance and questions and issue answers to questions and modifications to the selection process if appropriate in addendum format.

4. Receive consultant proposals in accordance with the City procedures. Review the proposals in accordance with the approved selection process. Meet with City staff to provide input and receive comments on the proposals. Summarize in writing the City’s recommendations on what firms should be selected for interview. Review of up to six proposals is assumed per the RFP.

5. Conduct interviews, as appropriate, with up to three shortlisted firms in accordance with the authorized selection process. Prepare written comments on the firm interviews to support the City’s decision-making process on the firm to be awarded the design consultant contract.

6. Using the City-designated contract terms and conditions, negotiate the scope, LOE and schedule for each final design contract with the selected firm. Prepare cost analysis metrics for evaluation of LOEs associated with various professional services contracts. Prepare independent cost-of-services estimates, if needed. Prepare backup materials for City Council action and other procurement requirements and document selection processes. Coordinate discussions with the City and consultant’s legal counsel, if required. Prepare final contract for signature by the City and the final design consultant.

Deliverables: None
Where HDR is PM on projects:

1. City meeting agenda and minutes to confirm final design consultant lists, selection process, schedule and draft RFP development

2. Draft and final design RFP(s)

26.14 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

3. Written recommendation for selection of final design consultant

4. City Council agenda package (attachments to staff reports) for final design contracts Assumptions:

1. Budget for independent cost-of-services estimate(s) is not included in this fee. If determined to be needed, this will be added via contract change amendment.

2. HDR will support the City in preparation of the City Council agenda package for submitting each final design contract to the City Council for its review and approval. It is assumed that HDR will not attend City Council meetings in FY27.

3. One project may be in the position to select final design consultants in FY27.

Activity C: Manage Project Progress and Changes
HDR, where augmenting City staff as PM, will monitor the progress of the planning, design and construction phases, while also managing the process for making changes to those scoped efforts.

Where augmenting City staff as assistant PM or project engineer, HDR will support the PM. Where HDR is not augmenting staff at the project level, general support and oversight will be provided via Task 2 Design and Planning Management. Project management tasks include:

1. As part of the project kickoff meeting with the consultants, the PM will provide information (as applicable) regarding the Program or design guidelines, standard details, design review process and QA/QC procedures.

2. Attend progress meetings led by the consultants on a biweekly basis. These meetings will cover items such as progress to date, major issues, contract compliance, deliverables, QA/QC and impacted agencies and utilities.

3. Lead planning and design coordination and deliverable review meetings and workshops.

4. Address questions and issues from the planning and design consultants. Interface with City staff and receive feedback when necessary. Issues and their status will be discussed at the biweekly team meeting.

5. Implement project-specific change management, including documentation of change log items with associated analysis to support approvals for proposed changes during a project that impact cost or schedule.

6. Work with package manager, as applicable, to identify and facilitate resolution on overlaps and interfaces between adjacent projects.

7. Review the monthly project progress report and invoice submitted by the final design consultant.

Provide invoice recommendations to City staff for their final action.

8. Provide the status of project activities, deliverables and cost accruals to Program controls and Program design and planning manager for reporting.

9. Participate in meetings with regulatory agencies, as needed, regarding planning or design activities and document reviews and approvals.

10. Assist in the preparation of permit submittal packages by final designers to meet regulatory requirements. Monitor permit submittals and coordinate modifications, as required and requested by the permit lead. Coordinate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process, as applicable.

11. Assist with survey, geotechnical and right-of-way (ROW) efforts.

12. Prepare or direct the modification of Division 0 and Division 1 specification templates.

13. Lead the implementation of CM strategy and guidelines on the project, including constructability review during design.

14. Procure and assist technical advisors for the project, as applicable.

26.15 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

15. Identify, together with City staff, which bid packages require contractor prequalification.

16. Develop, administer and maintain contractor prequalification criteria and solicitation documents.

17. Manage and coordinate the prequalification process.

18. Manage (or support City management of) construction-phase services, including CM (see Task 5) and engineering services during construction.

19. Conduct site visits if needed in consultation with the City PM or concerned City staff.

Deliverables:

1. Meeting agendas, presentations and minutes from project coordination and review meetings

2. Change log entries, as required

3. Monthly project status reports

4. Permit applications (prepared by others)
Assumptions:

1. The labor hours in the budget table are based on HDR’s understanding of the LOE for the listed projects in Table 1.

Activity D: Technical Review of Deliverables, Plans and Specifications HDR will augment City staff to support review of planning studies, design submittals and design and constructability review of the final designs, including facility design elements, equipment vendor selection, configuration and process control. In doing so, HDR will supplement the City’s technical resources and confirm that Program design guidelines and standards are integrated. Specifically, HDR will:

1. As needed and requested by the PM, conduct a review of the project’s plans and specifications at the 30, 60, 90 and 100 percent completion points. The detailed check of each design submittal will remain the design consultant’s responsibility and will be completed prior to providing the submittal to the Program team for review.

2. As needed and requested by the PM, conduct a review and comment on the cost estimate and schedule provided in the 30, 60, 90 and 100 percent submittals.

3. Provide a constructability review, likely at the 60 percent submittal.

4. Where HDR is PM, document and track the action taken by the designer on items noted during each review.

5. Operability reviews will be provided by the City’s O&M staff and HDR O&M Liaison. HDR, where PM, will conduct workshops on 60 and 90 percent final design consultant submittals for City O&M staff to provide comments.

6. As PM, conduct a “plan in hand” field walk and create a checklist with the O&M lead at the 60 percent deliverable, to verify the adequacy and completeness of design documents.

7. As PM, work with the final designer to identify long-lead procurement items and develop an approach to address those issues.

Deliverables:

1. Review comments at 30, 60, 90 and 100 percent final design completion, including constructability review at 60 percent

2. Agenda and minutes of the meetings for City O&M staff reviews at 60 and 90 percent final design consultant submittals

3. Spreadsheet to document and track design review comments and actions taken Assumptions:

26.16 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

1. Design reviews are assumed to include up to three HDR technical reviewers (i.e., electrical, mechanical, structural) to support City review on each project deliverable.

Activity E: Facilitate Bidding Process
During the construction bidding process, the PM will perform the services below. HDR’s LOE associated with this scope applies to projects where HDR is the PM (to lead these activities) and to support these activities where HDR is providing support-staff augmentation.

1. Prepare for and participate in pre-bid or pre-proposal conferences in support of procurement.

2. Facilitate review of bids and formal recommendations of award.

3. Assist with the procurement of long-lead time and pre-purchased equipment and materials, as needed.

4. Coordinate the assembly of construction bid packages with designers and City staff.

5. Monitor the distribution of construction bid packages (plans and specifications) to prospective bidders.

6. Participate in pre-bid meetings and possible site visits for each of the construction packages.

7. Manage and facilitate pre-bid geotechnical condition demonstration activities.

8. Monitor the addenda development process. Up to two addenda are assumed per bid package.

9. Evaluate construction bids for completeness, develop bid tabulations and consult with the final design engineers and City staff to recommend award of each contract.

10. Develop and maintain an overall comprehensive bid tab for the Program, including unit price information, lump sum and other bid cost data items and reference to appropriate construction cost index.

11. Work with City staff to execute construction contracts and obtain performance bonds and insurance documents.

12. Coordinate with final designers and construction contractors to confirm that they obtain required construction permits prior to proceeding with construction.

Deliverables:

1. Agenda and minutes from pre-bid meetings

2. Contractor prequalification solicitation documents

3. Bid tabulations
Assumptions:

1. No projects are currently planned to be in the bidding phase in FY27.

Activity F: Cost Estimating Support [Select Projects for FY27] HDR will provide construction cost estimating review services, as requested, during the project design phase. Review of the design engineer’s cost estimate is intended to provide validation and alignment with Program processes.

HDR will provide summary comments to the PM and as requested by the PM, will meet with the design engineer to discuss and resolve the comments. The PM will provide process mechanical equipment and specialty subcontractor equipment quotes as discussed.

Assumptions:

1. Detailed takeoffs will not be performed.

26.17 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

2. One meeting with the City (and designer, as desired) to review the estimate review comments (by phone).

3. A placeholder budget of up to 10 hours is allocated for each estimate review. Budget will be refined and confirmed upon selection of project and prior to initiating this task.

26.18 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Task 3: Program Administration
Task 3 covers ongoing implementation of the Program structures, policies, procedures and systems that were developed initially during Program mobilization and have in many cases continued to evolve and improve. Over the course of the Program management services contract, the implementation of Program administration activities (including Program risk management, quality, project delivery and schedule and budget tracking) described within this section will be completed in close association with the City’s Program leadership team. This task consists of the following subtasks, each over a 12-month duration:
• Subtask 3.1: General Program Administration
• Subtask 3.2: Risk Management
• Subtask 3.3: Document Management
• Subtask 3.4: Training/Workforce Development
• Subtask 3.5: Quality Assurance Implementation
• Subtask 3.6: Program Controls
o Subtask 3.6.1: Program Controls Management
o Subtask 3.6.2: Program Schedule
o Subtask 3.6.3: Program Cost/Estimating
o Subtask 3.6.4: Program Change Management
• Subtask 3.7: Miscellaneous Support for Water Finance/Accounting Department • Subtask 3.8: Design Drawing Review Software
Subtask 3.1: General Program Administration
HDR will complete the following general Program administration tasks:

1. Update Program workflow policies and procedures, as determined needed by the integrated City/HDR Program team and implement following submission to and approval by City.

Incorporate these updates in the PgMP.

2. Manage Program resources and make available technical, management and support resources to meet the City’s goals and objectives. Implement staff approval policy and maintain approved staff matrix list and resume library. Revisit project and Program staffing assumptions and future needs on twice annual (or more often as needed) basis.

3. Attend Water Commission, City Council, and other meetings as requested. Support preparation of presentations given at these meetings, as requested by the Program Director.

4. Conduct biweekly Program review meetings with the Program Director and monthly progress meetings with Program Executive Team.

5. Work with the Program Director to maintain the overall Program management organization chart and related roles and responsibilities.

6. Prepare an Annual Work Plan to provide City staff with information needed for the City’s annual budgeting cycle and to support City Council review and approval of next year’s Program management service order.

7. Manage the Program management contract, including preparation of monthly invoices and associated invoice activity progress reports, maintain the Program management contract change log to track and document interim scope changes and subsequent contract amendments, review and update the HDR contract schedule, and develop annual work order including scope of work and associated budget.

26.19 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

8. Implement the Program Safety, Health and Environmental (SHE) guidelines by performing the following:
a. Receive information from the City’s safety consultant for reporting. b. Train new Program team members on SHE guideline requirements. Communicate safety status to wider team through periodic SHE guideline training refreshers. c. Implement internal HDR safety policies.
d. Attend City water department safety meetings.

The key Program roles supported in this subtask are described below. The hours associated with the major tasks for each role are also shown.

1. Program Manager: Overall leadership of the Program activities and Program leadership team, leads reporting to executive staff, leads the ongoing development and implementation of the PgMP (approximately 0.54 FTE).
a. Manage Program resources, including:
i. Leading annual service order kickoff
ii. Leading monthly PMs meeting
iii. Meeting regularly with HDR Program core leadership to assess and respond to resource needs
iv. Meeting monthly with wider HDR team and individually with local core HDR team v. Developing and managing hiring requisitions in response to Program needs vi. Coordination of technical expertise to support the Program vii. Coordination of resource needs and availability with Program Director and other City leadership
viii. Lead staff approval process
ix. Develop and maintain Program staff plan
x. Estimated 25 hours per month
b. Track project and Program progress and completion: 0.5–1.0 hour per project per month (10 hours per month)
c. Facilitate continued development and progression of the implementation of the overall risk analysis and management strategy (4 hours per month)
i. Support general communication about and preparation for and participate in stage gate meetings: up to 3 hours for each stage gate meeting (3 hours per month on average)
ii. Review of Program costs, schedule, change management log, quality review reports (8 hours per month on average)
iii. Identify, coordinate and schedule trainings (up to 2 hours per month) iv. Review meetings with Program Director, Program Executive Team and City’s Program management consultant, including associated action items (10 hours per month)
v. Update Program management policies and procedures (4 hours per month) vi. Manage Program management contract, including contract change log and amendments, quarterly internal Program reviews, Program management invoices and associated status reports (14 hours per month)

2. Assistant Program Manager: Supports Program manager in execution of the role and supports Program PMs, technical staff and administrative staff in accessing and using Program resources (approximately 0.48 FTE).

26.20 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

a. Manage Program resources, including:
i. Assist development of Annual Work Plan
ii. Supporting annual service order kickoff
iii. Assist in planning and recording monthly PMs meeting iv. Meeting regularly with HDR Program core leadership to assess and respond to resource needs
v. Meeting monthly with wider HDR team
vi. Support staff approval process
vii. Facilitate HDR Program staff onboarding and provide ongoing support to in use of Program tools and policies
viii. Items i through vii are estimated 25 hours per month b. Track project and Program progress and completion (16 hours per month) c. Identify, coordinate, and schedule trainings (up to 2 hours per month) d. Update Program management policies and procedures: (2 hours per month) e. Manage Program management contract (25 hours per month) i. Review monthly contract invoices and monthly contract status reports ii. Support HDR task managers to track task costs, progress and scope completion iii. Manage HDR contract change log

3. CM Lead: Maintains CM strategy document; coordinates Program CM activities, supports City staff where City is construction manager and HDR staff where HDR is construction manager. CM lead scope and LOE is described in Task 5, Construction Management.

4. Program Administrative Coordinators: Provide Program administrative support. The hours associated with this task (General Program Administration) are estimated at 45 hours per month (0.31 FTE). Typical tasks include:
a. Support staff approval process and management of HDR staff matrix i. Support monthly HDR invoice and monthly status reporting ii. Coordinate HDR and City staff calendars to schedule meetings, trainings and workshops
iii. Contract management support, including subcontracts and purchase orders (POs) iv. Coordination of internal Program quarterly reviews
v. General administration support
vi. HDR internal documentation control and POs support

5. Project Controller/Accountant: Provides financial and accounting management for HDR contract including developing monthly invoices, financial review of HDR contract budget and amendments and assists in contract and task budget management (30 hours per month).

Deliverables:

1. Draft and final SO scope, fee, and Annual Work Plan

2. Monthly invoice(s), one per service order, including summary table, invoice activity status report, and earned-value report

3. Contract change log updates, contract amendments for new scope, or reallocation of existing scope, as applicable

4. Staff approval requests, as applicable

5. Updates to working Program tracking tools, including staff planning spreadsheets and Program improvement log

26.21 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

6. PgMP updates, as applicable
Assumptions:

1. Contractor safety plan submittals for construction projects during FY27 will be reviewed by the City’s third-party safety consultant.

2. Contractor safety data is submitted to the Program by the CM for each respective project for the Program’s reporting.

3. The contractor shall be solely and completely responsible for the conditions of the job site, including safety of persons and property during performance of the work. This requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal work hours.

Subtask 3.2: Risk Management
HDR will administer and manage the Risk Management Plan (RMP) and support associated activities as follows:

1. Develop, maintain, and improve processes, tools and templates, including updating the PgMP document as appropriate.

2. Review and manage the Program risk register (quarterly). Coordinate with risk item owners to support the development and implementation of mitigation activities.

3. Coordinate and facilitate the biannual risk review meetings for the purpose of communicating progress, challenges and successful mitigations associated with the Program risk register (and establish new risks, as applicable).

4. Facilitate risk planning discussions, including assessment and use of management reserves.

Incorporate identified risks and mitigations into cost and schedule reporting.

5. Coordinate with the PMs to conduct a risk assessment workshop and perform qualitative and/or quantitative risk analysis with risk specialist for a TBD project before construction contract award.

6. Support PMs in their implementation of risk management at the project level, including progression of project risk register documentation and associated mitigation activities.

7. Support the Program director on project and Program risk contingency management.

Deliverables:

1. Quarterly (or as-needed) Program risk register updates

2. Biannual risk review meeting materials, meeting minutes

3. Draft and final risk workshop report (one project and one Program-wide) Assumptions:

1. One quantitative risk workshop for the Program and one quantitative risk workshop for the Water Supply Augmentation project will be performed in this SO 12, assuming up to 367 total hours with input from the risk specialist, senior economist, risk workshop assistant and a senior technical specialist to provide QC.

Subtask 3.3: Document Management
HDR will implement the Document Management Plan, per the PgMP. Specific activities within this task and estimated combined hours for the document management team include:

1. Provide general management and oversight of the Document Management and SharePoint/Procore processes and support tasks (6 hours per month).

2. Provide ongoing document management support (30 hours per month).

26.22 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

a. Monitoring placement of documents and use of proper naming conventions and folder structures.
b. Provide communication and ongoing training to support team members on accessing and using document storage.
c. Identify areas for improvement, develop options and facilitate decision making regarding long-term storage and repository of project files.
d. Execute ad hoc support tasks and special projects as requested by leadership and team members. If not achievable within assumed budget, develop scope and LOE for approval in advance of initiating such work.
e. Support Stage Gate preparation as requested.
f. Maintain project files for reference, retrieval and storage in electronic format. Maintain hard copies for those documents that the City deems necessary, according to the PgMP; contractual-related or contract change documents are to be finalized in hard-copy format.

3. Provide basic SharePoint/Procore administration support (14 hours per month). a. Maintain and update user profile information
i. Provide ongoing training and support for team members ii. Perform basic technical support, including tech support requests, management of site settings, editing of Program pages, photos and schedules iii. Create and manage SharePoint libraries and folder structures iv. Act as liaison for team members and information technology (IT) support v. Coordinate activate and deactivate user accounts with City. Manage and update individual security groups, including access and permissions.

4. Provide SharePoint technical support as requested by the City throughout the year for system functionality and end-user experience, including the following (7 hours per month):
a. Perform detailed technical support including troubleshooting, set up new projects, updating dashboards and respond to team member technical support requests. b. Provide ongoing necessary tasks during the year such as creating new lists, adding libraries, landing pages, and editing metadata.

Deliverables:

1. Document management processes and tools updated, as appropriate

2. Updates to SharePoint processes and tools, as appropriate Subtask 3.4: Training/Workforce Development
Continue to support the City’s workforce development objectives and efforts by providing training on project management and Program management processes to City staff through day-to-day interactions with the Program management team, short monthly refresher trainings, 1-hour topical seminars, extended workshops and ongoing refinement of project management tools. Update the workforce development technical memorandum (TM) in the PgMP, as required, to reflect changes and input from the Program leadership team. Coordinate and plan for training topics with Program leadership.

Deliverables:

1. Presentation materials for training sessions and seminars

2. Updates to the PgMP, as appropriate
Assumptions:

26.23 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

1. Ten monthly 10-minute “refresher” trainings during the PM monthly meeting at 1 hour each for preparation and presentation.

2. Six 1-hour-long trainings at 4 hours each for preparation and presentation. Assume half of these are performed by core Program staff and half are performed by others traveling to Santa Cruz.

3. One half-day training at 10 hours each for planning, execution and trainer travel.

Subtask 3.5: Quality Assurance Implementation
HDR will administer and manage the Quality Management Plan, per the PgMP. The primary objective of the Quality Management Plan is to assist project teams in compliance with Program and project standards. As such, the management of quality covers the four general categories listed below:
• Process quality: covers implementation of the processes and procedures established for the Program
• Project Quality Plan: covers preparation and implementation of a Project Quality Plan by each project team, primarily by the consultant’s preparing deliverables • Business delivery: covers how well each project is delivering to business metrics—cost, schedule, change and risk management
• Technical delivery: covers the overall technical quality of the work being done, primarily associated with deliverables
HDR’s scope for this task includes:

1. Develop, maintain and improve processes, tools, and templates, including updating the PgMP document, as appropriate.

2. On a monthly basis, perform a quality check at the Program and project levels, identifying areas of compliance as well as areas for improvement and report the results in the Program quality report card. Example areas include monthly project reporting, risk registers and Program tools, such as project quality checklist and project quality plans. Summarize in the monthly quality report card and Program overview table.

3. Quality management reviews are performed and reported once every 4 months via a report delivered to the Program Director. The report covers four general categories including (1) process quality, (2) Project Quality Plan, (3) business delivery and (4) technical delivery.

4. Review and evaluate key performance indicators (KPIs) for continuing development and refinement to support Program tracking. For FY27, the monthly project overview KPIs for cost, schedule and quality is tracked on a monthly basis. No additional KPIs will be developed.

Deliverables:

1. Updates to the PgMP and other processes and tools, as appropriate

2. Monthly quality reports for the Triannual Quality Review and ongoing updates to the quality report card

3. Triannual review reports
Subtask 3.6: Program Controls
This subtask includes services required to implement the Program Controls Plan, per the PgMP.

Subtask 3.6.1: Program General Management
The Program controls lead oversees Program administration activities, including risk, document management, quality, administration of the Program SharePoint site and controls, including change management. The controls lead has scope in several Program administration subtasks. Scope and

26.24 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

effort associated with Subtasks 3.2 through 3.5 and 3.7 are included in each respective task. The hours associated with this subtask (Program General Management) are estimated at 22 hours per month (0.15 FTE):

1. Participate in various Program meetings, including executive, leadership and PM meetings, as well as other miscellaneous meetings and workshops (14 hours per month)

2. Support Program Director and Program manager as requested (6 hours per month)

3. Participate in and provide training for various Program processes and tools (2 hours per month, plus additional hours in Subtask 3.4, Training)
Subtask 3.6.2: Program Schedule
Program schedule will continue to be developed and maintained in P6 by the designated P6 scheduler. Schedules will be updated with PMs during and as follow-up to the recurring individual monthly project update meetings and will be posted monthly to the SharePoint site for review and use by the Program team.

1. General oversight and schedule support (12 hours per month).

2. Attending monthly PM update meetings, updating schedules, performing variance analysis and generating various reports (28 hours per month).

3. The following eight types of schedules are anticipated for posting monthly during FY27:
a. Level 1 single-line schedule
i. Consolidated high level, showing “key” work breakdown structure (WBS) phase durations b. Level 3 activity detail
i. Expanded to show detailed activities; this is the lowest level schedule c. Level 3 60-day look-ahead
i. A layout showing detailed activities that have been finished in the previous 30 days, activities in progress and activities highlighted starting within the next 60 days and anticipated activities during the current fiscal year
d. Level 3 activity detail by PM
i. Expanded to show detailed activities, sorted by PM
e. Level 3 City Council and Water Commission meetings
f. Level 3 z01 detail schedule
i. Detailed schedule of Program administrative activities g. Level 3 activity detail for procurement activities
h. Project implementation schedule
i. A layout showing specific activities across projects that impact priority projects In addition, at the request of Program team members, the P6 scheduler will support producing specific schedule reports (such as variance reports), filtered schedules and custom layouts. HDR will perform schedule re-baselining per the PgMP, in conjunction with change management and in coordination with the Program Director.

Deliverables:

1. Updated monthly schedules, as indicated above

2. Updated scheduling processes, tools as part of PgMP updates, as appropriate Assumptions:

26.25 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

1. This subtask assumes no hours for reviewing construction contractors’ schedules or construction progress reporting. Where needed, effort for construction schedule review is included in Task 5:

Construction Management.

Subtask 3.6.3: Program Cost/Estimating
HDR will perform estimating, cost collection, analysis, forecasting and reporting of Program and project costs. Specific activities include:

1. Update the PgMP documents and associated processes and templates, as appropriate (estimated 2 hours per month).

2. Prepare for and address action items from the monthly PM update meetings. Review and evaluate Program and project cost, schedule, risk and change management status. Present for review and approval by the City as part of the Program monthly report (estimated 16 hours per month).

3. Support PMs in the updates of their PCE. Review and update project budgets, forecasts and perform variance analysis (8 hours per month).

4. In coordination with the City Finance team, collect Program and project actual costs on a monthly basis. Update CASPER (the Program cost management system [CMS]) with Programlevel data, including Program administration, escalation, contingencies, management reserves and time-phasing based on the current schedule (24 hours per month). Develop and distribute regular cost performance reports, including cost and cash flows, through a variety of tables, dashboards, graphs and reports with appropriate levels of detail for various audiences. Also provide various ad hoc reports as requested (8 hours per month).

5. Maintain CASPER, the CMS, an Excel and database tool, which is the Program’s primary tool for managing costs (estimated 16 hours per month).

6. Support Program Director on general cost- and schedule-related items, including the approach, development, monitoring and use of Program and project contingencies and management reserves (estimated 4 hours per month).

Deliverables:

1. Monthly dashboards posted to SharePoint, a cost performance report (included in the Program monthly report) and various cost reports as requested

2. Updated cost and estimating processes, tools as part of PgMP updates, as appropriate Assumptions:

1. Katy Fitzgerald (City) will provide cost controls support at up to 12 hours per month.

Subtask 3.6.4: Program Change Management
Program controls will provide ongoing support to the change management process, according to the PgMP. The change management process facilitates the identification, tracking and resolution of changes that impact project or Program cost or schedules (8 hours per month). Specific activities include:

1. Maintain and improve processes, tools and templates related to change management, including updating the PgMP document, as appropriate. Communicate updates to the Program team in a timely manner.

2. Coordinate with PMs to efficiently prepare and submit appropriate documentation of proposed changes for recommendation and approval by Program leadership.

26.26 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

3. Support the administration and maintenance of the Program change log that resides on SharePoint.

Deliverables:

1. Updates to Section 2 (Change Management) of the PgMP, as appropriate Assumptions:

1. Katy Fitzgerald (City) will provide change support at up to 16 hours per month.

Subtask 3.7: Water Finance/Accounting Support to the Water Department As requested by the City, HDR will provide miscellaneous support in the areas of finance and accounting to assist the City in capital planning, annual budgeting, alternative funding, or similar tasks. This scope is intended to reflect work that is beyond the scope of Subtask 3.6, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:
• Additional reporting for Program capital improvement project (CIP) and non-Program CIP projects.
• Support for development of annual budgets, additional cost/cash flows and forecasting alternatives, coordination with the City’s pro forma consultant. • Support associated with project funding options.

Assumptions:

1. An allowance of 12 hours per month is allocated for this task.

Subtask 3.8: Design Drawing Review Software
The City continues to implement Bluebeam as a collaborative design drawing review tool that enables multiple reviewers to edit and comment on a common document. The City will need to continue to provide training, enhance the use of Bluebeam and support the review work processes as more Program projects use the tool. This subtask provides additional support for the Bluebeam collaborative review processes. The anticipated work includes:
• Project support for the different projects moving forward/going into design. Staff will engage HDR as the first resource and a City subject-matter expert will provide additional support as needed (12 hours for three projects: 3.1, 3.3 and 3.3.4). • Update training documentation: This will include modification of existing training materials previously implemented with incorporation of lessons learned (3 hours).

Deliverables:

1. Updated Program documents (3 hours)
Assumptions:

1. Three projects will use Bluebeam for design drawing review during the fiscal year.

26.27 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Task 4: Planning and Preliminary Engineering
In general, Task 4 covers activities critical to the planning of Program projects. This task involves planning and preliminary engineering efforts by HDR that would be performed during this service order. It includes the following subtasks:
• Subtask 4-6.1: U4 Tank Electrical, I&C Design Support • Subtask 4.3.6: Asset On-boarding Support
Subtask 4-6.1: U4 Tank Electrical, I&C Design Support
HDR will provide engineering services during construction including review and responses to requests for information (RFIs) and submittals and change orders.

Deliverables:

1. Submittal reviews

1. RFI responses

2. Design change notifications/Change orders

3. Materials required for permit applications

4. Startup and commissioning services
Assumptions:

1. One RFI per sheet

2. Two submittals per sheet
City Responsibilities:

City will lead the CM efforts including communications with the contractor.

Subtask 4.3: Asset Management
Subtask 4.3.6: Asset Onboarding Support
This subtask provides as-needed support to implement asset onboarding for capital projects that will be designed or constructed during FY27 as well as additional services to help the City improve the use of its data management systems to support asset management. The effort for this subtask is based on allocating a budget for three capital projects in the Design phase, and six projects in the Construction/Post-Construction phase during FY27 and budget to provide data management support to update the asset maintenance management system (AMMS) database so that data collected during construction of these new capital projects are ready for use.

Meetings:

1. Up to two meetings with each project team for training and project coordination

2. 12 meetings to support as-needed data management coordination for the AMMS Deliverables:

1. Training materials for asset onboarding for each project Assumptions:

1. Data required to complete the asset inventory will be readily available for each project.

26.28 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

2. No field work (e.g., developing asset records through site inspection) is anticipated.

3. Each project’s PM will be responsible for developing the initial managed asset list during project design.

4. Contractors will be responsible for providing construction-phase asset data in the defined format during project construction.

5. Activities to load the data into Cityworks or AMMS are assumed to be completed by the City and are not included in this estimate.

6. Research efforts to review equipment submittals and compile asset attribute data are assumed to be covered by each project

26.29 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Task 5: Construction Management
CM for the Program projects is implemented in accordance with the CM Strategy and CM Guidelines documents that were developed during mobilization and are included in the PgMP. CM may be performed by the City, HDR, an integrated City-HDR team, or, in certain circumstances, by a thirdparty firm. HDR will implement or continue CM services for the following project subtasks for this service order:
• Task 5: 0.0 General Construction Management Oversight • Task 5: 2.2.1 Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill • Task 5: 2.4 Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz–Scotts Valley
• Task 5: 3.3.3 Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR
• Task 5: 4.3 GHWTP Concrete Tanks Project
• Task 5: 4.4 GHWTP Facility Improvements Project
• Task 5: 6.1 U4 Tank Rehab/Replacement
Each project subtask includes performing CM services that align with the phase(s) of project construction during FY2027. Table 2 summarizes the types of services for each subtask that are planned for SO12. A detailed description of each type of service follows.

Table 2. Construction Management Key Activities Duration in SO12 by Project Task No. Project
PreConstruct
ion
Services
Construction
Phase
Services
Facility Testing and
Commissioning
Project
Closeout and
Transfer of
Operations

2.2.1 Newell Creek Pipeline
Felton/Graham Hill a Done 10 months Included in construction phase 2 months

2.4 Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz–
Scotts Valley b Done 2 months Included in construction phase 2 months

3.3.3 Beltz 8 Upgrades for
ASR CMa Done 12 months Included in construction phase Not in FY27

4.3 GHWTP Concrete
Tanks Replacement b Done 1 month Included in construction phase 5 months

4.4 GHWTP Facility
Improvements Project b 6 months 6 months Included in construction phase Not in FY27

6.1 U4 Tank Rehab/
Replacement c Done 12 months Included in construction phase Not in FY27 a. Third-party-led CM team.
b. HDR & City integrated CM team (may include part-time City support or part time HDR and subcontractors). c. City-led PM/CM team.

Task 5: 0.0 General Construction Management Support
The CM lead or designee will provide oversight of CM planning and implementation for the Program.

Typical tasks will include:

1. Coordinate planning for CM services with project PMs and Program Director.

2. Lead staffing for CM team, whether HDR or integrated City/HDR teams.

3. Develop project-specific CM services budgets.

26.30 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

4. Monitor CM services across Program for consistency and adherence to CM Strategy and CM Guidelines to facilitate accomplishment of project goals, including timely reporting and communication withthe City on key issues.

5. Coordinate technical support resources, as required, for the construction phase such as cost estimating. Provide cost estimating support during the construction phase, either “in house” or from third-party party consultant.

6. Champion the use of the Program’s CM information system software (Procore) for projects, wherever possible. Coordinate technical support and training supplements to enhance use by CMs and optimize capability of the system.

7. Support City CM lead as needed on select projects
Assumptions:

1. The LOE for the CM lead to perform the above tasks is 480 hours. In addition, this task includes 140 hours for CM document controls administrator.

Task 5-2.2.1 Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill
High level support to City PM’s management of the third-party CM consultant.

Task 5-2.4 Intertie 1- Santa Cruz–Scotts Valley
HDR proposes to provide support for the City PM’s management, and other construction-related tasks, including inspection, environmental team coordination, public outreach, County, and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) encroachment permit coordination, and coordination between CM/contractor and ESDC. The HDR team will support the City PM with project closeout activities, as needed.

Assumptions:

1. Material testing and sampling for density compaction and concrete testing and sampling are a rough-order-of-magnitude estimate.

2. Public outreach and notification are done by the City or other consultant(s).

3. Sampling, testing, compaction, welding and specialty discipline inspection—BAGG.

Task 5-3.3.3 Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR
High level support to City PM’s management of the third-party CM consultant.

Task 5-4.3 Concrete Tanks Replacement CM
Construction is anticipated to be completed in 2026. This section describes each of the key activities that may occur during FY27, as indicated by the construction phases in Table 2. This section is organized as shown below.
• Activity 1: Project-Specific Construction Management Activities o 1.1 Project Management and Construction Management Plan o 1.2 Communications
o 1.3 Document Control and internet-Based Communication System (Procore) o 1.4 Contract Compliance Verification
o 1.5 Progress and Coordination Meetings
o 1.6 Schedule Monitoring
o 1.7 Change Management
o 1.8 Contractor Invoices and Payment Recommendations
o 1.9 Quality Assurance/Quality Control

26.31 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

o 1.10 Submittal Process
o 1.11 Request for Information Process
o 1.12 Record Documents
• Activity 2: Inspections, Special and Specialty Inspections and Surveying o 2.1 Inspections
o 2.2 Specialty Inspections
o 2.3 Surveying
• Activity 3: Division 1 and Special Provisions Compliance • Activity 4: Training, Testing, Startup and Commissioning o 4.1 Operators Training
o 4.2 Testing, Startup and Commissioning
• Activity 5: Acceptance and Closeout
Activity 1. Project-Specific Construction Management Activities The Program manager will administer the construction contract in accordance with the requirements as stated in HDR’s agreement with the City. HDR will maintain project records and finalize during project closeout. The construction manager will coordinate the activities of the project participants including City management and operations staff, the designer and the construction contractor. The construction manager will balance the objectives of stakeholders to achieve completion of construction, startup and commissioning while managing the project risks including cost, schedule and quality.

1.1. Project Management and Construction Management Plan This task includes project management efforts required to organize the Program manager’s CM team, assign and control work and report progress to the City in the form of monthly progress reports.

The Construction Management Plan (CMP) defines project guidelines and procedures that conform to the Program’s CM Guidelines as applicable and incorporates the Program manager’s CM best management practices (BMPs) to address and mitigate the anticipated challenges and risks of each project. The CMP will define the approach of the CM team in completing the scope of services. It will explain the structure and organization of the CM team with roles and responsibilities defining tasks and deliverable actions of team members, as well as communication between the CM team, City staff, designer, contractor and other project participants. The processes and procedures for construction contract administration and quality assurance will be defined along with the methodology for their implementation. The CMP will provide documentation and recordkeeping and define the document control system (DCS) and use.

The construction manager will:

1. Define an approach to effectively manage and administer the construction contract.

2. Develop and implement a CMP that includes guidelines, procedures and policies for management of project construction. The CMP guidelines and procedures will conform with the construction contract documents and/or consultant’s CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate.

3. Include, but not be limited to, the following components in the CMP:

26.32 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

a. CM organization, structure, roles and responsibilities, staffing plan and contact list, including identifying CM team staff to conduct communications with the City and design consultant performing the project design services (City designer)
b. CM activities and deliverables, including, but not limited to, communications protocols, document control, progress meetings, schedule reviews, change management, contractor invoicing, QA/QC, submittal process, RFI process and preparation of record documents c. Inspections and contractor compliance with the City’s Special Provisions portion of the Contract Documents
d. Project-Specific Safety Management Plan for HDR staff e. Training, testing and startup
f. Partnering and dispute management
g. Spare parts and warranties
h. Acceptance and closeout of Construction Contract

4. Amend and update the CMP during the project as required to incorporate changes or refinements in scope, schedule, or deliverables.

5. Implement the CMP.

Deliverables:

1. Original and updated CMPs, as necessary
Assumptions:

1. The contractor shall be solely and completely responsible for the conditions of the job site, including safety of persons and property during performance of the work. This requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal work hours.

1.2. Communications
The construction manager will facilitate teamwork; achieve common goals for the project; facilitate coordination of team members to execute tasks without disruption of plant operations; and generate and maintain a record of project activities, communications, quality of performance, negotiations, and payments.

The construction manager will:

1. Coordinate communications among the participants in the project by directing communications through the construction manager or other representative at the job site, in accordance with the consultant’s CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate. Participants include, but are not limited to, the contractor, City, and City’s designer.

2. Serve as the primary point of communication for coordination between the contractor, City, City’s designer and other parties; receive contractor correspondence; prepare draft responses; and transmit City-approved responses.

3. Establish, implement, and manage a master calendar of significant events and meetings for the construction project. The master calendar will be accessible by team members from their personal computer workstations.

4. Establish, implement, and maintain a master project directory listing of project participants, their role on the project, address, phone number(s), email address and other pertinent information.

The master project directory will be accessible by team members from their personal computer workstations.

26.33 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

5. Initiate correspondence with and respond to correspondence from the contractor, designer, City and other entities as may be required to administer the project.

Deliverables:

1. Project data and communications as compiled within the DCS (project record)

1.3. Document Control and Internet-Based Communication System The Program has selected and will provide Procore, the web-based DCS, and internet connectivity to facilitate efficient communication and maintain project data and records. The DCS will include features to log and track documents (submittals, RFIs, potential change order [PCO]) as well as store electronic copies. It will provide secure viewing levels that will be controlled by the City and it will be configured and monitored by the CM team, which will train project participants on its use. A primary objective of the DCS is to provide the project team with a centralized document exchange portal to communicate technical and other project-related information. The construction manager will post project information, logs and reports, meeting agendas and notes, QA reports and other similar information. The DCS will provide a repository for project data and records; its electronic database will be archive-able and will provide for a protected record of the project history.

The construction manager will maintain current files using the City’s project directory on projectrelated records including correspondence, construction photographs, public outreach tracking inquiries, job files, submittals, shop drawings, RFIs, Contract Document clarification, PCO documentation, directed change order documentation, change order and PCO documentation, issue/action tracking log, claims, nonconformance reports, stop-work notices, daily inspection diaries, weekly inspection summary report, field memoranda, claims management files, warranty/guarantee files, as-built drawings and specifications, shop drawings, training plan, qualification records, material test reports, project payment estimates and records, certified payrolls, manpower utilization reports, insurance, bonds, status reports and meeting minutes, in accordance with the CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate.

1. Use on-site DCS (Procore) for the timely logging, filing and tracking of project-related correspondence and to enable efficient retrieval and to establish the chronology of events

2. Maintain an internet-based communication system that can be asked to share information among team members and track project communication by date, subject and status and contract specification number

3. Allow the use of the internet-based communication system to connect the project controls system to the job site, central project personnel and City managers

4. Provide training for the City, consultant, designer, and contractor as appropriate for proper use of internet-based communication system

5. At completion of the project, provide the complete project database of CM documentation to the City in a format that does not need the internet-based system to review Assumptions:

1. The construction manager will organize and maintain the DCS (Procore).

1.4 Contract Compliance Verification
The construction manager will administer the construction Contract Documents to check contractor compliance with its terms and conditions. The construction manager will:

1. Administer the Construction Contract including prosecution and progress of work, QC administration, daily documentation of work and measurement, and payment.

26.34 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

2. When necessary and appropriate, consult and coordinate with the City’s designer regarding interpretation of the Contract Documents; notify the City in writing in cases of disagreements regarding such interpretations that require resolution. The construction manager will analyze such disagreements and provide input to the City.

3. Document contractor-obtained permits, licenses, insurance, bonds, warranties and guarantees in accordance with the Contract Documents.

4. Monitor that documentation required from the contractor is received in a timely manner and that project records are complete.

5. Review and document compliance with the Contract Documents.

1.5 Progress and Coordination Meetings
The construction manager will organize, coordinate, and lead progress and coordination meetings.

The construction manager will provide the project team with agendas, meeting notes and action items and identify follow-up activities. The weekly meetings will include review of recent activities and agenda items, exchange of new information and planning and coordination of upcoming construction and related activities.

The construction manager will also:

1. Organize and conduct regular weekly progress meetings with the contractor, City, and other participants as necessary to discuss construction progress and planned work, coordination with City operations, submittals, RFIs, construction issues and PCOs.

2. Organize and conduct periodic and special meetings to resolve issues with the contractor, utilities (e.g., PG&E), regulators and local agencies having jurisdiction (e.g., Department of Health Services, fire department, Bay Area Air Quality Management), City’s operations staff and contractors and other participants as appropriate.

3. Identify construction, schedule and/or cost coordination and potential dispute issues and recommend an approach for resolving issues.

4. Prepare agendas and produce meeting minutes with a summary of meeting discussion, action items and decision logs.

5. If required, attend other periodic and/or special meetings organized by the City.

Deliverables:

1. Meeting agenda, minutes, and action items log
Assumptions:

1. The construction manager will organize and lead project meetings and will receive information from other team members in planning and coordinating meetings.

2. Deliverables will be distributed through the DCS and email.

3. Meetings will be held weekly for the duration of the project or as otherwise directed by the City.

1.6. Schedule Monitoring
The CM team will manage contract time through the implementation of project controls on the construction schedule. The construction manager will review the contractor’s preliminary and baseline schedules prior to commencement of work to verify that the full scope of construction work is included and properly sequenced and that adequate time is provided for the performance of construction activities.

Monthly monitoring of the contractor’s schedule and progress will provide early feedback on deviations from the baseline schedule and identify trends that could lead to project delays. To

26.35 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

validate the schedule for measuring work progress, the construction manager will confirm that the schedule updates provided by the contractor are consistent with the work actually performed. To maintain an accurate accounting of project time from the Notice to Begin Work to project completion, schedule updates will be compared with previous submissions, noting progress compared to observations of current and planned work activities.

Negotiated adjustments in contract time and schedule will be evaluated by analyzing each PCO and change order for its impact. The construction manager will include and evaluate rain delays, work disruptions, and other impacts to the contractor’s schedule for adjustments to project completion.

Incorporating the baseline schedule with the time adjustments made during change management will provide a basis for evaluating timely completion, evaluating potential assessment of liquidated damages and the resolution of potential claims.

The construction manager will:

1. Review the construction baseline schedule and monthly updates for conformance with the Contract Documents with regard to activity sequencing, logic, milestones and constraints, in accordance with the Program Construction Guidelines and/or Program manager’s CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate; check for proper preparation and accuracy of the contractor’s schedule and recommend acceptance or rejection to the City.

2. Review monthly construction schedule updates and evaluate progress and associated effect on project cost.

3. Monitor actual start and finish dates.

4. Track and document individual activity duration and sequencing through comparisons with daily inspector’s reports.

5. Identify critical and sub-critical activities, including the City’s operational requirements; check that work is scheduled in an acceptable sequence with reasonable staffing and includes appropriate time for shop drawing preparation, review, material fabrication and shipping, complete installation, finishing, systems testing and delivery of third party’s material and equipment; verify that submittals are included in the schedule and that schedule includes acceptance-testing period and indicates milestone completion for each separate portion and/or phase of work.

6. Review activities that interface or tie in within the same construction contract, or with other construction contracts or City activities to optimize preparation for the coordination of these interfaces or tie-ins.

7. Evaluate initial schedules submitted by the contractor pending complete schedule submittal are adequate to pursue initial construction work.

8. Conduct a pre-schedule submission meeting with the contractor to inform the contractor of its contract responsibilities regarding the development and submission of the preliminary and baseline schedules.

9. After prior approval by the City’s PM, the construction manager will require the contractor to prepare and submit a recovery schedule demonstrating its program and proposed plan to make up a lag in scheduled progress and to demonstrate completion of the work within the contract time. The construction manager will review the contractor’s recovery schedule for compliance with the Contract Documents and coordination with the overall project and submit it to the City’s PM with written recommendations for acceptance or rejection.

10. On a monthly basis, review the progress of construction, evaluate the percentage complete of each construction activity as indicated in the contractor’s updated schedule and review such percentages with the contractor.

11. After the City’s acceptance, use the accepted schedule to monitor progress. When significant changes are made to the Contract Documents or when time extensions are granted, the

26.36 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

construction manager will direct the contractor to immediately revise the schedule based on the changed conditions.

12. Evaluate potential delays and advise the City accordingly. The construction manager will highlight such matters during each weekly progress meeting.

13. Observe the contractor’s progress with the work and evaluate whether completion will occur within the specified time and will conform with the requirements of the Contract Documents. If a delay in the work is identified or it appears that the work is not progressing such that the project can be completed within the specified time, or if the project is beyond the completion date and still not complete, inform the City promptly.

14. If delays continue and it appears likely that the construction contractor is not cooperating in correcting the problem, the Program manager will immediately consider and recommend appropriate contract enforcement actions to the City.

1.7 Change Management (Contract Document Clarification, Potential Change Orders, Directed Change Orders, and Change Orders)
The Program manager will perform services relating to changes to the Contract Documents including change orders. The construction manager will:

1. Develop a change management process to assist in the coordination of changes to the Contract Documents, including claims in accordance with the City’s and/or Program manager’s CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate.

2. Manage timely processing of documents in accordance with the construction Contract Documents.

3. Work with the contractor to mitigate field conditions that could result in added work or completion schedule delays.

4. Institute a screening process for change requests initiated by the City, City’s designer, or contractor.

5. Initiate appropriate negotiation, approval, payment and documentation of changes.

6. Administer the changes as follows, for each PCO:
a. Receive the contractor’s proposal and perform technical analysis for negotiations of final terms and price.
b. Analyze the contractor’s requests for time extensions with analytical software and generate an independent schedule and prepare findings of fact for extending or not extending time. c. Compare and evaluate the contractor’s proposal with the reconciled and City-approved independent cost estimate and schedule analysis.
d. Upon the City’s approval, negotiate with the contractor the cost and time extensions associated with the PCO work; if mutually agreeable terms cannot be negotiated on change orders, submit to the City’s PM the pertinent facts and a recommendation of what action should be taken.
e. For change orders on which agreement has not been reached on the amount of equitable adjustment prior to commencing work, the construction manager will monitor construction contractor performance and make detailed records of equipment, material and labor used; the impact of changed and unchanged work; and other data or information pertinent to a determination of the amount of equitable adjustment of contract price and time of performance.
f. Prepare a change order package for approval and execution by the City and contractor; for each change order package, prepare and submit to City.

26.37 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

g. Issue directed change order to the contractor for the purpose of unilaterally modifying the Contract Documents if: (1) The contractor fails to submit a proposal for PCO work within the time specified, or (2) when the city and contractor cannot agree on the terms and conditions of PCO work within a reasonable amount of time as determined by City and CN, or (3) when in the judgment of the City, it is impractical because of the nature of the change or for other reasons, such as the best interests of the City or the public, for the City and contractor to determine and agree on the costs and schedule impacts before the change must be performed. The construction manager will prepare a draft direct change order with a cover letter for the City PM’s approval before issuing.
h. Negotiate with the contractor mutually acceptable terms and conditions of a change order to replace a directed change order, if deemed appropriate by the City.

7. Establish and implement a Construction Contract change order management system to track the status of proposed and executed changes in the work of the contractor, in a format acceptable to, or prescribed by, the City.

8. Keep the City informed of potential changes. Changes affecting project design, quality, schedule, or costs are subject to approval by the City.

1.8. Contractor Invoices and Payment Recommendations
The construction manager will review the contractor’s proposed schedule of values for reasonableness and ease of monitoring in progressing payments. Changes will be negotiated as needed to provide for accurate valuation, ease of verification and processing payments. Once approved, the schedule of values will be entered into the City’s standard payment forms and submitted for City approval. The approved payment form will be used by the construction manager and contractor in preparing monthly payment requests. The progress payments will incorporate Contract Document changes, payment for materials on hand and retentions withheld.

In reviewing the contractor’s payment request, the construction manager will consider compliance with permits, small-business enterprise (SBE) participation, prevailing wages, quality of work, current insurance certificates, State Revolving Fund (SRF) funding requirements, labor compliance requirements, and other items. Each month, the construction manager will review the progress payment with the contractor and members of the CM team to confirm progress of the work and its conformance with the Contract Documents.

The construction manager will, in accordance with the City’s Construction Manual and/or CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate:

1. Review the contractor’s initial cost breakdown (schedule of values) for reasonableness and ease of monitoring and examine the schedule of values to evaluated for front-loading, that the work is sufficiently itemized to determine appropriate progress payments and the work item values are realistic.

2. Provide an independent assessment of progress, quantities of materials placed and equipment delivered, and installed based upon acceptability of work.

3. Document that the contractor has updated record drawings and provided a monthly project schedule update.

4. Review applications for payment with the contractor for compliance with contract requirements and verify that payment requested comprises payment due based on work completed as related to the schedule of values and materials and equipment furnished but not incorporated into the work.

26.38 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

5. Evaluate and document the contractor-certified payroll submittal and provide labor compliance monitoring.

6. Prepare monthly progress payment using the City’s standard form. The payment application review period will comply with review period requirements established in the Construction Contract.

1.9 Quality Assurance/Quality Control
The objective of the QA/QC Plan is to monitor the contractor in compliance with the Contract Documents and permit requirements. The QA/QC Plan will address the contractor’s work requirements including plant operations and startup and testing. The construction manager will perform QA inspections to identify and address potential defects in construction. The construction manager will establish a Field Quality Assurance Plan, providing procedures and guidelines to monitor the contractor’s QA/QC activities.

1. Establish the Field Quality Assurance Plan, including describing the methods for conducting and evaluating that the required Special Inspections and tests are performed according to the Construction Contract drawings and specifications, as well as in compliance with applicable codes, standards and regulations.
a. Review and approval of the contractor’s QA/QC Plan
b. Field design change control
c. Monitor special processes
d. Manufacturing source inspection and witness testing
e. Inspections and test control; special and specialty inspections f. Verification and calibration of measuring and test equipment

2. Document the contractor’s compliance with the QA/QC Plan including materials testing requirements in accordance with Program CM Guidelines, City, and/or CM BMPs, as applicable and appropriate.
a. Develop and implement as part of the Field Quality Assurance Plan the methods for inspections and verifications, but not be limited to, the following activities:
i. Inspection of civil work, including excavation and backfill, pile driving, concrete construction, paving
ii. Inspection of structural work
iii. Mechanical equipment inspection
iv. Plumbing; heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC); and fire protection inspections
v. Electrical inspection and testing
vi. Field welding and inspection
vii. Hydrostatic and pneumatic testing
viii. Instrumentation and control (I&C) inspection and testing ix. Special and specialty inspections, if applicable

3. Document the contractor’s compliance with the QA/QC Plan including materials testing requirements in accordance with Program CM Guidelines, City and/or CM BMPs, as applicable and appropriate.

26.39 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

1.10 Submittal Process
The construction manager will coordinate and manage the submittal and shop drawing review and approval process. Each project design requires specialized materials, equipment, and performance of tasks, which are specified within the Contract Documents. The submittal process will provide an understanding between the contractor, City’s designer, City and construction manager of the acceptability of products or procedures proposed by the contractor.

Product information or proposed procedures will be submitted to the construction manager and processed with reviews by the City’s designer, City and construction manager. Submittals will be reviewed and stamped (approving or not approving) in accordance with the Contract Documents, with the comments provided. Submittals not meeting specification requirements will be returned to the contractor for correction. Complete submittals, when approved, will be distributed to the parties involved and provide for a common understanding of the acceptable materials to be incorporated into the project. SRF funding compliance may require American Iron and Steel (AIS)-compliant product certification as part of the submittal.

The construction manager will, in accordance with the Program Construction Guidelines and/or CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate:

1. Review Contract Documents and prepare anticipated submittal list

2. Receive, log, and confirm compliance with submittal requirements and distribute for review and monitor the submittals to achieve timely return to the contractor

3. Review submittals for format, compliance, and general completeness prior to forwarding to the City’s designer

4. Forward or return submittals within 2 business days from time of receipt by the construction manager

5. Prepare the submittal tracking log in accordance with City standards

6. Maintain a computerized submittal base showing submittal number, description, date received, dates forwarded to and returned from the City and/or City’s designer, date returned to the contractor, and approval status

7. Develop a tracking procedure to enable follow-up on the status of materials and equipment through the entire duration of the project including documentation of AIS compliance

8. Develop lists and monitor status of manufacturer’s certificates, services, spare parts, manuals and warranties

9. Receive, log and file manufacturer’s certificates, including warranties; review for compliance with Contract Documents

10. Receive, log, and turn over spare parts to the City

11. Receive, log, and distribute manufacturer’s O&M manuals for review and acceptance; review for compliance with the Contract Documents

1.11 Request For Information (RFI) Process
The construction manager will coordinate and manage a formal RFI review and approval process.

RFIs submitted by the contractor will be processed into the DCS by the construction services manager and routed to the City’s designer and City for information and comment. The review comments of the CM team, City’s designer and City will be coordinated and a response logged into the DCS and provided to the contractor.

The construction manager will, in accordance with the Program CM Guidelines and/or CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate:

26.40 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

1. Receive, review, analyze, log and distribute for review and monitor the RFIs to achieve timely return to the contractor
a. Determine required response suspense date to avoid contractor delay b. Track the status of RFIs and advise the City’s designer of unusual site conditions affecting RFI review
c. Review RFIs for appropriateness, format, content and general completeness prior to forwarding to the City’s designer
d. Forward or return RFIs within 2 business days from time of receipt by the construction manager

2. Prepare the RFI tracking log

3. Develop and maintain a computerized RFI database showing RFI number, general description, date received, responsible party or parties, dates forwarded to and returned from party or parties, date returned to contractor and disposition status; continually monitor status of RFIs to track responses and/or compliance with contract-specified turnaround times, as applicable

4. In the case an RFI requests for change, or a response to an RFI results in change, provide input based on the contractual merit of the request or response

5. Monitor status of responses for compliance with agreed or contract-specified turnaround times

6. Track reasons for each RFI, including unforeseen conditions, design issues and if it is answerable in existing contract documents (unnecessary)

1.12 Record Documents
The CM team will maintain a set of Contract Documents recording the addenda, design clarifications and other modifications implemented during the project. At the conclusion of the project, the CM team will combine this information with additional documentation from the contractor’s as-built drawings. The contractor’s as-built documents reflect precisely how the contractor constructed the project, including changes made to the Contract Documents during construction. These compiled specifications and drawings will provide a complete field record of the Contract Documents and their revisions.

The CM team will also provide the marked-up plans and specifications to the City’s designer, who will use them to update the Contract Documents and create Record Drawings. The complete, revised Contract Documents will then be provided to the City as the Record Documents for the project. Accuracy and completion are important as they are a critical project record for the City’s ongoing maintenance and operations of the plant.

The construction manager will, throughout the project and otherwise as appropriate during individual phases of construction or necessary because of interim plant operational status:

1. Maintain a control and record set of plans and specifications with changes as a result of RFIs, PCOs, directed change orders, change orders, or field memorandum.

2. Review and maintain records of marked-up as-built drawings and specifications so that the Record Documents will be consistent with the construction in progress; the marked-up as-built drawings and specifications shall be neat, clean and accurately reflect work as constructed. The marked-up as-built drawings will include accurate graphical representations of construction changes, including redlines, detailed drawings, sketches, call-outs and notes. The marked-up specifications will include redlines and text describing the specific changes. Just referencing RFIs, submittals, design clarifications, or change order documents on the marked-up, as-built drawings and specifications will not be adequate or acceptable.

26.41 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

3. After confirming the completeness, coordinate the transmittal of Record Documents from the City’s designer to the City.

4. Secure from the contractor, review for compliance with the Contract Documents and transmit to the City the required guarantees, warranties, bonds, waivers, keys, manuals, as-built drawings, maintenance stocks and originals of other Contract Documents and papers, including correspondence.

Activity 2. Inspections, Special and Specialty Inspections, Surveying The CM team inspection staff will provide immediate feedback to the construction manager on project activities and site and operational conditions and will document the work performed in detailed daily reports. The reports will be logged into the DCS and will be readily available for viewing by the City. The inspection reports will provide a detailed accounting of the work performed and serve to make sure that work is completed in accordance with the Contract Documents.

2.1 Inspections
The construction manager’s inspection staff will be present during construction work hours to evaluate if work is being accomplished in accordance with the Contract Documents. Inspections will provide for monitoring of the construction work and field verification of the contractor’s QC program.

The CM lead and contractor will plan and coordinate inspections of construction work to provide the needed special and specialty inspections. Inspections will focus on contractor compliance with Contract Documents, permit requirements, and coordination with ongoing plant operations. The inspection reports will provide a written and photographic record of observations including weather conditions, contractor work force and equipment, and significant material or equipment deliveries.

The CM team inspection staff will monitor the work quality through visual inspection and materials testing and will use as-needed special and specialty inspections. During inspections, the contractor will be advised of nonconforming work observed and, if not corrected within designated time frames, the City will be notified.

Nonconforming work, corrected or not corrected in accordance with designated time frames, will both be recorded on deficiency lists and addressed.

The construction manager will:

1. Provide appropriate qualified, experienced inspection staff to monitor major work activities associated with work performed on shifts and days worked by the contractor, and to perform inspections and special and specialty inspections as required per the Contract Documents.

2. Inspect materials, equipment, construction procedures, work in progress, and completed work for compliance with the Contract Documents.

3. Monitor the contractor’s look-ahead schedule and confer with the contractor to schedule qualified personnel including specialty inspectors on an as-needed basis to inspect and monitor QC for major work activities.

4. Monitor completed work for contract compliance and generate appropriate deficiency lists.

5. Prepare daily inspection reports detailing weather conditions, status of work, and the location and type of work performed by the contractor, in accordance with the City’s Construction Manual and/or CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate.

26.42 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

6. For each work activity, document the number and classification of craft labor, supervision, equipment (including idle equipment), and materials used.

7. Note material and equipment deliveries or off-hauls, delays (including cause of delay), equipment breakdowns or other field problems, visitors, and other pertinent observations.

Augment reports with sketches and digital photographs.

8. Track progress of work for payment purposes and evaluate if the contractor’s progress payment request reflects the submitted schedule of values and the work actually performed.

9. Develop and implement a written communication system and database notifying the contractor of nonconforming work.

2.2 Specialty Inspections
These as-needed inspections will include structural steel, concrete, soil, and other architectural and mechanical specialties. These inspections will require specialized training and in many cases are associated with risks of wind, seismic, and fire. The construction manager will provide highly skilled specialty inspectors to provide assurance that the work quality will mitigate these potential risks.

The construction manager will:

1. Provide and conduct special inspections in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 17 of the California Building Code (CBC).

2. Provide, at minimum, special inspections for the following work:
• Structural steel inspections and verification, including special provisions for seismic resistance.
• Concrete inspections and verification, including special provisions for seismic resistance. • Inspection for wind resistance.
• Foundation soil inspections and verification.
• Inspections and verification for seismic resistance for other building systems, including designated seismic systems, mechanical and electrical components, storage racks and access floors, and architectural components.
• Specialty inspections for the following work disciplines: architectural, structural, mechanical, plumbing, HVAC, fire protection, electrical, and process and instrumentation.

2.3 Surveying
Surveying will provide independent field verification of finish grades and contractor-provided as-built elevations to confirm compliance with the approved construction documents, grading plans, and specifications.

The construction manager will:

1. Identify and contract with a two-person surveying team to perform the work over a one-week period of time.

2. Provide the surveying team with both contract and as-built elevations and grades prior to mobilization for entry into their surveying equipment.

26.43 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

3. Coordinate the surveying team’s work and documentation through the HDR Construction Inspector.

4. Review grading or elevation discrepancies with the Contractor, HDR Construction Inspector, and Engineer of Record to resolve issues.

5. Document the surveying teams findings in the project document control system for project documentation.

6. Provide the Engineer of Record with the surveying team’s documentation of as-built grades and elevations to complete the final Record Drawings.

Activity 3. Division 1 and Special Provisions Compliance The Special Provisions section of the Contract Documents state work requirements for the project including phasing and sequencing, construction coordination with plant operation, and permit compliance. The Project Construction Manual provides specific instructions on monitoring for special provisions compliance such as restrictions on work hours, traffic control, and limiting impacts to the surrounding neighborhood.

The CM team inspection staff will monitor contractor compliance with the Special Provisions and mitigation measures, thereby reducing project risk. Key areas of monitoring by the consultant include stormwater (Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan [SWPPP]), environmental compliance, discharge permits, and disruption to the neighborhood.

The construction manager will, in accordance with the City’s CM Guidelines and/or CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate:

1. Monitor contractor compliance with Division 1 and Special Provisions specifications including, but not limited to, mitigation commitments, wildlife protection and environmental permits, discharge permits, and erosion and sedimentation control requirements

2. Monitor the contractor’s noise, vibration, traffic, and odor control mitigation plans for contract requirements

3. Provide written notification to the contractor and City with a compliance concern

4. Provide immediate notification to the contractor and City of noncompliance with specifications and permits
Activity 4. Training, Testing, Startup, and Commissioning The construction manager will perform services relating to City staff training, plant startup, and commissioning.

4.1 Operator Training
The construction manager will coordinate contractor-provided operator training and assist in developing operating procedures and processes so that City staff can learn to operate the upgraded plant.

The construction manager will arrange for manufacturer-provided staff training, focusing on operations within the upgraded treatment plant. Trainings will include an on-site training facility with video and audio facilities, and after installation of equipment, instruction classes will be held on operation and maintenance of the equipment. Operations manuals for process equipment will be reviewed and their procedures will be incorporated into the plant operation manual. The construction

26.44 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

manager will assist the City developing of interim operation procedures and assist staff in initial phases of operation.

The construction manager will:

1. Facilitate and coordinate training of the City’s plant operators with contractors, manufacturers, suppliers, City staff, and the City’s designer

2. Review the contractor’s training schedules and training plans

3. Coordinate and provide logistics for the training

4.2 Testing, Startup, and Commissioning
The construction manager will coordinate training once the equipment has arrived and installation is advanced sufficiently to provide for manufacturer inspections and certification of proper installation.

A representative of the manufacturer will visit the site and examine installation to confirm proper installation. After necessary adjustments are made, the manufacturer’s representative will verify the proper installation of equipment and provide operations staff with training on operation and maintenance.

The plant operations support team will organize a startup team from City staff, the City’s designer, and the contractor and lead this team in testing, startup, and commissioning for each phase of the project.

The construction manager will:

1. Coordinate functional and operational testing activities with the contractor, manufacturers, City’s designer, and City.

2. Review the contractor’s test procedures, witness the contractor’s testing, and receive and review the contractor’s test reports.

3. Coordinate and schedule startup and commissioning activities.

4. Lead, coordinate, and assist with day-to-day startup and commissioning activities.

Activity 5. Acceptance and Closeout
The construction manager will facilitate commissioning in accordance with the project construction phases and facilitate acceptance of each project milestone and the project once their respective commissioning period has been completed. During the later stages of construction for each milestone and of the project, the construction manager will meet with the contractor and develop deficiency lists based on record of inspection and observed noncompliant work.

The construction manager will regularly follow up with the contractor to address the deficient work items prior to commencement of operational testing. Included with system acceptance will be obtaining required warranties and guarantees from equipment manufacturers and contractors that fully comply with the Contract Documents.

The construction manager will begin the process of milestone acceptance near the conclusion of each milestone and the process of project acceptance and Construction Contract closeout near the conclusion of the project.

The construction manager will implement the steps called out in the City’s Construction Manual and/or CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate. Each step will be documented and include a complete review of contract administration, quality assurance and inspection and plant operations. A

26.45 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

complete review of the DCS will be made to identify unresolved issues for RFIs/submittals/deliveries/warranties services or certifications. Documentation for each step of the closeout process will be assembled along with a calendar of warranty inspection and follow-up activities.

The construction manager will, in accordance with the City’s Construction Manual and/or CM BMPs as applicable and appropriate:

1. Manage the deficiency list process

2. Coordinate the efforts of the City’s designer, City, City operations and permit authorities to develop a list of deficiencies

3. Coordinate with the contractor, City operations, and other parties to correct the deficiencies

4. Conduct an inspection of the completed work for each milestone and of the entire job site and review documents to determine if construction efforts are in compliance with the Contract Documents

5. Evaluate the closure/completeness/delivery of RFls, submittals, O&M documents, spare parts, training and testing activities, record documents, construction photographs, warranties, guarantees, maintenance bonds and nonconformance reports

6. Provide the City with documentation required for each milestone acceptance and the final project acceptance and closeout of the Construction Contract

7. Coordinate warranty services with the contractor and City through completion of each milestone as required and through final completion and acceptance of the project

8. Provide the City with warranty calendars with recommended warranty inspection dates prior to warranty expirations
Task 5-4.4 GHWTP Facility Improvements Project
The FY27 scope of FIP Construction Management (CM) focuses on the start of project construction.

CM activities may include support for: third-party CM procurement, site planning for third-party CM, construction management plan review, communications, progress and coordination meetings, schedule review, change management, submittal and RFI review, as needed. Additional CM support activities are described below.

Document Control and Internet-Based Communication System The Program has selected and will provide Procore, the web-based DCS, and internet connectivity to facilitate efficient communication and maintain project data and records. The team will evaluate the current Design-Bid-Build (DBB) workflows templates for use in a Progressive Design Build (PDB) delivery model. The DBB workflows will be evaluated by the team to confirm the current workflows are valid to use or must be revised or new workflows need to be developed. The evaluation of the Procore workflows will be in concert with the Design Builder’s document controls system to avoid any duplications or conflict in document workflows.

Additionally, to enhance productivity, standard City forms will be replicated within Procore to allow for faster document processing.

Training will be provided for the City, Design Builder and third-party CM as appropriate for proper use of internet based communication system.

Assumptions:

1. The third-party construction manager will maintain the DCS (Procore).

O&M liaison support:

26.46 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Support the implementation of the Project Delivery Model, focusing on the interaction and information transfer between Operations (or specifically Production Section), the Engineering Group and the design engineers. One objective of the O&M liaison is to support the City’s O&M needs during this project, while streamlining deliverable reviews. The O&M liaison will apply their familiarity with City O&M standards and preferences and prepare and execute deliverable reviews with O&M staff. Another objective of this role is to facilitate development of operations plans related to planned outages, construction-phase operational risk mitigation, and startup and commissioning.

Assumptions:

1. The contractor shall be solely and completely responsible for the conditions of the job site, including safety of persons and property during performance of the work. This requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal work hours.

Task 5-6.1 U4 Tank Rehab/Replacement CM Support
HDR proposes to provide support for the City PM’s management, and other construction-related tasks, including inspection, environmental team coordination, public outreach, stakeholder coordination, and coordination between CM/contractor and ESDC. The HDR team will support the City PM with project closeout activities, as needed.

Assumptions:

1. Public outreach and notification are done by the City or other consultant(s).

2. Sampling, testing, compaction, welding and specialty discipline inspection performed by others.

3. The contractor shall be solely and completely responsible for the conditions of the job site, including safety of persons and property during performance of the work. This requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal work hours.

Task 6: Program Support
Task 6 groups together several tasks and activities that are critical to project success, including environmental support services, ROW investigation and acquisition, survey, geotechnical investigation, and other miscellaneous services. Project type and phase of development dictate the degree to which particular projects may require the use of these tasks. For example, a treatment plant project may have very extensive geotechnical investigation needs, but very little survey or ROW needs. The following subtasks are included in this service order:
• Subtask 6.1: Environmental Advisory, Compliance & Technical Support (12-month duration) o Subtask 6.1-0: Environmental Advisory/General
o Subtask 6.1-2.4: Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz – Scott’s Valley o Subtask 6.1-4.3: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement
o Subtask 6.1-4.4: GHWTP Facility Improvements Project Environmental Support o Subtask 6.1–6.1: University Tank No.4 Rehab/Replacement • Subtask 6.2: ROW Acquisition [not used]
• Subtask 6.3: Support Communications and Public Outreach (12-month duration) • Subtask 6.4: Salmonoid Habitat Conservation Plan Consultation (12-month duration) • Subtask 6.5: Geotechnical Investigations [not used]
• Subtask 6.6: Project Funding Assistance [not used]

26.47 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

• Subtask 6.7: Program Technical Support (12-month duration) Subtask 6.1: Environmental Advisory, Compliance and Technical Support Under SO 12, HDR will support projects across the Program as noted below.

Subtask 6.1-0: Environmental Advisory/General Environmental Support Under SO 12, HDR will support the projects across the Program by providing environmental advisory support in the form of Program QA, project-level QC, process improvement, and professional development for the environmental team members. The environmental advisor will work with each City project Environmental Lead (EL) collectively and individually to understand the projects and provide useful and objective technical strategy. They will work with Program leadership to identify and lead process improvement opportunities as well as staff development, project negotiations, and both professional and project technical advancement opportunities. They will coordinate with the CEQA/permitting consultant to bring consistent QA and objective feedback to our extended team.

They will support the hiring and development of environmental team members and provide support as needed (either directly or through the identification of specific technical expertise or availability within the HDR Program team).

The environmental advisor will participate in regular Program and team meetings including but not limited to the monthly Program PM meetings; monthly environmental Program team meeting; monthly HDR environmental team meetings; monthly HDR Program team meetings; monthly HDR leadership meeting; project-specific strategy; and as-needed controls or planning meetings, Water Infrastructure and Finance Innovation Act (WIFIA)/funding strategy meetings, risk management meetings, project lessons-learned or conflict resolution meetings, Program trainings, or team building meetings. The environmental advisor will further participate in as-needed meetings with the CEQA/permitting consultant, other Program team meetings, environmental team initiative meetings, or other Program meetings requiring environmental advisory services.

Outside of general environmental advisory, under SO 12, HDR could, upon request, provide other types of environmental technical support such as, but not limited to:
• Maintenance of PgMP Chapter 17 and Environmental Checklist • Coordination with HDR technical support
• Participation in Program meetings
• Supporting Program environmental processes and advancements • Preparation of technical resource studies
• Providing peer review technical studies or documents
• Scoping or providing strategic advisory to technical approach • Completion of historic records searches, cultural resource inventory analysis, field survey, or review of studies prepared by the City or other consultant(s) • Completion of aquatic resource delineations, biological reconnaissance surveys, avian surveys, or other site verification surveys
• Completion of field verifications or surveys and prepare related reports to support environmental reviews or permitting
• Conducting fisheries studies, modeling, or engineering • Reviewing or providing guidance or direction on stormwater issues including coordination with a local stormwater consultant

26.48 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

• Reviewing or providing guidance or direction on hazardous-materials issues including coordination with a local hazardous-materials consultant/contractor and training development for City team
• Preparing and providing hazardous materials training workshop and potential field visit • Hazardous-materials support might be needed to advise on materials found at the FIP and U4 sites
• Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD) air contaminant permitting • Supporting construction teams on unexpected or unprescribed technical issues at the direction of the project EL. Including time for unexpected technical support on four ongoing construction projects (FIP and U4)
• Providing geospatial or geographic information system (GIS) support to assess environmental conditions
• Supporting regulatory consultation processes
• Providing QC or peer technical review on environmental methodology or study reports • Supporting project alternative screenings including analysis • Supporting project consultant negotiations
• Supporting project business case evaluations
• Coordinating with environmental consultants to the City to maintain performance standards • Working with environmental team to continue to develop the environmental processes and functions of the overall Program
• Conducting other environmental support functions as defined through the project development and collaboration process
Assumptions:

1. The estimated LOE for Subtask 6.1-0 (Environmental Advisor/General Environmental Technical Support) includes regular participation in Program, team, and project meetings; Program- and project-level discussions; process development/maintenance initiatives with the City’s environmental team; undefined technical support (stormwater, biological resources, cultural resources, hazardous materials, regulatory); and project-level QC reviews of deliverables.

2. Up to 6 same day trips are included in the scope either by the environmental advisor or general environmental technical support team members.

3. Per the City’s CEQA Process Review Guidance, QC reviews are anticipated to include the project and alternative descriptions; Notices of Preparation; Administrative Draft Initial Studies/EIR documents; draft final documents; or other document iterations, sections, materials, or supporting studies, as needed.

4. Subtask 6.1-0 includes CEQA and permitting contract reviews.

5. Support for projects that do not have a designated 6.1-X subtask will be provided as general technical support under Subtask 6.1-0.

6. Environmental compliance management functions are anticipated for the U4 Tanks and FIP projects. Other compliance support needs will be addressed through the contract change/amendment process.

7. The scope of work and LOE for the FIP project, is based on negotiations prior to starting the construction phase of the project. This scope of work is intended to encompass what might be performed and the related LOE.

8. Fees for literature reviews, licenses, trainings, permit fees, agency environmental document review fees, or other external expenses will be covered by the City or negotiated separately when the need arises.

26.49 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

9. Environmental support functions assume work from an HDR office other than on-site meetings when needed. No seconded positions are assumed.

HDR is not authorized to coordinate directly with permitting or regulatory agencies without taskor project-specific authorization to do so from a City PM or associate planner.

Subtask 6.1-2.4 Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz – Scott’s Valley Environmental Support Construction Compliance Management
To assist the City with environmental compliance and management of biological and cultural resources before, during, and after construction, HDR will provide general oversight and management by an Environmental Compliance Manager (ECM). The ECM will oversee and advise the City Environmental Lead (EL) in the day-to-day environmental compliance functions of construction with the intention of building a clear competency and confidence in this role in the future.

The environmental aspects of the projects will be managed together with two coordinated levels of oversight including the overall environmental management of the City EL and the compliance oversight and management of the ECM. This scope of work applies to the second level with certain ECM efforts delegated to the EL as shown in Table 3. This scope of work includes the strategy, scoping and coordination of these services as well as subconsultant contract management and oversight to make sure that the necessary work is completed for the project. The ECM will maintain effective communication with the EL as well as effective documentation of the compliance process through completion of the projects. The EL will be responsible for overall environmental compliance and will handle regulatory coordination, agency engagement and changes to the construction contract documents that have potential environmental considerations.

Table 3. Construction Environmental Compliance Management Responsibilities

ECM (HDR) EL (CITY)
Attend weekly meetings with the Intertie 1
construction team through the construction period,
dropping off after Environmental is discussed.

Attend weekly meetings with the Intertie 1
construction team through the construction period.

Review environmental awareness training
development, monthly compliance reports.

Prepare environmental awareness training, monthly
compliance reports
Review reporting, monitoring schedules, tracking and
Procore logs.

Develop reporting and monitoring schedules to
maintain project environmental compliance and will
provide monthly updated schedules for the duration
of construction.

When biological monitoring is occurring, the EL will
review the monitor’s logs on Procore and will upload
copies of documentation to Procore to allow the
City’s CM and ECM to keep abreast of the issues
and progress.

Coordinate with the City and contractor about
upcoming scheduled activities and provide a “2-week
look-ahead” for use by the PM and construction
manager as needed.

26.50 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

ECM (HDR) EL (CITY)
Visit the Intertie 1 project site monthly. Participate in site visits, a needed, to shadow ECM and learn protocols and practices.

Biweekly 30-minute meetings with EL to review
construction status, recent and upcoming ECM
efforts, and provide advice, as needed.

Biweekly 30-minute meetings with ECM to review
construction status, recent and upcoming ECM and
EL efforts, and ask questions, as needed.

Guide and support EL in day-to-day environmental
compliance activities. Participate in field efforts, as needed.

Lead day-to-day environmental compliance
activities. Oversee environmental field coordination
and subcontractors, coordinate compliance
monitoring and project/contractor coordination in
response to construction needs.

Administrative services to monitor and administer
subcontracts.

Oversight of compliance monitoring and
subconsultants and project/contractor coordination
and will provide professional expertise.

Perform related tasks to monitor mitigation measures
and standard construction practices applicable to the
projects including, but not limited to, pre-construction surveys.

Participate in field monitoring or surveys to shadow
ECM and learn protocols and practices.

The ECM will work with the EL and construction
manager, as necessary, to resolve issues and
conflicts or adjust the process as needed to make the
project run smoothly.

Communicate issues real time with ECM and work
with ECM to resolve conflicts.

Serve as a backup point of contact for EL. Review deliverables when ECM is not available.

Meetings and Site Visits
The EL and ECM will attend weekly meetings with the Intertie 1 construction team, the ECM will drop off the meeting after Environmental issues are discussed so ECM will attend for 0.5 hour each week through the construction period. The ECM will attend biweekly meetings with the EL, each will be 30 minutes long and will continue until the project has been completed.

The ECM will visit the Intertie 1 project site monthly. Each site visit is estimated to take up to 2.5 hours.

Compliance Management
Ongoing compliance management is assumed to take 2 hours per month. The ECM will work with the EL and construction manager, as necessary, to resolve issues and conflicts or adjust the process as needed to make the project run smoothly. File management, archiving and related documentation with conflict resolution in a format agreed upon by the City will also be included. In addition, the EL will complete monthly compliance updates via the MMRP tracker for the project and ECM will review each month.

Deliverables:

Project compliance tracking spreadsheet

26.51 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Assumptions:
• Up to two months of ECM support is included under SO 12 • The EL will coordinate with regulators about the project. The EL will submit documents to regulators.
• The HDR construction manager and inspector (separate from this scope of services) will cooperate with the ECM and EL and support environmental compliance activities while carrying out CM responsibilities. The construction manager, the EL, and the ECM will have stop work authority.
• The HDR CM team will exercise management oversight over the stormwater responsibilities of the contractor. The CM team will inform the environmental team of the results of the SWPPP inspections. The CM team will issue stop work notices if the SWPPP deficiencies are not addressed in a timely manner. Neither the ECM nor EL will have responsibilities in this regard. The EL, with support from the ECM, will participate in structuring a communication strategy for the project to allow clear lines of communication. Contractor permit violations, deficiencies and non-compliance are controlled with inspection monitoring and reporting by the CM team.
• In the event that the contractor puts the City at risk of impacting sensitive resources because of noncompliance with environmental documentation, specifications and plans, the CM lead inspector will provide the contractor with written notification when the CM team (regarding contract requirements) or environmental compliance team (regarding the MMRP or SCPs) observes work activities or job conditions that violate requirements of the special provisions.

These noncompliance notifications will be logged into Procore by the inspector and notification will be provided to the ECM team and the City EL. These concerns will be logged and communicated based on the level of urgency for resolution and discussed at weekly project meetings and at QA/QC meetings to verify that the contractor mitigates previous actions and performs work in a timely manner and in accordance with special provisions. At the ECM’s and/or EL’s direction, a biological monitor may be called to the site if a specialstatus species is at risk from project activities. The City’s EL will monitor contractor compliance with the project permits, special provisions and MMRP. The EL will notify the ECM within 1 business day of the discovery of compliance deficiencies with fencing and/or MMRP restrictions.
• These services are not included in this scope:
o SWPPP oversight: SWPPP field implementation, enforcement and inspection is a part of the CM contract’s scope of work.
o Noise monitoring, lead and asbestos testing and monitoring and contaminated-soils monitoring. Under HDR CM contract.

Subconsultant Management
HDR obtained qualified, local subconsultants to provide biological, arboricultural, and paleontological construction monitoring to meet environmental compliance requirements set forth by the project’s documentation and specifications. The City will not pay for travel expenses for consultants.

Expenses should be included in the professional rate of the employee submitted in the proposal. The elements of the subconsultant environmental services needed as part of this scope of work will include project management, reporting and documentation, preparing and implementing a WEAP, biological resources surveys and construction monitoring, arboricultural surveys and monitoring, PRIMP development and paleontological resources monitoring.

26.52 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

The EL will coordinate with the ECM and the biological, arboricultural, and cultural subcontractors each month as needed via either email or conference call. Coordination includes scheduling, reviewing invoices, deliverables (WEAP, datasheets, inspection reports) and project reporting. The ECM will review all deliverables before submittal. This coordination is estimated to take 1 hours on average per month for the project during the contract period.

Subtask 6.1-4.3 Graham Hill WTP Concrete Tanks Replacement – Environmental Support Under SO 12, HDR will provide continued construction compliance management for the GHWTP Concrete Tanks project. Specifically, HDR will provide technical compliance managers with expertise in cultural resources and biological resources with the roles and responsibilities defined below:
• The cultural-resources compliance manager will oversee and guide the work of the contractors during project initiation and should cultural or archeological resources be encountered during construction.
• The biological-resources compliance manager will oversee and guide the work of Jodi McGraw and team (Jodi McGraw Consulting), the biological monitoring consultant.

No stormwater compliance management or monitoring is assumed under this task.

The compliance manager will function under the purview of the City’s EL for the project. Activities might include:
• Site visits, estimated at one visit every month
• Yearly special-status species surveys, estimated at two per year • Development, review, or update of worker environmental awareness training • Preparation of monthly compliance reports
• Compliance tracking of all CEQA mitigations and permitting conditions • Oversight and coordination with monitoring subcontractors • Supporting monitoring procurement processes
• Working with the project EL to develop project-specific monitoring plans, bringing processes and lessons learned from across the Program
• Relaying project requirements to the monitoring team
• Participating in project construction monitoring meetings, as needed • Participating in project construction status meetings, as needed (e.g., when construction schedule changes or changes in activities are expected) • Managing monitoring resourcing when there is a change in monitor, change in construction schedule, or when multiple monitors are needed
• Resolving issues with monitoring team, should they arise • Providing day-to-day point of contact to monitoring team, EL, CM team, or project team for compliance questions
• Helping resolve monitoring or finding questions/issues • Collecting and documenting daily/weekly reports
• Managing and filing all pertinent project transmittals • Scheduling and reviewing agency noticing
One subcontractor is included in this scope of work: Jodi McGraw, who is performing biological monitoring. Jodi McGraw will complete necessary daily biological monitoring including that required for the Mount Hermon June beetle. She will lead worker environmental awareness program (WEAP) trainings and make necessary updates through the course of the project. She will make sure that BMPs are in place and maintained and will support regulatory engagements and provide updates to

26.53 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

the compliance tracking. She will also assist in developing any project close out documents required by the City for biological resources. This work will be identified by the City’s EL and coordinated by the compliance manager.

Subtask 6.1-4.4 GHWTP Facility Improvements Project – Environmental Support A budget of up to 35 hours is allotted to support the construction environmental compliance efforts for the GHWTP FIP, on an as needed basis. Specific scope of work to support this effort is undefined but could include planning and pre-construction efforts such as advisory and support of City-led ECM as well as other technical support for biological, cultural, tribal, or stormwater needs.

Subtask 6.1-6.1 University Tank No.4 Rehab/Replacement ECM Construction Compliance Management
To assist the City with environmental compliance and management of biological resources during construction, HDR will provide general oversight and management by an Environmental Compliance Manager (ECM). The ECM will oversee and advise the City Environmental Lead (EL) in the day-today environmental compliance functions of construction with the intention of building a clear competency and confidence in this role in the future.

The environmental aspects of the project will be managed together with two coordinated levels of oversight including the overall environmental management of the City EL and the compliance oversight and management of the ECM. This scope of work applies to the second level with certain ECM efforts delegated to the EL as shown on Table 4. This scope of work includes the strategy, scoping and coordination of these services as well as subcontractor contractual management and oversight to make sure that necessary work is completed for the project. The ECM should maintain effective communication with the EL as well as documentation of the compliance process through completion of the project. The EL will be responsible for overall environmental compliance and will handle regulatory coordination, agency engagement and changes to the construction contract documents that have potential environmental considerations.

Table 4. Construction Environmental Compliance Management Responsibilities

ECM (HDR) EL (CITY)
Review daily construction photos on Procore,
Procore environmental monitoring logs, and
monthly compliance tracker spreadsheet.

Prepare monthly compliance tracker spreadsheet.

Review daily construction photos on Procore. Site visits as needed to address compliance issues.

Review contractor’s weekly schedule if needed,
address coordination issues with subcontractor
with scheduling.

Coordinate with CM team regarding scheduled
construction activities to maintain project environmental compliance. Inform ECM of scheduled work via
email related to the contractor’s weekly schedules for
the duration of construction.

When biological monitoring is occurring, the EL will
review logs uploaded by subconsultant on Procore. EL
will coordinate via email on Procore to allow the City’s CM and ECM to keep abreast of the issues and
progress.

26.54 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

ECM (HDR) EL (CITY)
Coordinate with the City and contractor about
upcoming scheduled activities. This will include monthly updates of an MMRP tracker (mitigation and monitoring
plan comments log).

Participate in site visits, as needed. Visit the U4 project site monthly.

Monthly meetings with EL to review construction
status, recent and upcoming ECM efforts, and
provide advice, as needed.

Monthly meetings with ECM to review construction
status, recent and upcoming ECM and EL efforts, and
ask questions, as needed.

Guide and support EL in day-to-day environmental
compliance activities. Participate in field efforts, as needed.

Lead day-to-day environmental compliance activities,
overseeing environmental field coordination and
subcontractors.

Administrative services to monitor and administer
subcontracts.

Oversight of compliance monitoring and
subconsultants and project/contractor coordination
and will provide professional expertise.

Coordinate compliance monitoring and
project/contractor coordination in response to day-today construction needs.

Perform related tasks to monitor mitigation
measures and standard construction practices
applicable to the projects including, but not limited
to, wildlife surveys.

Participate in field monitoring or surveys to shadow
ECM and learn protocols and practices.

Meetings and Site Visits
The EL will attend weekly meetings with the U4 construction team. The ECM will also attend monthly meetings with the EL; each will be up to 30 minutes long and continue until the project has been completed. Up to 6 additional meeting hours are factored herein to account for construction delays, issues, or project closeout meetings deemed necessary.

The ECM shall visit the U4 Tank project site when requested. Each site visit is estimated to take up to 2.5 hours.

Compliance Management
The EL will monitor construction activities remotely, and when needed visit the site, to maintain project environmental compliance and will comment on the program schedule on a monthly basis for the duration of construction. The EL will coordinate with the City and contractor about upcoming scheduled activities. Reporting will include monthly updates of a MMRP tracker (mitigation and monitoring plan comments log) in a format agreed upon by the City. The EL will upload photos and copies of documentation to Procore to allow the CM and ECM to keep abreast of the issues and progress.

26.55 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

As required, ECM will direct subconsultants to use GIS to map the occurrence of nesting birds and special status species for the City’s use to coordinate with construction contractor as needed.

ECM’s compliance management coordination is assumed to take 1 hour per month. The ECM will work with the EL and construction manager, as necessary, to resolve issues and conflicts or adjust the process as needed. EL will manage environmental files on SharePoint.

In the event of an inadvertent discovery, and in compliance with City, state, and federal regulations, HDR cultural resources staff will be available to assist the City with resource assessment, Tribal coordination, and mitigation recommendations (if necessary). This scope of work is for each discovery, with two discoveries estimated. Upon notification of a potential discovery, an HDR cultural resource specialist (CRS) meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standard (PQS) will be immediately available to assess the find via phone call, text message with photo, video call, or other remote access process. If necessary and/or requested, HDR’s CRS will also be available to make an in-person site visit to further assess the inadvertent discovery and meet with Tribal, agency, and City representatives.

Based on the results of the assessment, HDR’s CRS will make the necessary Tribal and agency notifications, including the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and will prepare a brief summary memorandum that describes the nature of the discovery, the cultural and natural context, and the potential for uncovering additional associated cultural material. The summary memo will also include (if necessary) recommendations for additional mitigation/treatment to resolve the significant impact/adverse effect.

Deliverables:
• Project compliance tracking spreadsheet
Assumptions:
• The EL will coordinate with regulators about the project. The EL will submit documents to regulators.
• The City’s construction manager and Inspector (separate from this scope of services) will cooperate with the ECM and support environmental compliance activities while carrying out CM responsibilities. The construction manager, the EL, and the ECM will have stop work authority.
• The construction manager will exercise management oversight over the stormwater responsibilities of the contractor. The construction manager will inform the environmental team of the results of the ESCP inspections. The CM team would issue stop work notices if the ESCP deficiencies are not addressed in a timely manner. The ECM would not have responsibilities in this regard. The EL will participate in structuring a communication strategy to allow for clear lines of communication. Contractor permit violations, deficiencies and noncompliance are controlled with inspection monitoring and reporting. • In the event that the contractor puts the City at risk of impacting sensitive resources because of noncompliance with environmental documentation, specifications and plans, the CM lead inspector will provide the contractor with written notification when the CM team (regarding contract requirements) or environmental compliance team (regarding the mitigation measures or SCPs) observes work activities or job conditions that violate requirements of the special provisions. These noncompliance notifications will be logged into Procore by the inspector and notification will be provided to the ECM team and the City EL. These concerns will be logged and communicated based on the level of urgency for resolution and discussed at weekly project meetings and at QA/QC meetings to verify that the contractor mitigates

26.56 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

previous actions and performs work in a timely manner and in accordance with special provisions. At the ECM’s and/or EL’s direction, a biological monitor may be called to the site if a special-status species is at risk from project activities. The EL will monitor contractor compliance with the project permits, special provisions and MMRP. • The scope of work for inadvertent discovery is limited to the initial response, assessment, notifications, and preparation of the memorandum. Additional consultation with Tribes, agencies, participating parties, and SHPO beyond the initial notification is not included. Implementation of required treatment/mitigation is not included. HDR archeological services will be provided for this fee. HDR is not preparing a contract with AMTB to do tribal cultural monitoring at this location.
• These services are not included in this scope:
o Erosion Sediment Control Plan monitoring
o Noise monitoring
o Lead and asbestos testing and monitoring
o Contaminated soils monitoring
Subconsultant Management
HDR obtained qualified, local subconsultants to provide biological construction monitoring to meet environmental compliance requirements set forth by the project’s documentation and specifications.

The elements of the ECM’s subconsultant environmental services needed as part of this scope of work will include project management, invoice QA/QC coordination, review of biological or cultural inspection results and documentation.

The City’s EL will coordinate with the ECM, the biological subcontractors as needed via either email or conference call. Coordination includes scheduling, reviewing deliverables (datasheets, inspection reports) and project reporting. The ECM will review all deliverables before submittal. This coordination is estimated to take up to 1.5 hours on average per month for the project during the contract period.

Subtask 6.2: Right of Way (ROW) Acquisition
No ROW services are anticipated for FY27.

Subtask 6.3: Support Communications and Public Outreach Communications and public outreach on the Program generally occur in the following areas:

1. Internal departmental communications: Communications between the Program team and City staff members about Program activities.

2. Management communications: Communications from the Program team to City management staff, the City Council and the Water Commission. These communications will always flow through City staff, usually the Program Director and the Director of Engineering.

3. Public outreach: External communication to the public at large. This is usually “one-way” in nature (from the Program out to the public) and involves communications with the public about the purpose and progress of the Program. These communications flow through the City communications lead.

4. Stakeholder communications and engagement: External communication to specific members of the public. This is usually “two-way” in nature and involves communicating with specific stakeholders about issues impacting them individually (e.g., a homeowner that we are trying to purchase a pipeline easement from). These communications may involve the PM and/or department directors but always engage the City communications lead.

26.57 Santa Cruz Program Management: Service Order 12
5-26-2026

Provide support for communications and public outreach by doing the following:

1. Internal communications: Train new staff on the Communications Guidelines and assessment tool.

2. Management communications: Support the Program Director by preparing memoranda, PowerPoint presentations, graphics and other support materials for use in communicating with the City Council and Water Commission.

3. Public outreach: Support the City communications lead by preparing text, graphics and other support materials for use in communicating with the public. Support the preparation of public information documents (e.g., fliers, brochures, posters, frequently asked questions [FAQs]) for use at public meetings/workshops, for uploading to the City’s Water Program and Projects web pages and participate in those meetings if requested.

Assumptions:

1. Up to 144 hours are allocated for implementing communications and outreach support.

Subtask 6.4: Salmonoid Habitat Conservation Plan Consultation As requested by the City, HDR may assist the City and NMFS/NOAA with the development of a Programmatic Agreement (PA) to guide NMFS/NOAA Section 106 regulatory obligations throughout the life of the ASHCP. The PA will identify the nature and need for the PA, consulting parties (both signatory and concurring) and definition of the undertaking’s APE. The PA will also include stipulations that will, minimally, specify time frames and review procedures, Tribal involvement, identifying the APE, historic property identification and evaluation procedures, a process for determining effects, professional qualifications, provisions for inadvertent discoveries and/or unanticipated effects, and a dispute resolution process.

In support of the PA, HDR may also assist NMFS/NOAA with outreach and coordination with the Native American community. HDR may contact the Native American Heritage Commission to request their most recent Section 106 consultation list for Santa Cruz County and will prepare PA notification letters on NMFS/NOAA’s behalf to inform local Tribes of the PA process and schedule.

Potential Meeting:

1. A one-hour internal meeting with NMFS/NOAA, the City, HDR and other interested parties to discuss the draft PA prior to submittal to SHPO.

Assumptions:

1. NMFS/NOAA will be the lead federal agency for Section 106 compliance. Consultation with other federal agencies will not be necessary.

2. Development of a Historic Properties Treatment Plan to resolve adverse effects resulting from the undertaking will not be necessary.

Subtask 6.5: Geotechnical Investigations [not used this service order] Subtask 6.6: Project Funding Assistance [not used this service order] Subtask 6.7: Program Technical Support
Outside of specific technical reviews on projects (covered in Task 2: Design and Planning Management), HDR will provide technical input on water infrastructure, treatment, and water quality issues, as requested by the City. An allocation of 192 hours has been made in this service order for these as-needed efforts.

26.58 5% 5%
Task 2 Design and Planning Management
18,528 $4,812,411 $49,250 $53,345 $4,915,006
Task 3 Program Administration
6,008 $1,658,346 $125,471 $0 $1,783,817
Task 4 Planning Efforts
636 $164,017 $2,862 $0 $166,879
Task 5 Construction Management
5,022 $1,548,825 $35,145 $16,800 $1,600,769
Task 6 Program Support
797 $245,717 $3,666 $29,400 $278,783
30,991 $ 8,429,317 $ 216,393 $ 8,745,255 99,545 $
Subtotals Task 3
Subtotals Task 4
Subtotals Task 5
Subtotals Task 6
Service Order 12 Totals
Total Cost ($)
Service Order 12
HDR Expenses
with Mark up ($)
Sub Consultant
with Mark up ($)
Subtotals Task 2
Task Task Description Total HDR
Labor Hours
Total HDR Labor
Inclusive of APC
($)
Program Mangagement Services, Service Order 12 - Fiscal Year 27 Program Activities (Assumed NTP July 1, 2026) Exhibit B-1
Estimated Work Effort and Fee Estimate
Table 3 - Estimated Work Effort and Fee Estimate (June 2026) City of Santa Cruz

26.59 Activity ID Activity Name Dur Start Finish
City of SC City of SCWP 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27
Service O Service Order 12 - z01 - HDR Pro r ject Management Contract 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461410 Notice to Proceed 0 01-Jul-26*Task 2 - Des Task 2 - Design and Planning Management 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Sub Task A - Sub Task A - Support Best Value Delivery Methods Implementation 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-2A70 Implementation oversight of delivery method contract 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2A80 Coordination and/or support of the City's legal department in delivery method use 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Sub Task B - Sub Task B - Select Final Design (or other) Consultants 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-2B130 City meeting agenda and minutes 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2B140 Draft and final design RFP(s) 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2B150 Written recommendation for selection of final design consultant 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2B160 City Council agenda package (attachments to staff reports) for final design contracts 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Sub Task C - Sub Task C - Monitor Project Progress and Changes 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-2C130 Meeting agendas, presentations, and minutes from project coordination and review meetings 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2C140 Change log entries, as required 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2C150 Monthly project status reports 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2C160 Permit applications (prepared by others) 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Sub Task D - Sub Task D - Technical Review of Deliverables, Plans and Specifications 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-2D100 Review Comments at 30%, 60%, 90% and 100% Final Design Completion 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2D110 Agenda and Minutes for City O&M Staff Reviews at 60% and 90% Final Design Consultant Submittals 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2D120 Spreadsheet to Document and Track Design Review Comments and Actions 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Sub Task F - Sub Task F - Cost Estimating Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-2H70 Cost Estimate and basis of estimate document 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Electrical, In Electrical, Instrumentation s , and Controls (EI&C) Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-2H80 GE Intellisys 85 01-Jul-26 30-Oct-26SO12-2H90 Utility Pole Relocation Reviews 162 01-Jul-26 26-Feb-27SO12-2H100 Review Arc Flash Studies 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-2H110 Felton Booster Pump Station Power Quality Analysis 162 01-Jul-26 26-Feb-27SO12-2H120 Backup Power for SCADA Cabinet at GHWTP 124 01-Jul-26 31-Dec-26SO12-2H130 Spec Updates, Commissioning & Startup Procedures 85 01-Jul-26 30-Oct-26 Task 3 - Program Administration 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Sub Task 3.1 Sub Task 3.1 - General Program Administration 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461320 Draft and final Service Order scope, fee, and Annual Work Plan 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461430 Monthly invoices 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461440 Contract change log updates 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461450 Staff approval requests, as applicable 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461460 Updates to working Program tracking tools, including staff planning spreadsheets, and program improvement log 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461470 PgMP updates, as applicable 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Sub Task 3.2 Sub Task 3.2 - Risk Management 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Risk Register & Tool U e pdates 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461310 Risk Register and Planning Tool updates 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Quarterly Risk Reviews s 205 01-Sep-26 30-Jun-27
SO12-461300 Quarterly Risk Reviews (1st Quarter of FY 2026) - Risk Register Update and Risk Review Meeting 21 01-Sep-26 30-Sep-26SO12-461240 Quarterly Risk Reviews (2nd Quarter of FY 2026) - Risk Register Update 21 01-Dec-26 31-Dec-26SO12-461230 Quarterly Risk Reviews (3rd Quarter of FY 2026) - Risk Register Update and Risk Review Meeting 23 01-Mar-27 31-Mar-27SO12-461220 Quarterly Risk Reviews (4th Quarter of FY 2026) - Risk Register Update 21 01-Jun-27 30-Jun-27 Risk Works Risk Workshop(s) 163 01-Jul-26 01-Mar-27
SO12-461740 Water Supply Augmentation Quantitative Risk Workshop 1 01-Jul-26 01-Jul-26SO12-461290 Program Quantitative Risk Workshop 1 03-Nov-26 03-Nov-26SO12-461210 Program Quantitative Draft Risk Report 31 04-Nov-26 21-Dec-26SO12-461030 Risk Report Meeting 1 19-Jan-27 19-Jan-27SO12-461200 Program Quantitative Final Risk Report 28 20-Jan-27 01-Mar-27 Sub Task 3.3 Sub Task 3.3 - Document Management 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461020 Provide general management and over-sight of the Document Management and SharePoint processes and suppor 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461280 Provide ongoing document management support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461380 Provide basic SharePoint administration support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461390 Provide ongoing SharePoint maintenance, configuration and technical support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461400 Support continuous improvements 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Sub Task 3.4 Sub Task 3.4 - Training / Workforce Development 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461270 Monthly Refresher Trainings 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27Training Schedule 205 13-Aug-26 10-Jun-27 SO12-461010 Hour Training #1 1 13-Aug-26 13-Aug-26SO12-461330 Hour Training #2 1 12-Nov-26 12-Nov-26 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 2026 2027
CITY of SANTA CRUZ WATER PROGRAM
Capital Improvement Projects
Level 3 - z01 Detail Schedule
Remaining Actual Critical Remaining Work
MilestoneSummaryActual Work
Remaining Work Page 1 of 3 City Program Director: Isidro Rivera HDR Program Manager: Holly Burles
Data Date: 31-Mar-26
Print Date: 08-May-26

26.60 Activity ID Activity Name Dur Start Finish
SO12-461340 Hour Training #3 1 11-Feb-27 11-Feb-27SO12-461350 Hour Training #4 1 11-Mar-27 11-Mar-27SO12-461480 Hour Training #5 1 08-Apr-27 08-Apr-27SO12-461490 Hour Training #6 1 13-May-27 13-May-27SO12-461360 Half Day Training #1 1 10-Jun-27 10-Jun-27 Sub Task 3.5 Sub Task 3.5 - Quality Management 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461040 Updates to the PgMP 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461260 Monthly Quality Reports 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461370 Quality Review and Report #1 - March thru June 2025 22 01-Jul-26 31-Jul-26SO12-461500 Quality Review and Report #2 - July thru October 2025 18 02-Nov-26 30-Nov-26SO12-461510 Quality Review and Report #3 - November thru Feburary 2026 23 01-Mar-27 31-Mar-27 Sub Task 3.6 Sub Task 3.6 - Program Controls 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 3.6.1 - Task 3.6.1 - Program Controls Management 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461520 Program Meetings 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461530 Program Director and Program Manager Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461540 Participate in and provide training for various Program processes and tools 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 3.6.2 - Task 3.6.2 - Program Schedule 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461090 Updated Monthly Schedules 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461160 Updated Scheduling Processes, Tools as part of PgMP updates 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 3.6.3 - Task 3.6.3 - Program Cost / Estimating 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461070 Monthly Dashboards posted to Sharepoint, and a Cost Performance Report 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461080 Updated Cost and Estimating Processes and Tools as part of the PgMP 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 3.6.4 - Task 3.6.4 - Program Change Management 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461050 Updates to Section 2 (Change Management) of the PgMP 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461060 Coordinate with PMs to prepare and submit proposed changes 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 3.7 - W Task 3.7 - Water Finance/Accountin a g Support to the Water Department 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461150 Water Finance / Accounting Support to the Water Department 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 3.8 - De Task 3.8 - Design Drawing Review Software 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461180 Project support for projects moving into design 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461190 Updated Program Documents 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 4 - Pla Task 4 - Planning and Preliminary Engineering 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 4-6.1 - Task 4-6.1 - U4 Tank Electrical U , I&C Design Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461720 Provide Engineering Services During Construction 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 4.3 - A Task 4.3 - Asset Mana s gement 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 4.3.6 - Task 4.3.6 - Asset On-boardin A g Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461170 Training materials for asset on-boarding for each project 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27Projects In Des Projects In Design 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461730 3.3.4 - Beltz 9 Upgrades for ASR 150 01-Jul-26 09-Feb-27SO12-461620 6.3 - Pasatiempo Tanks Replacement 43 29-Apr-27 30-Jun-27SO12-461770 4.8 - Beltz Water Treatment Plant 39 05-May-27 30-Jun-27 Projects In Co Projects In Construction n 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461550 4.3 - GHWTP Concrete Tanks Project 61 01-Jul-26 25-Sep-26SO12-461630 2.2.1 - Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461640 2.4 - Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz-Scotts Valley 72 01-Jul-26 13-Oct-26SO12-461650 6.1 - University Tank No. 4 Rehab/Replacement 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461750 3.3.3 - Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR 207 28-Aug-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461560 4.4 - GHWTP Facility Improvements Project 123 05-Jan-27 30-Jun-27 Task 5 - Co Task 5 - Construction Mana n gement 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 General Con General Construction Mana s gement Oversight 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461140 General Construction Management Oversight 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 CM Support CM Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27
SO12-461570 2.2.1 - Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill CM Support 196 01-Jul-26 15-Apr-27SO12-461580 2.4 - Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz-Scotts Valley CM Support 57 01-Jul-26 21-Sep-26SO12-461590 4.3 - GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement CM Support 6 01-Jul-26 09-Jul-26SO12-461610 6.1 - U4 Tank Rehab/Replacement CM Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461660 4.4 - GHWTP Facility Improvements Project 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461790 3.3.3 - Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR 240 01-Jul-26 17-Jun-27 Task 6 - Program Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27
Task 6.1 - En Task 6.1 - Environmental Advisory, Compliance and Technical Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461110 Environmental Advisory/General Environmental Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27Environmen Environmental Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461100 4.3 - GHTWP Concrete Tanks Compliance Management 90 01-Jul-26 06-Nov-26SO12-461680 4.4 - GHWTP Facilities Improvements Project Environmental Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27SO12-461690 6.1 - U4 Tank Rehab/Replacement Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 2026 2027
CITY of SANTA CRUZ WATER PROGRAM
Capital Improvement Projects
Level 3 - z01 Detail Schedule
Remaining Actual Critical Remaining Work
MilestoneSummaryActual Work
Remaining Work Page 2 of 3 City Program Director: Isidro Rivera HDR Program Manager: Holly Burles
Data Date: 31-Mar-26
Print Date: 08-May-26

26.61 Activity ID Activity Name Dur Start Finish
Task 6.3 - Support Communications and Public Outreach 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461120 Ongoing Communications and Public Outreach 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 6.4 - Sa Task 6.4 - Salmonid Habitat Conservation Plan Consultation l 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461700 Assist in Preparation of Programmatic Agreement 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Task 6.7 - Pr Task 6.7 - Program Technical Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 SO12-461130 Program Technical Support 248 01-Jul-26 30-Jun-27 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 2026 2027
CITY of SANTA CRUZ WATER PROGRAM
Capital Improvement Projects
Level 3 - z01 Detail Schedule
Remaining Actual Critical Remaining Work
MilestoneSummaryActual Work
Remaining Work Page 3 of 3 City Program Director: Isidro Rivera HDR Program Manager: Holly Burles
Data Date: 31-Mar-26
Print Date: 08-May-26

26.62 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 1 of 19 Fiscal Year 2027-Annual Work Plan
Santa Cruz Water Program
Introduction
The City of Santa Cruz’s Water Department is implementing the Santa Cruz Water Program (Program) to address a number of critical needs for backbone infrastructure rehabilitation or replacement and to develop supplemental supply that would improve the reliability of the Santa Cruz water system. In the fall of 2017, the Water Department selected HDR to provide program management services to support implementation of the Program, and in December 2017, The City Council approved a five-year Master Services Agreement that is the basis for developing specific task or service orders. The Master Services Agreement was renewed for another five years as of July 1, 2022. This Annual Work Plan (AWP) summarizes the work completed in Service Order 11 and covers HDR’s anticipated program management activities, staffing, schedule, and fees in Service Order 12 for fiscal year 2027 (FY 2027), which covers the period of July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027.

Overview of Work Performed During FY 2026
Over the past fiscal year, the Program team of City and HDR staff engaged in Program implementation in the areas of design and planning project management, program administration and controls, planning and preliminary engineering, construction management, and other program support areas such as environmental and right of way services. Table 1 summarizes the Program wide and project level activities for fiscal year 2026.

Table 1 – Project Work Completed (Fiscal Year 2026)
No. Projects Phase Key Work Completed

1.5 Newell Creek Dam Inlet/Outlet
Replacement Project Closeout • Environmental mitigation

2.2.1 Newell Creek Pipeline
Felton/Graham Hill
Construction • Majority of pipeline installed and pressure tested • Trenchless railroad pipe crossing complete

2.2.3 Brackney Landslide Area Pipeline
Risk Reduction
Design • Decision to defer project to 2029 and combine with other pipeline segments

2.4 Intertie 1 – Santa Cruz-Scotts
Valley
Construction • Intertie piping installed and pressure tested • Tie-in to Scotts Valley water main
• Final paving and striping completed up to the Pump
Station site
• Pump Station concrete pad
• Substantial completion achieved per grant

3.1 Water Supply Augmentation Planning • Final Report for the Optimization Study submitted to DWR to fulfill SGMI grant requirements
• Final Water Supply Augmentation Implementation
Plan, including implementation of road maps
• Groundwater modeling for the Mid-County and Santa
Margarita Groundwater Basins, with focus on City
water supply infrastructure and incorporating transfers with SVWD
• Water supply availability analysis
• Developed cost-benefit analysis framework
• Collaboration with both Soquel Creek and Scotts Valley Water Districts on operational agreements for nearand long-term use of the respective interties.

26.63 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 2 of 19 No. Projects Phase Key Work Completed

3.3 ASR Planning Planning • Coordination of Mid-County Basin groundwater management
• ASR sampling plan and injection workflow flow chart
• Beltz 10 ASR pilot test work plan and CEQA Notice of
Exemption

3.3.1 Beltz 8 Design with Beltz 12
Upgrades
Beltz 8: Design
Beltz 12:

Construction
• Beltz 8:
o Completed final design and bid documents
• Beltz 12:
o Installed electrical conduits and duct banks
o Installed BASKI downhole flow control valve
and nitrogen gas system
o RWQCB ASR General Order permanent facilities
permit

3.3.3 Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR Construction • Awarded construction contract • Issued Notice to Begin Preconstruction Activities
• Preconstruction submittal reviews
• RWQCB ASR General Order permanent facilities
permit

3.3.4 Beltz 9 Upgrades for ASR Design • Issued RFP for Design Engineer • Awarded design contract and design kickoff

4.3 Graham Hill WTP Concrete Tanks
Replacement
Construction • Completed the construction of:
o Inlet structure
o Wash Water Pump Station
o Treated Water Tank disinfection
o Soil nail wall shotcrete
• Construction in progress
o Storm drain system
o Retaining wall along service road
o Grading around tanks

4.4 Graham Hill WTP Facility
Improvements Project
Design • Remobilized Design Build contractor
• Reviewing Draft GMP submission
• Updated Front End documents
• Issued request for pre-construction services
• Issued RFQ for Construction Manager and
Environmental Consultants

4.7 Beltz 12 Well Ammonia Removal Closeout • Construction complete. System fully installed, operational, and staff trained in its operation

6.1 University Tank No. 4 Rehab /
Replacement
Construction • U6 Pump Station roof replacement, fire hardening of the building, floor restoration and corroded pipe
replacement
• Surge tank installation and tie-in
• Bolted steel maintenance tank installation
• Misc. piping installation
N/A Asset Management Planning • Provided data management support to update the asset maintenance management system (AMMS)
database for projects in design and construction
phase including:
o Beltz 8 & 12
o Concrete Tanks Replacement
o FIP

26.64 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 3 of 19 No. Projects Phase Key Work Completed
o Newell Creek Inlet Outlet Replacement
o Beltz 12 Ammonia Removal
o Intertie 1 – Santa Cruz-Scotts Valley
Developing procedures for asset onboarding across active projects
N/A Program Wide Items All / Ongoing • Completion of project prioritization efforts, development of updated CIP plan and department
wide rollout
• Quality Management: triannual reviews and
reports
• Risk Management: quarterly project risk reviews
• Updates to Program Management Plan
o Construction Guidelines
o Environmental Program Management
o Invoicing
o Document Management
o Santa Cruz Water Program Map
o Delivery Org Chart
o Project Delivery Model
• Workforce development trainings including wildfire
and defensible space, baseline schedule review,
schedule workshop, system outage requests and
cross project schedule, PM refresher training,
shutdown lessons learned & spec update
workshop, shutdown lessons learned & internal
process workshop and environmental compliance
management workshop
• Continued implementation of O&M Liaison role to
support treatment projects and balance operations
resource limitations
• Program controls implementation: monthly schedule
updates and master format enhancement, cost
management system updates with monthly reporting,
document management, finance team support of
fiscal year budgeting
• Document management maintenance; Supported
SharePoint migration to City ownership
• Program safety reporting

26.65 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 4 of 19 Photo 1: Intertie 1 Santa Cruz Scotts Valley –
Valve installation for 12-inch pipeline
Photo 2: Intertie 1 Santa Cruz Scotts Valley –
Pipe installation
Photo 3: Intertie 1 Santa Cruz Scotts Valley –
Trenching for installation of pipe
Photo 5: Intertie 1 Santa Cruz Scotts Valley –
Pump Station concrete pour
Photo 4: Intertie 1 Santa Cruz Scotts Valley –
Rebar installation for Pump Station concrete pad
Photo 6: Intertie 1 Santa Cruz Scotts Valley –
Tapping sleeve and valve installation

26.66 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 5 of 19 Photo 7: Graham Hill WTP Concrete Tanks Replacement – Project Overview Photo 8: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Piping tee installation
Photo 9: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Testing for Field Element Control Box

26.67 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 6 of 19 Photo 10: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Treated Water Inlet Structure rebar installation
Photo 11: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Treated Water Inlet Structure
Photo 12: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Treated Water Inlet Structure wall pour
Photo 13: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Inlet Structure top slab and access complete

26.68 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 7 of 19 Photo 14: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Electrical conduit installation
Photo 15: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Installing electrical conduits at Treated Water Tank
Photo 16: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Treated Water Tank system handrail installation
Photo 17: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Washwater Pump Station and Tanks

26.69 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 8 of 19 Photo 18: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
Site inspection with DDW
Photo 19: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
42” Finished Water Disconnect – 36” Treated Water Tie-In (1 of 3) Photo 20: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
42” Finished Water Disconnect – 36” Treated Water Tie-In (2 of 3) Photo 20: GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement –
42” Finished Water Disconnect – 36” Treated Water Tie-In (3 of 3)

26.70 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 9 of 19 Photo 22: Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill –
Pipeline installation
Photo 23: Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill – Pipe jointing Photo 24: Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill –
Pipe and fitting installation on Graham Hill Rd.

Photo 26: Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill –
Pipe and fitting installation

Photo 25: Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill –
Trench preparation at Henry Cowell Redwoods State Park
Photo 27: Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill –
Preparing pipe for installation

26.71 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 10 of 19 Photo 29: Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill –
Pavement Restoration
Photo 28: Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill –
Pipe welding and jointing
Photo 30: University Tank 4 Rehab/Replacement –
U6 Pump Station Building at the U4 reservoir site
Photo 31: University Tank 4 Rehab/Replacement –
Installation of surge tank tee tie-in

26.72 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 11 of 19 Photo 32: University Tank 4 Rehab/Replacement –
Surge Tank installation
Photo 34: University Tank 4 Rehab/Replacement –
Application of interior pipe mortar to welded steel yard pipe Photo 33: University Tank 4 Rehab/Replacement –
Pipe welding inside the U6 PS building
Photo 35: University Tank 4 Rehab/Replacement –
New U4 reservoir isolation valve installation
Photo 36: Beltz 12 Well Ammonia Removal Phase 2 –
Installation of dosing pump skid
Photo 37: Beltz 12 Well Ammonia Removal Phase 2 –
Installation of 1,500 gallon hypochlorite storage tank

26.73 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 12 of 19 Photo 38: Beltz 12 Well Ammonia Removal Phase 2 –
Chlorine Generation System (CGS) installation
Photo 39: Beltz 12 Well Ammonia Removal Phase 2 –
Onsite CGS O&M training
Photo 40: Beltz 12 Upgrades for ASR –
BASKI downhole flow control valve installation (1 of 2) Photo 41: Beltz 12 Upgrades for ASR –
BASKI downhole flow control valve installation (2 of 2)

26.74 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 13 of 19 Photo 42: Beltz 12 Upgrades for ASR – Electrical conduit work Photo 43: Beltz 12 Upgrades for ASR – Electrical work on control panel

26.75 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 14 of 19 Overview of Planned Work During FY 2027
During FY 2027, the Santa Cruz Water Program team of City and HDR staff will continue to implement the Program Management Plan, an organizational framework with processes for managing and staffing individual capital projects that are at different stages of development. During FY 2027, projects will continue to progress from planning into design and from design into construction and through the construction phase. Table 2 lists the Program projects starting or ongoing in FY 2027 and divides them into their particular phase(s) of work: Planning Projects, Projects in Design and Projects in Construction.

Table 2 – Program and Project Work Planned by Phasea (Fiscal Year 2027) Program Wide
• Technical expert support and
deliverable reviews
• Quality management
implementation
• Design Review software
implementation – ongoing
support
• Program controls implementation:
schedule, cost, change management
• Document management
• Department finance support
• Risk management: quarterly reviews, risk
model update
• Program CM oversight
• Program Environmental Advisory
• General electrical staff support
• Program O&M Liaison
• Workforce development trainings
• Asset Management
• Constructability reviews
• Program communications support
Planning Projects Projects in Design Projects in Construction

3.1 - Water Supply Augmentation

3.3 - ASR Planning

6.3 - Pasatiempo Tanks Replacement
NCIP.002 - Main Replacements -
Engineering

3.3.4 - Beltz 9 Upgrades for ASR

4.8 - Beltz WTP Upgrades

6.3 - Pasatiempo Tanks Replacement

2.2.1 - Newell Creek Pipeline
Felton/Graham Hill

2.4 - Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz-Scotts Valley

3.3.1 - Beltz 8 & 12 Design with Beltz 12
Upgrades

3.3.3 - Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR

4.3 - Graham Hill WTP Concrete Tanks
Replacement

4.4 - Graham Hill WTP Facility
Improvements Project

4.7 - Beltz 12 Well Ammonia (PostConstruction Support)

6.1 - University Tank No. 4 Rehab /
Replacement
a) Projects may be shown twice if they transition between phases, for example from design to construction.

This AWP includes a wide range of services focused on progressing each of the projects forward. Table 3 summarizes the types of services for each of the three categories of services that HDR will be providing during FY 2027 as part of Service Order 12.

26.76 5/26/2026 Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Work Plan 15 of 19 Table 3 –Types of Services for each Project Phase (Fiscal Year 2027) HDR Planning Services HDR Design Management Services HDR Construction Services • Review and document existing
information and identify data gaps
• Conduct planning level studies to
define technical feasibility and cost
• Prepare reports, presentations, and
briefing materials to support
decision making processes and stage
gate meeting approvals
• Develop implementation and
sequencing plans and schedules for
recommendations
• Facilitate planning meetings and
workshops for Water Department
Staff to discuss alternatives and
coordinate with stakeholders
• Perform/support business case
evaluations and document
recommendations
• Support Water Department Staff in
the update and calibration of
hydraulic models
• Perform infrastructure condition
assessments to support planning.
• Assist the Department in financial
analysis associated with program
funding efforts
• Support the Department’s
implementation of asset
management system onboarding for
capital projects
• Augment the city staff by providing
PMs and project engineers for
various projects including Water
Supply Augmentation, Pasatiempo
Tanks Replacement, Main
Replacements and ASR Planning
• Assist in reviewing of planning
consultant deliverables
• Provide environmental advisory
support, program-wide
• Provide discipline specific support
including: general electrical
engineering, operations specialist,
structural, geotechnical,
environmental staff augmentation
support
• Support PMs in management of
consultants and alignment with
program reporting and processes
• Support implementation of design
management and cost estimating
guidelines
• Augment the City staff by providing
PMs and/or project engineers for
various projects including: Beltz 9
Upgrades for ASR, Newell Creek
Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill (Pump
Station), Beltz WTP Upgrades and
Pasatiempo Tanks Replacement
• Assist in reviewing consultant
deliverables and conducting cost
estimating reviews, as requested.
• Provide environmental compliance
management services
• Assist with other environmental
technical support, including CEQA,
NEPA, technical study, field surveys,
or permit application
• Support Department Staff in the
development and implementation
of communications and community
engagement plans
• Provide technical expert input as
requested
• Support ongoing implementation
and use of collaborative design
review software on projects
• Provide Construction Management
lead
• Implement Program Construction
Management Guidelines
• Implement Construction
Management software for new
construction projects
• Augment the City staff by providing
PMs and/or project engineers for
construction phase projects including:

Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham
Hill, GHWTP Facility Improvements
Project, Intertie 1- Santa Cruz-Scotts
Valley, Beltz 12 Upgrades for ASR,
Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR, Beltz 12
Well Ammonia Removal (post
construction support), and Concrete
Tanks Replacement
• Provide construction management,
resident engineer, O&M liaison,
document manager, lead or special
inspector(s), as required, for the
GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement,
GHWTP Facility Improvements
Project, University Tank No. 4
Rehab/Replacement and Intertie 1-
Santa Cruz-Scotts Valley
• Provide post construction start-up
commissioning and operations
support
• Provide workforce development
training in areas of Construction
Management
• Assist with environmental mitigation,
monitoring and/or procurement of
services
Figure 1 shows the schedule of activities planned for each project, with work broken down into several phases: planning, design, bidding, construction, and project close out.

26.77 5/26/2026 FY 2027 Annual Work Plan 16 of 19
Figure 1: Santa Cruz Water Program Master Program Schedule

26.78 5/26/2026 FY 2027 Annual Work Plan 17 of 19
Staffing
The major resources being provided through the HDR Program Management Contract involves staffing services. These services are necessary because, on average, the Water Department’s annual capital program expenditures are rising nearly five-fold over spending levels during the last decade. The Water Department’s Engineering Section currently includes around 12 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions supporting the capital program in various capacities, including vacant engineering positions. The staffing analysis completed in 2018 during the Program Validation effort estimated total staffing needs required to manage and support the Program projects in peak years at 20+ FTEs. Staff augmentation for project management (including project managers, engineers, but not including program administration or construction management, for example) is estimated at 11 FTEs for FY27.

The staffing augmentation plan for FY27 was developed to support the implementation plans and schedules for each Program project. The staffing plan integrates the Water Department’s available staff in Engineering and Operations and Maintenance and supplements resource needs with compatible HDR staff. A key focus of both City and HDR administrative and operating personnel who are part of the Program is the consistent and efficient delivery of project from planning through construction, while maintaining the Department’s ability to produce and deliver a reliable supply of high-quality drinking water to its customers throughout project construction. Achieving this goal requires ongoing planning and coordination by all members of the team.

Part of the ongoing work on the Program to date has been to identify, integrate, and maintain HDR Program team members. Table 4 identifies HDR key staff in each of the three major Service Order 12 work areas. Names may be duplicated due to support in multiple phases.

Table 4 – Key HDR Staffing for Planned Program Management Services (Fiscal Year 2027) HDR Planning Services HDR Design
Management Services
HDR Construction Services
Tracey Eden-Bishop
Jillian Brown
Lock Kwan
Ray Genato
Aneeshi Desai
Kelsey Kenel
Allan Scott
Jillian Brown
Aneeshi Desai
Kelsey Kenel
Lock Kwan
Phoenix Nguyen
Greg Bradshaw
Ray Genato
Pierre Gouley
Allison McReynolds
Ron Perkins
Jaime Burrola
Tom Richardson
Brian Watanabe
Doug Jones
Pierre Gouley
Sandie Goings
Lock Kwan
Ajmal Shams
Amir Samimi
Yihan Zhang
Morgan DeAngelis
Danielle Tannourji
Ali Hasan
Phil White
Ongoing Program management and administration will be led by Holly Burles (Program Manager), Brandon Hillis (Deputy Program Manager), Molly Owens (Controls Manager), and Sandie Goings (Document Management).

Implementation of the Santa Cruz Water Program also involves a range of ongoing administrative and quality control services including, for example:
• Monthly activities including cost and schedule tracking, risk management and quality assurance • Document management and SharePoint site maintenance and updates • Application and updates to the Program Management Plan, as well as the implementation of the program health and safety plan.

26.79 5/26/2026 FY 2027 Annual Work Plan 18 of 19
All personnel to support the Program are identified in writing and authorized by the City’s Program Director. The personnel and labor hours for the FY 2027 Work Plan represent the Program Team’s best understanding of the strategic, technical, and administrative requirements for delivering the planned services. Actual requirements may vary and the City and HDR will work together to adjust the staffing and distribution of labor hours within this AWP to maintain progress toward delivery of the Program.

Estimated Fees
Table 5 presents the FY 2027 HDR fees for services for the work to be done on each project during the coming year. The fee estimate is also presented by task and total hours as an attachment to Contract Amendment 2027-01.

Table 5 –Project Budget and Associated HDR Fee
# Project
HDR FY27
Service Order
Budget
Planning Design Bid Construction
2 - NCIP.002 Main Replacements-Engineering $76,680 X

2.2.1 Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/Graham Hill $414,044 X

2.4 Intertie 1 - Santa Cruz - Scott's Valley $247,101 X

3.1 Water Supply Augmentation $656,178 X

3.3 ASR Planning $453,225 X

3.3.1 Beltz 8 & 12 Design with Beltz 12 Upgrades $52,774 X

3.3.3 Beltz 8 Upgrades for ASR $157,925 X

3.3.4 Beltz 9 Upgrades for ASR $396,653 X

4.3 GHWTP Concrete Tanks Replacement $462,826 X

4.4 GHWTP Facility Improvements Project $2,301,742 X

4.7 Beltz 12 Well Ammonia Removal $52,337 X

4.8 Beltz WTP Upgrades $262,988 X

6.1 University Tank No. 4 Rehab/Replacement $485,458 X

6.3 Pasatiempo Tanks Replacement $79,879 X X

6.4 Salmonid Habitat Conservation Plan Consultation $3,016 Admin Program Admin General a $1,779,859
Other Other Program-Wide Work b $731,641
AM Asset Management $130,928
Total HDR FY27 Service Order 12 Budget $8,745,255
a Includes General Program Administration, Risk Management, Document Management, Training/Workforce Development, Quality Assurance Implementation, Program Controls (General, Schedule, Cost/Estimating and Change Management), Annual Work Plan, Workforce Development Trainings, Program staffing and resource management, Invoice preparation. b Includes Staff Augmentation (Planning & Design Management, Project Management, Project Engineering support, Environmental Leads, Environmental Advisory, Electrical support, Operations support), Design Review Software Implementation, General Construction Management oversight, Communication & Public Outreach, As-Needed project support not included in CIP, Project Funding, and Program Technical (general).

26.80 5/26/2026 FY 2027 Annual Work Plan 19 of 19
Funding Source:

Funding for all activities planned as part of Service Order 12, including the program management fee, is included in the Water Department’s FY 2027 Capital Investment Program. Additional work planned for FY 2027 includes continuation of minimal activities pre-authorized and funded within the prior Service Order 11. As many of the projects included in Water Program are large and will occur over multiple years, the Department developed the 2021 Long Range Financial Plan to identify the steps needed to fund these investments in rehabilitating or replacing existing water system infrastructure and developing a supplemental supply to improve the reliability of the Santa Cruz water system. That plan was approved by the City Council on April 6, 2021 and is guiding the Department’s approach to planning for and funding this more than decade long capital reinvestment cycle.

The Water Department executed low-interest loans through the State Revolving Fund (SRF) for: Newell Creek Inlet/Outlet, Concrete Tanks and construction of Newell Creek Pipeline Felton/GHWTP, and are in progress on executing a new loan for FIP. The Department also executed a Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) loan for partial funding for projects: planning and design for Newell Creek Pipeline – Felton/GHWTP, planning and design of the Water Supply Augmentation project, FIP, any ASR projects, and U4. Both the State (SRF) and Federal (WIFIA) loan programs reimburse for design, construction, and program management costs-to implement projects. Intertie has obtained a DWR grant through Scotts Valley Water District. Additionally, the City has secured Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) grant funding for the groundwater basin ASR projects (Beltz 8 & 12 Design with Beltz 12 Upgrades) and federal congressional grants for the Newell Creek Pipeline – Felton/GHWTP and U4. The City continues to seek grant opportunities for the program.

26.81 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 06/03/2026
AGENDA OF: 06/23/2026
DEPARTMENT: Economic Development
SUBJECT: Cooperative Retail Management Business Real Property Improvement District Assessments for FY 2027 (ED)
LOCATION: District 4
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to adopt a resolution confirming the Cooperative Retail Management Business Real Property Improvement District FY 2026/2027 Annual Report/Plan and levying Cooperative Retail Management Business Real Property Improvement District Assessments for FY 2027.

BACKGROUND: On February 8, 1994 the City Council adopted Ordinance 94-06 adding Chapter 5.06 to the Santa Cruz Municipal Code establishing the Cooperative Retail Management (CRM) Business Real Property Improvement District (District) and levying assessments on the properties along Pacific Avenue pursuant to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 for the purpose of establishing a Downtown Hospitality Program. The City Council approved the Downtown Management Corporation (DMC) as an advisory board to make recommendations on the expenditure of revenues collected from the assessment. In 1996, the area was expanded to include side streets between Cedar and Front Streets and some downtown alleyways including Lincoln-Cathcart, Pacific-Front, Pearl Alley, Plaza Lane, Locust Lane, Commerce Lane, Elm Lane, and Birch Lane. In 2023, the area was expanded to include all real property used for commercial or business purposes on parcels with street frontage on Cedar Street, Front Street, the south side of Mission Street and Water Street, and the north side of Laurel Street.

DISCUSSION: On June 9, 2026, the City Council approved the DMC Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/2027 Annual Report/Plan and adopted a resolution stating its intention to levy business improvement assessments for FY 2027.

The assessments are based upon the linear foot frontage and lot size and building size of the real property used for commercial or business purposes, including rental residential, within the CRM District.

27.1 Each parcel’s assessment is calculated as follows:

Linear Feet Frontage x Linear Feet Frontage Rate = Linear Footage Assessment Lot Area Square Footage x Lot Area Square Footage Rate = Lot Assessment Building Square Footage x Building Square Footage Rate = Building Assessment Linear Footage Assessment + Lot Assessment + Building Assessment = Annual Assessment
The CRM assessment formula allows the DMC to recommend an annual adjustment in the rate based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The annual CPI adjustment as of February 2026 is

2.5%, therefore the rates per square foot will increase as follows:

FY 2026 Rates

SERVICE
ZONE
Comm Bldg
SF
Assessment
Res Bldg SF
Assessment
Parcel SF
Assessment
Pacific Ave
Frontage
Assessment
All Other
Frontage
Assessment
Pacific Ave
Parcels $0.0755 $0.0755 $0.0853 $7.4028 $5.5521
All Other
Parcels $0.0566 $0.0566 $0.0640 $0.0000 $5.5521
FY 2027 Rates

SERVICE
ZONE
Comm Bldg
SF
Assessment
Res Bldg SF
Assessment
Parcel SF
Assessment
Pacific Ave
Frontage
Assessment
All Other
Frontage
Assessment
Pacific Ave
Parcels
$0.0773 $0.0773 $0.0874 $7.5879 $5.6909
All Other
Parcels
$0.0580 $0.0580 $0.0656 $0.0000 $5.6909
The Resolution of Intention was published in the Santa Cruz Sentinel and mailed to affected property owners as required by State law.

At the public hearing portion of this meeting, City Council shall hear and consider written and oral protests pertaining to the proposed levy of assessments, the amount of the proposed assessments, the proposed improvements and activities to be funded with the revenues derived from the proposed levy of assessments, and/or the proposed boundaries of the District in accordance with State & Highways Code Sections 36524 and 36525.

At the conclusion of the public hearing, absent the receipt of written and oral protests from a majority of property owners, City Council is requested to adopt a resolution confirming the DMC's plan, as approved by the City Council on June 9, 2026 and levying assessments for FY 2027.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) DETERMINATION: The proposed Council action is not a “project” under CEQA because it does not have the potential to cause a physical change in the environment directly or indirectly.

27.2 HEALTH IN ALL POLICIES (HiAP): The proposed City Council action and services provided by the DMC through the annual workplan align with the HiAP goals of equity, community connectedness, and increased economic vitality in the CRM District.

FISCAL IMPACT:

1. The recommendation in this report impacts the General Fund: Yes

2. This recommendation requires a budget adjustment: No

3. The recommendation creates an on-going expenditure commitment: Yes FISCAL IMPACT DESCRIPTION: The City owns property within the boundaries of the District. The assessment for City properties in FY 2027 is $89,191.91. The General Fund (Fund 101), Parking Fund (Fund 741) and Housing Successor (Fund 281) contribute to the assessments and funding for the assessments has been included in the FY 2027.

Prepared By:

Rebecca Unitt
Economic Development
Manager
Submitted By:

Bonnie Lipscomb
Deputy City Manager
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

27.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ CONFIRMING THE FISCAL YEAR 2027 COOPERATIVE RETAIL MANAGEMENT BUSINESS REAL

PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS AND THE FISCAL YEAR 2026/2027 ANNUAL REPORT/PLAN FOR THE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Downtown Management Corporation has prepared a report to the City of Santa Cruz for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/2027 pertaining to the business improvement area assessments for the Cooperative Retail Management Business Real Property Improvement District (the "District") under California Streets and Highways Code Sections 36533 and 36541 and Santa Cruz Municipal Code Chapter 5.06; and
WHEREAS, that report was filed with the City Clerk on June 9, 2026; and WHEREAS, on June 9, 2026 the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-30,660 stating its intention to levy business improvement assessments for FY 2027; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the City Council's June 9, 2026 resolution of intention, the City Council, on June 23, 2026 in accordance with California Streets and Highways Code Section 36535, held a public hearing as provided for in Streets and Highways Code Sections 36524 and 36525 at which time it considered the annual report, and the levy of business improvement assessments for FY 2027.

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

1. The FY 2027 Annual Report/Plan for the Cooperative Retail Management Business Real Property Improvement District Area filed by the Downtown Management Corporation of Santa Cruz, a California nonprofit corporation ("DMC"), with the City Clerk on June 9, 2026 is hereby confirmed.

2. The adoption of this resolution shall constitute the FY 2027 levy of assessment provided for in Chapter 5.06 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code pertaining to the downtown business improvement area zone and rate of the Cooperative Retail Management business real property improvement assessments.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

27.4 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 06/04/2026
AGENDA OF: 06/23/2026
DEPARTMENT: City Manager/Community Development/City Council SUBJECT: 2nd Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No. 2026-12 and Ordinance No. 2026-13 Amending the Santa Cruz Municipal Code Title 24, Zoning, Related to Protections Against On-Shore Facilities Supporting Off-Shore Oil and Gas Drilling and Deep-Sea Mining and Exploration, and Corresponding Changes to the City’s Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan (CM/CD/CN)
LOCATION: Citywide
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Adopt Ordinance No. 2026-12 adding Section 24.06.093 to Chapter 24.06 – Zoning Map and Text Amendments and amending Sections 24.06.090 and 24.10.1620 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (SCMC) related to adding protections against on-shore facilities supporting offshore oil and gas drilling and deep-sea mining exploration and development; 2) Adopt Ordinance No. 2026-13 amending the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan (LCP IP) and amending Section 24.10.1525 of the SCMC to add protections against on-shore facilities supporting deep-sea mining exploration and development; and 3) Adopt a resolution directing staff to submit Ordinance No. 2026-13 to the California Coastal Commission.

BACKGROUND: The City of Santa Cruz (City) is a global leader in environmental protection and sustainability initiatives. For decades, the City has led regional initiatives to prevent extractive, polluting activities off California’s Central Coast that pose significant risk to coastal communities like Santa Cruz.

In the wake of the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill, local jurisdictions and activists united to prevent oil and gas drilling along the coast of California. These efforts helped create the Local Government Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Coordination Program in 1980, which succeeded in creating a “Blue Wall” in opposition to the U.S. Department of the Interior’s proposed lease sale of 15 areas in the OCS for oil and gas drilling.

28.1 In November, 1985, 82% of Santa Cruz City voters approved Measure A, codified in the SCMC by Ordinance No. 85-70, expressing local opposition to off-shore oil and gas drilling and preventing zoning changes to accommodate facilities that would support off-shore oil and gas drilling without a vote of the people. The City also directed staff to dedicate resources to education on the topic. The City entered into contract with Save Our Shores to inform other coastal communities trying to pass similar laws. Through this contract, Dan Haifley was hired to conduct outreach with community groups and government bodies along the California coast. As part of a regional effort, 26 communities took action against offshore drilling before an oil industry lawsuit came forward against 13 of those communities. That lawsuit halted momentum, but local governments ultimately prevailed in the courts. In 2020 a 27th ordinance was approved in Marin County; together they make up the Blue Wall covering most of the state’s coastline.

Continuing the City’s leadership in this area, on September 30, 2025, Mayor Keeley, Vice Mayor Kalantari-Johnson, and Councilmember Renee Golder, brought forward an initiative to further strengthen Opposition to Offshore Oil Drilling. At that meeting the City Council committed to supporting local efforts to oppose off-shore drilling and deep-sea mining in our region and directed staff to work in collaboration with the County and engage in coordinated opposition of current efforts by the federal administration to overturn protections of our local marine environment. This work included reinvigorating the Local Government OCS Coordination Program and contracting with Save Our Shores, the marine conservation organization instrumental in creating the “Blue Wall” in the 1980s, to help lead policy efforts to strengthen local protections against the federal OCS leasing proposal and other changes that threaten the environmental and economic resiliency of coastal Santa Cruz.

Council submitted various rounds of comment and letters of opposition to the federal administration's proposed 11th National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing program between December 2025 and March 2026. Vice Mayor Kalantari-Johnson also serves on the League of Cities, Coastal Cities Leadership Committee, to further amplify the importance of coordinated local and regional opposition to proposed marine protection rollbacks.

On, June 6, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, after which Council approved the introduction and first reading of Ordinance Nos. 2026-12 and 2026-13.

DISCUSSION: Staff is now returning to the City Council for a second reading and final adoption of Ordinance Nos. 2026-12 and 2026-13, as well as consideration of a resolution directing staff to submit Ordinance No. 2026-13 to the California Coastal Commission.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) DETERMINATION: The proposed amendments are categorically exempt from CEQA review pursuant to the Class 7 Exemption (14 CCR § 15307) – Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources and the Class 8 Exemption (14 CCR § 15308) – Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment, as the proposed ordinances are intended to ensure the maintenance of natural resources and the protection of the environment through protection against potential oil or trailing spills, leaks, and other harmful impacts from on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas drilling and deep-sea mining and exploration that could disrupt the biological productivity of coastal waters and conditions required to sustain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long-term commercial, recreational, scientific, and educational purposes. None of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions (14 CCR § 15300.2) apply since there is no expected cumulative impact from prohibiting new on28.2 shore facilities as the action would simply maintain the status quo, there are no unusual circumstances related to prohibiting on-shore facilities that would create a significant effect on the environment, prohibiting new on-shore facilities would not impact any scenic highway, the prohibition of on-shore facilities would not affect hazardous waste sites, and the prohibition would not cause a substantial adverse change in any historical resource. The amendments are also exempt under the Common Sense Exemption (14 CCR § 15061(b)(3)) as it can be seen with certainty that prohibiting on-shore facilities related to off-shore oil and gas drilling and deep-sea mining and exploration will maintain the status quo, and there is no possibility of a significant negative effect on the environment.

HEALTH IN ALL POLICIES (HiAP): The proposed amendments support the sustainability pillar of HiAP by affirming the City’s commitment to greenhouse gas emissions mitigation by discouraging extractive activities along California’s Central Coast that pose significant environmental hazards to the surrounding ecosystems while also perpetuating a reliance on fossil fuels and non-renewable resources. The proposed action also supports the public health pillar of HiAP. Allowing the development of on-shore facilities that support oil and gas drilling and DSM within the City could expose residents to harmful impacts of the mineral extraction processes, threaten the health of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, and pose risks to coastal recreation opportunities along the City’s coastline. The proposed amendments also support the equity pillar of HiAP by adding protections that aim to preserve continued coastal recreation access for all community members.

FISCAL IMPACT:

1. The recommendation in this report impacts the General Fund: No

2. This recommendation requires a budget adjustment: No

3. The recommendation creates an on-going expenditure commitment: No FISCAL IMPACT DESCRIPTION: These amendments have no future impact on the General Fund, nor do they create an on-going expenditure commitment. The appropriation of funds to support the development, analysis, and coordination of regional efforts regarding the proposed ordinances was absorbed by the City Manager’s operating budget in Fiscal Year 2026. In that sense, the General Fund impact associated with the proposed ordinance has already been approved by City Council, and the item before Council today represents a return on that expenditure.

Prepared By:

William Kelley
Management Analyst
Akana Jayewardene
Senior Planner
Submitted By:

Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson,
Vice Mayor, District 3
Scott Newsome
Councilmember, District 4
Renee Golder
Councilmember, District 6
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2026-12 - OFF-SHORE OIL AND GAS DRILLING AND DEEP-SEA MINING AND EXPLORATION - LCP (CD).DOCX

28.3 2. 2026-13 - OFF-SHORE OIL AND GAS DRILLING AND DEEP-SEA MINING AND EXPLORATION - NON-LCP (CD).DOCX

3. RESOLUTION.DOCX

28.4 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 24.10.1525 – PROHIBITED USES, PROHIBITING THE

DEVELOPMENT OF ON-SHORE FACILITIES SUPPORTING DEEP-SEA MINING EXPLORATION & DEVELOPMENT WITHIN CERTAIN LAND USE DISTRICTS.

SECTION 24.10.1525 IS PART OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (LCP IP) AND WILL REQUIRE APPROVAL BY THE

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION PRIOR TO TAKING EFFECT INSIDE THE COASTAL ZONE. (CEQA: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO CLASS 7 EXEMPTION (14 CCR § 15307); CLASS 8 EXEMPTION (14 CCR § 15308); AND THE COMMONSENSE EXEMPTION (14 CCR § 15061(B)(3)))
WHEREAS, the four-mile portion of the California coastline within the boundaries of the City of Santa Cruz (the “City”) is a precious natural resource which is valuable to the People of the City, the State of California, and the Nation; and
WHEREAS, the City has authority under the U.S. Constitution, the California Constitution, and State law, through its City Council, to use its police powers to enact legislative measures regulating land use within the City’s geographical jurisdiction in the interest of public health, safety, environment, and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City bases its coastal management decisions on the policies and priorities in the California Coastal Act, and conflicts are resolved in a manner which on balance is the most protective of significant coastal resources; and
WHEREAS, there have been several times in the recent past wherein the waters off of the City’s coastline have been considered for off-shore development of oil and gas resources and deepsea mineral extraction; and WHEREAS, in the 1980s, the United States’ Department of the Interior launched a campaign to “unleash” American energy through the then USGS Conservation Division, opening wide areas off of America’s coast to leasing for oil and gas drilling; and WHEREAS, in 1985, and in an effort to create a “blue wall” of zoning prohibitions against these proposed area leases, a majority of the voters from the City approved Measure A, requiring voter approval before the City could make any zoning changes that would permit the construction of on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas drilling efforts (“Measure A”); and WHEREAS, Measure A was codified into the City Code as Santa Cruz Municipal Code (SCMC) Section 24.06.090; and
WHEREAS, the City later passed ordinances prohibiting the refinery of petroleum products or other industrial activities in support of off-shore oil drilling in General Industrial

28.5 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12
2 Districts (SCMC 24.10.1525) and in General Industrial Districts/Performance Districts (SCMC

24.10.1620); and
WHEREAS, in 2025, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (“BOEM”) initiated an overhaul of the United States’ off-shore drilling policy as the “Unleashing American Energy” initiative, pursuant to the proposed 11th National Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing Program (the “Program”); and
WHEREAS, in September 2022, the State of California enacted the California Seabed Mining Prevention Act, banning new oil and gas leasing and seabed mining in state waters due to unacceptably high risk of harm to the marine environment and the public interest; and WHEREAS, the health, safety, environment, economy, and general welfare of the City’s coastline and local communities, including but not limited to the County of Santa Cruz more broadly, could be threatened both directly and indirectly by proposals for on-shore support facilities, including those proposed by the Program, intended to support the off-shore development of oil and gas resources and deep-sea mineral extraction, including but not limited to:

1. On-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas development and deep-sea mining could substantially adversely affect the many significant coastal resources located within the City of Santa Cruz:
a. The City of Santa Cruz’s coastline is highly scenic and central to the coastal character of the town. The City has long protected the scenic and visual qualities of its coastal areas by siting development to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas and to minimize the alteration of natural land forms. For example, the City prohibited development of Lighthouse Field through the voterapproved Measure D (1974). And, in 1992, the City approved its first Local Coastal Plan prioritizing habitat protection, public access, and viewsheds as vital community resources. Siting an on-shore facility in the City’s coastal zone could disrupt the scenic and visual qualities the City has worked hard to protect. b. The City is home to numerous tourist destinations, including the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk, Wharf, world-renowned surf breaks, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Exploration Center, two City beaches (Main Beach and Cowell Beach), three State Beaches (Natural Bridges State Beach, Seabright State Beach, and Lighthouse Field State Beach), and the Santa Cruz Harbor. The City provides access to numerous public beaches, beach bluffs, and coastal trails. It relies on tourism, including over 1 million annual visitors to the Wharf alone, as a significant part of its economy. On-shore support facilities could detract from the tourist experience in the City, both visually and by limiting the available coastal areas for tourists to visit.
c. The construction and operation of on-shore support facilities in the City could impede public access to the coastline. Oil or tailings spills from on-shore support facilities could cut off public access to the beach and ocean for months.

28.6 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12
3 d. The California Coastal Act requires that valuable marine resources in the City be maintained and enhanced. These marine resources could be impaired by the construction or operation of on-shore support facilities by increasing the risk of oil spills and leaks from facilities.
e. An on-shore facility and its risks of spills and leaks could disrupt the biological productivity of coastal waters and conditions required to sustain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long-term commercial, recreational, scientific, and educational purposes. Operations from on-shore facilities could also impair state marine protected areas, the Natural Bridges State Marine Reserve, and sections of the 6,094 square mile Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary - all in close proximity to the City.
f. The Monterey Bay region is home to over 500 fish species, 90 species of seabird, and 30 species of marine mammals. The City is home to resident and transitory populations of blue whale, humpback whale, southern sea otter, leatherback sea turtle, snowy plover, coho salmon, and steelhead trout, all of whom are threatened or endangered. A portion of these species’ habitats are found along the City’s coastline; oil spills and leaks from new on-shore facilities on the coast could destroy that habitat and threaten the existence of the species. g. Acres of environmentally sensitive habitat – including sandy beaches, coastal bluffs and marine terraces, kelp forests, estuaries, and coastal dunes and lagoons – are found along the City of Santa Cruz’s coastline. Building an on-shore facility could directly destroy the habitat, as well as indirectly affect its long-term health. h. The City has a vibrant and economically and culturally important commercial fishing sector: commercial fish catch from all California National Marine Sanctuaries (which includes Santa Cruz) generated over $69 million in annual revenue from 2010-2012 with Dungeness crab, squid, salmon, urchin, halibut, and groundfish playing important roles. The City has devoted significant space to serving those industries and has a strong interest in supporting the economic wellbeing of this ocean-dependent sector. On-shore facilities such as pipelines, tankers, and tailing ponds located within the coastal zone could take up valuable harbor space and substantially interfere with this industry. i. Significant harbor space exists at the Santa Cruz Harbor to serve boating industries, which houses 800 permanent vessel slips for commercial, recreational, and research users and serving as a hub for boating, fishing charters, and whale watching. Public launching facilities and additional berthing space in the Harbor encourage increased recreational boating use in adjacent coastal waters. The City prioritizes limiting non-water-dependent land uses – such as on-shore support facilities – that could congest access corridors and preclude boating support facilities. j. The City’s coast is internationally recognized for its surf culture, with 13 surf breaks along a 4-mile stretch from Natural Bridges State Beach to the Santa Cruz

28.7 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12
4 Harbor catering to all skill levels. Important surf breaks include Steamer Lane, Cowells, Indicators, and Middle Peak, among others. Nearly 800,000 annual surf visits occur in Santa Cruz County, generating almost $200 million yearly for the greater Santa Cruz area. This vital ocean-oriented recreational activity cannot readily be provided at inland water areas. The City’s residents, as well as tourists who travel to participate, may be deprived of this activity if an on-shore support facility is built.
k. There are numerous significant archaeological or paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer located on or near the City’s coast. Key resources include ancient Native American shell mounds, coastal terrace sites dating back thousands of years (such as the Sand Hill Bluff just north of City limits and extensive marine fossils associated with local manifestations of the Purisima Formation), Santa Cruz Mudstone, and Santa Margarita Sandstone. These resources are culturally and historically valuable and could be irreparably harmed if on-shore support facilities were constructed in their vicinity. l. The City’s existing municipal infrastructure is inadequate to support on-shore facilities. For example, State Highway Route 1 services the City; the section at the Fishhook is narrow, winding, and heavily congested with traffic on an ongoing basis. Additionally, the City does not have oil spill containment technologies in the event of a pipeline leak; the nearby Santa Cruz Harbor cannot handle tankers and other large vessels; and local City streets are not amenable to the large trucks needed to service on-shore facilities to transport oil or mineral resources out of the City.

2. The City of Santa Cruz has unique characteristics that could make it particularly unsuitable for siting on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas development and deep-sea mining:
a. The City of Santa Cruz experiences extreme winter storms, including atmospheric rivers that regularly result in local flooding, including of the San Lorenzo River and associated watershed, and destructive coastal wave events, including wave overtopping of West Cliff Drive, that may make on-shore operations hazardous and at risk of creating an oil spill or leak.
b. The City is a seismically hazardous area, located near the San Andreas and San Gregorio Faults and home to the massive 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake that destroyed or damaged 40 buildings and killed six people. Because the City is at a higher risk for earthquakes, this has the potential to rupture pipelines or disrupt other on-shore facilities.
c. The coastline of the City has suffered from high erosion rates. Substantial episodic and seasonal coastal erosion occurs along developed bluffs and sandy beaches along with slower long term erosion. Areas of particular concern include West Cliff Drive and Main Beach. Drivers of erosion include accelerating sea level rise, wave

28.8 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12
5 energy, and extreme winter storms exacerbated by climate change. This would put an on-shore facility located on the coast at great risk of an oil spill or leak.

3. The construction and operation of on-shore support facilities could create many hazards and risks threatening the public health, safety, environment, and general welfare of the City of Santa Cruz:
a. On-shore support facilities can create the risk of spills or leaks, such as the spill experienced on Refugio State Beach in 2015, in which 140,000 gallons of oil spilled and spread over 150 miles of the California coast. The spill led to the closure of miles of beaches and 130 square miles of fishing grounds and killed hundreds of birds, fish, and marine mammals. Oil spills can have numerous adverse effects, including: degradation of sensitive marine environments; contamination of beaches and other recreational areas; reduction in property values; decrease in tourism; long-term impairment of water-dependent industries, such as fishing; and acute human health effects, such as skin and eye irritation, breathing problems, nausea and vomiting, and others.
b. On-shore support facilities can emit and transport hazardous and toxic air pollutants, such as:
i. Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene. Short-term exposure to these chemicals can cause drowsiness, dizziness, nausea, depression, fatigue, and eye, skin, and respiratory tract irritation; long-term exposure can result in respiratory effects, damage to the central nervous system, kidneys, and liver, and developmental effects (such as birth defects). Benzene is also a known human carcinogen and has been linked to leukemia. ii. Particulate matter (PM). Exposure can result in heart attacks, irregular heartbeats, asthma, decreased lung function, increased respiratory symptoms, and premature death in people with heart or lung disease. PM can also stain and damage stone and other materials, including culturally or historically valuable objects such as statues and monuments, as well as harm sensitive ecosystems by contributing to acid rain and nutrient depletion. iii. Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Short-term exposure can result in irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat, headache, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, coughing, difficulty breathing, and permanent damage to the central nervous system. iv. Carbon monoxide (CO). Short-term exposure can result in headache, dizziness, vomiting, nausea, unconsciousness, and death. v. Nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides (SOx). Short-term exposure can aggravate respiratory diseases, particularly asthma, leading to respiratory symptoms such as coughing, wheezing or difficulty breathing. Long-term exposure may contribute to the development of asthma and potentially

28.9 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12
6 increase susceptibility to respiratory infections. NOx and SOx also contribute to acid rain, and NOx contributes to nutrient pollution in coastal waters.
c. On-shore support facilities for deep-sea minerals also raise significant concerns about radioactive waste and dust. Scientific studies have revealed that polymetallic nodules contain high concentrations of radioactive materials. During processing, as nodules are crushed, small particles may be distributed into the air, posing radiological hazards to human health. Furthermore, residual products from mining slurry—a mixture of seawater, sediment, and nodule fines—also pose significant risk if discharged back into the ocean. Radioactive particles may be ingested by marine organisms, introducing radiation into the food web that may be ingested by people. These public health risks are especially concerning given the limited regulatory frameworks and scientific understanding governing radioactive byproducts from deep-sea mining operations.
d. On-shore support facilities are also potential contributors to groundwater and surface water pollution. For example, some facilities use deep-injection wells to dispose of wastewater that may contain oil residuals, chemicals, and other hazardous wastes, which can contaminate aquifers and groundwater. e. Noisy helicopter and commercial street traffic and other nuisances like light pollution from 24-hour facilities could be significant irritants to the City’s residents.

4. The City of Santa Cruz has considered the national energy interest and found that it already significantly supports national energy needs:
a. The City of Santa Cruz has consistently committed to advancing renewable energy systems (especially distributed solar), green building standards, sourcing green energy, reducing fossil fuel demand, and protecting economically and environmentally critical coastal resources, all of which aligns with long-term national energy strategies moving away from reliance on fossil fuels and fossil fuel extraction.
b. The City of Santa Cruz has fully committed to California’s prioritization of a just decarbonization transition in a responsible way. The City of Santa Cruz’s strategy to rapidly achieve a just decarbonization transition is through its Climate Action Plan 2030, which includes building codes that incentivize electrification and require deep decarbonization, sourcing 97% of its electricity city-wide from Central Coast Community Energy (which will provide 100% renewable electricity by 2030), prioritizing electric vehicles, public transit and active transportation, and supporting community scale distributed renewable energy systems.

WHEREAS, the City wishes for the voters of the City of Santa Cruz to retain the final authority on whether to allow on-shore support facilities for all off-shore oil and gas development and deep-sea mining, and not just on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas drilling as currently specified in the Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section 24.06.090; and

28.10 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12
7 WHEREAS, at its May 7, 2026 meeting, the City Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments to Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code and found that the public necessity, the general community welfare, and good zoning practice shall be served and furthered; and that the proposed amendments are in general conformance with the principles, policies, and land use designations set forth in the General Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and any adopted area or specific plan as proposed to be amended; and
WHEREAS, at its May 7, 2026 meeting, the Santa Cruz Planning Commission considered the modifications to the Santa Cruz Municipal Code as modifications to the Local Coastal Program and found that (1) the proposed amendments are deemed to be in the public interest; (2) the proposed General Plan and/or Local Coastal Program amendments are consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and LCP and any implementation programs that may be affected; (3) the potential impacts of the proposed amendments have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and (4) the proposed amendments have been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, at its May 7, 2026 meeting, the City Planning Commission passed a motion that recommended the City Council approve the determination under the California Environmental Quality Act and approve the proposed amendments to Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City of Santa Cruz as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the above recitals are true and correct and are adopted and incorporated herein by reference as findings.

SECTION 2. Section 24.10.1525 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

1. Any manufacturing use involving the primary production of products from new materials found to be incompatible with the neighborhood or the city as a whole based on noise, odor, air quality or other adverse environmental impact shall be prohibited.

2. No use which either produces or utilizes asbestos in any manufacturing process shall be permitted.

3. Refinery of petroleum products or other industrial activities in support of off-shore drilling or deep-sea mining, as defined in Section 24.06.093, shall not be permitted.

4. Repeal or amendment of subsection 3 shall be subject to the requirements of other applicable portions of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code, including but not limited to Sections

24.06.090 and 24.06.093.

28.11 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12
8 SECTION 3. Intention and Interpretation of Ordinance

1. Sections 2 and 3 of this Ordinance are intended and shall be interpreted to be additive to and complement Santa Cruz Municipal Code section 24.06.090, which was enacted by a vote of the people on November 5, 1985 via Ordinance 85-70.

2. Nothing in this Ordinance shall apply to prohibit any person or entity from exercising a vested right, obtained pursuant to State or local law, as of the effective date of this Ordinance.

3. The provisions of this Ordinance shall not be applicable to the extent they violate the constitution or laws of the United States or the State of California.

4. If any section, sentence, clause, phrase, or part of this Ordinance is held unconstitutional or invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance shall be given full effect consistent with the intent and purpose of the Ordinance.

SECTION 4. The City Council finds and determines that the adoption of this ordinance is considered a “project” under California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 15378(a)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, typically subject to environmental review. The City Council finds that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review, pursuant to: Class 7 Exemption (14 CCR § 15307) – Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources, as the proposed ordinance intends to ensure the maintenance of a natural resource; Class 8 Exemption (14 CCR § 15308) – Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment, as the proposed ordinance intends to ensure the protection of the environment; and the Common Sense Exemption (14 CCR § 15061(b)(3)) as it can be seen with certainty that prohibiting on-shore facilities related to off-shore oil and gas drilling and deep-sea mining and exploration will maintain the status quo, and there is no possibility of a significant negative effect on the environment.

SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days after final adoption outside of the Coastal Zone. Within the Coastal Zone, this ordinance shall take effect and be in full force after approval by the California Coastal Commission, but no earlier than thirty (30) days after final adoption.

28.12 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12
9 PASSED FOR PUBLICATION this 9th day of June, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Trigueiro, Brunner, Newsome, Golder, O’Hara; Vice Mayor Kalantari-Johnson; Mayor Keeley.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
PASSED FOR FINAL ADOPTION this 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
This is to certify that the above and
foregoing document is the original
of Ordinance No. 2026-12 and that
it has been published or posted in
accordance with the Charter of the
City of Santa Cruz.
________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

28.13 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 24.06 – ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS, SECTION 24.06.090 – SUPPORT FACILITIES FOR OFF-SHORE OIL AND GAS DRILLING – SUBMISSION TO THE ELECTORATE, AND SECTION 24.10.1620 – PROHIBITED

USES, REQUIRING VOTER APPROVAL FOR ON-SHORE FACILITIES SUPPORTING

OFF-SHORE OIL & GAS OR DEEP-SEA MINING EXPLORATION & DEVELOPMENT

AND FURTHER PROHIBITING THE DEVELOPMENT OF ON-SHORE FACILITIES

SUPPORTING DEEP-SEA MINING EXPLORATION & DEVELOPMENT WITHIN CERTAIN LAND USE DISTRICTS. (CEQA: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO CLASS 7 EXEMPTION (14 CCR § 15307); CLASS 8 EXEMPTION (14 CCR § 15308); AND THE COMMONSENSE EXEMPTION (14 CCR § 15061(B)(3)))
WHEREAS, the four-mile portion of the California coastline within the boundaries of the City of Santa Cruz (the “City”) is a precious natural resource which is valuable to the People of the City, the State of California, and the Nation; and
WHEREAS, the City has authority under the U.S. Constitution, the California Constitution, and State law, through its City Council, to use its police powers to enact legislative measures regulating land use within the City’s geographical jurisdiction in the interest of public health, safety, environment, and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City bases its coastal management decisions on the policies and priorities in the California Coastal Act, and conflicts are resolved in a manner which on balance is the most protective of significant coastal resources; and
WHEREAS, there have been several times in the recent past wherein the waters off of the City’s coastline have been considered for off-shore development of oil and gas resources and deepsea mineral extraction; and WHEREAS, in the 1980s, the United States’ Department of the Interior launched a campaign to “unleash” American energy through the then USGS Conservation Division, opening wide areas off of America’s coast to leasing for oil and gas drilling; and WHEREAS, in 1985, and in an effort to create a “blue wall” of zoning prohibitions against these proposed area leases, a majority of the voters from the City approved Measure A, requiring voter approval before the City could make any zoning changes that would permit the construction of on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas drilling efforts (“Measure A”); and WHEREAS, Measure A was codified into the City Code as Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section (SCMC) 24.06.090; and
WHEREAS, the City later passed ordinances prohibiting the refinery of petroleum products or other industrial activities in support of off-shore oil drilling in General Industrial

28.14 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
2 Districts (SCMC 24.10.1525) and in General Industrial Districts/Performance Districts (SCMC

24.10.1620); and
WHEREAS, in 2025, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (“BOEM”) initiated an overhaul of the United States’ off-shore drilling policy as the “Unleashing American Energy” initiative, pursuant to the proposed 11th National Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing Program (the “Program”); and
WHEREAS, in September 2022, the State of California enacted the California Seabed Mining Prevention Act, banning new oil and gas leasing and seabed mining in state waters due to unacceptably high risk of harm to the marine environment and the public interest; and WHEREAS, the health, safety, environment, economy, and general welfare of the City’s coastline and local communities, including but not limited to the County of Santa Cruz more broadly, could be threatened both directly and indirectly by proposals for on-shore support facilities, including those proposed by the Program, intended to support the off-shore development of oil and gas resources and deep-sea mineral extraction, including but not limited to:

1. On-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas development and deep-sea mining could substantially adversely affect the many significant coastal resources located within the City of Santa Cruz:
a. The City of Santa Cruz’s coastline is highly scenic and central to the coastal character of the town. The City has long protected the scenic and visual qualities of its coastal areas by siting development to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas and to minimize the alteration of natural land forms. For example, the City prohibited development of Lighthouse Field through the voterapproved Measure D (1974). And, in 1992, the City approved its first Local Coastal Plan prioritizing habitat protection, public access, and viewsheds as vital community resources. Siting an on-shore facility in the City’s coastal zone could disrupt the scenic and visual qualities the City has worked hard to protect. b. The City is home to numerous tourist destinations, including the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk, Wharf, world-renowned surf breaks, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Exploration Center, two City beaches (Main Beach and Cowell Beach), three State Beaches (Natural Bridges State Beach, Seabright State Beach, and Lighthouse Field State Beach), and the Santa Cruz Harbor. The City provides access to numerous public beaches, beach bluffs, and coastal trails. It relies on tourism, including over 1 million annual visitors to the Wharf alone, as a significant part of its economy. On-shore support facilities could detract from the tourist experience in the City, both visually and by limiting the available coastal areas for tourists to visit.
c. The construction and operation of on-shore support facilities in the City could impede public access to the coastline. Oil or tailings spills from on-shore support facilities could cut off public access to the beach and ocean for months.

28.15 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
3 d. The California Coastal Act requires that valuable marine resources in the City be maintained and enhanced. These marine resources could be impaired by the construction or operation of on-shore support facilities by increasing the risk of oil spills and leaks from facilities.
e. An on-shore facility and its risks of spills and leaks could disrupt the biological productivity of coastal waters and conditions required to sustain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long-term commercial, recreational, scientific, and educational purposes. Operations from on-shore facilities could also impair state marine protected areas, the Natural Bridges State Marine Reserve, and sections of the 6,094 square mile Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary - all in close proximity to the City.
f. The Monterey Bay region is home to over 500 fish species, 90 species of seabird, and 30 species of marine mammals. The City is home to resident and transitory populations of blue whale, humpback whale, southern sea otter, leatherback sea turtle, snowy plover, coho salmon, and steelhead trout, all of whom are threatened or endangered. A portion of these species’ habitats are found along the City’s coastline; oil spills and leaks from new on-shore facilities on the coast could destroy that habitat and threaten the existence of the species. g. Acres of environmentally sensitive habitat – including sandy beaches, coastal bluffs and marine terraces, kelp forests, estuaries, and coastal dunes and lagoons – are found along the City of Santa Cruz’s coastline. Building an on-shore facility could directly destroy the habitat, as well as indirectly affect its long-term health. h. The City has a vibrant and economically and culturally important commercial fishing sector: commercial fish catch from all California National Marine Sanctuaries (which includes Santa Cruz) generated over $69 million in annual revenue from 2010-2012 with Dungeness crab, squid, salmon, urchin, halibut, and groundfish playing important roles. The City has devoted significant space to serving those industries and has a strong interest in supporting the economic wellbeing of this ocean-dependent sector. On-shore facilities such as pipelines, tankers, and tailing ponds located within the coastal zone could take up valuable harbor space and substantially interfere with this industry. i. Significant harbor space exists at the Santa Cruz Harbor to serve boating industries, which houses 800 permanent vessel slips for commercial, recreational, and research users and serving as a hub for boating, fishing charters, and whale watching. Public launching facilities and additional berthing space in the Harbor encourage increased recreational boating use in adjacent coastal waters. The City prioritizes limiting non-water-dependent land uses – such as on-shore support facilities – that could congest access corridors and preclude boating support facilities.

28.16 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
4 j. The City’s coast is internationally recognized for its surf culture, with 13 surf breaks along a 4-mile stretch from Natural Bridges State Beach to the Santa Cruz Harbor catering to all skill levels. Important surf breaks include Steamer Lane, Cowells, Indicators, and Middle Peak, among others. Nearly 800,000 annual surf visits occur in Santa Cruz County, generating almost $200 million yearly for the greater Santa Cruz area. This vital ocean-oriented recreational activity cannot readily be provided at inland water areas. The City’s residents, as well as tourists who travel to participate, may be deprived of this activity if an on-shore support facility is built.
k. There are numerous significant archaeological or paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer located on or near the City’s coast. Key resources include ancient Native American shell mounds, coastal terrace sites dating back thousands of years (such as the Sand Hill Bluff just north of City limits and extensive marine fossils associated with local manifestations of the Purisima Formation), Santa Cruz Mudstone, and Santa Margarita Sandstone. These resources are culturally and historically valuable and could be irreparably harmed if on-shore support facilities were constructed in their vicinity. l. The City’s existing municipal infrastructure is inadequate to support on-shore facilities. For example, State Highway Route 1 services the City; the section at the Fishhook is narrow, winding, and heavily congested with traffic on an ongoing basis. Additionally, the City does not have oil spill containment technologies in the event of a pipeline leak; the nearby Santa Cruz Harbor cannot handle tankers and other large vessels; and local City streets are not amenable to the large trucks needed to service on-shore facilities to transport oil or mineral resources out of the City.

2. The City of Santa Cruz has unique characteristics that could make it particularly unsuitable for siting on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas development and deep-sea mining:
a. The City of Santa Cruz experiences extreme winter storms, including atmospheric rivers that regularly result in local flooding, including of the San Lorenzo River and associated watershed, and destructive coastal wave events, including wave overtopping of West Cliff Drive, that may make on-shore operations hazardous and at risk of creating an oil spill or leak.
b. The City is a seismically hazardous area, located near the San Andreas and San Gregorio Faults and home to the massive 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake that destroyed or damaged 40 buildings and killed six people. Because the City is at a higher risk for earthquakes, this has the potential to rupture pipelines or disrupt other on-shore facilities.
c. The coastline of the City has suffered from high erosion rates. Substantial episodic and seasonal coastal erosion occurs along developed bluffs and sandy beaches

28.17 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
5 along with slower long term erosion. Areas of particular concern include West Cliff Drive and Main Beach. Drivers of erosion include accelerating sea level rise, wave energy, and extreme winter storms exacerbated by climate change. This would put an on-shore facility located on the coast at great risk of an oil spill or leak.

3. The construction and operation of on-shore support facilities could create many hazards and risks threatening the public health, safety, environment, and general welfare of the City of Santa Cruz:
a. On-shore support facilities can create the risk of spills or leaks, such as the spill experienced on Refugio State Beach in 2015, in which 140,000 gallons of oil spilled and spread over 150 miles of the California coast. The spill led to the closure of miles of beaches and 130 square miles of fishing grounds and killed hundreds of birds, fish, and marine mammals. Oil spills can have numerous adverse effects, including: degradation of sensitive marine environments; contamination of beaches and other recreational areas; reduction in property values; decrease in tourism; long-term impairment of water-dependent industries, such as fishing; and acute human health effects, such as skin and eye irritation, breathing problems, nausea and vomiting, and others.
b. On-shore support facilities can emit and transport hazardous and toxic air pollutants, such as:
i. Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene. Short-term exposure to these chemicals can cause drowsiness, dizziness, nausea, depression, fatigue, and eye, skin, and respiratory tract irritation; long-term exposure can result in respiratory effects, damage to the central nervous system, kidneys, and liver, and developmental effects (such as birth defects). Benzene is also a known human carcinogen and has been linked to leukemia. ii. Particulate matter (PM). Exposure can result in heart attacks, irregular heartbeats, asthma, decreased lung function, increased respiratory symptoms, and premature death in people with heart or lung disease. PM can also stain and damage stone and other materials, including culturally or historically valuable objects such as statues and monuments, as well as harm sensitive ecosystems by contributing to acid rain and nutrient depletion. iii. Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Short-term exposure can result in irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat, headache, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, coughing, difficulty breathing, and permanent damage to the central nervous system. iv. Carbon monoxide (CO). Short-term exposure can result in headache, dizziness, vomiting, nausea, unconsciousness, and death. v. Nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides (SOx). Short-term exposure can aggravate respiratory diseases, particularly asthma, leading to respiratory

28.18 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
6 symptoms such as coughing, wheezing or difficulty breathing. Long-term exposure may contribute to the development of asthma and potentially increase susceptibility to respiratory infections. NOx and SOx also contribute to acid rain, and NOx contributes to nutrient pollution in coastal waters.
c. On-shore support facilities for deep-sea minerals also raise significant concerns about radioactive waste and dust. Scientific studies have revealed that polymetallic nodules contain high concentrations of radioactive materials. During processing, as nodules are crushed, small particles may be distributed into the air, posing radiological hazards to human health. Furthermore, residual products from mining slurry—a mixture of seawater, sediment, and nodule fines—also pose significant risk if discharged back into the ocean. Radioactive particles may be ingested by marine organisms, introducing radiation into the food web that may be ingested by people. These public health risks are especially concerning given the limited regulatory frameworks and scientific understanding governing radioactive byproducts from deep-sea mining operations.
d. On-shore support facilities are also potential contributors to groundwater and surface water pollution. For example, some facilities use deep-injection wells to dispose of wastewater that may contain oil residuals, chemicals, and other hazardous wastes, which can contaminate aquifers and groundwater. e. Noisy helicopter and commercial street traffic and other nuisances like light pollution from 24-hour facilities could be significant irritants to the City’s residents.

4. The City of Santa Cruz has considered the national energy interest and found that it already significantly supports national energy needs:
a. The City of Santa Cruz has consistently committed to advancing renewable energy systems (especially distributed solar), green building standards, sourcing green energy, reducing fossil fuel demand, and protecting economically and environmentally critical coastal resources, all of which aligns with long-term national energy strategies moving away from reliance on fossil fuels and fossil fuel extraction.
b. The City of Santa Cruz has fully committed to California’s prioritization of a just decarbonization transition in a responsible way. The City of Santa Cruz’s strategy to rapidly achieve a just decarbonization transition is through its Climate Action Plan 2030, which includes building codes that incentivize electrification and require deep decarbonization, sourcing 97% of its electricity city-wide from Central Coast Community Energy (which will provide 100% renewable electricity by 2030), prioritizing electric vehicles, public transit and active transportation, and supporting community scale distributed renewable energy systems.

28.19 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
7 WHEREAS, the City wishes for the voters of the City of Santa Cruz to retain the final authority on whether to allow on-shore support facilities for all off-shore oil and gas development and deep-sea mining, and not just on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas drilling as currently specified in the Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section 24.06.090; and WHEREAS, at its May 7, 2026 meeting, the City Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments to Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code and found that the public necessity, the general community welfare, and good zoning practice shall be served and furthered; and that the proposed amendments are in general conformance with the principles, policies, and land use designations set forth in the General Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and any adopted area or specific plan as proposed to be amended; and
WHEREAS, at its May 7, 2026 meeting, the City Planning Commission passed a motion that recommended the City Council approve the determination under the California Environmental Quality Act and approve the proposed amendments to Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City of Santa Cruz as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the above recitals are true and correct and are adopted and incorporated herein by reference as findings.

SECTION 2. Section 24.06.090 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

So long as Ordinance 85-70 (adopted by a vote of the people on November 5, 1985) remains in effect, no zoning changes to accommodate on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas drilling shall be enacted without a vote of the people of the city of Santa Cruz.

Similarly, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2026-12, no zoning changes to accommodate on-shore support facilities for deep-sea mining shall be enacted without a vote of the people of the City of Santa Cruz. The definitions contained in Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section 24.06.093 shall apply to this Section.

SECTION 3. Chapter 24.06 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Map and Text Amendments) is hereby amended to add Section 24.06.093 to read as follows:

24.06.093 Support Facilities for Off-Shore Oil and Gas Drilling or Deep-Sea Mining – Submission to the Electorate.

The purpose of this section is to protect the City of Santa Cruz’s coastline, water, economy, local industries, including tourism, air quality, public access, recreation, biodiversity, and quality of life, and to further the City of Santa Cruz’s transition away from the direct and indirect effects of harmful extractive off-shore activities. As further specified in Ordinance No. 2026-12’s findings, the general welfare of the City of Santa Cruz is both directly and indirectly tied to the health and resiliency of the Pacific Ocean. These provisions continue the City’s long-standing practice of protecting the Pacific Ocean and its coastline as valuable public resources by ensuring that any

28.20 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
8 legislative approvals (including, but not limited to, a zoning amendment, General Plan amendment, Local Coastal Program amendment, Development Plan, Specific Plan, or other legislative action) that allow on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas development or deep-sea mining within the City only be allowed if they are approved by a simple majority (50% +1) of the voters in the City of Santa Cruz who cast ballots.

1. Definitions.
a. The term “on-shore support facility” means any new or expanded facilities within the City of Santa Cruz’s jurisdiction that support the exploration, development, production, storage, processing, or other activities related to off-shore fossil fuel, including oil and gas, energy resources development or deep-sea mining. “On-shore support facilities” include but are not limited to:
i. Transportation facilities: On-shore facilities and equipment for the purpose of transporting crude off-shore oil and gas or deep-sea minerals and slurry to and from processing and storage facilities, including pipelines, pipeline landfalls, pump stations, tankers, rail spurs, and trucking terminals. ii. Storage facilities: On-shore facilities and equipment for the purpose of storing crude off-shore oil and gas or deep-sea minerals, including tank farms and slurry ponds, or storing chemicals, drilling muds, cuttings, produced waters, and/or other materials used in the course of drilling offshore oil and gas wells, production, or in the processing of crude off-shore oil and gas.
iii. Processing facilities: On-shore facilities and equipment for the purpose of processing, distilling, converting, treating, blending, purifying, leaching, and/or refining crude off-shore oil and gas or deep-sea minerals, including refineries, gas plants, treatment tanks, tailing ponds, and distillation units. iv. Waste disposal facilities: On-shore facilities, including tailing ponds and landfills, and equipment for the purpose of disposing of chemicals, drilling muds, cuttings, produced waters, tailings, dried wastes, and other toxic materials generated in the course of drilling off-shore oil and gas wells, production, or in the processing of off-shore oil and gas or deep-sea mineral products.
b. Exceptions. The term “on-shore support facilities” does not refer to:
i. Transportation, storage, processing, or waste disposal facilities or equipment that are not being used to support off-shore oil and gas development or deep-sea mining.
ii. Existing facilities that support on-shore or off-shore oil and gas development.

28.21 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
9 iii. Gas stations or power plants used to support off-shore-oil and gas development and deep-sea mining.
c. The term “deep-sea mining” means the extraction of deep-sea mineral deposits, including, but not limited to, polymetallic nodules, ferromanganese crusts, and seafloor sulfides, from the ocean floor or seamounts at depths typically greater than 200 meters, including in areas within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and beyond national jurisdiction.
d. The term “deep-sea minerals” means natural deposits of valuable minerals found in the ocean, including, but not limited to, metals and placer deposits of metals, nonmetallic minerals, gemstones, ores, gold, silver, copper, lead, iron, cobalt, nickel, manganese, silica, chrome, platinum, tungsten, zirconium, titanium, garnet, and phosphorous. e. Exceptions. The term “deep-sea minerals” does not refer to rock, gravel, sand, silt, oyster shells, or hydrocarbons.

2. Voter Approval for On-Shore Support Facilities.

Any legislative approvals (to include, but not be limited to, a zoning amendment, General Plan amendment, Local Coastal Program amendment, Development Plan, Specific Plan, or other legislative action), including those that comply with existing City zoning laws or require a zoning change, authorizing or allowing the development, construction, opening, installation, or expansion of any on-shore support facility within the City of Santa Cruz, shall not be effective unless such authorization is approved by a simple majority (50% +1) of the voters in the City who cast ballots.

SECTION 4. Section 24.10.1620 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

1. Any manufacturing use involving the primary production of products from new materials found to be incompatible with the neighborhood or the city as a whole based on noise, odor, air quality or other adverse environmental impact shall be prohibited.

2. No use which either produces or utilizes asbestos in any manufacturing process shall be permitted.

3. Refinery of petroleum products or other industrial activities in support of off-shore drilling or deep-sea mining, as defined in Section 24.06.093, shall not be permitted.

4. Repeal or amendment of subsection 3 shall be subject to the requirements of other applicable portions of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code, including but not limited to Sections

24.06.090 and 24.06.093.

28.22 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
10 SECTION 5. Intention and Interpretation of Ordinance

1. Sections 2 and 3 of this Ordinance are intended and shall be interpreted to be additive to and complement Santa Cruz Municipal Code section 24.06.090, which was enacted by a vote of the people on November 5, 1985 via Ordinance 85-70.

2. Nothing in this Ordinance shall apply to prohibit any person or entity from exercising a vested right, obtained pursuant to State or local law, as of the effective date of this Ordinance.

3. The provisions of this Ordinance shall not be applicable to the extent they violate the constitution or laws of the United States or the State of California.

4. If any section, sentence, clause, phrase, or part of this Ordinance is held unconstitutional or invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance shall be given full effect consistent with the intent and purpose of the Ordinance.

SECTION 6. The City Council finds and determines that the adoption of this ordinance is considered a “project” under California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 15378(a)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, typically subject to environmental review. The City Council finds that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review, pursuant to: Class 7 Exemption (14 CCR § 15307) – Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources, as the proposed ordinance intends to ensure the maintenance of a natural resource; Class 8 Exemption (14 CCR § 15308) – Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment, as the proposed ordinance intends to ensure the protection of the environment; and the Common Sense Exemption (14 CCR § 15061(b)(3)) as it can be seen with certainty that prohibiting on-shore facilities related to off-shore oil and gas drilling and deep-sea mining and exploration will maintain the status quo, and there is no possibility of a significant negative effect on the environment.

SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days after final adoption.

28.23 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
11 PASSED FOR PUBLICATION this 9th day of June, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Trigueiro, Brunner, Newsome, Golder, O’Hara; Vice Mayor Kalantari-Johnson.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: Mayor Keeley.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
PASSED FOR FINAL ADOPTION this 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
This is to certify that the above and
foregoing document is the original
of Ordinance No. 2026-13 and that
it has been published or posted in
accordance with the Charter of the
City of Santa Cruz.
________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

28.24 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 24, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY

OF SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE, AS LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENTS TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL

COMMISSION FOR FINAL CERTIFICATION
WHEREAS, the four-mile portion of the California coastline within the boundaries of the City of Santa Cruz (the “City”) is a precious natural resource which is valuable to the People of the City, the State of California, and the Nation; and WHEREAS, the City has authority under the U.S. Constitution, the California Constitution, and State law, through its City Council, to use its police powers to enact legislative measures regulating land use within the City’s geographical jurisdiction in the interest of public health, safety, environment, and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the City bases its coastal management decisions on the policies and priorities in the California Coastal Act, and conflicts are resolved in a manner which on balance is the most protective of significant coastal resources; and WHEREAS, there have been several times in the recent past wherein the waters off of the City’s coastline have been considered for off-shore development of oil and gas resources and deep-sea mineral extraction; and
WHEREAS, in the 1980s, the United States’ Department of the Interior launched a campaign to “unleash” American energy through the then USGS Conservation Division, opening wide areas off of America’s coast to leasing for oil and gas drilling; and WHEREAS, in 1985, and in an effort to create a “blue wall” of zoning prohibitions against these proposed area leases, a majority of the voters from the City approved Measure A, requiring voter approval before the City could make any zoning changes that would permit the construction of on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas drilling efforts (“Measure A”); and
WHEREAS, Measure A was codified into the City Code as Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section (SCMC) 24.06.090; and
WHEREAS, the City later passed ordinances prohibiting the refinery of petroleum products or other industrial activities in support of off-shore oil drilling in General Industrial Districts (SCMC 24.10.1525) and in General Industrial Districts/Performance Districts (SCMC

24.10.1620); and
WHEREAS, in 2025, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (“BOEM”) initiated an overhaul of the United States’ off-shore drilling policy as the “Unleashing American Energy” initiative, pursuant to the proposed 11th National Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing Program (the “Program”); and

28.25 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,XXX
2 WHEREAS, in September 2022, the State of California enacted the California Seabed Mining Prevention Act, banning new oil and gas leasing and seabed mining in state waters due to unacceptably high risk of harm to the marine environment and the public interest; and WHEREAS, the health, safety, environment, economy, and general welfare of the City’s coastline and local communities, including but not limited to the County of Santa Cruz more broadly, could be threatened both directly and indirectly by proposals for on-shore support facilities, including those proposed by the Program, intended to support the off-shore development of oil and gas resources and deep-sea mineral extraction, including but not limited to:

1. On-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas development and deep-sea mining could substantially adversely affect the many significant coastal resources located within the City of Santa Cruz:
a. The City of Santa Cruz’s coastline is highly scenic and central to the coastal character of the town. The City has long protected the scenic and visual qualities of its coastal areas by siting development to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas and to minimize the alteration of natural land forms. For example, the City prohibited development of Lighthouse Field through the voter-approved Measure D (1974). And, in 1992, the City approved its first Local Coastal Plan prioritizing habitat protection, public access, and viewsheds as vital community resources. Siting an on-shore facility in the City’s coastal zone could disrupt the scenic and visual qualities the City has worked hard to protect.
b. The City is home to numerous tourist destinations, including the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk, Wharf, world-renowned surf breaks, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Exploration Center, two City beaches (Main Beach and Cowell Beach), three State Beaches (Natural Bridges State Beach, Seabright State Beach, and Lighthouse Field State Beach), and the Santa Cruz Harbor.

The City provides access to numerous public beaches, beach bluffs, and coastal trails. It relies on tourism, including over 1 million annual visitors to the Wharf alone, as a significant part of its economy. On-shore support facilities could detract from the tourist experience in the City, both visually and by limiting the available coastal areas for tourists to visit.
c. The construction and operation of on-shore support facilities in the City could impede public access to the coastline. Oil or tailings spills from on-shore support facilities could cut off public access to the beach and ocean for months. d. The California Coastal Act requires that valuable marine resources in the City be maintained and enhanced. These marine resources could be impaired by the construction or operation of on-shore support facilities by increasing the risk of oil spills and leaks from facilities.
e. An on-shore facility and its risks of spills and leaks could disrupt the biological productivity of coastal waters and conditions required to sustain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long-term commercial, recreational, scientific, and educational purposes. Operations from

28.26 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,XXX
3 on-shore facilities could also impair state marine protected areas, the Natural Bridges State Marine Reserve, and sections of the 6,094 square mile Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary - all in close proximity to the City. f. The Monterey Bay region is home to over 500 fish species, 90 species of seabird, and 30 species of marine mammals. The City is home to resident and transitory populations of blue whale, humpback whale, southern sea otter, leatherback sea turtle, snowy plover, coho salmon, and steelhead trout, all of whom are threatened or endangered. A portion of these species’ habitats are found along the City’s coastline; oil spills and leaks from new on-shore facilities on the coast could destroy that habitat and threaten the existence of the species. g. Acres of environmentally sensitive habitat – including sandy beaches, coastal bluffs and marine terraces, kelp forests, estuaries, and coastal dunes and lagoons – are found along the City of Santa Cruz’s coastline. Building an on-shore facility could directly destroy the habitat, as well as indirectly affect its longterm health. h. The City has a vibrant and economically and culturally important commercial fishing sector: commercial fish catch from all California National Marine Sanctuaries (which includes Santa Cruz) generated over $69 million in annual revenue from 2010-2012 with Dungeness crab, squid, salmon, urchin, halibut, and groundfish playing important roles. The City has devoted significant space to serving those industries and has a strong interest in supporting the economic wellbeing of this ocean-dependent sector. On-shore facilities such as pipelines, tankers, and tailing ponds located within the coastal zone could take up valuable harbor space and substantially interfere with this industry. i. Significant harbor space exists at the Santa Cruz Harbor to serve boating industries, which houses 800 permanent vessel slips for commercial, recreational, and research users and serving as a hub for boating, fishing charters, and whale watching. Public launching facilities and additional berthing space in the Harbor encourage increased recreational boating use in adjacent coastal waters. The City prioritizes limiting non-water-dependent land uses – such as on-shore support facilities – that could congest access corridors and preclude boating support facilities.
j. The City’s coast is internationally recognized for its surf culture, with 13 surf breaks along a 4-mile stretch from Natural Bridges State Beach to the Santa Cruz Harbor catering to all skill levels. Important surf breaks include Steamer Lane, Cowells, Indicators, and Middle Peak, among others. Nearly 800,000 annual surf visits occur in Santa Cruz County, generating almost $200 million yearly for the greater Santa Cruz area. This vital ocean-oriented recreational activity cannot readily be provided at inland water areas. The City’s residents, as well as tourists who travel to participate, may be deprived of this activity if an on-shore support facility is built.
k. There are numerous significant archaeological or paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer located on or near the City’s coast. Key resources include ancient Native American shell mounds, coastal

28.27 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,XXX
4 terrace sites dating back thousands of years (such as the Sand Hill Bluff just north of City limits and extensive marine fossils associated with local manifestations of the Purisima Formation), Santa Cruz Mudstone, and Santa Margarita Sandstone. These resources are culturally and historically valuable and could be irreparably harmed if on-shore support facilities were constructed in their vicinity.
l. The City’s existing municipal infrastructure is inadequate to support on-shore facilities. For example, State Highway Route 1 services the City; the section at the Fishhook is narrow, winding, and heavily congested with traffic on an ongoing basis. Additionally, the City does not have oil spill containment technologies in the event of a pipeline leak; the nearby Santa Cruz Harbor cannot handle tankers and other large vessels; and local City streets are not amenable to the large trucks needed to service on-shore facilities to transport oil or mineral resources out of the City.

2. The City of Santa Cruz has unique characteristics that could make it particularly unsuitable for siting on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas development and deep-sea mining:
a. The City of Santa Cruz experiences extreme winter storms, including atmospheric rivers that regularly result in local flooding, including of the San Lorenzo River and associated watershed, and destructive coastal wave events, including wave overtopping of West Cliff Drive, that may make on-shore operations hazardous and at risk of creating an oil spill or leak. b. The City is a seismically hazardous area, located near the San Andreas and San Gregorio Faults and home to the massive 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake that destroyed or damaged 40 buildings and killed six people. Because the City is at a higher risk for earthquakes, this has the potential to rupture pipelines or disrupt other on-shore facilities.
c. The coastline of the City has suffered from high erosion rates. Substantial episodic and seasonal coastal erosion occurs along developed bluffs and sandy beaches along with slower long term erosion. Areas of particular concern include West Cliff Drive and Main Beach. Drivers of erosion include accelerating sea level rise, wave energy, and extreme winter storms exacerbated by climate change. This would put an on-shore facility located on the coast at great risk of an oil spill or leak.

3. The construction and operation of on-shore support facilities could create many hazards and risks threatening the public health, safety, environment, and general welfare of the City of Santa Cruz:
a. On-shore support facilities can create the risk of spills or leaks, such as the spill experienced on Refugio State Beach in 2015, in which 140,000 gallons of oil spilled and spread over 150 miles of the California coast. The spill led to the closure of miles of beaches and 130 square miles of fishing grounds and killed hundreds of birds, fish, and marine mammals. Oil spills can have numerous adverse effects, including: degradation of sensitive marine environments;

28.28 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,XXX
5 contamination of beaches and other recreational areas; reduction in property values; decrease in tourism; long-term impairment of water-dependent industries, such as fishing; and acute human health effects, such as skin and eye irritation, breathing problems, nausea and vomiting, and others. b. On-shore support facilities can emit and transport hazardous and toxic air pollutants, such as:
i. Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene. Short-term exposure to these chemicals can cause drowsiness, dizziness, nausea, depression, fatigue, and eye, skin, and respiratory tract irritation; long-term exposure can result in respiratory effects, damage to the central nervous system, kidneys, and liver, and developmental effects (such as birth defects).

Benzene is also a known human carcinogen and has been linked to leukemia.
ii. Particulate matter (PM). Exposure can result in heart attacks, irregular heartbeats, asthma, decreased lung function, increased respiratory symptoms, and premature death in people with heart or lung disease.

PM can also stain and damage stone and other materials, including culturally or historically valuable objects such as statues and monuments, as well as harm sensitive ecosystems by contributing to acid rain and nutrient depletion.
iii. Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Short-term exposure can result in irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat, headache, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, coughing, difficulty breathing, and permanent damage to the central nervous system.
iv. Carbon monoxide (CO). Short-term exposure can result in headache, dizziness, vomiting, nausea, unconsciousness, and death. v. Nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides (SOx). Short-term exposure can aggravate respiratory diseases, particularly asthma, leading to respiratory symptoms such as coughing, wheezing or difficulty breathing. Long-term exposure may contribute to the development of asthma and potentially increase susceptibility to respiratory infections.

NOx and SOx also contribute to acid rain, and NOx contributes to nutrient pollution in coastal waters.
c. On-shore support facilities for deep-sea minerals also raise significant concerns about radioactive waste and dust. Scientific studies have revealed that polymetallic nodules contain high concentrations of radioactive materials.

During processing, as nodules are crushed, small particles may be distributed into the air, posing radiological hazards to human health. Furthermore, residual products from mining slurry—a mixture of seawater, sediment, and nodule fines—also pose significant risk if discharged back into the ocean. Radioactive particles may be ingested by marine organisms, introducing radiation into the food web that may be ingested by people. These public health risks are especially concerning given the limited regulatory frameworks and scientific

28.29 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,XXX
6 understanding governing radioactive byproducts from deep-sea mining operations.
d. On-shore support facilities are also potential contributors to groundwater and surface water pollution. For example, some facilities use deep-injection wells to dispose of wastewater that may contain oil residuals, chemicals, and other hazardous wastes, which can contaminate aquifers and groundwater. e. Noisy helicopter and commercial street traffic and other nuisances like light pollution from 24-hour facilities could be significant irritants to the City’s residents.

4. The City of Santa Cruz has considered the national energy interest and found that it already significantly supports national energy needs:
a. The City of Santa Cruz has consistently committed to advancing renewable energy systems (especially distributed solar), green building standards, sourcing green energy, reducing fossil fuel demand, and protecting economically and environmentally critical coastal resources, all of which aligns with long-term national energy strategies moving away from reliance on fossil fuels and fossil fuel extraction.
b. The City of Santa Cruz has fully committed to California’s prioritization of a just decarbonization transition in a responsible way. The City of Santa Cruz’s strategy to rapidly achieve a just decarbonization transition is through its Climate Action Plan 2030, which includes building codes that incentivize electrification and require deep decarbonization, sourcing 97% of its electricity city-wide from Central Coast Community Energy (which will provide 100% renewable electricity by 2030), prioritizing electric vehicles, public transit and active transportation, and supporting community scale distributed renewable energy systems.

WHEREAS, the City wishes for the voters of the City of Santa Cruz to retain the final authority on whether to allow on-shore support facilities for all off-shore oil and gas development and deep-sea mining, and not just on-shore support facilities for off-shore oil and gas drilling as currently specified in the Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section 24.06.090; and WHEREAS, at its May 7, 2026 meeting, the Santa Cruz Planning Commission reviewed the modifications to the Santa Cruz Municipal Code and found that the public necessity, and the general community welfare, and good zoning practice shall be served and furthered; and that the proposed amendments are in general conformance with the principles, policies and land use designations set forth in the General Plan, Local Coastal Program and any adopted area or specific plan; and
WHEREAS, at its May 7, 2026 meeting, the Santa Cruz Planning Commission considered the modifications to the Santa Cruz Municipal Code as modifications to the Local Coastal Program and found that (1) the proposed amendments are deemed to be in the public interest; (2) the proposed General Plan and/or Local Coastal Program amendments are consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and Local Coastal Program and any implementation programs that may be affected; (3) the potential impacts of the proposed

28.30 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,XXX
7 amendments have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and (4) the proposed amendments have been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed this ordinance at a duly noticed public hearing on May 7, 2026, and recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, on June 9, 2026, the City Council held a public hearing where the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code were introduced for publication; and WHEREAS, on June 23, 2026, the City Council held a public hearing for the second reading, after which the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code were approved; and WHEREAS, in making their decisions, including this direction, the Council considered the full public record for said items, including but not limited to the staff reports and associated materials in the packet; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now finds:

1. The proposed amendments to Title 24 are in the public interest as they offer protections against on-shore facilities supporting off-shore oil and gas drilling and deep-sea mining exploration and development.

2. The proposed amendments to Title 24 are consistent and compatible with the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected.

3. The proposed amendments to Title 24 are intended to be carried out in a manner fully in conformity with the Coastal Act (CA Section 30510).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that it hereby directs the City Manager to submit the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan changes, as shown in Ordinance 2026-13 that makes modifications to Title 24 of the City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code, to the Coastal Commission for certification.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that it hereby further authorizes the City Manager, with approval by the City Attorney, to make nonsubstantive text revisions to the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan amendments, as may be requested by California Coastal Commission to achieve certification, that are consistent with Council action and direction.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amendments to the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan will become effective inside the Coastal Zone upon final certification by the California Coastal Commission.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

28.31 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,XXX
8 ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

28.32 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:

June 17, 2026
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

This 17th day of June, 2026, Santa Cruz, California
____________________________
Julia Wood
Deputy City Clerk Administrator
______________
Julia Wood

28.33 DECLARATION OF POSTING

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS.

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ )
On the 10th day of June, 2026, I posted conspicuously in three public places within the City of Santa Cruz, Ordinance No. 2026-12, 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—11.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 10th day of June, 2026, in Santa Cruz, California.
_______________________________
Julia Wood
Deputy City Clerk Administrator
______________
Julia Wood

28.34 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:

June 17, 2026
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

This 17th day of June, 2026, Santa Cruz, California
____________________________
Julia Wood
Deputy City Clerk Administrator
______________
Julia Wood

28.35 DECLARATION OF POSTING

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS.

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ )
On the 10th day of June, 2026, I posted conspicuously in three public places within the City of Santa Cruz, Ordinance No. 2026-13, 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—9.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 10th day of June, 2026, in Santa Cruz, California.
_______________________________
Julia Wood
Deputy City Clerk Administrator
______________
Julia Wood

28.36 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 06/01/2026
AGENDA OF: 06/23/2026
DEPARTMENT: City Manager
SUBJECT: Independent Police Auditor Report 2025 (CM)
LOCATION: Citywide
RECOMMENDATION: Receive the 2025 annual report from the City’s Independent Police Auditor, OIR Group.

BACKGROUND: In January 2003, the City Council (Council) created the Independent Police Auditor (IPA) role charged with assisting complainants, providing independent reviews of use of force, citizen complaints and critical incidents, reviewing and making recommendations regarding the Santa Cruz Police Department’s (SCPD) policies and practices, and reporting findings to Council annually. The City continues to utilize consultants for this important independent review.

Since 2020, the City has been using OIR Group, selected through a competitive RFP process.

This nationally recognized firm focuses on law enforcement reform and accountability systems.

The annual report includes summaries of cases reviewed; information on misconduct complaint investigations and trends; recommendations for improvements to SCPD policy, procedures, and training; and the results of annual audits.

DISCUSSION: The Independent Police Auditor 6th Annual Report provides a comprehensive review of SCPD’s administrative investigations closed between January 1 and December 31, 2025. The report features 14 policy and procedural recommendations to enhance accountability, transparency, and department operations.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) DETERMINATION: The proposed Council action is not a “Project” under the CEQA because it will not cause any physical change in the environment, directly or indirectly. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21065.) HEALTH IN ALL POLICIES (HiAP): The Independent Police Auditor Report aligns with the City of Santa Cruz’s HiAP framework by advancing public health and equity through transparent and accountable public safety oversight. By offering an independent, in-depth review of use of force incidents, citizen complaints, and critical events, and by issuing recommendations on SCPD policies and procedures, the report ensures that public safety strategies are both datainformed and community-responsive. This work supports equitable and effective policing,

29.1 reinforces community trust, and promotes a public safety environment that contributes to the social and physical well-being of all residents.

FISCAL IMPACT:

1. The recommendation in this report impacts the General Fund: No

2. This recommendation requires a budget adjustment: No

3. The recommendation creates an on-going expenditure commitment: No FISCAL IMPACT DESCRIPTION: No impact.

Prepared By:

Catherine Brothers
Principal Management
Analyst
Submitted By:

Michelle Templeton
Assistant City Manager
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. INDEPENDENT POLICE AUDITOR 6TH ANNUAL REPORT.PDF

29.2 City of Santa Cruz
Independent Police Auditor
6 th Annual Report
June 23, 2026

29.3 2 | P a g e
323-821-0586
6510 Spring Street #613 | Long Beach, CA 90815
OIRGroup.com

29.4 P a g e | 3
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................4 Administrative Investigation: Process & Recommendations .......................6 Background and Definitions ....................................................................6 Process Improvements in Reporting Period ............................................8 Expand SCPD’s Force Review Board to Include Other Significant Incidents..................................................................................................9 Ensuring Complete and Thorough Investigations ................................. 13 Investigating Individual Incidents and Identifying Repeated Patterns of Concern ................................................................................................ 22 The Continued Case for Technology .................................................... 28 Policy and Procedure Recommendations ................................................. 30 Automated License Plate Reader Program ........................................... 30 Community – Police Mediation Program ............................................... 31 Body-Worn Camera: Accountability and Policy Updates ...................... 33 Canine Policy ........................................................................................ 36 Updates from Prior Recommendations ................................................. 36 Community Engagement .......................................................................... 38 Conclusion ................................................................................................ 39 Recommendations .................................................................................... 40 Appendices ............................................................................................... 42

29.5 4 | P a g e
Introduction
This report presents the Independent Police Auditor’s sixth annual assessment of the Santa Cruz Police Department’s accountability systems, investigative practices, and policy framework during the 2025 reporting period. Prepared for the City Council and the community it serves, the report is intended to provide a clear, objective overview of how the Department responds to complaints, reviews critical incidents, and incorporates oversight recommendations to strengthen public trust.

Independent police oversight plays a vital role in ensuring that law enforcement agencies operate transparently, consistently, and in alignment with community expectations and legal standards. Through its review of administrative investigations, policies, and departmental practices, the Independent Police Auditor evaluates not only whether individual cases were handled appropriately, but also whether the Department’s systems support learning, accountability, and continuous improvement over time.

This year’s report reflects both meaningful progress and persistent challenges. We observed improvements in investigative quality, timeliness, and responsiveness to prior recommendations, as well as greater openness by Department leadership to feedback and reform. At the same time, our review identified recurring structural issues that limit the Department’s ability to identify patterns, fully examine complex incidents, and translate individual case outcomes into organization-wide learning.

Accordingly, this report focuses on several core themes that are central to effective policing and public confidence: the importance of thorough and well-scoped investigations; the need for robust review of significant incidents beyond narrowly defined policy compliance; the value of technology and data systems that support early intervention and accountability; and the role of clear policies, training, and supervision in guiding officer decision-making. These themes are explored through a

29.6 P a g e | 5
combination of policy analysis, aggregate observations, and illustrative case examples.

The recommendations offered in this report are grounded in nationally recognized best practices and informed by the City’s values and priorities.

They are intended to be constructive, achievable, and forward-looking, supporting the Department’s efforts to strengthen accountability while also promoting officer development, consistency in supervision, and transparency to the public.

We recognize the complex and demanding environment in which SCPD operates and appreciate the Department’s continued cooperation with independent oversight. We hope this report serves as a useful tool for informed governance, resource allocation, and policy direction, and as a reaffirmation of the City’s commitment to fair, effective, and accountable policing.

29.7 6 | P a g e
Administrative Investigation:

Process & Recommendations
Background and Definitions
Over the course of our engagement, SCPD has updated its case classification system to align with our recommendations and best practices nationwide. As of December 31, 2024, SCPD has four case classification types. The first three categories are investigated and managed by its Professional Standards Unit (PSU):
 Informational: This classification is for cases that are brought to the attention of the Department by members of the public, but that, upon initial review of available evidence such as body-worn camera footage or police reports, show that the allegations definitively did not occur. SCPD closed forty-two (42) Informational cases in this audit cycle.
 Inquiry: This classification is for questions or concerns by community members about policies or procedures or improper conduct of relatively minor violations of procedure, courtesy or service, which, even if true, would not result in discipline. SCPD closed seventeen (17) Inquiry cases in this audit cycle.  Formal: This classification is for cases where the complaining party, whether it be a member of the public or a Department supervisor, requests further investigation. In these cases, further investigation is needed to determine if an allegation is true. And, if it is true, the employees involved may be subject to discipline. SCPD closed (6) six formal investigations in this audit cycle.

The fourth type is “Divisional Matters” (DM); these cases that are investigated at the division level by supervisors. As of 2024, these cases are now formally numbered and routed through the Professional Standards Unit for tracking purposes. If policy violations or problematic

29.8 P a g e | 7
behavior are identified, DM cases may result in a range of corrective actions, including counseling, training and discipline that is recorded and kept in the employee’s personnel file for at least one year. We did not receive or review any DM cases in this audit cycle.

The classification of a case is determined by the Chief of Police after an initial review of the available evidence. Any subsequent investigative steps stem from the way the case is classified: cases that are classified as Informational, for example, are closed after a review of body-worn camera and police reports, while cases classified as Inquiries or Formal involve more investigative steps, such as officer, complainant, and witness interviews, to determine if the allegations are true.

Last year, we identified concerns with SCPD’s use of case classifications, particularly in “gray area” cases where the evidence did not clearly prove or disprove allegations. Misclassification in those instances risked narrowing the scope of investigations and missing opportunities for corrective action or systemic improvement. We recommended that SCPD adhere strictly to its classification definitions and conduct Inquiry or Formal investigations when the evidence was not clearly dispositive.

This year, we observed measurable improvement: cases were classified more appropriately, with Informational designations reserved for matters where allegations could be definitively disproven and no policy violations were identified. For example:
 In one case, the complainant alleged improper force during an unlawful arrest. However, a careful review of dispatch records confirmed the arrest was based on a valid warrant, and body-worn camera footage showed that no force was used. Because the facts were clear from the available evidence, the Department correctly classified the matter as Informational. The Department notified the complainant by letter that it had reviewed the body-worn camera footage in the case, and no force was used during the lawful arrest. We reviewed the same evidence and concurred with the Department’s findings.
 In another case, the complainant reported that officers had failed to respond to her home after she called 911. The Department’s preliminary investigation determined that the County Sheriff deputies, not SCPD officers, had been dispatched to the residence. The

29.9 8 | P a g e
Department sent a letter to the complainant explaining that the Santa Cruz Sheriff’s Office had handled her call for service and had forwarded her complaint to the Sheriff’s Office. The letter also provided the complainant with the Sheriff’s Office’s contact information.

Both cases involved relatively simple investigative steps and allegations that could be definitively disproven. The Department appropriately classified these cases as “informational” and sent letters to the complainants explaining the investigative steps the Department had taken to address their complaints.

Process Improvements in Reporting Period
Beyond appropriate use of the classification system, we also observed the Department completing its investigations in a timely manner. We observed thorough investigations, detailed reports, and sound findings in numerous cases we reviewed. The quality of the Department’s letters sent to complainants improved in many cases by more fully explaining the investigative steps taken and the basis for the Department’s conclusions.

In several cases we observed the Professional Standards Unit sergeant taking additional time to explain the investigative process, address complainants’ concerns and questions, and connect complainants to other agencies when appropriate. The Department readily answered our questions and promptly responded to our requests for additional evidence or investigative steps.

We also noted that cases requiring deeper inquiry were more often designated as Inquiry or Formal, triggering additional investigative steps such as interviews and evidence review. This is a positive development and demonstrates SCPD’s responsiveness to prior recommendations.

Throughout this report, we commend the Department’s overall improvement in case investigation, while also noting continued room for refining the process.

29.10 P a g e | 9
Expand SCPD’s Force Review Board to
Include Other Significant Incidents
In our experience as police auditors, we find that certain types of cases — due to their complexity, seriousness or community concern —may merit a more robust evaluation. Our review of a traffic fatality and an arrest of a bicyclist prompts our recommendation that the Department expand its Use of Force Review Board to include review of significant incidents.

Currently, SCPD convenes its Use of Force Review Board when an officer’s use of force results in very serious injury or death to another or discharges a firearm. The Chief may also convene the Review Board to investigate circumstances surrounding any use of force incident. 1 The Board is required to assess the full incident, including officer tactics, decision-making, equipment, training and policy and make written recommendations and findings (see Use of Force Review Board Policy 302.4.2) The benefit of a Review Board is that it brings together command staff, trainers and subject matter experts to engage in a multi-disciplinary, comprehensive review of the incident.2
While this approach aligns with national best practices for evaluating these high-risk events, we believe that other complex, significant incidents merit the same level of scrutiny and organizational learning. The recent fatal 1 The SCPD Policy Manual can be found in its entirety at the Department’s Transparency Portal: https://www.santacruzca.gov/Government/CityDepartments/Police/Transparency-Portal/Accountability 2 In addition to formal Review Board processes, leadership reported that SCPD regularly conducts operational debriefs following incidents, and that this is a routine practice for tactical teams. These debriefs, which are not formally documented and typically occur at the shift level, reportedly provide a forum for open discussion and reflection.

29.11 10 | P a g e
traffic collision is a prime example; although this event did not involve the use of force, it raised important operational questions that go to the heart of SCPD’s accountability and training systems. In this case, an intoxicated individual whom officers had contacted earlier in the night was fatally struck by a motorist. The Department made the commendable decision of activating the County’s Critical Incident Response Protocol so that the Sheriff’s Office, rather than SCPD, conducted a criminal investigation, including assessing any potential criminal culpability concerning the police officers who had earlier contacts with the victim.

Based on the Sheriff’s Office investigation, the District Attorney found no criminal wrongdoing of the officers. The Department subsequently initiated an administrative investigation that concluded that the officers acted within policy.

While we concur with the Department’s conclusion that the officers involved acted within policy and procedure, the case would have benefited from a more robust administrative review. The limitations we identified stemmed less from intent and more from how the critical incident protocol unfolded once the criminal investigation was led externally. Department leadership reported that SCPD attempted to remain engaged but had limited influence over the process at that stage.

SCPD policy and County protocol permit administrative involvement, particularly during initial interviews, and the Department reported that its typical practice is to participate in those interviews to limit duplication. In this case, however, SCPD’s Professional Standards Unit personnel were not notified that the criminal interviews were scheduled. As a result, PSU did not have the opportunity to observe interviews, ask policy-specific questions, or administer compelled statements if warranted.

The internal review relied heavily on evidence gathered through the criminal investigation, and certain materials were absent from the administrative file, including dispatch recordings and the autopsy report.

Officer interviews were audio-recorded but not video-recorded and the file did not include documentation of officer notifications required by the Peace Officers’ Bill of Rights. Taken together, these gaps reflect procedural shortcomings in the execution of the critical incident process rather than a lack of departmental commitment, and they underscore the importance of early, consistent administrative involvement in complex cases.

29.12 P a g e | 11
Beyond these procedural gaps, several operational issues were left unaddressed during the Department’s administrative review. An officer who had prior contact with the victim participated in post-collision scene management, raising potential conflict concerns.3 One of the officers did not activate his body-worn camera during an earlier interaction with the victim, and the administrative investigation did not address this deficiency, or evaluate whether this deficiency merited a more robust body worn camera policy at that time.4 These are precisely the types of issues - policy adherence, tactical decisions, and systemic vulnerabilities - that a Review Board is designed to examine.

Similarly, a case involving use of force during a stop of a Black bicyclist for moving violations illustrates why a Review Board should be convened for significant incidents of public concern even when they fall within existing policy. While the investigation concluded that the force used was within policy, the case revealed other troubling dynamics: an initial failure to deescalate, confusing and contradictory communication by the primary officer, rapid escalation to physical force, and a lack of supervisory intervention when multiple officers converged on the scene.

Body-worn camera footage showed a disconnect between officers’ accounts and the actual events, raising questions about training, communication, and crowd management tactics. These issues go beyond the narrow question of whether force was justified: they speak to systemic concerns about training, decision-making under stress, and the influence of group dynamics. A Review Board could have provided a structured forum to examine these factors, identify lessons learned, and recommend improvements to prevent similar outcomes in the future. 3 We note that it was initially unclear that the victim was the same person contacted earlier in the evening, and that officers on-duty responded to the scene as they would to any priority call for service.
4 We note that to its credit, the Department eventually amended its Body Worn Camera policy in August 2025 to require that officers activate their body worn camera for all calls for service and the performance of law enforcement-related functions. (See SCPD Policy 429.5). We discuss this further in our section regarding body-worn camera policy, below.

29.13 12 | P a g e
These two cases illustrate the need to expand the scope of the Department’s Use of Force Review Board so that significant cases, due to their complexity, seriousness or community concern, receive a more robust evaluation. Had these cases been subject to Board Review, the Board would have conducted a structured, multi-disciplinary review of officer tactics, decision-making, equipment, training and policy. This discussion would include reinforcing de-escalation training, revisiting body worn camera activation protocols, clarifying scene management responsibilities, ensuring comprehensive evidence collection and identifying lessons learned.

Additionally, the Board’s review would have culminated in written findings and recommendations and any action steps arising from the Board’s review.5 Such reviews would not only strengthen internal accountability but also provide transparency to the public, demonstrating SCPD’s commitment to learning from all significant incidents, and not just those involving deadly force.

RECOMMENDATION 1
SCPD should rename the Use of Force Review Board and expand its capacity to include review of significant incidents due to their complexity, seriousness or public concern.

RECOMMENDATION 2
SCPD should amend the Use of Force Review Board policy to reflect an expanded scope.
5 We note that the Department convened its Use of Force Review Board to review a non-injury officer involved shooting in 2024, informed IPA that it had met once and intended to meet again to finish its review. Written findings and recommendations concerning this review have yet to be shared IPA.

29.14 P a g e | 13
Ensuring Complete and Thorough
Investigations
A core responsibility of any effective accountability system is ensuring that complaint investigations are framed broadly enough to address all relevant issues raised by an incident, not just ensuring that narrowly defined allegations result in discipline. Thorough and well-structured investigations give agencies a fuller understanding of how officer decision-making, communication, supervision, and procedural adherence intersect during real-world encounters. When reviews are too narrowly scoped, they risk missing critical context and overlooking meaningful opportunities for accountability and, more importantly, improvement.

In our 2024 Annual Report, we highlighted several cases involving two repeatedly-complained-of officers, noting that although the Department took corrective steps in each matter, the investigations themselves were framed too narrowly. We recommended that SCPD ensure its complaint reviews consistently identify all potential issues and allegations. This framing is essential not only for defensible investigative outcomes, but also for tracking trends and implementing early intervention.

This year’s review reflects some progress. In one case, for example, SCPD acknowledged an internal communication failure regarding a new local ordinance and quickly issued a Department Bulletin to correct the gap. This represents an encouraging example of using a complaint as a learning opportunity.

Despite continued improvement, framing and scoping investigations remains an ongoing challenge for SCPD. This is not due to a lack of intent, reported leadership, but because of limitations in capacity and competing operational demands. Department leadership has emphasized that its investigative approach is intended to be proactive and forward-thinking, with the goal of identifying broader lessons and preventing future issues.

As a result, while some investigations appropriately identified misconduct and led to corrective action, others were limited in scope and did not examine relevant factors such as communication quality, de-escalation efforts, supervisory involvement, or officer decision-making. These

29.15 14 | P a g e
constraints do not reflect a lack of commitment to improvement, but they do limit the Department’s ability to consistently identify patterns, strengthen training, enhance supervision, and fully leverage investigations as tools for organizational learning.

This section highlights the importance of thorough and complete investigations, particularly as a means of reinforcing SCPD’s stated goal of proactive improvement. We present examples where the Department effectively addressed the full scope of potential concerns, as well as cases where broader review could have supported earlier intervention, clearer guidance, or enhanced training. Together, these examples illustrate both SCPD’s capacity for strong investigative work and the opportunity to further align investigative practices with the Department’s forward-looking vision, even within existing resource constraints.

Potential for Department-Wide Lessons Learned
One case reviewed demonstrates both progress and continued gaps; in that case, the Department correctly acknowledged that a complainant had been improperly cited despite displaying a valid disabled placard, rescinded the citations, sent the complainant a responsive letter that included an apology, and counseled the officer.

But the investigation did not address broader issues revealed by the incident beyond the actions of the individual officer. In this case, the supervisor who directed the officer to issue the citations acknowledged that he was not aware of the applicable exemptions when a vehicle displays a disabled placard.6 Given the supervisor’s role in training and guiding officers, this gap in understanding highlighted an opportunity for a more comprehensive corrective approach. A broader approach would have assessed whether officers receive adequate information and training on disabled placard rules specifically and disability-related laws generally.

At a minimum, issuing a Department Bulletin that clearly outlines the 6 Vehicles displaying a disabled placard are exempt from several parking restrictions, including permit requirements, time limits in blue and green zones, and meter fees.

29.16 P a g e | 15
exemptions and restrictions associated with disabled placards would help ensure consistent understanding and enforcement going forward.

Similarly, the Department’s handling of a complaint from a crime witness reflects the limits of a narrowly framed inquiry. In this incident, a crime witness expressed discomfort about being interviewed in front of suspects, and his several attempts to reach a supervisor to discuss his concerns went unanswered. Although the investigation thoroughly reviewed whether the officer violated policy, it did not address the underlying issue: a community member who reported an active crime felt exposed, unsafe, and ignored.

The real lesson for the Department is not about whether the officer moved the witness or whether the complainant documented every attempted call.

It is about how officers communicate with crime witnesses in ways that protect their anonymity, how supervisors respond when witnesses raise safety concerns, and how the Department ensures community members receive timely call-backs. Instead, the focus on refuting specific allegations overshadowed the chance to learn from the complaint and strengthen community trust.

In both cases, the Department resolved the immediate allegation but failed to identify broader lessons that could inform improved training, communication practices, and supervisory expectations.

De-Escalation Lessons: Recognizing What Went Well
(and What Did Not)
The investigation of one case illustrates the value of a complaint review process that looks beyond the narrow question of whether misconduct occurred and instead examines the full scope of the incident. In this case, the complainant alleged that excessive force was used against him during an arrest, and that this force was racially motivated.

The supervisor’s analysis did more than simply evaluate the allegations raised: it recognized the importance of assessing the officer’s overall decision-making, communication, and professionalism during a volatile interaction involving security guards and three Black male community

29.17 16 | P a g e
members. The investigation noted that the responding officer maintained composure and impartiality, clearly explained the legal basis for his actions, and transparently addressed concerns about biased policing.

Even when subjected to personal and racially charged insults, he remained professional and successfully de-escalated the situation.

The review also evaluated the officer’s use of force within the broader context of the encounter. When a threat emerged, the officer responded with only the force necessary to safely detain the involved parties, a conclusion supported by body-worn camera footage that contradicted claims of excessive force. By documenting these observations, the investigation highlighted how thoughtful communication, equitable enforcement, and emotional control can defuse high-tension situations and reinforce public trust. This case demonstrates how thorough, well-framed investigations can identify and elevate effective practices, and not simply confirm the absence of misconduct.

By contrast, and as we discussed above, the case involving the bicycle rider illustrates how the absence of a careful, comprehensive review can obscure important lessons. The encounter escalated rapidly, with repeated commands, threats of Taser deployment, and little effort to pause, regroup, or employ alternative communication strategies.

Supervisory involvement was delayed, further reducing opportunities to de-escalate the encounter.

However, the investigation focused largely on whether the officer’s actions technically met policy requirements, without examining the broader issues implicated by the incident. A more complete and thoughtful review would have assessed the officer’s communication approach, decision-making under stress, and use of de-escalation principles, as well as the supervisor’s role in managing the scene. By not exploring these dimensions, the investigation missed an opportunity to identify concerns and reinforce expectations for effective, professional resolution of tense encounters.

29.18 P a g e | 17
Communication & Training with Vulnerable
Populations
The following cases demonstrate how narrowly framed reviews can overlook concerns about officer communication, especially with more vulnerable community members such as juveniles and the elderly.

One case involved a 12-year old who called 9-1-1 to report that she was being threatened by three other individuals in a park. When an officer arrived, he quickly concluded with minimal investigation that no crime had been committed. A short time later, he saw one of the juvenile suspects whom the victim had identified at the scene, cursed at him, ordered him not to return to the park, and took an aerosol can from the suspect’s pocket.

The supervisor assigned to investigate the complaint focused largely on the officer’s failure to provide a receipt for the juvenile suspect’s property the officer had taken. The investigation determined that the seizure of property without a receipt violated Department policy, and remedial action was taken with respect to this specific policy violation.

However, we found that the manner in which the officer interacted with the juvenile victim and suspect and investigated the incident merited a more in depth assessment.

The responding officer did not separate the victim from the suspects at the scene. After the victim told the officer that the subjects threw rocks at her, he asked whether she wanted to prosecute--a concept he did not explain nor would be familiar to a 12-year old. When she said no, he conducted no further investigation. He did not ask the victim’s name, where she lived or whether he could call her parents, questions that could have conveyed to a 12-year old who had contacted 911 for help that her safety was his concern. He left within three minutes of his arrival. The supervisor’s investigation failed to address the quality of the officer’s investigation and his interaction with a 12-year old victim.

Similarly, the supervisor’s assessment of the officer’s interaction with the juvenile suspect was incomplete. He found the officer’s reliance on profanity was minimal and due in part to the officer’s limited options in light

29.19 18 | P a g e
of the 12-year old victim’s unwillingness to pursue criminal charges.7 The supervisor did not assess whether the officer’s demeanor—yelling, cursing and confrontative with the juvenile suspect was effective or if other communication tactics would have better modeled the professional standards expected of police.8
We discussed these concerns with the Department after we concluded our review and they were receptive to our viewpoint. We appreciate the Department’s candor and openness to our observations.

Beyond the incomplete framing of potential misconduct, our review of the above case (as well as other past complaints involving youth) prompts us to recommend that the Department provide specific officer training on interactions between police and youth. It is widely acknowledged that police encounters with youth can often present unique challenges.

Research demonstrates that the adolescent brain differs significantly from that of an adult. Impulsivity, risk taking, susceptibility to influence, an inability to grasp negative consequences, and a tendency to question or fear authority are some of the characteristics of adolescent thinking and behavior that can impact police-youth interactions.

Law enforcement experts recommend that officers receive training on adolescent brain development, effective communication and de-escalation with youth, and how to recognize and respond effectively to youths’ mental health, trauma-related and developmental challenges. To provide officers critical information and tools for improving police-youth interactions, these trainings should include the developmental differences between juveniles and adults and incorporate scenario-based learning on de-escalation 7 As pointed out above, we question the merit of an officer asking 12-year olds if they desire prosecution without any explanation or guidance from an adult. It is equally problematic that the supervisor used the 12-year old’s negative response to prosecution as justification for the officer’s reliance on profanity and confrontational tactics.
8 While the Department does not have a policy that specifically addresses profanity, the Code of Professional Conduct and Responsibility for Peace Officers is incorporated into SCPD's Manual; Standard 4.11 is the most applicable here. It states: "Peace Officers shall be courteous and respectful in their official dealings with the public, fellow officers, superiors and subordinates."

29.20 P a g e | 19
techniques, communication skills and trauma recognition tailored to policejuvenile encounters. 9

RECOMMENDATION 3
The Department should provide training on developmental differences between juveniles and adults, incorporating scenario-based instruction on de-escalation, communication, and trauma recognition tailored to police-juvenile interactions.

A case on the opposite end of the age spectrum involved an elderly complainant dissatisfied with how her call for service was handled and the accuracy of the resulting police report. Here again, we found that the investigation was too narrowly focused. The investigation correctly determined that the officer had not fully investigated the matter and had drafted an inaccurate police report. The Department took appropriate remedial action to address the officer’s actions. Nonetheless, the inquiry overlooked several other broader issues beyond the immediate allegations of misconduct.

First, the close-out letter was vague, and OIR has not been notified as to whether the police report was ever corrected. Second, although the investigator commendably pulled prior calls for service involving the same 9 See e.g., International Association of Chiefs of Police. 2018. Police-Youth Engagement. Practices in Modern Policing. Alexandria, VA: International Association of Chiefs of Police.
https://www.theiacp.org/resources/document/practices-in-modern-policing-policeyouth-engagement. Jeff Golden, “Training to Work Effectively with Youth: Reflect on the Past and Retool for the Future,” The Police Chief 82 (November 2015):
22–29; https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/training-to-work-effectively-withyouth-reflect-on-the-past-and-retool-for-the-future/; see also A Toolkit for California Law Enforcement: Policing Today’s Youth
https://www.policinginstitute.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/08/PF_IssueBriefs_TeenBrain_Final.pdf

29.21 20 | P a g e
complainant to look for other issues, those calls were not evaluated for additional concerns. This was a missed opportunity: those earlier incidents revealed a possible issue with service related to this specific female that was not unique to the officer held accountable. Prior calls involving the same individual had been handled with minimal engagement and, in at least one case, the responding officer had failed to activate his body-worn camera. We also noted one of the previous reports referred to the complainant as an “EDP” (“emotionally disturbed person”), language potentially dismissing her concerns (and that was neither assessed nor addressed).

These broader issues were not evaluated in the investigation for follow-up.

As with other cases, the investigation’s narrow focus on a single aspect of officer performance prevented the Department from identifying and addressing additional, significant concerns embedded in the same set of interactions.

Mental Health and Crisis Response
In reviewing the following case, our focus is on the scope and depth of the Department’s subsequent investigation and whether it fully leveraged the incident as an opportunity for organizational learning.

In this case, a family complained that officers failed to take appropriate action when responding to a loved one experiencing a behavioral health crisis. The investigation focused almost exclusively on whether officers correctly determined that the subject did not meet the criteria for an involuntary mental health hold and whether required procedures were followed.

While those questions are important, we found that the investigation did not meaningfully examine broader issues raised by the encounter. The review summarized that officers relied on third-party information and phone contact, and noted that the Department’s mental health liaison was unavailable due to a holiday, but it did not evaluate whether the overall approach to the call was appropriate given the reported risk factors.

A more robust investigation could have examined the officers’ decision not to enter the residence or speak directly with the subject; while on scene,

29.22 P a g e | 21
the officers explained that they “don’t go into houses.” Similarly, the investigation did not evaluate the trainee’s performance beyond procedural compliance.10
Overall, the investigation did not address whether disengagement was appropriate, whether other crisis intervention strategies were appropriate or available, or how officers should balance safety considerations with the need for direct assessment in behavioral health crisis calls. All of these factors would have been valuable guidance to officers responding to similar calls in the future.

By focusing primarily on whether officers correctly determined that no involuntary mental health hold was warranted, the investigation missed an important opportunity to evaluate SCPD’s broader crisis response practices.

We acknowledge that mental health–related calls for service are among the most challenging faced by law enforcement agencies nationwide.

These calls are often high-risk, involve incomplete or conflicting information, and raise complex questions about public safety, individual rights, and the appropriate role of police in non-criminal crises.

Department leadership noted that SCPD is actively working to improve its response to these types of calls for service. For example, the Department recently issued directives clarifying SCPD’s role when responding to certain local facilities involving juveniles and behavioral health concerns, emphasizing that SCPD is often called to secure scenes where no crime has occurred and where traditional enforcement tools are limited or inappropriate. These efforts reflect the Department’s recognition of the complexities inherent in mental health-related calls.

This case underscores the importance of aligning investigative scope with that intent. A more holistic review would examine not just legal thresholds, but also operational decision-making, training implications, and 10 Notably, the trainee demonstrated effective communication skills in the limited interactions that did occur, an observation that could have informed both individual development and broader training practices, even if such feedback was captured elsewhere in daily training documentation.

29.23 22 | P a g e
supervisory guidance.

RECOMMENDATION 4
The Department should ensure that complaint investigations are framed to identify all relevant issues, including policy considerations, training needs, communication concerns, and systemic gaps, and should document resulting action steps such as policy updates, curriculum enhancements, or supervisory guidance.

Investigating Individual Incidents and
Identifying Repeated Patterns of Concern
Department leadership has emphasized that, as a relatively small agency, SCPD benefits from internal awareness of personnel performance and operational challenges. They reported that supervisors and command staff regularly discuss officer conduct and emerging concerns in real time.

At the same time, this year’s review continues to show that certain officers and supervisors appear repeatedly across complaint matters. As we have noted in prior reports, repeated involvement alone does not indicate misconduct. Officers who are highly active or assigned to public-facing roles may naturally generate more contacts and, correspondingly, more complaints. Supervisors, likewise, are often involved in disputes precisely because of their role in resolving them. Nonetheless, when recurring involvement reflects similar themes, such as communication challenges, decision-making under stress, or supervisory oversight, it suggests that informal awareness may benefit from being supplemented by more structured, cross-case analysis.

A more formalized system for tracking and reviewing patterns across complaints would not replace the Department’s existing knowledge or judgment, but rather support it. Such a system would help ensure that

29.24 P a g e | 23
patterns are documented consistently, remain visible despite personnel changes, and are used intentionally to inform training, supervision, and early intervention.

Last year’s report highlighted this same challenge. Through a series of case studies, we demonstrated how patterns of behavior, when viewed collectively, revealed concerns that were not apparent in any single investigation. This year’s sample reflects a similar dynamic, including for some of the same employees discussed previously. As in prior reporting cycles, we found instances where the Department conducted strong, and at times exemplary, investigations, yet the absence of a holistic view of employee performance limited SCPD’s ability to recognize repeated patterns or respond to them systematically.

In the sections that follow, we present two examples that illustrate this point. Both demonstrate SCPD’s capacity to conduct thorough investigations. At the same time, they reflect a continued tendency to treat incidents in isolation, even when the same officers or supervisors have been involved in multiple concerns.

Example 1: A Supervisor’s Negative Interactions with
the Public
A complainant called the Department to report a violation of a new city ordinance and a negative interaction with a sergeant ensued. Although noting the sergeant’s conversation with the complainant could have been handled differently, the investigating supervisor stated this was the first time he had seen a complaint of this nature involving this sergeant.

Unbeknownst to the supervisor, ten months before this incident, the Department had received a complaint against the same sergeant for making unprofessional and discourteous remarks. The complaint involved credible evidence to support the allegations of unprofessional and discourteous remarks and was pending at the time the supervisor investigated the second complaint. However, because the Department has no system in place that flags multiple complaints and performance

29.25 24 | P a g e
issues, this supervisor lacked accurate information about the sergeant’s complaint history. Unaware of the previous case, the supervisor was prevented from observing an emerging pattern of problematic communication and tailoring appropriate corrective action that considered both cases.

Example 2: Risk v. Reward in Officer’s Repeated
Conduct
Another case represents a significant investigation in this audit cycle, both for what the Department did well and because it highlights persistent concerns about how SCPD responds to repeated misconduct by certain officers. While the investigation of this case itself was rigorous and reflected strong internal review practices, the final disciplinary outcome did not fully account for the broader pattern of behavior at issue.

In this case, officers were assigned to conduct specialized enforcement -.

Despite a supervisor’s explicit instructions to limit their activity to that mission and avoid a specific area, they engaged in various self-initiated enforcement actions in the prohibited area, including a traffic stop and a hit-and-run investigation.

To SCPD’s credit, supervisors recognized the seriousness of this conduct, particularly because it was the second instance this officer team disregarded a supervisor’s orders (see our 2024 Annual Report). The chain of command diligently reviewed body-worn camera and in-car footage, raised substantive concerns, and elevated the case to a formal investigation. Command staff directed additional interviews when initial findings left gaps. This case demonstrated the Department’s capacity for a robust and diligent investigation when warranted.

However, despite this strong investigative work, the final findings and discipline left important issues unresolved. For example:
 Ignoring a direct order: Supervisors repeatedly emphasized their concern that this assignment team had ignored the mission and limitations their supervisor had given them and that this team had

29.26 P a g e | 25
previously ignored a supervisor’s order. This aspect prompted additional investigation to determine if both officers knew of, and had violated, the direct order. Ultimately, the Department held only one officer accountable for this violation, finding insufficient information to determine if the other officer knew about the direct order. More importantly, the Department did not address what steps supervisors must take in the future to ensure that their orders are known and understood by both members of the assignment team they supervise.
 High-risk tactics and escalation: Supervisors documented concerns about unnecessary high-risk tactics, lack of a Code-3 broadcast, insufficient backup, and limited de-escalation. These were later minimized based largely on officer explanations, without a clear reconciliation of the contradictory supervisory assessments.  Credibility and Accuracy Concerns: Supervisors expressed concerns about the accuracy of the officers’ reports and the reasonableness of the justifications the officers gave for their actions, concerns that have also been raised in previous cases involving these officers. The persistence of these troubling behaviors is not directly addressed by the Department’s actions.

These inconsistencies, along with delays between investigative steps, raise questions about the clarity and coherence of the final decision-making process.

It is important to acknowledge that the Department should assess the full range of an officer’s performance, including their effectiveness, productivity, and commendations they receive. These strengths matter, and a fair assessment should recognize them.

But a comprehensive accountability system must also address repeated problematic behavior. Across multiple closed cases, including during this audit cycle11, one officer has demonstrated recurring issues with 11 Another case in this cycle involved the officer’s repeated challenges with officer discretion and decision-making. While corrective action was taken for some deficiencies, we again found that the review process failed to holistically

29.27 26 | P a g e
supervision, judgment, risk-taking, truthfulness, and communication.

Ignoring direct orders, particularly more than once, is a serious concern in any law-enforcement agency. Additionally, the officer has a pending 2025 case that falls outside the reporting period, making the full trajectory of performance even more relevant.

While we recognize the Department’s authority to determine appropriate findings and discipline, we suggest that despite the supervisors’ observations, the Department’s ultimate approach did not fully address the severity of the officer’s continuing problematic behaviors. The final disciplinary outcome in this case did not escalate meaningfully beyond prior discipline, nor did it reflect the accumulated nature of the officer’s conduct. The Department’s stated commitment to progressive intervention was not clearly reflected in the final decision.

We remain concerned that SCPD continues to treat repeated misconduct as a series of discrete incidents rather than as an emerging pattern requiring structured intervention. A robust accountability system should integrate the full context, strengths, risks, improvements, and repeated concerns, and ensure that both the "reward" and "risk" sides of the ledger are accounted for. In this case, the recurring risks increasingly overshadow the benefits, underscoring the need for a more holistic and documented approach to remediation, supervision, and progressive discipline.

These examples -- one involving a supervisor, the other involving a line officer -- reflect a broader process gap: SCPD’s current systems are equipped to resolve individual complaints, but they do not reliably connect information across cases to identify behavioral patterns, coaching needs, or broader risk indicators. To strengthen the Department’s ability to respond proactively and holistically, we again recommend the actions that we have previously recommended over the past six years of auditing the Department. They include:
address the conduct of both officers, or the broader implications for case management and prosecution.

29.28 P a g e | 27

1. Implement a formal Early Intervention System (EIS)
A comprehensive, formal EIS would consolidate data from multiple sources, complaints, use-of-force reports, performance notes, commendations, and training records, to help identify emerging patterns early. These systems support non-punitive, timely interventions before concerns escalate.

2. Create Structured, Documented Coaching and Development Plans When patterns emerge, whether related to communication, professionalism, decision-making, or supervisory oversight, SCPD should provide targeted support. That may include formal mentoring, one-on-one coaching, skill-building assignments, or periodic check-ins.

Importantly, these efforts should be documented to support fair evaluation, provide continuity across supervisory transitions, and mitigate liability if issues recur.

3. Strengthen Supervisor Awareness Through Better
Information-Sharing
Supervisors cannot respond to emerging patterns if they do not know they exist. SCPD should ensure that supervisors receive timely, consolidated information about repeated complaints or performance concerns involving their personnel, along with guidance on appropriate follow-up. Department leadership reported that they currently facilitate information-sharing of this type with sergeant meetings every shift change (three times a year); these sessions reportedly include training with PSU as well as opportunities to share insights about officer performance.

4. Expand Wellness and Support Resources
Repeated performance issues sometimes signal stress, burnout, or personal challenges. Flagging repeated concerns early allows the Department to ensure employees are offered appropriate support—not as punishment, but as part of a healthy organizational culture. To support officers as well as community members, the Department recently brought on a therapy canine.

Together, these practices would enable SCPD to move beyond incident-based accountability and toward a more integrated, holistic understanding of employee performance. Such an approach strengthens officer development, improves supervisory effectiveness, and enhances

29.29 28 | P a g e
public trust by ensuring that repeated patterns of concern, positive or negative, are identified early, understood in context, and addressed proactively.

Finally, we note that SCPD leadership has articulated a commitment to operating as a learning-oriented organization, one that uses the complaint system not only for corrective action, but also as a tool to improve performance. Department leadership has expressed that this is an outcome the Department actively strives for, even if it cannot always be fully realized due to resource constraints, staffing limitations, and competing operational demands. We recognize these realities and view the Department’s stated intent as an important foundation.

To further support the Department’s intent, we recommend that the Department establish a regular and intentional practice of reviewing complaint investigations for lessons learned. By doing so, SCPD can better identify patterns, guide training priorities, and embed continuous learning into its supervisory and leadership practices in a way that is sustainable over time.

RECOMMENDATION 6
On a continual basis and at least annually, the Department should review its complaint investigations to identify, develop and implement training to improve the outcome of the circumstances that led to those complaints.

RECOMMENDATION 7
The Department should craft policy that clarifies the steps supervisors must take to ensure that their orders are known and understood by the members of any team they supervise.

The Continued Case for Technology
Our observations throughout this report point to another repeated area of concern: the critical need for SCPD to fully implement and utilize technology solutions that support accountability, early intervention, and

29.30 P a g e | 29
organizational learning. Despite incremental progress in tracking and reporting, the absence of formal, automated systems continues to hinder the Department’s ability to identify patterns, intervene early, and ensure comprehensive oversight.

SCPD has taken steps to improve internal tracking, such as developing an Excel workbook for administrative investigations and formalizing the tracking of Divisional Matters. Regular command staff meetings now include updates on outstanding cases, which has improved transparency and accountability at the leadership level. However, these manual processes remain vulnerable to gaps, delays, and loss of institutional knowledge, especially as personnel transition or workloads increase.

The Department’s ongoing challenges with system implementation, whether due to competing priorities, resource constraints, or delays in updating the Records Management System, have real operational consequences.

SCPD’s commitment to fully populating its Blue Team12 tracking software is a positive step, but it has tasked a singular supervisor, who holds multiple other essential assignments, to complete this onerous task. The Department should prioritize and resource these efforts to ensure that technology is not just acquired but effectively embedded in daily operations.
12 “BlueTeam,” is an industry-standard tool that enables agencies to track use of force, complaints, and performance indicators in real time. The system supports Early Intervention Systems (EIS), which can flag at-risk behaviors and prompt non-disciplinary interventions before issues escalate. They also ensure that critical data is retained, accessible, and integrated with other systems such as CAD and RMS.

29.31 30 | P a g e
Policy and Procedure
Recommendations
In addition to administrative process improvements, our case reviews often identify policy and procedural challenges. This section examines specific cases to illustrate where current policies may be insufficient, inconsistent, or unclear. Our recommendations are informed by national best practices and legal precedents and aim to enhance the department’s ability to respond to incidents effectively, ensure officers are held accountable in a fair and transparent manner, and provide officers with the necessary support and training to uphold their responsibilities.

Automated License Plate Reader Program
In late 2025, the IPA received a complaint alleging that the Department’s use of automated license plate readers (ALPRs) involved improper data sharing and audit tampering. The complainant asserted that Flock had altered network audit logs and that SCPD’s ALPR network was accessed by out-of-state and federal agencies, raising concerns under California’s SB 34 (ALPR privacy) and SB 54 (sanctuary protections). We forwarded the complaint to the Department for investigation. The Department’s investigation of this case was completed in January 2026, outside the audit period for this Annual Report.

On January 13, 2026, the City Council voted to terminate the Department’s ALPR contract with Flock and to stop using the company’s automatic license plate readers. Although the Department does not currently operate an ALPR program, in the next audit cycle we will address the Department’s response to this complaint.

29.32 P a g e | 31
Community – Police Mediation Program
Recent cases have highlighted the value of mediation as a tool for resolving disputes and building stronger relationships between SCPD and the community. One case introduced above and involving a school official and a supervisor, serves as a compelling example of how mediation can address communication breakdowns and foster mutual understanding.

In that case, following a contentious interaction between the parties, SCPD leadership recognized the potential for mediation to repair and strengthen the working relationship. Both parties expressed a willingness to participate in a mediated conversation, with the supervisor acknowledging that the situation could have been handled differently and the school official seeking a constructive path forward. Importantly, this approach was supported by command staff and discussed with the police union, which indicated openness to mediation for minor complaints, pending further review.

This case illustrates the broader approach of establishing a formal community-police mediation program. Mediation offers a confidential, nonadversarial forum where community members and officers can address misunderstandings, express concerns, and collaboratively develop solutions. Unlike traditional complaint investigations, mediation focuses on dialogue and relationship-building rather than fault-finding or discipline.

This process can lead to greater satisfaction for all parties, reduce the likelihood of recurring conflicts, and enhance trust in SCPD’s commitment to accountability and service.

Supporting SCPD in setting up a mediation program aligns with our previous mediation recommendation and the Chief’s expressed interest in a department-wide discussion on this topic. Key steps for implementation include:
 Convening a working group with department leadership, union representatives, and community stakeholders to design the program framework.

29.33 32 | P a g e
 Identifying qualified mediators, either from within the city or through external partnerships, who are trained in dispute resolution and familiar with police-community dynamics.
 Establishing clear guidelines for which types of complaints or disputes are appropriate for mediation, ensuring participation is voluntary and confidential.
 Providing training for officers and staff on the goals and processes of mediation and communicating the program’s availability to the public.

By institutionalizing mediation as an option for resolving minor complaints and interpersonal conflicts, SCPD can not only address individual incidents but create culture of open communication and collaborative problem-solving, key ingredients for building lasting trust between SCPD and the community.

The Department should take the following steps to implement a mediation program.

RECOMMENDATION 7
SCPD should convene a working group with department
leadership, union representatives, and community stakeholders to design the mediation program’s framework.

RECOMMENDATION 8
SCPD should identify qualified mediators, either from within the city or through external partnerships, who are trained in dispute resolution and familiar with police-community dynamics.

RECOMMENDATION 9
SCPD should establish guidelines for which types of complaints or disputes are appropriate for mediation, ensuring participation is voluntary and confidential.

RECOMMENDATION 10
SCPD should provide training for officers and staff on the goals and processes of mediation and communicate the program’s availability to the public.

29.34 P a g e | 33
Body-Worn Camera: Accountability and
Policy Updates
In August 2025, the Department made significant improvements to Policy 429 governing body-worn cameras. The updated policy now requires activation for all calls for service and law-enforcement-related functions, replacing the prior, narrower activation standard. The Department also strengthened program oversight by expanding the responsibilities of the “BWC Coordinator.” The coordinator is now charged with conducting periodic compliance audits, updating body-worn camera training, and completing an annual administrative review of the program. These changes position the coordinator to monitor system performance more effectively and to identify and address trends as they arise.

Because many of the cases reviewed in this audit cycle occurred under the prior policy, some of the issues we observed in the 2025 reporting period were shaped by the now-outdated policy. For example, in the fatal traffic collision, the absence of body-worn camera footage during the initial welfare check of the subject significantly limited the evidentiary record and the ability to fully assess the incident. Under the new policy updates, this welfare check would now qualify as a call for service, and activation would be required.

Although the Department has addressed activation standards in the updated policy, the updated policy still contains broad language concerning when deactivation is permitted.13 Without clearer direction, intermittent recording may continue to occur in situations where continuous documentation is necessary to maintain an accurate evidentiary record. One example is a DUI investigation in which the arresting officer repeatedly stopped and restarted the BWC during the 13 The updated policy’s provisions on deactivation are not significantly different from the old policy. The new policy permits deactivation when officers discuss case tactics or strategy, private conversations with other officers or emergency responders, to avoid recording a confidential information or undercover officer, to protect the privacy of a victim or witness or when the privacy concern of an individual outweighs any legitimate department interest. (See Policy 429.5.2).

29.35 34 | P a g e
encounter, including during moments when the subject appeared injured and later refused a breath test. Although the former policy allowed deactivation for broadly defined reasons (e.g., discussions of tactics or investigative strategy), the resulting intermittent footage limited the clarity and completeness of the record. While internal reviewers recognized this concern, neither the updated policy nor the current training materials fully resolve the underlying ambiguity that allowed intermittent activation to be treated as compliant. We recommend that the Department further refine policy to clarify any ambiguity in deactivation protocols.

RECOMMENDATION 11
The Department should revise Policy 429.5.2 to eliminate ambiguity regarding when officers may deactivate their cameras. The policy should require continuous recording throughout any enforcement or investigative contact, with narrowly defined, documented exceptions (e.g., sensitive victim conversations, protected privacy settings).

Beyond policy, our reviews over the years suggest that the Department is seemingly reluctant to hold officers fully accountable for BWC violations.

Last year, we documented late or sporadic activation, often explained by officers as administrative or discretionary decisions. These patterns largely persisted in 2025. And, like last year, we again noted instances of improperly tagged or uncategorized footage. For example, in one case, a supervisor had to manually search for body-worn camera footage due to improper tagging.

These lapses (whether of activation or tagging) were, and still are, handled through informal counseling; in another case, the supervisor reported that he intended to “talk with the officer” about the importance of correctly labeling evidence, an important remediation step. But the recurring issues suggest that the Department’s current approach of using informal counseling without formal accountability has not resolved the issue.

We recommend that the Department adopt a more structured approach, ensuring that repeated or unjustified failures are documented formally and officers given the appropriate remedial action. SCPD should establish clear consequences for non-compliance with BWC activation requirements, including documentation in performance evaluations and

29.36 P a g e | 35
consideration in disciplinary decisions when failures occur without justification. Formalizing accountability will reinforce the seriousness of these requirements.

RECOMMENDATION 12
The Department should adopt a more formal approach to
accountability regarding body-worn camera usage, including activation and tagging, to ensure that repeated or unjustified failures are documented and, when appropriate, considered in disciplinary decisions.

Finally, and consistent with the updated policy, the BWC Coordinator should conduct regular audits across all units to assess activation, continuity of recording, and proper tagging. Audit findings should inform targeted training for both officers and supervisors, including practical strategies for maintaining compliance in dynamic field conditions. And any issues identified by officers and supervisors should also be communicated to the BWC Coordinator so that emerging trends can be monitored and incorporated into training and audit priorities.14
RECOMMENDATION 13
Consistent with the updated policy, the BWC coordinator should conduct regular audits across all units to assess activation, continuity of recording, and proper tagging.

RECOMMENDATION 14
Officers and supervisors should report BWC issues and concerns to the BWC coordinator and the Department’s BWC policy should be amended to include this responsibility.
14 The Department’s BWC policy currently requires officers to report any malfunctioning or damage to BWC equipment to the BWC coordinator. (BWC Policy 429.3.2.). This reporting responsibility appears limited to mechanical issues concerning the BWC equipment. We recommend amending this provision to include the reporting of any BWC-related issues to the BWC coordinator (including equipment, policy or training concerns) and that this reporting responsibility apply to both members and supervisors.

29.37 36 | P a g e
We commend the Department for updating its BWC policy and expanding the coordinator role, steps that significantly strengthen oversight and transparency. Continued attention to activation consistency, deactivation standards, and accountability will help ensure that these policy updates are fully realized in practice.

Canine Policy
In our 4th Annual Report (May 2024), we reviewed a canine bite incident in which a crime victim was bitten during a police response; we found that the scope of SCPD’s internal investigation was too narrowly tailored to the canine deployment itself, missing broader issues such as tactical decisionmaking, de-escalation efforts, and supervisory performance. More importantly, we recommended that SCPD update its canine policy to require that all canine bites be subject to the Department’s formal use of force review process and advised the Department to ensure its canine procedure manual was consistent with its formal policy.

In 2025, the Department provided and our office reviewed an updated Canine Policy that was largely responsive to these recommendations.

Our review involved a detailed analysis of the new policy against nationally recognized guidelines and compliance with California laws. We provided feedback to the Department, and look forward to seeing the final policy implemented.

Updates from Prior Recommendations
In our 5th Annual Report, published in May 2025, we made 10 recommendations that arose from the cases we had reviewed. Of our 10 recommendations, the Department ranked the implementation of BlueTeam (a software platform to track use of force, complaints, and

29.38 P a g e | 37
performance indicators in real time) as its first priority.15 As previously discussed, this project will require leadership, training and sufficient resources to ensure that this technology is fully integrated into daily operations. The Department ranked as its second priority, the creation of a case-tracking system that tracks assignments, deadlines, status updates and other relevant case information for its Investigation Unit and an Investigation Unit manual that delineates investigative protocols and standards. The Department designated refresher training on auto-tagging to ensure proper body-worn camera tagging as its third priority. While we are aware of continued staffing challenges, we urge the Department to commit the necessary resources to implement the recommendations we made during last year’s audit.

Since the start of our engagement in 2020, we have made 83 recommendations. The Department agreed with 76 of these, and, as of publication of this report, has completed or is in the process of completing 73 of them. Appendix B lists these, the Department’s response to those recommendations, and the current status.

We appreciate the Department’s collaboration on completing Appendix B. 15 See SCPD’s Presentation to the Santa Cruz City Council’s Public Safety Committee, June 25, 2025.

29.39 38 | P a g e
Community Engagement
Throughout the year, we fielded referrals and complaints regarding SCPD actions, and the IPA team worked closely with community members at every stage of the process. This work extends well beyond answering questions or providing procedural guidance. It reflects a deeper commitment to ensuring that complainants are heard, supported, and able to navigate a system that can feel complex and intimidating. The sustained engagement not only strengthened individual complainants’ ability to participate meaningfully in the process but also helped surface systemic issues that might otherwise have gone unnoticed.

Our team also continued to engage with community partners and stakeholders. We met with representatives from the ACLU, and we attended the Chief’s Advisory Committee meeting in February 2026 to discuss our role as the Independent Police Auditor, answer questions, and hear concerns directly from committee members. These interactions deepen the community’s understanding of the oversight process and reinforce our commitment to transparency, accessibility, and accountability.

29.40 P a g e | 39
Conclusion
This sixth annual review reflects both meaningful progress and continued challenges within the Department’s accountability systems. Over the 2025 reporting period, the Department demonstrated improved investigative quality, more appropriate case classification, and responsiveness to prior recommendations. These developments signal a commitment by Department leadership to strengthening transparency, fairness, and professionalism.

This report also identifies areas where existing structures and practices would benefit from further development to better support organizational learning and consistency. The recommendations in this report are intended to help SCPD move from an incident-based, reactive model toward a more integrated, learning-oriented approach to accountability. By expanding review mechanisms for significant incidents, strengthening investigative framing, investing in early-intervention and data systems, and formalizing tools such as mediation and targeted training, the Department can better identify risk, reinforce effective practices, and address concerns before they escalate.

Independent oversight is most effective when it functions as a partner in continuous improvement. We appreciate the Department’s cooperation throughout this audit cycle and its willingness to engage candidly.

29.41 40 | P a g e
Recommendations
1: SCPD should rename the Use of Force Review Board and expand its capacity to include review of significant incidents due to their complexity, seriousness or public concern.
2: SCPD should amend the Use of Force Review Board policy to reflect an expanded scope.
3: The Department should provide training on developmental differences between juveniles and adults, incorporating scenario-based instruction on de-escalation, communication, and trauma recognition tailored to police-juvenile interactions. 4: The Department should ensure that complaint investigations are framed to identify all relevant issues, including policy considerations, training needs, communication concerns, and systemic gaps, and should document resulting action steps such as policy updates, curriculum enhancements, or supervisory guidance.
5: On a continual basis and at least annually, the Department should review its complaint investigations to identify, develop and implement training to improve the outcome of the circumstances that led to those complaints.
6: The Department should craft policy that clarifies the steps supervisors must take to ensure that their orders are known and understood by the members of any team they supervise.
7: SCPD should convene a working group with department leadership, union representatives, and community stakeholders to design the mediation program’s framework.
8: SCPD should identify qualified mediators, either from within the city or through external partnerships, who are trained in dispute resolution and familiar with police-community dynamics.

29.42 P a g e | 41
9: SCPD should establish guidelines for which types of complaints or disputes are appropriate for mediation, ensuring participation is voluntary and confidential.
10: SCPD should provide training for officers and staff on the goals and processes of mediation and communicate the program’s availability to the public.
11: The Department should revise Policy 429.5.2 to eliminate ambiguity regarding when officers may deactivate their cameras. The policy should require continuous recording throughout any enforcement or investigative contact, with narrowly defined, documented exceptions. 12: The Department should adopt a more formal approach to accountability regarding body-worn camera usage, including activation and tagging, to ensure that repeated or unjustified failures are documented and, when appropriate, considered in disciplinary decisions.
13: Consistent with the updated policy, the BWC coordinator should conduct regular audits across all units to assess activation, continuity of recording, and proper tagging.
14: Officers and supervisors should report BWC issues and concerns to the BWC coordinator and the Department’s BWC policy should be amended to include this responsibility.

29.43 42 | P a g e
Appendices
[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

29.44 APPENDIX A: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 Closed Formal and Inquiry Cases – Summary & Findings Annual
Report
Case No. Brief Summary SCPD Allegations/Findings IPA Review OIR25-01
Complainant alleged that officers failed to
investigate a hit and run collision, wrote an
inaccurate report that omitted the hit and run
collision and failed to make a private person's
arrest resulting in reduced criminal charges
against the defendant.

The Department identified policy
violations and took corrective action. Concur
OIR25-02
Complainant alleged that officers provided
inadequate assistance when he alerted them of
the location of his stolen property.

The Department found one officer had
violated policy. Officer no longer with
Department. Concur
OIR25-03
Complainants alleged excessive force, biased
policing, and a failure to provide officer
identification during an incident involving the stop
of a Black bicyclist. The Department exonerated the officers.

See Force Review Board and DeEscalation sections.

OIR25-04
Complainant alleged that Department employee
was unprofessional and failed to identify herself.

The Department found no policy violation
though would have counseled the
employee had the employee not
resigned (unrelated to this complaint). Concur
OIR25-05
Complainant alleged that a community service
officer was unprofessional.

The Department concluded the
allegations were unfounded and
counseled the officer. Concur
OIR25-06
The complainant, a school administrator, alleged
that a supervisor made unprofessional,
discourteous remarks to him in front of a family
and students.

The complainant and involved supervisor
engaged separately in a mediated
discussion with a member of Command
staff. The Department acknowledged the
benefit of creating a formal communitypolice mediation program. See Community-Police Mediation section.

OIR25-07
Department-initiated investigation of officers'
involvement in enforcement activities outside of a
supervisor's instructions.

The Department identified policy
violations and took corrective actions.

See Example 2: Risk v. Reward
section.

OIR25-08
Department-initiated investigation of an officer
allegedly visiting an ex-girlfriend's home in uniform
for a personal purpose.

The Department found the allegation
was not sustained. Concur
OIR25-09
Department-initiated investigation where
complainants alleged excessive force, false
The Department exonerated the officers
on unlawful arrest, unreasonable force
and biased-policing allegations. The Concur. See De-Escalation section.

29.45 APPENDIX A: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 Closed Formal and Inquiry Cases – Summary & Findings Annual
Report
Case No. Brief Summary SCPD Allegations/Findings IPA Review arrest, racial bias and failure to provide medical
assistance.

Department found policy violations
involving obtaining medical clearance
and supervisor notification and
counseled the officer.

OIR25-10
Department-initiated investigation of a traffic
fatality where officers had contact with the
pedestrian-victim earlier in the evening. The Department exonerated the officers.

Concur. See Force Review Board
and De-Escalation sections.

OIR25-11
Complainant alleged that the officer was
discourteous and failed to secure his car after he
was arrested.

The Department exonerated the officer
on the discourtesy allegation, sustained
the secured vehicle allegation and took
corrective action. Concur
OIR25-12
Complainant alleged she was illegally arrested
and not all of her property was booked for
safekeeping.

The Department exonerated the officer;
BWC confirmed no policy violations. Concur
OIR25-13
Complainant alleged a failure to investigate and
slow response time to an incident involving a 12-
year-old victim.

Department found that the response
time, scene investigation and use of
profanity were reasonable. Officer
violated property handling policy and
corrective action was taken.

See Communication and Training
with Vulnerable Population section.

OIR25-14
Complainant alleged the officer's incident report
was inaccurate.

The Department found the officer had
violated policy and took corrective action.

Concur. See Communication and
Training with Vulnerable Population
section.

OIR25-15
Complainant alleged that officers failed to provide
medical assistance during a DUI arrest.

Department exonerated the officers.

Complainant was treated at hospital, and
her pre-incident injuries were
documented in a police report. Concur
OIR25-16
Department-initiated review of dishonesty
allegation against probationary officer and
delayed reporting to California Police Officer
Standards Training of the sustained dishonesty
allegation.

Department sustained a policy violation,
resulting in separation. See Technology section.

OIR25-17
Complainants alleged officers failed to take
appropriate actions when they responded to a
mental health crisis call.

The Department found no policy
violations.

See Mental Health and Crisis
Response section.

29.46 APPENDIX A: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 Closed Formal and Inquiry Cases – Summary & Findings Annual
Report
Case No. Brief Summary SCPD Allegations/Findings IPA Review OIR25-19
Complainant alleged that officer drove unsafely
through an intersection.

Department exonerated the officer;
evidence demonstrated that officer was
responding with flashing lights on his
way to an in-progress burglary. Concur
OIR25-20
A complainant alleged that he had been issued a
parking citation, it had still not been entered into
the system and was preventing him from clearing
his record.

The Department found the conduct was
inadvertent and counseled the officer. Concur
OIR25-21
Complainant alleged that a supervisor was
unprofessional when he called to report a violation
of a new city ordinance.

The Department found no policy violation
and counseled the supervisor.

See Example 1: A Supervisor's
Negative Interactions with the Public
section.

OIR25-22
Complainant alleged that he had been improperly
interviewed in front of suspects and his attempts
to talk with a supervisor went unanswered.

The Department found no policy
violation.

See Potential for Department-Wide
Lessons Learned section.

OIR25-23
Complainant alleged officers failed to address his
noise complaint.

The Department found the officer had
violated policy and took corrective action. Concur
OIR25-24
Complainant alleged he had been improperly cited
twice despite displaying a valid disabled placard in
his vehicle.

The Department had the citations
rescinded, apologized to the
complainant, found no policy violation
and counseled the officer.

See Potential for Department-Wide
Lessons Learned section.

29.47 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
25-1
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
SCPD should rename the Use of Force Review Board
and expand its capacity to include review of significant incidents due to their complexity, seriousness or public concern. TBD N/A
25-2
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
SCPD should amend the Use of Force Review Board
policy to reflect an expanded scope. TBD N/A
25-3
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
The Department should provide training on
developmental differences between juveniles and adults, incorporating scenario based instruction on de
escalation, communication, and trauma recognition
tailored to police juvenile interactions. TBD N/A
25-4
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
The Department should ensure that complaint
investigations are framed to identify all relevant issues, including policy considerations, training needs,
communication concerns, and systemic gaps, and
should document resulting action steps such as policy
updates, curriculum enhancements, or supervisory
guidance. TBD N/A
25-5
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
On a continual basis and at least annually, the
Department should review its complaint investigations to identify, develop and implement training to improve the outcome of the circumstances that led to those
complaints. TBD N/A
25-6
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
The Department should craft policy that clarifies the
steps supervisors must take to ensure that their orders are known and understood by the members of any team
they supervise. TBD N/A

29.48 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
25-7
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
SCPD should convene a working group with department
leadership, union representatives, and community
stakeholders to design the mediation program's
framework. TBD N/A
25-8
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
SCPD should identify qualified mediators, either from
within the city or through external partnerships, who are trained in dispute resolution and familiar with policecommunity dynamics. TBD N/A 25-9
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
SCPD should establish guidelines for which types of
complaints or disputes are appropriate for mediation,
ensuring participation is voluntary and confidential. TBD N/A 25-10
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
SCPD should provide training for officers and staff on the goals and processes of mediation and communicate the
program's availability to the public. TBD N/A
25-11
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
The Department should revise Policy 429.5.2 to
eliminate ambiguity regarding when officers may
deactivate their cameras. The policy should require
continuous recording throughout any enforcement or
investigative contact, with narrowly defined, documented exceptions. TBD N/A
25-12
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
The Department should adopt a more formal approach to
accountability regarding body-worn camera usage,
including activation and tagging, to ensure that repeated or unjustified failures are documented and, when
appropriate, considered in disciplinary decisions. TBD N/A 25-13
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
Consistent with the updated policy, the BWC coordinator should conduct regular audits across all units to assess activation, continuity of recording, and proper tagging. TBD N/A

29.49 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
25-14
2025
Annual
Report 6/23/2026
Officers and supervisors should report BWC issues and
concerns to the BWC coordinator and the Department's
BWC policy should be amended to include this
responsibility. TBD N/A
24-1
2024
Annual
Report 5/27/2025
SCPD should create a procedure manual for the
Investigation Unit that delineates investigative protocols and standards, including consistent use of an Activity
Log that tracks all investigative steps per industry best practice. Agreed
To be
implemented
when new
systems are
implemented.
24-2
2024
Annual
Report 5/27/2025
SCPD should adhere to its own case type definitions
when classifying administrative cases and conduct
Inquiry or Formal investigations when the evidence is not clearly dispositive. Agreed In progress
Current practice to align with
policy. OIR Group 2025
Annual Report shows
improvement in classification
24-3
2024
Annual
Report 5/27/2025
SCPD should prioritize the implementation of software
designed for law enforcement agencies to enhance
accountability, transparency, and efficiency and populate such systems within the next 12 months. Agreed In progress BlueTeam training, set up
being explored by PSU.
24-4
2024
Annual
Report 5/27/2025
SCPD should frame all potential allegations to ensure
complete and thorough investigations that accurately
reflect the totality of the circumstances of each case. Agreed In progress Current practice to align with
policy.
24-5
2024
Annual
Report 5/27/2025
The Department should consider a Department-wide
refresher training on the auto-tagging feature that
includes dispatch reporting requirements for follow-up
calls to ensure proper BWC tagging. Agreed In progress
Auto-tagging added to
Department-wide refresher
training.
24-6
2024
Annual
Report 5/27/2025
When delays in investigation are caused by alleged
scheduling conflicts or other external challenges, SCPD should intervene to facilitate and enable timely
completion of administrative investigations, while also balancing sworn personnel’s rights to due process. Agreed On-going OIR Group audits and internal
timeline review.

29.50 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
24-7
2024
Annual
Report 5/27/2025
SCPD should evaluate their ability to create an in-house Supervisor Field Training Officer program to better
support and develop their supervisory ranks. Agreed In progress Two week supervisor training
and orientation for newly
promoted supervisors
24-8
2024
Annual
Report 5/27/2025
When a case is classified as a Formal investigation,
SCPD should follow its investigative protocol and
conduct formal administrative interviews of subject
employees. Agreed On-going
Investigative protocol requires
formal admin interview.
24-9
2024
Annual
Report 5/27/2025
SCPD should implement additional training for officers
on the proper handling, documentation, and storage of
arrested persons’ personal property. Agreed Completed
Policy outlinines expectations
related to arrested persons'
property.
23-1
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should revise its critical incident protocols or
develop training materials to ensure that once an officerinvolved shooting scene is secure, SCPD should direct any available officer to immediately sequester involved officers and prevent those officers from further
involvement in the incident. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure. Update
to policy is pending.
23-2
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should revise current policy or develop training
materials to explicitly require that all involved officers shall be observed and sequestered until they are able to provide a Public Safety Statement to a supervisor, and
then removed from the immediate scene of an officerinvolved shooting, unless there is a special need to assist at the location. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure. Update
to policy is pending.

29.51 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
23-3
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD and its County partners should revisit its Critical Incident Guidelines and express a preference for sameday interviews to better align with 21st Century critical incident investigative practices, unless precluded by
extenuating circumstances such as an injury of an
officer. Disagreed
Not
Completed
This was proposed to the
County Critical Incident
Team, but was not accepted
by the group.
23-4
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should revise its own internal policy, General
Order 306, to express that same preference to require
interviews of involved and witness officers before the
end of their shift. Disagreed
Not
Completed
SCPD disagrees with this
recommendation.
23-5
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should remove language in current policy that
permits officers involved in a critical incident from
viewing their body-worn camera recording(s) prior to
providing a statement. Disagreed
Not
Completed
SCPD disagrees with this
recommendation.
23-6
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should update General Order 309: Canines to
require that all canine bites be reviewed using the
Department’s formal use of force review process,
including on-scene investigation (e.g., interview of
subjects, victims and witnesses), review by command
staff, and a Use of Force Review Board. Agreed In progress Policy drafting In progress. 23-7
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
Upon implementation of its new Foot Pursuit Policy,
SCPD should train officers in its new Foot Pursuit Policy. Agreed Completed Policy 425 is now in affect
and officers have been
trained.
23-8
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
Once implemented, SCPD should evaluate all incidents
that involve a foot pursuit for compliance with the Foot Pursuit policy. Agreed Completed
Policy 425 is not in affect and
states "The supervisor shall
continuously assess the
situation in order to ensure
the foot pursuit is conducted
within established department
guidelines."

29.52 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
23-9
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should align the canine unit's Procedure Manual
with General Order 309: Canines Agreed In progress
Manual to be updated with
policy updates.
23-10
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should conduct a holistic review of all cases and
engage in broader “issue spotting” to provide the
appropriate level of investigation and remedial action
across all PSU investigations. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
23-11
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should consider more detailed analysis of biasedbased policing investigations, including at least a document review of subject officers’ complaint history
and recent stop data statistics. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
23-12
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
When corresponding with complainants known to
communicate in a language other than English, SCPD
should consider translating all written correspondence, such as the close-out letter, into the complainant’s
language using the City’s translation services. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
23-13
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should post a more complete RIPA data set to
increase transparency and accountability in its traffic stops including the total number of detentions in addition to percentages. Agreed Completed
The Records Division now
posts RIPA data quarterly to
include total number of
detentions and percentages.
22-1
2023
Annual
Report 5/28/2024
SCPD should draft a policy to address the public
recording of law enforcement activity that address topics such as the right to observe, record and retain recorded material of law enforcement activities, safety and
interference of officer duty restrictions, supervisor onscene response, warning when an individual is interfering with safety of an officer’s duties and the
circumstances that permit seizure of evidence. Agreed Completed Policy 429 "Recording of
Police Employees" has been
drafted and is now in effect.

29.53 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
22-2
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should revise its Taser policy to permit Taser use only when there is an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, consisting of observable assaultive behavior or the threat thereof. Agreed Completed Policy 305.1 now states the
Taser may be used when
"The subject is violent. The
subject has demonstrated, by
words or action, an intention
to be violent or to physically
resist, and reasonably
appears to present the
potential to harm officers,
him/herself, or others."
22-3
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
SCPD should ensure that when its supervisors evaluate
uses of force that they consider each of the relevant
factors articulated in its policy. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
22-4
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should revise its Taser policy to require officers to document the justification for multiple
applications of a Taser and Taser exposure longer than
15 seconds. Agreed Completed
Policy 305.5.3 now states
"Multiple applications of the
Taser, including the
justification for each
application, shall be
documented....Taser
exposure lasting longer than
fifteen seconds, including the
justification for, shall also be
documented in the related
report"
22-5
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should revise its Taser policy to require that the Department’s review of a Taser incident includes whether multiple applications of the Taser or Taser
exposure for longer than 15 seconds was justified. Agreed Completed Policy 305.8 now states "A
supervisor should review
each incident where a person
has been exposed to a Taser
device. to include whether
multiple applications of the
Taser and/or Taser exposure
for longer that fifteen seconds
was justified."

29.54 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
22-6
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should revise its Taser policy to require that post-Taser deployment, the reviewing sergeant
download the Taser use data concerning the event,
including but not limited to the number of discharges,
amount of time for each discharge, time between
discharges, and probe or stun mode application. Agreed Completed Policy 305.8 now states "The
device's onboard memory
should be downloaded
through the data port by a
supervisor and saved with the
related arrest/crime report.

The download of the Taser
use data concerning the
event shall include but not
limited to the number of
discharges, amount of time
for each discharge, time
between discharges, and
probe or stun mode
application."
22-7
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should adopt policy that requires use of force review to assess the effectiveness of
communication by involved personnel. Agreed Completed
Policy 302 (Use of Force
Review Board) is now in
effect.
22-8
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should adopt a policy that requires all
relevant allegations of potential misconduct against
involved officers and supervisors be brought. Any
recommendation suggesting that a member should be
named as a subject but then not followed should be
documented and explained in the investigative file. Agreed In progress This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure. Update
to policy is pending.
22-9
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should revise its Taser policy to require the Taser instructor team to analyze all reports involving Taser deployment and to provide recommendations
concerning tactics, decision-making, policy, training and supervision related to their subject matter expertise and incident review. Agreed Completed
Taser policy 305.9 now
addresses this requirement.

29.55 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
22-10
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should revise its Taser policy to
address the increased risks that the Taser poses
(including from single and multiple activations) to
susceptible individuals that the Taser manufacturer has identified. Agreed Completed
Policy 305.5.2 now addresses
the increased risks.
22-11
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should ensure that careful attention be
placed on the review of any Taser use in drive stun
mode to ensure that it meets the limited exceptions set out in policy. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
22-12
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should revise its Use of Force policy to define supervisors’ duties to document and review a
reportable force incident. Agreed Completed
See policy 300.7 "Supervisor
Responsibility"
22-13
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should revise its Use of Force policy to identify each reviewer in the chain of command and their incident review duties. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure. Update
to policy is pending.
22-14
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should identify the one-year statute of
limitations date for each administrative investigation and actively monitor and ensure that the Department’s
internal review and notification of potential discipline to involves officers are provided within the statutory period. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
22-15
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The subject officer’s supervisor should be required to
participate in a comprehensive debriefing about this
incident, including his evaluation of his subordinate’s performance throughout the incident. Agreed Completed
This debrief was completed
by a manager.

29.56 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
22-16
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should amend its Use of Force policy to
require officers to document their de-escalation efforts in their incident reports. Agreed Completed
Policy 300.5 now states "The
officer should articulate the
factors perceived and why
he/she believed the use of
force was reasonable under
the circumstances, and any
alternative tactics or deescalation efforts employed if applicable."
22-17
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department’s review of force incidents should
include whether de-escalation efforts were warranted
and their effectiveness. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
22-18
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should consider adopting a children of
arrested parents policy. Agreed Completed
Policy 339 "Children of
Arrested Parents" policy has
been adopted.
22-19
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department’s review of force incidents should
include any planning efforts by the Department before
the incident. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
22-20
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should treat complainants of the same
incident as co-complainants and provide notification of the Department’s findings at the conclusion of its case. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
22-21
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department should revise its Use of Force policy to provide when feasible a warning and time to comply
before using force. Agreed Completed
Policy 300.3.2 now states
"Where feasible and when it
is safe to do so, a peace
officer shall, prior to the use
of any force, make
reasonable efforts to identify
themselves as a peace officer
and to warn that force may be
used…"

29.57 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
22-22
2022
Annual
Report 5/9/2023
The Department’s letter to complainants should provide
findings as to each allegation raised in the complaint. Agreed Completed Policy 1009.10.1 now states
"A disposition letter that
provides findings as to each
allegation raised in the
complaint should be sent to
the complainant for all
complaints (formal, inquiries,
and informational) received
when appropriate."
21-1
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should revise its Officer Involved
Shooting and Death policy to require interviews of
involved and witness officers before the end of their shift unless precluded by extenuating circumstances such as
an injury of an officer. Disagreed
NotCompleted SCPD disagrees with this
recommendation.
21-2
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should revise its Mobile Audio/Video
(MAV)policy to require the activation of the in-car video camera when transporting prisoners. Agreed Completed
Policy 422.4 now states
"Upon a detainee being
placed in a patrol vehicle, the
Fleet system will be activated
and remain active until the
detainee is removed from the
vehicle."
21-3
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should revise its Officer Involved
Shooting and Death policy to define the Use of Force
Review Board’s composition, duties, timelines, meetings and scope. Agreed Completed
Policy 302 (Use of Force
Review Board) is now in
effect.
21-4
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should revise its Officer Involved
Shooting and Death policy to include a formal process to document, monitor and implement recommendations
and action steps arising from the Board’s assessments. Agreed Completed Policy 302 (Use of Force
Review Board) is now in
effect.
21-5
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should revise its Officer Involved
Shooting and Death policy to require that involved and
witness officers be debriefed on any issues/concerns
identified by the Review Board. Agreed Completed
Policy 302 (Use of Force
Review Board) updated.

29.58 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
21-6
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should revise its Seat Belt policy to
require constant monitoring of individuals handcuffed in patrol vehicles who cannot be safely seat-belted in light of the significant risk of positional asphyxiation of
handcuffed individuals lying in a stomach-down position. Agreed Completed Policy 1010.5 now states
"Officer(s) will maintain
observation of detainee to
monitor breathing status and
significant risks of positional
asphyxiation."
21-7
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should propose that the County’s
Critical Incident Guideline be revised to include
interviews of involved and witness officers before the
end of their shift unless extenuating circumstances such as significant injury to an officer preclude this. Disagreed NotCompleted
This was proposed to the
County Critical Incident
Team, but was not accepted
by the group.
21-8
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should debrief with the involved officers about this incident, including their incorrect assumption 9 that the detainee was feigning his medical distress as
well as the other issues raised by the Department’s and IPA’s review. Agreed Completed This debrief was completed. 21-9
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
SCPD should implement a more robust mechanism to
ensure that any recommendations coming out of a post
incident review are timely considered and implemented. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
21-10
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should implement a system for
accurately documenting the time, date and manner it has received a personnel complaint in its investigative file, and should update its Personnel Complaint policy to
include this documentation requirement. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure. Update
to policy is pending.
21-11
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department’s Personnel Complaint policy should be
revised to require that any reasons for significant
investigative delays be documented in the investigative file, and SCPD should ensure compliance with the
approval requirement for extensions. Agreed Completed
Policy 1009.6.5 now states
"... significant investigative
delays, any extension
requests, and authorizations
for such requests shall be
documented in the
investigative file."

29.59 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
21-12
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should continually monitor the
timeliness of its complaint investigations through regular status updates to the Chief or his designee. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure. Weekly
meetings with the Chief occur
to discuss status updates on
all complaints.
21-13
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
: The Department’s Personnel Complaint policy should
be revised to require that any tolling exception to the one year statute of limitations be approved by a supervisor in consultation with the City Attorney and documented in
the investigative file. Agreed Completed
Policy 1009.6.5 now states
"Any required tolling
exceptions to the one-year
statute of limitations shall be
approved by a Deputy Chief,
in consultation with the City
Attorney, and documented in
the investigative file."
21-14
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should describe any reform or learning
that resulted from the complaint when notifying the
complainant of its investigation’s conclusion. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
21-15
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should re-evaluate this complaint by
focusing on principles of bias by proxy when responding to calls for service. Agreed Completed
SCPD re-evaluated the case
focusing on the principles of
bias by proxy. Although
SCPD remains sensitive and
cognizant when responding to
these types of calls, SCPD
determined there was enough
reasonable suspicion to
warrant a response to this
incident.
21-16
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should develop policy and training on
how to prevent bias by proxy when responding to calls
for service. Agreed In progress
This recommendation is still
In progress
21-17
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should develop a written protocol to
require that copies of complainant letters are retained and included as part of the investigative file. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure. Update
to policy is pending.

29.60 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
21-18
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should revise its Personnel Complaint
policy to require that the complainant be interviewed as to each allegation and that a final personnel complaint investigation include findings for each allegation. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure. Update
to policy is pending.
21-19
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should notify the complainant in writing of its investigative conclusions and explain its policy and training efforts on bias by proxy. Agreed
Partially
Completed
This was completed by phone
by a manager. A written
conclusion was never sent.
21-20
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department’s Personnel Complaint policy should be
revised to require reasonable efforts to timely interview complainant. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
21-21
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should consider implementing a
procedure that identifies and offers mediation for low
level complaints. Agreed In progress
This recommendation is still
In progress
21-22
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should issue roll call training on Civil Harassment Restraining Orders After Hearing that
instructs officers on their duty to advise restrained
parties of the terms of the order and how to take
enforcement action. The roll call training should also
clarify that Policy 320.2.9(a) does not apply to courtordered civil harassment restraining orders. Agreed Completed This training was completed
by the department's victim
advocate.
21-23
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should implement a system that
captures accurate and sufficient detailed information
regarding intake, status, and disposition of complaints for easy tracking and reference. Agreed Completed
This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.

29.61 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
21-24
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should re-evaluate the findings in this
case and consider issuing the complainant a new
disposition letter. Agreed
Not
Completed
Involved officers were no
longer employed and unable
to be interviewed to
determine their rationale for
not serving order. SCPD
determined involved officers
did not violate policy.
21-25
2021
Annual
Report 3/23/2022
The Department should develop policy to address the
circumstances for including or excluding the identity of an arrestee in its social media postings. Agreed Completed Policy 323.6 Now states
"Content that is prohibited
from positing includes….(H)
Any booking photos of an
individual arrested on
suspicion of committing a
nonviolent crime….."
20-1
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
Case 2019-011: The dispatcher who provided erroneous
information that led to the complainant being erroneously booked on violating a court order should be counseled
about the mistake. Agreed Completed
This was forwarded to
NETCOM for them to provide
disposition.
20-2
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
Santa Cruz PD should develop protocols/practices to
ensure that copies of complainant letters are retained
and included as part of the investigative file. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
20-3
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
Case 2020-004: SCPD should counsel the responding
officer on his failure to initially inquire and secure any surveillance video capturing the incident. Disagreed
Not
Completed
SCPD disagrees with this
recommendation, as we
believe no crime occurred
and therefore no need to
collect surveillance video
20-4
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
Case 2020-004: SCPD should counsel the investigator
regarding his failure to address the initial responding officer’s failure to make inquiry and secure any video of the incident. Disagreed
Not
Completed
SCPD disagrees with this
recommendation, as we
believe no crime occurred
and therefore no need to
collect surveillance video
20-5
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
The investigator should be advised about the need to
ensure that all allegations and performance issues be
identified and addressed in the investigation. Agreed Completed This was completed and now
a standard operating
procedure.

29.62 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
20-6
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
Case 2020-017: The sergeant should further be
counseled about his inappropriate comment to the
complainant. Agreed Completed
The sergeant was counseled
about his failure to identify
himself.
20-7
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
Case 2020-017: The officers should be specifically
counseled about their failure to identify themselves when asked. Agreed Completed
The officers were counseled
about their failure to identify
themselves.
20-8
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
SCPD policy should be changed so that a sustained
finding is established by a preponderance of the
evidence. Agreed Completed
Policy 1009.6.4 now states
Sustained (Finding) - "An
allegation is sustained when
the evidence indicates that it
is more likely than not that a
violation of the policy or
procedure occurred; this
standard of evidence is called
the "preponderance of
evidence."
20-9
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
SCPD should ensure that it specifically authorize any
deployment of a K9 by an assisting agency. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.
20-10
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
SCPD should consider advising its officers of the
concerns about using a Taser in stun drive mode when
the subject is suspected of having mental issues and its preference of using the Taser in dart mode. Agreed Completed This has been implemented
and is now standard
operating procedure.

29.63 APPENDIX B: 2025 Annual Audit
2025 IPA Recommendations to Date (updated 5/26/26)
Log # Report
Date
Issued Recommendation SCPD Response Status Evidence
20-11
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
SCPD should consider modifying its policy to disallow
distraction strikes to the face. Agreed Completed
Policy 300.3.8 now states
"strikes and punches are an
approved use of force only
when there is an objectively
reasonable basis for use of
force given the facts and
totality of the circumstances.

Any person using force must
articulate the circumstances
as objectively reasonable and
apparently necessary under
the totality of the
circumstances, and that the
use of force is proportionate
to the severity of the crime,
the threat posed by the
suspect, and the suspect's
level of resistance."
20-12
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
SCPD should brief the involved sergeant and all of its
sergeants on the need to maintain a supervisory role
when officers are available to perform any tactical
response. Agreed Completed This brief was completed.
20-13
2020
Annual
Report 10/21/2020
SCPD should modify its policy to prohibit report writers from approving their own reports. Agreed Completed
Policy 328.8 now states "no
employee, with the exception
of Records personnel, shall
approve their own report."

29.64 2025 Annual
Review of the
Santa Cruz
Police
Department
JUNE 23, 2026

29.65 OIR Group
Overview
•Over 20 years of experience in
law enforcement oversight
• Specializing in the independent
evaluation of police agencies’
internal review systems
•Our team in Santa Cruz

29.66 Our Role as
Independent
Police Auditor
(IPA)
•Meet virtually with
Department on a quarterly
basis
•Provide input on policy and
procedures
•Review completed
complaint investigations
•Review officer-involved
shootings & other critical
incidents

29.67 Our Role as
Independent
Police Auditor
(IPA)
•Measure progress on prior
recommendations
•Assist complainants
• Talk with community
members and advocacy
groups
• Report to City Council
annually

29.68 2025 Annual Report:

Overall Takeaways
• Meaningful progress in investigative quality and
responsiveness
• Improved case classification and timeliness
• Greater openness to oversight feedback
• Continued structural gaps limiting systemic
learning and pattern identification

29.69 2025 Annual Report:

Core Themes Identified
• Importance of thorough, well-scoped
investigations: moving beyond allegations to
holistic lessons
• Need for expanded review of significant incidents
through Critical Incident Review process
• Role of technology in accountability and early
intervention
• Value of clear policy, training, and supervision

29.70 2025 Annual Report:

Identified Improvements
• Improved use of Informational, Inquiry, and
Formal classifications
• More timely completion of investigations
• Stronger investigative reports and findings
• Improved quality of complaint close-out letters
• Policy updates: Body-Worn Camera, Canine

29.71 Key Finding 1: Investigations
Should Support Broader Learning
Missed opportunities to assess:
• Communication and de-escalation practices
• Supervisory involvement and decision-making
• Training, policy, and system-level gaps
• Cases impacting vulnerable populations
(juvenile, elderly, persons in crisis)

29.72 Key Finding 1 continued
More holistic reviews can:
• Reinforce effective practices
• Identify areas for early intervention
• Strengthen consistency, trust, and organizational
learning

29.73 Key Finding 2: Identify Issues
and Gaps
Without a structured system:
• Repeated deficiencies in performance may go
unnoticed
• Opportunities for early intervention may be
missed
• Supervisors may lack critical context when
responding to new concerns

29.74 Key Finding 3: Promptly Address &
Correct Performance
A more integrated approach would support:
• Consistent supervision and coaching
• Early, non-punitive intervention
• Stronger organizational learning and risk
management

29.75 Key Finding 4: Technology
Supports Accountability
• Effective use of data systems strengthens
transparency, supervision, and organizational
learning
• Accountability technology must be:
• Fully implemented
• Adequately resourced
• Integrated into daily operations
•Prioritize population and use of BlueTeam
system

29.76 Recommendations
• 83 recommendations issued since 2020
• Majority accepted and implemented or in progress
• Continued need for resources and sustained
attention

29.77 Questions
14 29.78

CONTACT US
Visit our website:
https://www.oirgroup.com
Email or call us:

[email protected]
(310) 906-0259

29.79 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 06/03/2026
AGENDA OF: 06/23/2026
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
SUBJECT: Proposed Resolution Authorizing Application for the California Prohousing Designation Program (CD)
LOCATION: Citywide
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution to apply for a new Prohousing Designation from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD); and
2) Authorize the Director of Community Development to execute and deliver the application and any related program documents required for participation in the Prohousing Designation Program.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 101 which established the Prohousing Designation Program (PDP) to be administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The PDP provides incentives for jurisdictions that comply with state housing laws, housing element requirements, and that have adopted local policies and programs that support housing production beyond existing statutory requirements.

Jurisdictions that are awarded a Prohousing designation receive incentives and priority consideration for certain state housing and infrastructure grants and programs, such as the Prohousing Incentive Program (PIP), the Affordable Housing & Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program, the Infill Infrastructure Grant (IIG) program, the Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) program, Solutions for Congested Corridors Program (SCCP), the Local Partnership Program, the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP), and the Sustainable Transportation Planning Grants (STPG) program. Such funds are critical for local development and affordable housing projects which necessitate multiple funding sources to make a project viable.

DISCUSSION: In August of 2023, the City of Santa Cruz was awarded a Prohousing Designation by the HCD under the PDP’s initial emergency regulations. The City’s 2023 application received a score of 57 points based on the policies and programs in effect at that time, which was the fifth highest score of the 30 recognized jurisdictions in the state.

30.1 The 2023 Prohousing Designation award strengthened the City’s competitiveness for state housing funding opportunities. Most notably, the City received a $500,000 Prohousing Incentive Program (PIP) grant award, which supported the City’s rental assistance program serving lowerincome households at risk of eviction. This was the maximum award amount available under that funding opportunity.

The City’s current Prohousing Designation is temporary and will expire on January 1, 2027, therefore, a new application should be submitted by the City and approved under the HCD’s permanent regulations. Since the City’s original 2023 designation, HCD has updated and expanded the scoring criteria, including revisions to policy categories and enhancement factors, as well as homeless encampment response certification requirements, and new community engagement requirements, referenced below. Staff has reviewed the updated criteria and believes the City remains well-positioned for approval based on its existing policies, programs, and implementation efforts.

HCD requires a “Diligent Public Participation Process” with the new application, as a mandatory threshold requirement, supporting community engagement on housing policies outlined within the application. As a part of the process, jurisdictions must make their draft PDP application available for public review and comment for at least 30 days. The City’s draft application is currently available on the City’s website at www.santacruzca.gov/prohousing, and there is a required 30-day public comment period that started on May 20, 2026. Community outreach methods announcing the 30-day public comment period included mass email announcements utilizing City distribution lists related to the Housing Element, two publications in the City Manager Update newsletter, printed bilingual flyers on public service counters, City social media account postings, and a mass bilingual text message outreach effort from Nueva Vista Community Resources - the City’s Community Based Development Organization (CBDO) that serves households within the City’s approved Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA), including the Lower Ocean and Beach Flats neighborhoods.

Upon conclusion of the public comment period on June 20, all substantive comments received during the 30-day window will be documented, addressed where appropriate, and incorporated in the final application. All public comments will be posted online on or before noon on June 22, 2026, and application revisions will be posted online on or before 11:00 a.m. on June 23, 2026.

As needed, staff may incorporate additional revisions prior to formal submittal of the application.

The final application will also be posted online at the time of submittal to HCD.

A successful Prohousing application must score a minimum of 30 points out of a possible base score of 74 points across four different categories: 1) Favorable Zoning and Land Use, 2) Acceleration of Housing Production Timeframes, 3) Reduction of Construction and Development Costs, and 4) Providing Financial Subsidies. Additional “enhancement factor” points may also be awarded for qualifying policies that further state planning, equity, affordability, climate, or fair housing objectives. Based on staff’s preliminary self-scoring evaluation, the City is likely to qualify for approval again under the PDP.

Upon submission of the final application, HCD has sixty (60) calendar days to review the application and provide its determination, preliminary feedback, or findings. Applications are accepted on a rolling, over-the-counter basis, with most reviews evolving into a process where the HCD and applicant work together on revisions. If approved, the HCD will send an official letter formalizing the Prohousing designation and final score within a targeted timeframe of

30.2 thirty (30) calendar days. A Prohousing Designation lasts for three years from the first day of January following the designation date, with the option to reapply.

HCD requires an authorizing resolution from the governing body as part of the application package. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the City to apply for the PDP and further authorizing the Community Development Director to execute and deliver the application to the HCD, including any related documents required for participation in the program.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) DETERMINATION: Staff has determined that is not a “project” under Public Resources Code section 21065, because it does not have the potential to cause a direct or indirect physical change in the environment.

HEALTH IN ALL POLICIES (HiAP): In terms of assessing this item with respect to the three pillars of Health in All Policies, this action has a direct nexus with all three: public health, equity and sustainability. A Prohousing designation will allow the City to apply for and potentially be awarded more state funds not only for housing creation, but also for transportation and climate impacts. Stable housing improves public health outcomes, as does access to safe active transportation options. Equity will be positively impacted with the creation of more affordable housing units for all members of the community. Sustainability will also be positively impacted with the access to State funds that require sustainable components in housing projects.

FISCAL IMPACT:

1. The recommendation in this report impacts the General Fund: No

2. This recommendation requires a budget adjustment: No

3. The recommendation creates an on-going expenditure commitment: No FISCAL IMPACT DESCRIPTION: No impact.

Prepared By:

Emily R. Watkins
Management Analyst
Jessica de Wit
Housing & Community
Development Manager
Submitted By:

Lee Butler, LEED AP, AICP,
Director of Community
Development
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

30.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AUTHORIZING

APPLICATION TO AND PARTICIPATION IN THE PROHOUSING DESIGNATION

PROGRAM
WHEREAS, Government Code section 65589.9 established the Prohousing Designation Program (“PDP” or “Program”), which creates incentives for jurisdictions that are compliant with state housing element requirements and that have enacted Prohousing local policies; and WHEREAS, such jurisdictions will be designated Prohousing, and, as such, will receive additional points or other preference during the scoring of their competitive Applications for specified housing and infrastructure funding; and
WHEREAS, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (“Department”) has adopted regulations (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 25, § 6600 et seq.) to implement the Program (“Program Regulations”), as authorized by Government Code section 65589.9, subdivision (d); and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz (“Applicant”) desires to submit an Application for a Prohousing Designation (“Application”).

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

1. Applicant is hereby authorized and directed to submit an Application to the Department.

2. Applicant acknowledges and confirms that it is currently in compliance with applicable state housing law.

3. Applicant acknowledges and confirms that it will continue to comply with applicable housing laws and to refrain from enacting laws, developing policies, or taking other local governmental actions that may or do inhibit or constrain housing production. Examples of such local laws, policies, and actions include moratoriums on development; local voter approval requirements related to housing production; downzoning; and unduly restrictive or onerous zoning regulations, development standards, or permit procedures. Applicant further acknowledges and confirms that the Prohousing Policies in its Application comply with its duty to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing pursuant to Government Code sections 8899.50 and 65583. Applicant further acknowledges and confirms that its general plan is in alignment with an adopted sustainable communities strategy pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21155- 21155.4. Applicant further acknowledges and confirms that its policies for the treatment of homeless encampments on public property comply with and will continue to comply with the Constitution and that it has enacted best practices in its jurisdiction that are consistent with the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness’ “7 Principles for Addressing Encampments” (June 17, 2022, update).

30.4 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX
2 4. If the Application is approved, Applicant is hereby authorized and directed to enter into, execute, and deliver all documents required or deemed necessary or appropriate to participate in the Program, and all amendments thereto (the “Program Documents”).

5. Applicant acknowledges and agrees that it shall be subject to the Application; the terms and conditions specified in the Program Documents; the Program Regulations; and any and all other applicable law.

6. Community Development Director is authorized to execute and deliver the Application and the Program Documents on behalf of the Applicant for participation in the Program.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June 2026 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

The undersigned, Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator, of the City of Santa Cruz, does hereby attest and certify that the foregoing is a true and full copy of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz adopted at a duly convened meeting on the date above-mentioned, and that the resolution has not been altered, amended, or repealed.

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

30.5 Prohousing Designation Program Presentation | City of Santa Cruz 809 Center Street, Room 101
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Prohousing
Designation
Program
Application Renewal and
Funding Opportunities
City Council Meeting | June 23, 2026
Presented by: Emily Watkins, Management Analyst
Community Development Department

30.6 Prohousing Designation Program | City of Santa Cruz