Shafter City Council
November 4, 2025

38 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? □ □ ■ □
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous material into the
environment? □ □ ■ □
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? □ □ □ ■
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
§65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? □ □ □ ■
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? □ □ □ ■ f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? □ □ ■ □
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? □ □ ■ □ Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) Less than significant impact. The project proposes to develop 174 multi-family units and would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials as defined by the Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act. However, construction activities would require transport, storage, use, and/or disposal of hazardous materials such as fuels and grease for the fueling/servicing of construction equipment, and there is the potential for upset and accident conditions that could release such material into the environment. Such substances would be stored in temporary storage tanks/sheds that would be located at the site. Although these types of materials are not acutely hazardous, they are classified as hazardous materials and create the potential for accidental spillage, which could expose construction workers. All transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials used in the construction of the project would be in strict accordance with federal and state laws and regulations. During construction of the project, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)

39 for all applicable materials present at the site would be made readily available to onsite personnel. During construction, non-hazardous construction debris would be generated and disposed of at approved facilities for handling such waste. Also, during construction, waste disposal would be managed using portable toilets located at reasonably accessible onsite locations.

Although the project operation will require day-to-day maintenance activities, it would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials as defined by the Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act. Maintenance of the residential buildings would require the transport, storage, use, and/or disposal of household hazardous materials such as paints, cleaners, oils, batteries, and pesticides. Building tenants are required to follow any instructions for use and storage provided on product labels carefully to prevent any accidents in the living space. Users should also read product labels for disposal directions to reduce the risk of products exploding, igniting, leaking, mixing with other chemicals, or posing other hazards on the way to a disposal facility. Therefore, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
b) Less than significant impact. Please refer to response a. above. Therefore, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous material into the environment.
c) No impact. The closest schools to the project site are Golden Oak Elementary and Grow Academy located approximately 1.5 miles west of the site. Given the distance and the intervening uses, there is very limited potential for the project to affect the schools in the vicinity. Therefore, the project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 miles of an existing or proposed school.
d) No impact. According to the EnviroStor and Cortese lists pursuant to Government Code (GC) Section 65962.5, no portion of the project site is identified on either list, which provides the location of known hazardous waste concerns (EnviroStor 2025). Therefore, the project would not be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to GC Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
e) No impact. The project is not located within the adopted Airport Land Use Plan for Minter Airport (Shafter 2005). The closest airport is Minter Airport located approximately 6 miles east of the project site. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area because of a public airport or public use airport. f) Less than significant impact. The City maintains an emergency plan for response to disasters, including but not limited to earthquakes, floods, fires, hazardous spills or leaks, major

40 industrial accidents, major transportation accidents, major storms, airplane crashes, civil unrest, and national security emergencies. In a disaster, the City could experience significant casualties, property damage, and utility service interruptions, potentially exceeding the response capabilities of both the City and the County. The plan outlines the general authority, organization, and response actions for City staff to undertake, in compliance with existing law, when disasters happen. The objectives of the plan are to reduce loss of life, injury, and property losses through effective management of emergency forces (Shafter 2005). The emergency plan includes objectives and policies that would prevent new development from interfering with emergency response of evacuation plans. The project will comply with all local regulations related to the construction of new development that is consistent with the emergency plan. The project would also comply with the appropriate local and State requirements regarding emergency response plans and access. The proposed project would not inhibit the ability of local roadwaysto accommodate emergency response and evacuation activities. Therefore, the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. g) Less than significant impact. According to the Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer, the project is located outside the State Responsibility Area severity zones (Cal Fire 2024). Additionally, the City maintains an emergency plan for response to disasters, including fires. The objectives of the plan are to reduce loss of life, injury, and property losses through effective management of emergency forces (Shafter 2005). The emergency plan includes objectives and policies that would prevent new development from interfering with emergency response of evacuation plans. The project will comply with all local regulations related to the construction of new development that is consistent with the emergency plan. The project would also comply with the appropriate local and State requirements regarding emergency response plans and access. The proposed project would not inhibit the ability of local roadways to accommodate emergency response and evacuation activities. Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.

41 Hydrology and Water Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? □ □ ■ □
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the
basin? □ □ ■ □
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; □ □ ■ □ ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on- or off-site; □ □ ■ □
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage system or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or □ □ ■ □
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? □ □ ■ □
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation? □ □ □ ■
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? □ □ ■ □ Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) Less than significant impact. As discussed in Geology and Soils above, the project site’s soil type has a low-to-medium susceptibility to sheet and rill erosion by rainfall and a low susceptibility to wind erosion at the ground surface. Disturbance of onsite soils during construction could result in soil erosion and siltation, and subsequent water quality degradation through increased turbidity and sediment deposition during storm events to offsite locations. Additionally, disturbed soils have an increased potential for fugitive dust to be released into the air and carried offsite. As described in Geology and Soils, the project would be required to comply with the General Permit. To conform to the requirements of the General Permit, a SWPPP would need to be prepared that specifies BMPs to prevent construction pollutants from moving offsite. The project is required to comply with the General Permit because project-related construction activities would disturb at least 1 acre

42 of soil. The City owns and maintains a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4). The project’s operational urban storm water discharges are covered under the Central Valley Water Resources Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements General Permit for Discharges from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (Order No. R5-2016-0040-018; NPDES No.

CAS0085324) (MS4 Permit) (CVRWQCB 2024). The MS4 Permit mandates the implementation of a storm water management framework to ensure that water quality is maintained within the City because of operational storm water discharges throughout the City, including the project site. By complying with the General Permit and MS4 Permit, the project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Therefore, the project would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. b) Less than significant impact. A large groundwater basin covering over 1.7 million acres underlies most of the southern San Joaquin Valley, including the City, and has been providing water for the area since the early 1900s. This basin is replenished by the natural runoff from the Sierra Nevada, as well as through percolation from the many irrigation canals that import water into the area from other regions of the State. The City’s drinking water is derived from the aquifers within the basin and is pumped to the surface by a system of groundwater wells operated by the City. The City owns and operates its own public water system, including groundwater wells, above-ground water storage tanks with booster stations, an aboveground tank and booster plant, and water distribution lines (City of Shafter 2005).

Under the Urban Water Management Planning Act, every urban water supplier that provides water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplies more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually is required to prepare and adopt an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) every five years (Shafter 2021). The UWMP serves as a foundational document and source of information for Water Supply Assessments (Senate Bill 610) and Written Verifications of Water Supply (Senate Bill 221), as it includes a 25-year projection of water demand and supply under both wet and dry year scenarios.

Given that the project is a residential development and may result in population growth, the City’s 2020 UWMP has incorporated the project’s anticipated population increase into its demand projections. Based on these projections, it was concluded that the City has sufficient existing water supply capacity to serve the proposed development. By State law, current UWMP do not need to address the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) or sustainable groundwater management currently. Prior to obtaining a building permit, the applicant will have to obtain a water will-serve letter. As a result, the project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level.
c) The following discusses whether the project would substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces.

43 i. Less than significant impact. The project site does not contain any blue-line streams or other surface water features and therefore, the project would not alter the course of a river or stream. The project site would be graded and, as a result, the internal drainage pattern at the site would be altered from the baseline condition.

Additionally, the project would result in increased impervious surfaces (i.e., building pads, sidewalks, asphalt parking area, etc.) at the site, which would reduce percolation to ground and result in greater amounts of storm water runoff concentrations at the site. If uncontrolled, differences in drainage patterns and increased impervious surfaces could result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. However, the project would be required to comply with the General Permit during construction and MS4 permit during operation. To comply with the MS4 Permit, the City requires compliance with adopted building codes, including complying with an approved drainage plan, which avoids on- and offsite flooding, erosion, and siltation problems. Therefore, the project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite.
ii. Less than significant impact. Refer to response c.i above. Therefore, the project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or offsite. iii. Less than significant impact. Referto response c.i. above. Therefore, the project would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
iv. Less than significant impact. Construction activities could potentially degrade water quality through the occurrence of erosion or siltation at the project site.

Construction of the project would include soil-disturbing activities that could result in erosion and siltation, as well as the use of harmful and potentially hazardous materials required to operate vehicles and equipment. The transport of disturbed soil or the accidental release of potentially hazardous materials could result in water quality degradation. The project would be required to comply with the NPDES Construction General Permit. Additionally, a SWPPP would be prepared to specify BMPs to prevent construction pollutants. The project would not otherwise substantially degrade water quality.

44 The project site is located outside the 500-year floodplain and is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area (FEMA 2024). Therefore, the project would not impede or redirect flood flows.
d) No impact. As noted above, the project site is not within a FEMA flood hazard zone, nor is it located near the ocean or a steep topographic feature (i.e., mountain, hill, bluff, etc.).

Tsunamis are waves generated in oceans from seismic activity. Due to the inland location of the site, tsunamis are not considered a hazard for the site. Therefore, there is no potential for the site to be inundated by tsunami or mudflow.

A seiche is a wave generated by the periodic oscillation of a body of water whose period is a function of the resonant characteristics of the containing basin as controlled by its physical dimensions. There is no body of water within the vicinity of the project site. There is no potential for inundation of the project site by seiche.

There are no nearby levees that would be susceptible to failure or flooding of the site.

Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding because of the failure of a levee. e) Less than significant impact. Refer to a. through d. responses above. The Project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of any water quality control plan. The Project would be subject to the requirements of the NPDES Stormwater Program and would be required to comply with a SWPPP. The SWPPP would identify all potential sources of pollution that could affect stormwater discharges from the project site and specify BMPs to prevent significant impacts related to stormwater runoff. Moreover, the project is within the jurisdiction of the Kern County Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). The Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) was adopted by the Kern County Subbasin GSA in December 2024 (Kern County GSP 2024). The project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of this GSP. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

45 Land Use and Planning
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? □ □ □ ■
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating and environmental effect? □ □ ■ □ Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) No impact. The project does not include the construction of roads or any other physical barrier. The project includes the development of 174 multi-family units and is adjacent to existing multi-family development. The project is a continuation of the existing urban development pattern of the City, therefore, the project would not physically divide an established community.
b) Less than significant impact. The proposed project requires a GPA and ZC to be consistent with the General Plan land use designation and the zoning classification. The GPA would change the land use designation and zoning classification from low-density residential to medium high-density residential to allow the development of 174 multi-family units. If a GPA and ZC are approved by the City, the project would be consistent with the General Plan land use designation and the zoning classification. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

46 Mineral Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? □ □ □ ■
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site that is delineated in a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? □ □ □ ■
Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) No impact. The California Department of Conservation, Geological Survey classifies lands into Aggregate and Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs) based on guidelines adopted by the California State Mining and Geology Board, as mandated by the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1974. These MRZs identify whether known or inferred significant mineral resources are present in areas. Lead agencies are required to incorporate identified MRZs resource areas delineated by the State into their General Plans. The principal mineral resources within the City are oil and natural gas. The southern portion of Kern County is a major oil producing region, with oil fields extending into the southern portion of Shafter’s Planning Area (Shafter 2005).

No oil or gas resources have been identified in or extracted from the project site. According to the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) [formerly called Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR)], the project site is not located in an identified oilfield and there are no known wells located on the site (CalGEM 2025). The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of mineral resources as the project does not propose the extraction of mineral resources. Additionally, the proposed project would not restrict the ability of mineral rights’ holders in the area to exercise their legal rights to access surrounding sites for the exploration and/or extraction of underlying oil research or other natural resources. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. b) No impact. As noted above, the project is not designated as a mineral recovery area. The project would not alter any existing plans that protect mineral resources. As a result, the proposed project would not interfere with known mining operations and would not result in the loss of land designated for mineral and petroleum. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site that is delineated in a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan.

47 Noise
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? □ □ ■ □ b) Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or groundborne noise levels? □ □ ■ □ c) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? □ □ □ ■
Evaluation of Environmental Effects
Noise Impact Study prepared for the NEC Birch Street and E. Los Angeles Street Residential Project, Cesar Chavez Foundation, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., October 2023, included as Appendix C.
a) Less than significant impact. The project’s construction would generate temporary increases in noise levels. The General Plan Section 7.7 requires exterior noise levels in residential zones to be maintained at 60 to 65 decibels utilizing site and architectural design features to mitigate noise impacts when feasible (Shafter 2005). Therefore, a roadway noise impact analysis was performed to determine if a significant impact would occur if noise levels exceed the applicable noise standards and the project results in an increase of 3.0 dBA or more above “Without Project” conditions. It is assumed that all homes in the vicinity of the project site are equipped with fresh air supply or air conditioning systems and thus a windows closed condition is applicable. Additionally, a change of 3 dBA is considered barely perceptible by the average health human ear (RK Engineering Group, Inc 2023). As a result, the project will not cause a significant permanent increase in roadway noise levels along adjacent roadways.

The project would not generate substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. b) Less than significant impact. The project is expected to create temporary ground-borne noise and vibration because of the construction activities (during site preparation and grading).

Ground-borne noise is due to construction equipment used during the phases of construction, including site preparation, grading, building, construction, paving, and architectural coating. Noise levels are calculated based on the average distance of equipment

48 over a 1-hour period to the nearest adjacent property (RK Engineering Group, Inc. 2023). The project’s estimated construction noise levels have been calculated using the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model Version 1.1. The table below shows the noise level impacts from the center of the nearest plot to the nearest sensitive receptor property line.

Project Construction Noise Levels at 360 Feet
Phase Equipment Quantity Equipment Noise
Level at 360 feet
(Dba Leq)
Combined
Noise Level
Dba Leq)
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 66.9 69.9
Grading
Graders 1 67.9

70.4 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 66.9
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 66.9 69.9 Paving Rollers 2 67.9 70.9
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 60.6 60.7
Worst Case Construction Phase Noise Level Criteria (Dba Leq) 70.9 FTA Daytime General Assessment Construction Noise Criteria (dBA Leq) 90.0 Noise level exceed FTA criteria? No
As shown in the table above, the project is expected to generate a maximum noise level of

70.9 dBA. Therefore, the project’s construction noise levels will not exceed the Federal Transit Administration General Assessment Construction Noise Criteria threshold (RK Engineering Group, Inc. 2023).

Additionally, the project also performed a construction vibration assessment, which utilized the vibration levels and methodology determined by the 2018 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Federal Transit Administration (FTA 2018). The table below shows the Federal Transit Administration referenced vibration levels (RK Engineering Group, Inc 2023).

49 Typical Construction Vibration Levels
Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity
(PPV) (inches/second) at
25 feet
Approximate Vibration Level at
25 feet
Piledriver (impact), upper range 1.518 112
Piledriver (impact), typical 0.644 104
Piledriver (sonic), upper range 0.734 105
Piledriver (sonic), typical 0.170 93
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94
Hydro mill 0.008 66
(slurry wall) 0.017 75
Vibratory Roller 0.210 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson drill 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
The following table shows the project’s construction related vibration at the nearest structures to the project area. The distance between the construction area to the nearest structure is 58 feet.

Construction Vibration Impact Analysis
Construction Activity Calculated Vibration Level –
PPV (in/sec) Annoyance Criteria Level
Large Bulldozer 0.035 Barely Perceptible
Vibratory Roller 0.083 Barely Perceptible
Loaded Trucks 0.030 Barely Perceptible
*Distance to Nearest Structure 58 feet
Based on the tables above, the project related construction activity is not expected to cause any potential damage to the nearest structures (RK Engineering Group, Inc 2023). Therefore, the project would not expose persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels.
c) No impact. As noted in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section, the project is not located within the adopted Airport Land Use Plan for Minter Airport (Shafter 2005). The nearest airport to the project site is the Minter Field Airport Districted located approximately 4 miles east from the project site. Therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels for a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport.

50 Population and Housing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project;
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? □ □ ■ □
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? □ □ □ ■ Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) Less than significant impact. The project includes the development of new housing to accommodate the housing demand and provide housing to farmworker families, as stated the project does not include any new roads. According to the California Department of Finance the City’s reported population on January 2023 was 21,309 and on January 2024 was 22,226, which showed a population increase of 4.3 percent (DOF 2024). If this positive trend continues, the population in the City will continue to increase and will require more housing.

As stated, the project would assist with the need for housing in the City and would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the area, either directly or indirectly. b) No impact. The projectsite is undeveloped and will not involve demolition of existing housing and will not require the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, the project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

51 Public Services
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire protection? □ □ ■ □
ii. Police protection? □ □ ■ □
iii. Schools? □ □ ■ □
iv. Parks? □ □ ■ □
v. Other public facilities? □ □ ■ □
Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) The following discusses whether the project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts to public services. The need for additional public service is generally directly correlated to population growth and the resultant additional population’s need for services beyond what is currently available.
i. Less than significant impact. The construction and operation of the project would result in an increase in demand for fire protection services leading to the construction of new or physically altered facilities. Under contract with the City of Shafter, fire suppression support is provided by the Kern County Fire Department located at 325 Sunset Avenue.

The City of Shafter will ensure that construction activities are conducted in accordance with local and State fire codes. Services are adequately planned for within the City’s General Plan through policies to ensure the City maintains the fire department’s performance and response standards by allocating the appropriate resources. As stated, the project applicant is responsible for the development impact fees and constructing any infrastructure needed to serve the project. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection.

52 ii. Less than significant impact. Law enforcement and public protection are provided by the City of Shafter Police Department. The City’s police station is located at 201 Central Valley Hwy. The project would increase demand for public safety protection as the project is a residential development. However, the project applicant is responsible for the development impact fees and constructing any infrastructure needed to serve the project. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection.
iii. Less than significant impact. The project would impact on school facilities as the project is a residential development. However, the project would accommodate population growth and provide affordable housing to local families. Additionally, the project applicant is responsible for the school impact fees and constructing any infrastructure needed to serve the project. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for schools.
iv. Less than significant impact. The project would impact on parks and recreation facilities. However, the project applicant is required to pay recreation impact fees.

Therefore, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks. v. Less than significant impact. The project would impact on other public facilities such as libraries, hospitals, or emergency medical facilities. However, the project applicant is responsible for development impact fees and constructing any infrastructure needed to serve the project. The proposed project would comply with the objectives and policies of the General Plan. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for other public facilities.

53 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? □ □ ■ □ b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? □ □ □ ■ Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) Less than significant impact. The project could potentially increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks; however, the project applicant is required to pay development impact fees, which allows the City to upgrade, expand, or upkeep existing neighborhood and regional parks. Therefore, the project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would not occur or be accelerated. b) No impact. As discussed in this MND, with mitigation, the development of 174 multi-family units would not have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Therefore, the project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

54 Transportation/Traffic
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? □ □ ■ □
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines §15064.3, subdivision (b)? □ □ ■ □
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (for example, sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (for example, farm equipment)? □ □ ■ □ d) Result in inadequate emergency access? □ □ ■ □
Evaluation of Environmental Effects
A Traffic Impact Study was prepared for the NEC Birch Street and E. Los Angeles Street MultiFamily Residential Project, Cesar Chavez Foundation, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., October 2023, included as Appendix D.
a) Less than significant impact. The City has not finalized or adopted any policies or methodologies for VMT analysis. As such, the California Governor’s Office Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) formally known as the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA will be used as a basis for this project’s VMT analysis and provides screening criteria that lead agencies can apply to effectively screen projects from project-level assessment.

As stated, the project proposes the construction of 174 affordable housing units. The OPR Advisory recognizes that affordable housing projects typically generate lower VMT than market-rate housing, and a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis for the lead agency to find a less significant impact on VMT. Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing match, in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT. Evidence supports a presumption of a less than significant impact for a 100% affordable residential development in infill locations. Because the project consists of 100% affordable housing, the project may be presumed to have a less-thansignificant impact on VMT and no further VMT analysis would be required (RK Engineering Group, Inc., 2023). Therefore, the project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
b) Less than significant impact. See response to a. above. The project consists of 100% affordable housing, therefore, the project may be presumed to have a less than significant

55 impact on VMT and not further VMT analysis would be required (RK Engineering Group, Inc., 2023). As stated, the project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b).
c) Less than significant impact. The project will be designed to current standards and safety regulations. All site access/egresses will be constructed to comply with design and safety standards of Chapter 33 of the California Building Codes and the guidelines of Title 24 to create safe and accessible roadways. Vehicles exiting the site will be provided with a clear view of the roadway without obstructions. Landscaping associated with the entry driveways could impede such views, if improperly installed. Specific circulation patterns and driveway designs will incorporate all applicable safety measures to ensure that hazardous design features or inadequate emergency access to the site or other areas surrounding the project area will not occur. Therefore, the project would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses.
d) Less than significant impact. See response to c. above. The project would be required to comply with all emergency access requirements adopted and set forth in the City of Shafter Municipal Code. These requirements and all others required to be included in the project design will be verified by the City prior to project approval. Therefore, the project would not result in inadequate emergency access.

56 Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code §21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in the terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code §5020.1(k), or □ □ □ ■ b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code §5021.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code §5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. □ □ □ ■
Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) No impact. There are no sites, features, places, cultural landscapes that are geographically defined in the terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred places, or objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe located on the site. Therefore, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources.
b) No impact. See response to a. above and in the Cultural Resources section. Therefore, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is determined by the lead agency to be significant.

57 Utilities and Service Systems
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater
drainage, electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? □ □ ■ □
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during
normal, dry, and multiple dry years? □ □ ■ □
c) Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that is has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? □ □ ■ □ d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? □ □ ■ □ e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulation related to solid waste? □ □ □ ■ Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) Less than significant impact. Refer to Geology and Soils and Hydrology and Water Quality responses above regarding potable and irrigation water, wastewater, and stormwater. The above analysis concluded that the project would not require the relocation or construction of new or expanded facilities for potable and irrigation water, wastewater, and stormwater facilities.

The Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) provides electricity to the City. The existing trunk and transmission facilities are adequate to meet present and projected demand for the project site. The project will connect to the existing PG&E transmission lines for electrical power, but lighting would be minimal.

The City is served by multiple telecommunication providers such as AT&T, Spectrum, TMobile, ATel Communications, and Municipal Fiber Network.

No natural gas is proposed for the project.

Therefore, the project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas,

58 or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.
b) Less than significant impact. Refer to the Hydrology and Water Quality responses above.

Therefore, the project has sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. c) Less than significant impact. The project will connect to the City’s sewer mains and wastewater will be treated at the wastewater treatment plant owned and operated by the North of the River (NOR) Sanitary District which is in a Joint Powers Agreement with the City.

The wastewater treatment plant is currently designing an upgrade and expansion for additional treatment capacity. The wastewater treatment capacity will increase from 7.5 million gallons per day to 10 million gallons per day (NORSD 2025). Therefore, it has been determined by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.
d) Less than significant impact. Two franchise haulers, American Refuse and Varner Brothers, serve properties in the City. American Refuse is the franchise hauler within the city core area and will provide service to the proposed project. Solid waste that is collected is disposed of at the Shafter/Wasco Landfill and the Bakersfield Metropolitan (Bena) Landfill. These landfills are owned and operated by the Kern County Waste Management Department. The Shafter/Wasco Landfill is the City’s primary landfill, while the Bena Landfill accepts some refuse from industrial uses within the City. Both facilities are designated as Class III landfills and have the capacity to serve projected solid waste disposal needs through December 2053 and April 2046, respectively. Implementation of the project would result in the generation of solid waste on the project site, which would increase the demand for solid waste disposal.

During construction these materials, which are not anticipated to contain hazardous materials, would be collected and transported away from the site. The project, in compliance with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste, would dispose of all waste generated onsite at an approved solid waste facility. Additionally, prior to obtaining a building permit, the applicant will have to obtain a landfill will-serve letter.

Therefore, the project would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs.
e) No impact. See response to d. above. The 1989 California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) requires Kern County to attain specific waste diversion goals. In addition, the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991, as amended, requires expanded or new development projects to incorporate storage areas for recycling bins into the project design. The reuse and recycling of construction debris would reduce operating expenses and save valuable landfill space. As stated above, the Shafter/Wasco Landfill is the City’s primary landfill, while Bena Landfill accepts some refuse from industrial uses within the City. Both facilities have the capacity to serve projected solid waste disposal needs through

59 2056 and 2046, respectively. Therefore, the project would comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulation related to solid waste.

60 Wildfires
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or areas classified as very high hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? □ □ ■ □
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, or other factors, exacerbate wildfire risk, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of wildfire? □ □ ■ □
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? □ □ □ ■
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? □ □ □ ■ Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) Less than significant impact. See Hazards and Hazardous Materials section regarding emergency response. According to data from the Cal Fire, there are no fire hazard severity zones on the project site or within the City boundaries (CalFire 2024). As noted previously, the City of Shafter maintains an emergency plan for response to disasters, including fires. The objectives of the plan are to reduce loss of life, injury, and property losses through effective management of emergency forces (Shafter 2005). The emergency plan includes objectives and policies that would prevent new development from interfering with emergency response of evacuation plans. The project will comply with all local regulations related to the construction of new development that is consistent with the emergency plan. The project would also comply with the appropriate local and State requirements regarding emergency response plans and access. The proposed project would not inhibit the ability of local roadways to accommodate emergency response and evacuation activities. Therefore, the project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
b) Less than significant impact. The project site is in a region dominated by residential and agricultural uses. The topography of the area is flat. The project would install the required infrastructure to meet water supply demands for fire protection services. Development of the project will not increase the need for fire protection services or expand the service area of the local Fire Department, and the project will comply with all applicable fire codes and

61 regulations. Therefore, the project would not exacerbate wildfires and expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors.
c) No impact. The Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) provides electricity to the City. The existing trunk and transmission facilities are adequate to meet present and projected demand to the project site. The project will connect to the existing PG&E transmission lines for electrical power. Therefore, the project would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment.
d) No impact. The site is topographically flat land, as is the surrounding area. There are no slopes on or near the property and the project would not expose the people or structures to significant risks from downslope or downstream flooding or landslides due to a result of runoff, post fire instability or drainage changes. According to FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps the project is within an area of minimal flood hazards (FEMA 2024). Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

62 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Mandatory Findings of Significance:
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? □ ■ □ □
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) □ ■ □ □
c) Does the project have environmental effects which would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? □ ■ □ □
Evaluation of Environmental Effects
a) Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. As evaluated in this document, the project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. With implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in this document, the project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, significantly impact biological resources, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

Therefore, with the following mitigation measures the project would have a less than significant impact. Therefore, the project, with the implementation of the identified conditions of approval, best management practices, and mitigation measures, would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

63 b) Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. As described in the impact analyses in this document, any potentially significant impacts of the project would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of the project as described and by mitigation measures. The project would not otherwise combine with impacts of related development to add considerably to any cumulative impacts in the region. With mitigation, the proposed project would not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the project would have a less than cumulatively considerable impact with mitigation incorporated. There is no substantial evidence that with the implementation of the identified conditions of approval, best management practices, and mitigation measures, there are any cumulative effects associated with this project. c) Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. All the project’s impacts, both direct and indirect, that are attributable to the project were identified and mitigated. The project mitigation measures will substantially reduce or eliminate impacts of the project. Therefore, the project, with mitigation, would not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

64 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Cal Fire. 2024. California Fire Hazard Severity Zones Viewer Map.

Available:<https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness-andmitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps>.

2. CalGEM. 2025. Well Finder. Available:
<https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/>.

3. Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2025. California State Scenic Highway Mapping System. Available: <https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscapearchitecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways>.

4. CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2025. California Essential Habitat Connectivity. Available:< https://data.ca.gov/dataset/essential-connectivity-areascalifornia-essential-habitat-connectivity-cehc-ds620>.

5. DOC (California Department of Conservation). 2022. California Important Farmland Finder.

Available:<https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/>.

6. DOC (California Department of Conservation). 2025. Fault Activity Map of California.

Available:< https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/maps-data>.

7. DOF (California Department of Finance). 2024. Shafter, CA. 2024.

Available:<https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates-e1/>.

8. EnviroStor (Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor). 2025. Site/Facility Search.

Available:< https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?basic=True>.

9. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2024. FEMA Flood Map Service Center:

Search By Address. Available:< https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps>.

10. FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.

11. Kern County GSP. 2024. Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Available:< https://kerngsp.com/gsp-documents/>. December.

12. NORSD (North of the River Sanitary District). 2025. CIP Status Update.

Available:<https://www.norsd.com/cip-status-update>.

65 13. RK Engineering Group, Inc. 2025. NEC Birch Street and Los Angeles Street Residential Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Impact Study. April.

14. RK Engineering Group, Inc. 2023. NEC Birch Street and Los Angeles Street Residential Project Noise Impact Study. October.

15. RK Engineering Group, Inc. 2023. NEC Birch Street and Los Angeles Avenue Multi-Family Residential Project Traffic Impact Study. October.

16. Shafter (City of Shafter). 2005. General Plan.

17. SJVAPCD (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District). 2015. Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. March.

18. South Valley Biology Consulting LLC. 2025. Shafter Family Apartment Biological Resources Evaluation. March.

ATTACHMENT A
MMRP

EXHIBIT “A” - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program – GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) No. Mitigation Measure Time Frame for
Implementation
Responsible Monitoring
Agency Date Initials
GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

#1 Prior to grading plan approval, the applicant/developer shall submit documentation to the Planning Department that they will/have met all air quality control measures, design features, and rules required by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, including but not limited to the following:

To minimize Fugitive Dust during construction, the applicant will comply with the following:
 Apply water to unpaved surfaces and areas.
 Use non-toxic chemical or organic dust suppressants on unpaved roads and traffic areas.
 Limit or reduce vehicle speed on unpaved roads and traffic areas.  Maintain areas in a stabilized condition by restricting vehicle access.
 Install wind barriers.
 During high winds, cease outdoor activities that disturb the soil.  Keep bulk materials sufficiently wet when handling.
 Store and handle materials in a three-sided structure.  When storing bulk materials, apply water to the surface or cover the storage pile with a tarp.
 Don’t overload haul trucks. Overloaded trucks are likely to spill bulk materials.
 Cover haul trucks with a tarp or other suitable cover. Or, wet the top of the load enough to limit visible dust emissions.  Clean the interior of cargo compartments on emptied haul trucks prior to leaving a site.
 Prevent trackout by installing trackout control devices at all project access points.
 Clean up trackout at least once a day. If along a busy road or highway, clean up trackout immediately.
 Monitor dust-generating activities and implement appropriate measures for maximum dust control.

Prior to grading plan
approval
San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District;
City of Shafter Planning
Department
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. The applicant/developer shall obtain written proof from the SJVAPCD that the project will/have met all air quality control measures and rules.

3. Provide documentation to the Planning Department for the record.

EXHIBIT “A” - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program – GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) No. Mitigation Measure Time Frame for
Implementation
Responsible Monitoring
Agency Date Initials
GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Diesel Particulate Matter: during construction, the applicant will comply with the following design features:
 Construction equipment should be maintained in proper tune.  All construction vehicles should be prohibited from excessive idling. Excessive idling is defined as five (5) minutes or longer.  Minimize the simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units, to the maximum extent feasible.
 Establish an electricity supply to the construction site and use electric powered equipment instead of diesel-powered
equipment or generators, where feasible.
 Establish staging areas for the construction equipment that are as far from adjacent residential homes, as feasible.
 Use haul trucks with on-road engines instead of off-road engines for on-site hauling.
#2 Prior to grading plan approval, the applicant/developer shall submit proof to the Planning Department that the project has complied with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s Indirect Source Rule (Rule 9510).

Prior to grading plan
approval
San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District;
City of Shafter Planning
Department
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. The applicant/developer shall obtain written proof from the SJVAPCD that the project will/have met all air quality control measures and rules.

3. Provide documentation to the Planning Department for the record.

EXHIBIT “A” - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program – GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) No. Mitigation Measure Time Frame for
Implementation
Responsible Monitoring
Agency Date Initials
GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

#3 San Joaquin Kit Fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica)
Prior to ground disturbance, a pre-construction survey must be conducted 14 - 30 days within the Project Area and a 500-foot buffer to identify active or potential San Joaquin kit fox dens.  If potential kit fox dens are observed within the Project Area, a 50-foot avoidance buffer should be implemented. If construction activities require the destruction of a potential den, then den monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for a minimum of 4 consecutive nights following the protocols set forth in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for the Protection of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (USFWS 2011). Known dens shall require an avoidance buffer of at least 100 feet. If a known den cannot be avoided, it shall be left undisturbed, and the monitoring biologist shall be contacted immediately. Natal dens found within the Project Area or within a 500-buffer surrounding the Project Area should be avoided and the USFWS and CDFW shall be contacted.
 To prevent the entrapment of a San Joaquin kit fox or other wildlife, all steep walled, open trenches greater than 2 feet in depth should be covered at the end of each day. If covering an open excavation is not feasible, escape ramps made of earthen material or wooden planks at a 1:1- slope (45-degree angle) should be implemented. Trenches should be inspected in the morning prior to commencing work activities and prior to backfilling. If a San Joaquin kit fox or any other special-status species is found within the excavation, the monitoring biologist shall be contacted immediately. At no time should any personnel attempt to handle, corral, remove, or otherwise interact with the animal.

Prior to ground
disturbance
Qualified Biologist; City of
Shafter Planning
Department; California
Department of Fish and
Wildlife
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. Contract a qualified biologist to perform a pre-construction survey within 14 days prior to ground disturbance activities.

3. Provide results of survey to the Planning Department for the record.

4. If special-status species found, then contact CDFW to determine avoidance and minimization measures.

EXHIBIT “A” - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program – GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) No. Mitigation Measure Time Frame for
Implementation
Responsible Monitoring
Agency Date Initials
GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

#4 Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsoni)
 If construction activities are to take place during the nesting season (February - August), a preconstruction survey will be conducted 14 - 30 days prior to ground disturbing activities within the Project Area and a 500-foot buffer to identify individual Swainson’s hawk’s and active nests. This survey can be conducted concurrently with the San Joaquin kit fox preconstruction survey described above, depending on the timing of the pre-construction survey.
 If any active Swainson’s hawk nest is found during the preconstruction survey, a qualified biologist will prescribe an appropriate buffer zone surrounding the nest and a plan to be implemented to prevent disruption of nesting activities. If nest disruption is not possible, CDFW should be contacted for guidance.

Prior to ground
disturbance
Qualified Biologist; City of
Shafter Planning
Department; California
Department of Fish and
Wildlife
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. Contract a qualified biologist to perform a pre-construction survey within 14 days prior to ground disturbance activities.

3. Provide results of survey to the Planning Department for the record.

4. If special-status species found, then contact CDFW to determine avoidance and minimization measures.
#5 Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor)
 If construction activities are to take place during the nesting season for tricolored blackbird (February - May), a preconstruction survey will be conducted 14 - 30 days prior to ground disturbing activities within the Project Area and a 500- foot buffer to identify individual tricolored blackbirds and active nests. This survey can be conducted concurrently with the San Joaquin kit fox pre-construction survey described above, depending on the timing of the preconstruction survey.
 If any active tricolored blackbird nest sites are found during the pre-construction survey, a qualified biologist will prescribe an appropriate buffer zone surrounding the nest site and a plan to be implemented to prevent disruption of nesting activities.

Prior to ground
disturbance
Qualified Biologist; City of
Shafter Planning
Department; California
Department of Fish and
Wildlife
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. Contract a qualified biologist to perform a pre-construction survey within 14 days prior to ground disturbance activities.

3. Provide results of survey to the Planning Department for the record.

4. If special-status species found, then contact CDFW to determine avoidance and minimization measures.

EXHIBIT “A” - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program – GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) No. Mitigation Measure Time Frame for
Implementation
Responsible Monitoring
Agency Date Initials
GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

#6 Other Migratory Birds
Other migratory birds may use the proposed project site or surrounding lands for feeding, nesting, and roosting. In compliance with Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, if construction activities are to occur during the nesting and breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall determine the presence of any native bird and raptor nests prior to construction activities. If any nests are identified, appropriate buffer zones will be established around any identified nests to prevent disruption of nesting. If an adequate buffer zone cannot be established around any active nest, CDFW and USFWS will be contacted for guidance.

Prior to ground
disturbance
Qualified Biologist; City of
Shafter Planning
Department; California
Department of Fish and
Wildlife
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. Contract a qualified biologist to perform a pre-construction survey within 14 days prior to ground disturbance activities.

3. Provide results of survey to the Planning Department for the record.

4. If special-status species found, then contact CDFW to determine avoidance and minimization measures.

EXHIBIT “A” - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program – GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) No. Mitigation Measure Time Frame for
Implementation
Responsible Monitoring
Agency Date Initials
GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

#7 General Wildlife Avoidance Measures
To further ensure no special-status species are impacted by the project, the project will comply with the following general wildlife avoidance measures during the construction period.
 All vehicles should implement a maximum 10mph speed limit within the Project Area or adhere to the posted speed limit.  To avoid the entrapment of any animal, all excavations greater than 2 feet should be backfilled by the end of day. If backfilling by the end of day is not possible, excavations should be covered in a way to prevent wildlife species from entering the excavation.

If excavations cannot be covered, an earthen escape ramp or a ramp constructed of wooden planks should be implemented inside the excavation at a 1:1 slope (45 degrees). If any wildlife is found entrapped inside an open excavation, the biologist should be contacted immediately. All pipes, culverts, or similar structures staged onsite should be capped in a way to prevent the entry of wildlife. Such structures should be checked prior to moving to ensure no wildlife is entrapped inside.
 All food-related trash items including wrappers, cans, bottles, and scraps should be disposed of in a securely closed container and removed from the site at the end of each day.
 No firearms or pets should be allowed onsite.
 Any protected wildlife species that may venture onsite should be allowed to leave the site of their own accord. No attempt to handle or otherwise engage with the animal should be made. If after a reasonable amount of time the animal does not leave the project site, the biologist should be contacted.

During construction City of Shafter Planning
Department; Qualified
Biologist (if needed);
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (if needed)
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. Provide results of survey to the Planning Department for the record.

3. If special-status species found, then contact CDFW to determine avoidance and minimization measures.
#8 If prehistoric or historic-era cultural materials are encountered during construction activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall halt until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the find and make recommendations. Cultural resource materials may include prehistoric resources such as flaked and ground stone tools During construction Qualified Archeologist; City
of Shafter Planning
Department
Steps to Compliance:

EXHIBIT “A” - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program – GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) No. Mitigation Measure Time Frame for
Implementation
Responsible Monitoring
Agency Date Initials
GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

and debris, shell, bone, ceramics, and fire-affected rock as well as historic resources such as glass, metal, wood, brick, or structural remnants. If the qualified archaeologist determines that the discovery represents a potentially significant cultural resource, additional investigations may be required to mitigate adverse impacts from project implementation. These additional studies may include avoidance, testing, and evaluation or data recovery excavation.

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. If prehistoric or historic-era cultural materials are discovered, halt all work, and contact a qualified archaeologist to assess finds and recommend procedures.

3. If necessary, implement recommended procedures.

4. Provide summary of all relevant activities to the Planning Department for the record.
#9 If human remains are discovered during construction or operational activities, further excavation or disturbance shall be prohibited pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code.

The specific protocol, guidelines, and channels of communication outlined by the Native American Heritage Commission, in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code (Chapter 1492, Statutes of 1982, Senate Bill 297), and Senate Bill 447 (Chapter 44, Statutes of 1987), shall be followed. Section 7050.5(c) shall guide the potential Native American involvement, in the event of discovery of human remains, at the direction of the county coroner.

During construction City of Shafter Planning
Department; Kern County
Coroner (if needed); Native
American Heritage
Commission (if needed)
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. If human remains are uncovered, halt all work and contact the Kern County Coroner to evaluate the remains and follow the appropriate procedures and protocols.

3. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are Native American, the applicant/developer shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission.

4. If Native American human remains are located, the applicant/developer shall implement and comply with the requirements listed in this mitigation measure.

5. Provide summary of all relevant activities to the Planning Department for the record.

EXHIBIT “A” - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program – GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) No. Mitigation Measure Time Frame for
Implementation
Responsible Monitoring
Agency Date Initials
GPA 23-39 & ZC 23-72 (Cesar Chavez Multi-Family) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

#10 If any paleontological resources are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 25 feet of the find shall halt until a qualified paleontologist as defined by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources, can evaluate the find and make recommendations regarding treatment.

Paleontological resource materials may include resources such as fossils, plant impressions, or animal tracks preserved in rock. The qualified paleontologist shall contact the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or other appropriate facility regarding any discoveries of paleontological resources.

During construction Qualified Paleontologist;
City of Shafter Planning
Department
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. Contract a qualified paleontologist, if needed.

3. Perform additional investigations and fossil recovery, if needed.

4. Perform significance evaluation and effectuate recommendations, if needed.

5. Provide summary of all relevant activities to the Planning Department for the record.
#11 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project will provide proof to the Planning Department that the project scores a minimum of 29 points using the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) GHG Emission Reduction Best Performance Standard (BPS) Measures for Development Projects.

Prior to building
permit issuance
City of Shafter Building
Department; City of Shafter
Planning Department
Steps to Compliance:

1. This mitigation measure shall be incorporated as a condition of approval for any site plan review.

2. The applicant/developer shall submit percolation testing results to the Shafter Building Department.

3. Provide summary of all relevant activities to the Planning Department for the record.

ATTACHMENT B
Figures

Figure 5: Site Plan

Figure 6: Elevations

EXHIBIT 8
ORDINANCE NO. 772

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAFTER APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 23-72.

WHEREAS, the City Council has, at its regularly scheduled meeting on October 7, 2025, and continued to a date certain of October 21, 2025, studied and considered Zone Change No. 23- 72, a request to change the zone classification from R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium High Density Residential) on 8.7 acres (Accessor’s Parcel Number 028-180-57) located at the northeast corner of Birch Street and East Los Angeles Avenue as depicted in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance as set forth herein (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, it was determined that the Project, with mitigation, would not have a significant effect on the environment and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); and WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project includes enforceable mitigation described in the Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (“MMRP”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines have been followed; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shafter Planning Department (336 Pacific Avenue, Shafter, California) is the custodian of all documents and other materials upon which the environmental determination is based; and
WHEREAS, adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project has been approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to amend the City of Shafter Zoning Map to enhance the quality of life and to protect the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens by applying orderly development in the City; and

WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed public hearing for proposed Zone Change No. 23-72 was held by the City Council of the City of Shafter at a regular meeting on October 7, 2025, and continued to a date certain of October 21, 2025, at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said zone change.

NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shafter, in a regular session assembled on the 4th day of November, 2025, resolved to approve Zone Change No. 23-72 as illustrated in Exhibit “A”.

Shafter City Council Ordinance No. 772
November 4, 2025

PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 4th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025.
____________________________
Chad Givens, Mayor
ATTEST
______________________________
Yazmina Pallares, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
Marco A. Martinez, City Attorney

WINTERS DR

LACEY ST

ENTRAL VALLEY HWY

BIRCH ST

MCKENNA CTMARIE ST

ESTE ST

JACEY ANN CT

LA DANTE STBOESE ST

DANA ST

THOMPSON ST

E LOS ANGELES AVE

VINO TERRACE

LORES WAY

RMOUR DR
SITE
Exhibit A
Copyright nearmap 2015
3/14/2024, 1:30:20 PM
0 0.03 0.06 0.12 mi
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 km
1:4,514
City of Shafter
City of Shafter | Source: U.S. Census Bureau | County of Kern Planning Department, Bakersfield, California. | Kern County Assessor's Office, Mapping Section.

6hjla,

CALIFC)RNIA
336 Pacific Avenue . Shafter, California 93263

MEMORANDUM
Date: October 21,2025
To: City Council
From: Steve Esselman, Planning Dir""ror%
Subject: GPANo.23-39 &ZCNo.23-72 (Cesar ChavezMulti-Family)-OppositionEmails On October 20,2025, staff received two emails voicing opposition to the above-referenced project.

These emails were received after the agenda for the October 2I , 2025, City Council meeting was finalized and published. The letters arc attached to this memorandum and are being provided to the Council for their consideration when deliberating on the project.

Attachment(s): Two opposition emails
Planning and Building: (661 ) 746-5002 I Fax (661) 746-9125 . www.shafter.com Exhibit 9

Steve Esselman
From:

Sent:

Cc:

Subject:

Follow Up Flag:

Flag Status:

City Clerk
Monday, October 20,202510:29 AM
Lance Lippincott; Steve Esselman; Marco Martinez
FW: Public Comment Opposing GPA No. 23-39 and ZC No. 23-72 (Bich St. & E. Los Angeles Ave.)
Follow up
Completed
Councit,
Please see the Pubtic Comment in the emait below, received in the City Cterk inbox, OPPOSING Pubtic Hearing No. 1 General Ptan Amendment No. 23-39 and Zone Ghange No.23-72, for tomorrow evening's City Councit meeting.

Ptease let me know if you have any questions
Thank you!
shjlh,
YAXITTTTA PALIANES" CMC
{'i: r' ['lt.r'1,
CALIF€lFINIA
C ityel$rkG$.gh ir f I orc*, gO v
{6S:}746.5oOC}
33G F;rctllc Avsflue. Sh6ftsr, Cr'{ 93t63
vrvjw,s llir f t *r,eOrtl
rom: David Cruz <dacru [email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2025 9:42 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Public Comment Opposing GPA No. 23-39 and ZC No. 23-72 (Birch St. & E. Los Angeles Ave.) Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I am writing to share my concerns and opposition regarding General Plan Amendment No. 23-39 and Zone Change No.23-72,which propose changing the zoning for the property at the northeast corner of Birch Street and East Los Angeles Avenue from Low Density Residentiat to Medium High Density Residential..

Beyond the infrastructure and traffic issues atready mentioned by many residents, lwant to emphasize the impact this project would have on the privacy and quality of life of existing homeowners in the surrounding area. A medium- or high-density comptex woutd bring tal,ter buitdings and significantty more residents into a smal,l, area, creating an invasion of privacy for neighboring properties whose backyards and homes were never designed to face mutti-story apartment units.

Additional,l,y, devel,opments Like this often come with parking challenges that extend far beyond the property line. We've seen examptes in nearby cities, such as Wasco, where apartment comptexes did not provide enough parking for att residents. As a resutt, famities were forced to park in surrounding 1

neighborhoods, l,eading to overcrowded streets, safety issues, and tension with long-time residents. lt is very Likety that a simil,ar problem would occur here, given the timited space and existing traffic conditions in this part of Shafter.

I ask the Councit to ptease consider how these impacts witl affect not only traffic, but atso the day-to-day peace, privacy, and safety of the surrounding community. High-density devetopment may have its ptace, but this specific location is not an appropriate fit for such a project.

Thank you for your time and for tistening to the concerns of residents who care deepty about the future of our community.

Sincerety,
David Cruz
2

Steve Esselman
From:

Sent:

Cc:

Subject:

Follow Up Flag:

Flag Status:

City Clerk
Monday, October 20,2025 10:28 AM
Steve Esselman; Lance Lippincott; Marco Martinez
FW: Public Comment Opposing GPA No. 23-39 and ZC No. 23-72 (Bich St. & E. Los Angeles Ave.)
Follow up
Completed
Councit,
Ptease see the Pubtic Comment in the emait betow, received in the City Cterk inbox, OPPOSING Pubtic Hearing No. 1 Generat Ptan Amendment No. 23-39 and Zone Change No. 23-72, for tomorrow evening's City Councit meeting.

Please [et me know if you have any questions
Thank you!
shilb,
YAZIIilI{A PALLARES, CMC
t'itrr'{'ErrL

EALIFOFIHIA
city{ler kSl6lr ar i t *rct. g* v
{6S1}746..500C}
J.36 Faclfic Avenue, Slrsf ter, Cll S3?63
rr,/ycw,* hir f ! $r,{:orn
From: Andreina Cruz <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October L9,2025 9:38 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Public Comment Opposing GPA No. 23-39 and ZC No. 23-72 (Birch St. & E. Los Angeles Ave.) Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I am writing to express my opposition to General Plan Amendment No. 23-39 and Zone Change No.23-72, which woutd change the Land use designation for the approximatety 8.72-acre parcel at the northeast corner of Birch Street and East Los Angeles Avenue from Low Density Residential (R-1) to Medium High Density Residential (R-31.

White I understand that the City of Shafter may need additionat housing, this particutar location is not suitabl,e for a high-density devetopment of this scate. The area is already struggting with traffic congestion, especialty during peak commute times and agricutturaI work hours. Adding hundreds of additional, vehicles from a new mutti-famity complex witl, onty make matters worse and increase the risk of accidents.
1

Furthermore, tocal schools are already near or at capacity, and there are no nearby facitities to accommodate the significant inftux of new students this project woutd bring. The city's current infrastructure simpl.y does not support this level, of residential, growth in this area.

Beyond infrastructure concerns, residents continue to face limited access to affordable and quality groceries. Many of us are forced to travel to Wasco or Bakersfietd to purchase fresh, non-expired foodmeaning tocat sates tax do[tars that coutd support Shafter's economy are instead being spent etsewhere.

Before increasing popul,ation density, the city shoutd focus on improving essentiaI amenities and services for existing residents.

I atso question why this one parcet is being prioritized for such a drastic zoning change when there is ample vacant landin other parts of Shafter that coutd better accommodate medium- or high-density housing-such as areas aLong East or West Lerdo Highway, where traffic ftow and access to services are more manageabte.

For these reasons, I respectful,ty urge the Counci[ to decline this project and reconsider more suitabte sites for future housing devetopments that better atign with the city's [ong-term infrastructure and q uatity-of-tife goats.

Thank you for your time and consideration
Sincerely,
Andreina Cruz
2

6h*4,

CALIFOFINIA
336 Pacific Avenue . Shafter, California 93263

MEMORANDUM
Date: October 24,2025
To: City Council
From: Steve Esselman, Planning Director *--
Subject: GPANo.23-39 &ZCNo.23-72 (Cesar ChavezMulti-Family)-OppositionLetters On October 24,2025, staff received three letter voicing opposition to the above-referenced project.

These emails were received after the agenda for the October 2I,2025, City Council meeting was finalized and published. The letters are attached to this memorandum and are being provided to the Council for their consideration when deliberating on the project.

Attachment(s): Three opposition letters
Planning and Building: (661) 746-5002 I Fax (661) 746-9125 . www.shafter.com Exhibit 10

This letter is addressed to the city of Shafter and city council' It has come to mY attention,
bj".r"ffi|:,T:;??nil'"ilfr*il::St"i: H;: q&iii11or what the deveroper is requestins, a R3 rhat beins said , 5 units per aic wi, accommodate a area tnat witt be prosperou", a sat" and heathry way of living for families here in shafter. To stack 20 units in an acre in a smail town does not meet our varues and will jeopardize the saftey of residence of this develoment. This is u".v unn"urirry, unsate,tack of a play area ,tomany parking spaces' the reduction of home varues, prus our issues to metion. r" h;;d lt ;;;t units in " on" u"r" rot from-5 units to zo is a big request' LET the city decide on how they wi, meet tne staie reduiations ^bn nor"ing. D"ueropes do not need to come in and decide on how the city and *re ciiizlirs of shafter wirr r"etttate of carifornia riquirements. Let our citizens and city official work iog"th"t to lee what is best for the city and its citizens'

I SEND THIS LETTER TO CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER WHAT IS BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY' THANK YOU.

This letter is addressed to the city of shafter and city council' It has come to mY attention,
bjf":t;;:,:"".;??S"J"fiffi:",.i::ffii: H;:fl,lliiiiliorwhat the deveroper is requestins a R3 rhat beins said , 5 units per a/c wi, accommodate a area tnat witt be prosperour, u .ut" and heathly way of living for families here in shafter. To stack 20 units in an acre in a smail town does not *""i ori varues and will jeopardize the saftey of residence of this develoment. This is u"ry ,nn"urir,y, unsate,tagk gf a play area.,tomanybuiking spaces' the reduction of home varues, prus our issues to metion. r" ;;;id ;;;;t units in "
bn" ""r"
rot from-5 units to zo ts a big request' LET
the city decide on how they wiil meet tne staie reiuiations on..houring. Duu"ropes do not need to come in and decide on how the city and tn" citirl'ns of shafter wilr 'ieetttate of california i"qrir"tents. Let our citizens and city official work iog"th"t to Lee what is best for the city and its citizens'

I SEND THIS LETTER TO CI,, COUNCIL TO CONSIDER WHAT IS BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY' THANK YOU.
\/L'

This letter is addressed to the city of shafter and city council' It has come to mY attention' 'ijiXlt"J:lf ;iln"*:ilffi:"J::[X?: H;.: {T'l=^,*or what the deveroper is requestins a R3 rhat being said , 5 units per a/c wi, accommodate a area tnit *itt oe prospero;;, '; ;"1; and.heatnly way of iiving for famrlies here
in shafter. To stack zo units in an acre in u #Ji mwn does not *J"l"oui u-utul. uno witt ieopardize the saftey of residence of this deveroment. This is ""* ""nJuriiv,
unrrt",ru.i ot u ptuy area.,to.*"iv, n"irri"g spaces' the reduction of homevarues,plus orii..u"rtometion. lnhavingro*unyunitsrnuin"u"r"rotfromslnit.tizoirabigrequest'LET the city decide on r,ow in"v *iri meet the .tuil i"duiutions on, houJi"g. ;;rp?r 9r::l need ro come in and decide on how the city and tn* .iiir!'n. of shafter *irr m"ui"diate of carifo*iu'ilqrir"*ents Let our citizens and city official work ffi$; i"'i"" *tt't is best for the city and its citizens' ISENDTHISLETTERToCITYcoUNctLTOcoNSIDERWHATISBESTFoRoURCOMMUNITY'

THANK YOU

CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY OF SHAFTER

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Carol Chavolla, HR Director
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO CITY OF SHAFTER DEPARTMENT HEAD

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT TEMPLATE

RECOMMENDATION
Council find the action is not defined as a “project” per Section 15378(b)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines; and approve the amendment of the City of Shafter Department Head Employment Agreement Template to remove the clause under Section 3 (D) (d), Termination, stating “Refusal or failure to act in accordance with any directive or order of the City Manager.”

BACKGROUND
The City of Shafter uses a standardized employment agreement template for department head-level positions. The agreement outlines terms and conditions of employment, including duties, authority, and termination provisions consistent with the City’s at-will employment framework for department heads.

Within the current template, the causes for termination include language specifying that refusal or failure to act in accordance with any directive or order of the City Manager constitutes grounds for termination. This clause was originally intended to affirm the City Manager’s authority over department head operations and ensure accountability within the City’s organizational structure.

While the intent of the clause is to reinforce organizational hierarchy and ensure compliance with lawful directives, Staff have identified a potential ethical concern with its current wording. Specifically, the phrase “any directive or order” may be overly broad and could, in rare or unforeseen circumstances, be interpreted to require compliance with a directive that conflicts with ethical standards, laws, or professional obligations.

Although the likelihood of such a scenario is low, maintaining this language as written may inadvertently discourage department heads from exercising appropriate judgment or reporting potential ethical concerns. Removing this clause would mitigate the risk of misinterpretation and align the agreement more closely with ethical governance principles, while still preserving the City Manager’s general supervisory authority through other existing provisions.

If approved, the amendment would simply delete the above clause from the “Causes for

AMENDMENT TO CITY OF SHAFTER DEPARTMENT HEAD EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

TEMPLATE
- 2 -
Termination” section. All other terms and conditions of the Department Head Employment Agreement would remain unchanged.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this amendment.

CEQA ANALYSIS
The action is not defined as a “project” per Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines because the action is an organizational and administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment and is not subject to CEQA.

APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY
No

ATTACHMENTS

1. City of Shafter Department Head Employment Agreement Template - Amended 2025 11 04

1 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
[DEPARTMENT HEAD TEMPLATE ONLY]
THIS EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”) is made and entered into this _____ day of __________, 202__, by and between the City of Shafter, County of Kern, State of California, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the ”City”) and ____________________(hereinafter referred to as “Employee”). City and Employee are sometimes hereinafter referred to as “Party” or “Parties.” SECTION 1 EMPLOYMENT
A. The City agrees to and shall employ Employee as the [TITLE] of the City of Shafter, effective _____________ (“Effective Date”). Employee agrees to perform the functions and duties of the position of [TITLE]of the City of Shafter as described by state law, the Municipal Code of the City of Shafter, the job description of the position of [TITLE] attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, and to perform all other duties and functions as the City Manager of the City shall from time-to-time direct or assign.

B. Employee agrees to perform all such functions and duties to the best of his abilities and in a competent and efficient manner. Employee agrees to focus his/her full professional time, ability, and attention to City business during the term of this Agreement and agrees not to engage in any other business pursuits whatsoever or, directly or indirectly, render any services of a business, commercial or professional nature to any other person or organization, whether for compensation or otherwise, without the prior written consent of the City Manager.

SECTION 2 TERM
A. Employee shall serve at the will and pleasure of the City Manager in accordance with all provisions of the Charter of the City of Shafter and the Shafter Municipal Code. The City Manager may, from time to time, assign Employee to various City Departments as he/she may determine in his/her sole discretion to be in the best interest of the City. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit, or otherwise interfere with the right of the City Manager to terminate the employment of Employee at any time and for any reason, subject only to the provisions specified in Section 3 of this Agreement.

B. The City hereby employs Employee for a period beginning on the effective date until [MAXIMUM FOUR YEAR TERM], or until the services are terminated as provided for in Section 3 herein.

SECTION 3 TERMINATION
A. The City Manager and Employee may agree mutually in writing to terminate Employee’s employment and this Agreement under mutually agreeable terms consistent with this Agreement.

B. The City Manager may terminate Employee’s employment at any time without cause. In the event Employee is terminated by the City without cause , the City shall pay Employee

2 severance compensation equal to [UP TO] six (6) months of salary, health insurance premium payments, and all benefits. Employee shall also receive all accrued unused vacation leave and other such benefits as may be due and payable under applicable City rules, regulations, or policies and/or under applicable local, state, or federal law. In consideration of this severance payment, Employee agrees that he/she shall not be entitled to any other payment or compensation of any kind from the City in connection with the termination of his/her employment.

1. In the event Employee accepts the severance payments pursuant to this Section 3.B, as a condition precedent, Employee must execute a waiver of any rights, claims, or any other actions arising out of this Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The above severance provisions are intended to comply with the provisions of Government Code section 53260, et seq. Any severance payment under this Agreement is also subject to the forfeiture or repayment provisions of Government Code section 53243 et seq.

2. The severance payments provided in this Section 3 shall constitute the sole and only entitlement of Employee with respect to severance pay in the event of the termination, other than for cause or resignation. Employee expressly waives any and all other rights with respect to severance pay except as provided herein.

C. Employee may terminate his/her employment at any time for any reason by providing thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City Manager. In the event that Employee provides such written notice, he/she shall be entitled to receive at the termination of this employment only such accrued unused vacation leave and other such benefits as may be due and payable under applicable City rules, regulations, or policies, and/or under applicable local, state or federal law. Employee shall not, however, be entitled to any severance pay or other compensation at the termination of his/her employment due to resignation. During the period subsequent to Employee’s submission of his/her notice terminating his/her employment, he/she shall continue to perform his/her duties as [TITLE] pursuant to this Agreement unless removed from those duties and/or terminated by the City Manager pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. However, in the event that Employee is then removed from those duties and/or terminated by the City Manager, Employee shall continue to receive compensation in the form of salary and benefits through the completion of the thirty (30) day notice period without payment of severance.

D. In the event Employee and this Agreement are terminated for cause, Employee shall not be entitled to any severance pay or health insurance premium payments. The term “cause” shall be defined to include any misconduct materially related to performance of official duties, including but not be limited to any of the following:
(a) A willful breach of this Agreement.
(b) Habitual neglect of duties required to be performed under this Agreement. (c) Any acts of dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, or other acts of moral turpitude. (d) Refusal or failure to act in accordance with any directive or order of the City Manager.

3 (e)(d) Unauthorized absence or leave.
(f)(e) Engaging in conduct tending to bring embarrassment or disrepute to the City. (g)(f) Gross misfeasance or gross malfeasance.
(h)(g) “abuse of office or position” as defined in Government Code Section 53243.4 (i.e., waste, fraud, and violation of the law under color of authority and crimes against public justice, including crimes involving bribery and corruption).

For any of the foregoing, the City may, in its discretion, place Employee on paid or unpaid administrative leave until resolution.

E. The City Manager and/or Employee may terminate this Agreement in the event that Employee has been unable to perform the essential functions of his/her position due to illness or other disability for a period of twelve (12) weeks and it is medically determined that Employee is permanently disabled from performing the essential functions of his/her position.

1. A determination that Employee is permanently disabled shall be made by the City Manager based upon competent medical evidence and evaluation and in accordance with the applicable state and federal laws pertaining to the protection of disabled persons and with the California Public Employees Retirement Law.

2. In the event it is determined by the City Manager that a question exists as to Employee’s ability to perform the essential functions of his/her position, based upon objective facts, the City Manager may require Employee to undergo a fitness for duty examination.

F. Employee agrees that he/she shall not be entitled to any other payment or compensation of any kind from the City in connection with the termination of his/her employment without cause as defined in Section 3B of this Agreement.

SECTION 4 COMPENSATION
A. Effective upon the commencement of employment pursuant to this Agreement, the City shall pay to Employee a base salary within the City’s Salary Range of ______, Step ____, which represents a bi-weekly salary of $__________. This salary shall be paid on a pro-rata basis in regular installments pursuant to the City’s normal payroll procedures. Employee agrees his/her employment and duties as the [TITLE] are exempt from overtime compensation as required by the Fair Labor Standard Act.

B. The City Manager and Employee agree to cooperate in the conduct of an annual salary review concurrently with the annual performance evaluation as set forth in Section 6 of this Agreement. Upon conclusion of such review, the City Manager may, within his/her discretion, increase Employee’s Salary as he deems appropriate not to exceed the maximum of the ___________ salary range in accordance with the City’s Salary Schedule. Notwithstanding the City Manager’s discretion to grant an annual increase in salary, Employee shall also be eligible

4 for any salary increases granted by the City Council, provided such increases apply to all employees of the City.

C. The City Manager may set forth annually in writing certain goals consisting of duties and responsibilities above and beyond Employee’s ordinary duties and responsibilities. In the event that Employee achieves such goals, he may be entitled to receive other compensation in addition to his regular salary and benefits. The City Manager shall set forth the amount of additional compensation to which Employee would be entitled in the same writing setting forth the annual goals. Any such additional compensation will be at the discretion of the City Manager with the approval of the City Council as required.

SECTION 5 BENEFITS
A. The City shall deduct or withhold from Employee’s salary any and all sums as Employee may from time to time direct, or as required by law, including, but not limited to, sums for the payment of federal, state and/or local income taxes, social security and retirement plans.

B. [INSERT APPLICABLE PERS RETIREMENT BENEFIT RE LANGUAGE AS PEPRA EMPLOYEE OR CLASSIC EMPLOYEE]
C. The Employee shall receive all fringe benefits equal to those provided for nonrepresented, full-time City employees pursuant to the Resolution of the City Council of the City of Shafter Authorizing Wages and Related Benefits to Non-Represented Full-Time Employees.

Additionally, the City agrees to provide holidays, sick leave, sick leave incentives, education incentives, retirement benefits, and other benefits consistent with those benefits generally enjoyed by non-represented City employees.

D. In recognition of Employee’s need to use an automobile in the performance of his/her duties, the City shall provide Employee with an automobile allowance of up to four hundred dollars ($400.00) each month. In addition, Employee shall receive a mileage reimbursement at the City’s current reimbursement rate for each trip over 200 miles. Employee shall maintain in full force and effect during the term of his employment, insurance coverage for any automobile used in the performance of his official duties. Such insurance must be maintained at levels deemed adequate by the City, and Employee is required to provide adequate proof of such insurance to the City.

E. City will provide a cell phone for Employee and issue a monthly stipend of one hundred dollars ($100.00).

F. The City shall permit Employee to attend, at City expense, a reasonable number of local, state, and national conferences relevant to his/her duties and responsibilities as [TITLE] with the approval of the City Manager and budget authorization from the City Council.

G. Any provisions of the City code, rules, regulations, resolutions, and ordinances relating to non-represented. full-time employee benefits as they now exist or may later be amended, shall also apply to Employee. In addition to any benefits set forth in this Agreement, and except as those provisions of the City code, rules, regulations and ordinances relating to management

5 employee benefits may conflict or be inconsistent with the terms of this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall control.

SECTION 6 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
A. Annually, the City Manager, with the assistance of Employee, may define such goals and performance objectives which the City Manager determines necessary for the proper operation of City’s services and shall further establish a relative priority among those various goals and objectives. These goals and objectives shall be reduced in writing and should be reasonably attainable within the time limitations specified by the City Manager and in light of the appropriations provided through the annual operating and capital budgets B. The City Manager shall review and evaluate Employee’s performance annually.

This review and evaluation shall take into account any goals that may have been developed by the City Manager, as well as Employee’s performance of other functions and duties. The City Manager shall provide to Employee a summary written statement of the evaluation and shall provide Employee with the opportunity to discuss the evaluation with the City Manager.

C. The City Manager may fix any other terms and conditions of employment relating to Employee’s performance, as the City Manager may from time to time determine, provided that such other terms and conditions of employment are not contrary to or inconsistent with the terms set forth in this Agreement, the City’s rules, regulations and ordinances, local, state and/or federal law.

SECTION 7 GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. This Agreement constitutes the sole understanding and agreement of the City and Employee with respect to the matters set forth herein and supersedes any and all prior negotiations, statements, instructions, representations, or agreements, whether written or oral.

B. The parties agree and acknowledge that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements, oral or otherwise, have been made by any party, or by anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not contained herein and that any agreement, statement or promise not contained in this Agreement shall not be valid or binding on either party.

C. Any amendment to this Agreement shall be valid only if in writing approved and signed by both parties, unless otherwise specified in this Agreement.

D. If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force and effect.

E. If any action at law or in equity is necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees and costs in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled.

6 F. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, which are in full force and effect as of the date of execution and delivery by each party hereto.

G. Assembly Bill 1344, which was subsequently enacted as Government Code §§ 53243 - 53243.4, sought to provide greater transparency in local government and institute certain limitations on compensation paid to local government executives. These statutes also require that contracts between local agencies and its employees include provisions requiring an employee who is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of his/her office or position to provide reimbursement to the local agency for the following forms of payment: (i) paid leave salary; (ii) criminal defense costs; (iii) cash settlement payments; and (iv) any non-contractual settlement payments.

Accordingly, the Parties agree that it is their mutual intent to fully comply with these Government Code sections and all other applicable law as it exists as of the date of execution of this Agreement and as such laws may be amended from time to time thereafter. Specifically, the following Government Code sections are applicable and hereby incorporated in this Agreement:
§53243. Reimbursement of paid leave salary required upon conviction of crime involving office or position.
§53243.1. Reimbursement of legal criminal defense upon conviction of crime involving office or position.
§53243.2. Reimbursement of cash settlement upon conviction of crime involving office or position.
§53243.3. Reimbursement of noncontractual payments upon conviction or crime involving office or position.
§53243.4. “Abuse of office or position” defined.

Employee represents that Employee has reviewed, is familiar with, and agrees to comply fully with each of these provisions if any of these provisions are applicable to Employee, including that Employee agrees that any cash settlement or severance related to the termination that Employee may receive from the City shall be fully reimbursed to the local agency if Employee is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of his/her office or position. The Government Code provisions referenced in this section are attached hereto in Exhibit “B.” H. The City and Employee represent and warrant to each other that each has received legal advice from independent and separate legal counsel with respect to the legal effect of this Agreement, or had the opportunity to do so, and the City and Employee further represent and warrant that each has carefully reviewed this entire Agreement and that each and every term thereof is understood and that the terms of this Agreement are contractual and not a mere recital.

This Agreement shall not be construed against the party or its representatives who drafted it or who drafted any portion thereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of the date and year first written above.

7 APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: _______________________________
[Employee NAME]
[Title]
By: _______________________________
[CM NAME]
City Manager
By: _______________________________
[NAME]
City Attorney

8 EXHIBIT A
[Job Description on following page]

9 EXHIBIT B
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 53243-53243.4 and 53260(a)
53243. On or after January 1, 2012, any contract executed or renewed between a local agency and an officer or employee of a local agency that provides paid leave salary offered by the local agency to the officer or employee pending an investigation shall require that any salary provided for that purpose be fully reimbursed if the officer or employee is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of his/her office or position.
53243.1. On or after January 1, 2012, any contract executed or renewed between a local agency and an officer or employee of a local agency that provides funds for the legal criminal defense of an officer or employee shall require that any funds provided for that purpose be fully reimbursed to the local agency if the officer or employee is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of his/her office or position.
53243.2. On or after January 1, 2012, any contract of employment between an employee and a local agency employer shall include a provision which provides that, regardless of the term of the contract, if the contract is terminated, any cash settlement related to the termination that an employee may receive from the local agency shall be fully reimbursed to the local agency if the employee is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of his/her office or position. 53243.3. On or after January 1, 2012, if a local agency provides, in the absence of a contractual obligation, for any of the payments described in this article, then the employee or officer receiving any payments provided for those purposes shall fully reimburse the local agency that provided those payments in the event that the employee or officer is convicted of a crime involving the abuse of his/her office or position.
53243.4. For purposes of this article, "abuse of office or position" means either of the following:
(a) An abuse of public authority, including, but not limited to, waste, fraud, and violation of the law under color of authority.
(b) A crime against public justice, including, but not limited to, a crime described in Title 5 (commencing with Section 67) or Title 7 (commencing with Section 92) of Part 1 of the Penal Code.
53260. (a) All contracts of employment between an employee and a local agency employer shall include a provision which provides that regardless of the term of the contract, if the contract is terminated, the maximum cash settlement that an employee may receive shall be an amount equal to the monthly salary of the employee multiplied by the number of months left on the unexpired term of the contract. However, if the unexpired term of the contract is greater than 18 months, the maximum cash settlement shall be an amount equal to the monthly salary of the employee multiplied by 18.

CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY OF SHAFTER

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Carol Chavolla, HR Director
SUBJECT: RATIFICATION OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) WITH THE CITY OF SHAFTER (CITY) AND THE SHAFTER

POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (SPOA) AND

AUTHORIZATION FOR A BUDGET AMENDMENT

RECOMMENDATION
Council find the action is not defined as a “project” per Section 15378(b)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines; ratify the MOU between the City and SPOA for the period of January 3, 2026, to December 31, 2026; and authorize a budget amendment in the amount of $245,346 for Fiscal Year 25/26.

BACKGROUND
The City’s negotiating team met in good faith with SPOA representatives in accordance with the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act regarding salaries, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment. The negotiating team reached a tentative agreement with SPOA in conformity with the Council’s direction.

On October 28, 2025, the SPOA membership ratified the tentative agreement for a oneyear term of the SPOA MOU from January 3, 2026, to December 31, 2026, with the following updates:
• Cost-of-Living Adjustment: Three percent (3%)
• POST Supervisor Certificate Incentive: Five percent (5%) (max 15% cumulative for POST Intermediate, Advanced, and Supervisor Certifications) • Field Training: Two and one-half percent (2.5%) FTO/CTO Certification Incentive for Police Officers and Dispatchers; Two and one-half percent (2.5%) Active Training Incentive for Senior Police Officers, Police Officers, and Dispatchers • Take-Home Vehicle Program: Expand the mile radius to 50 miles • Shift Differential: Five percent (5%)
• Specialty Pay: Add gang detail assignment and drone operator assignment; three and one-half percent (3.5%) of base pay, limited to one specialty assignment at a given time, and shall not be combined with other specialty assignment pays.
• Health Benefits: City to pay one hundred percent (100%) of medical, dental, and vision premiums on the base plans for employees and eligible dependents

RATIFICATION OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) WITH THE CITY OF

SHAFTER (CITY) AND THE SHAFTER POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (SPOA) AND

AUTHORIZATION FOR A BUDGET AMENDMENT
- 2 -
• Retiree Medical: 12 months of City-subsidized COBRA continuation coverage; must have 10 years of continuous City service; excludes terminations • Shift Change Notification: 5 calendar days
• Overtime Eligibility Requirements: Not include sick leave as hours worked • Education Incentive Pay, Bilingual Spanish Pay, Sick Leave Stay Well Bonus, and Floating Holidays: Language clarification
• Vacation Cash-Out: Revise language in compliance with IRS regulations • Bereavement leave: Expand eligibility requirements for out-of-state bereavement leave

FISCAL IMPACT
Total Ongoing Costs $417,419
Fiscal Year 25/26 Budgeted 2% ($113,268)
OT Eligibility
Requirements
Estimated Cost
Savings
($58,805)
Net Fiscal Impact $245,346
The total ongoing cost associated with the negotiated terms of the 2026 SPOA MOU is $417,419. Taking into account the 2% labor negotiation contingency already included in the adopted budget and the estimated annual cost savings of $58,805 resulting from the removal of sick leave as “hours worked” for overtime eligibility, the net fiscal impact is projected to be $245,346. This amount exceeds current budget allocations and, therefore, requires a budget amendment to the Fiscal Year 2025/2026 budget.

CEQA ANALYSIS
The action is not defined as a “project” per Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines because the action is an organizational and administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment and is not subject to CEQA.

APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY
No

ATTACHMENTS

1. SPOA MOU 26 - Final

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

BETWEEN THE

SHAFTER POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
AND

CITY OF SHAFTER
JANUARY 3, 2026, THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2026

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

SHAFTER POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
AND

CITY OF SHAFTER
JANUARY 3, 2026 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2026

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS ..............................................................................................................................1 SECTION 1.1 PREAMBLE................................................................................................................................................1 SECTION 1.2 RECOGNITION..........................................................................................................................................1 SECTION 1.3 SEVERANCE..............................................................................................................................................1 SECTION 1.4 SOLE AGREEMENT .................................................................................................................................1 SECTION 1.5 FULL FORCE AND EFFECT....................................................................................................................1 ARTICLE II - RESPECTIVE RIGHTS ................................................................................................................................2 SECTION 2.1 ASSOCIATION RIGHTS...........................................................................................................................2 SECTION 2.2 CITY RIGHTS............................................................................................................................................2 ARTICLE III - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE ......................................................................................................................2 SECTION 3.1 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE .....................................................................................................................2 ARTICLE IV - HOURS OF WORK AND OVERTIME .....................................................................................................5 SECTION 4.1 HOURS OF WORK ....................................................................................................................................5 SECTION 4.2 OVERTIME ................................................................................................................................................6 SECTION 4.3 CALLBACK PAY.......................................................................................................................................6 SECTION 4.4 COURT TIME/STANDBY TIME..............................................................................................................7 ARTICLE V - PAY PROVISIONS.........................................................................................................................................7 SECTION 5.1 SALARY .....................................................................................................................................................7 SECTION 5.2 EDUCATION INCENTIVE PAY ..............................................................................................................7 SECTION 5.3 BILINGUAL SPANISH INCENTIVE PAY ..............................................................................................8 SECTION 5.4 RETIREMENT............................................................................................................................................8 SECTION 5.5 SICK LEAVE..............................................................................................................................................9 SECTION 5.6 VACATION LEAVE..................................................................................................................................9 SECTION 5.7 HOLIDAYS...............................................................................................................................................11 SECTION 5.8 BEREAVEMENT LEAVE .......................................................................................................................11 SECTION 5.9 MILITARY LEAVE .................................................................................................................................12 SECTION 5.10 OUT-OF-CLASS PAY............................................................................................................................12 SECTION 5.11 CANINE HANDLER INCENTIVE PAY...............................................................................................12 SECTION 5.12 TRAINING OFFICER PAY ...................................................................................................................12 SECTION 5.13 CELLULAR TELEPHONE PROVISION..............................................................................................12 SECTION 5.14 PAY SCHEDULE ...................................................................................................................................13 SECTION 5.15 TAKE-HOME VEHICLE PROGRAM ..................................................................................................13 SECTION 5.16 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL.........................................................................................................................13 SECTION 5.17 LONGEVITY PAY.................................................................................................................................13 SECTION 5.18 SPECIALTY PAY...................................................................................................................................14 ARTICLE VI - HEALTH AND WELFARE .......................................................................................................................14 SECTION 6.1 MEDICAL AND DENTAL INSURANCE COVERAGE........................................................................14 SECTION 6.2 UNIFORM/SAFETY EQUIPMENT ALLOWANCE..............................................................................14 SECTION 6.3 PROBATION ............................................................................................................................................15 SECTION 6.4 RETIREE MEDICAL BENEFITS............................................................................................................15 ARTICLE VII - CLOSING PROVISIONS.........................................................................................................................16 SECTION 7.1 TERM........................................................................................................................................................16 SECTION 7.2 SIGNATURES..........................................................................................................................................16

SPOA MOU 2026 1

ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS
SECTION 1.1 PREAMBLE
This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is made and entered into between the City of Shafter, hereinafter referred to as the “City” and the Shafter Police Officers Association (SPOA), hereinafter referred to as the “Association,” pursuant to California Government Code Section 3500, et seq., and the City's Employer - Employee Relations Policy. The purpose of this MOU is the establishment of wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment.

The City and Association agree that the provisions of this MOU shall be applied equally to all employees covered herein without favor or discrimination because of race, creed, color, sex, age, national origin, political or religious affiliations, or association memberships. Whenever the masculine gender is used in this MOU, it shall be understood to include the feminine gender.

SECTION 1.2 RECOGNITION
a. The City recognizes the Association as the recognized and exclusive representative for Animal Control Officers, Police Dispatchers, Police Officers, Police Sergeants, and Senior Police Officers. b. This recognition is exclusive of management employees, temporary employees, part-time employees, independent contractors, and individuals placed by employment agencies. c. The City agrees to meet and confer and otherwise deal exclusively with the Association on all matters relating to the scope of representation under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (GC 3500, et seq.), and as provided under the City's EmployerEmployee Relations Policy.

SECTION 1.3 SEVERANCE
a. If any provision of the Agreement should be found invalid, unconstitutional, unlawful, or unenforceable by reason of any existing or subsequently enacted constitutional or legislative provision shall be severed, and all other provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for the duration of the Agreement. b. If any provision of the MOU should be found invalid, unconstitutional, unlawful, or unenforceable, the City and the Association agree to meet and confer in a timely manner in an attempt to negotiate a substitute provision. Such negotiations shall apply only to the severed provision of the Agreement and shall not in any way modify or impact the remaining provisions of the existing MOU.

SECTION 1.4 SOLE AGREEMENT
a. The City and the Association agree that to the extent that any provision addressing wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment negotiable under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act found outside this MOU and are in conflict thereof, this MOU shall prevail.
b. If during the term of the MOU, the parties should mutually agree to modify, amend, or alter the provisions of this MOU in any respect, any such change shall be effective only if and when reduced to writing and executed by the authorized representatives of the City and the Association. Any such changes validly made shall become part of this MOU and subject to its terms.

SECTION 1.5 FULL FORCE AND EFFECT
a. All wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment that are negotiable subjects of bargaining under the MeyersMilias-Brown Act, including those set in this MOU, shall remain in full force and effect during the term of this MOU unless changed by mutual agreement.
b. The City will abide by the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act where and when it applies to the Association.

SPOA MOU 2026 2

ARTICLE II - RESPECTIVE RIGHTS
SECTION 2.1 ASSOCIATION RIGHTS
The Association shall have the following rights and responsibilities:
a. Reasonable advance notice of any City ordinance, rule, resolution, or regulation directly relating to matters within the scope of representation proposed to be adopted by the City Council. b. Reasonable use of one bulletin board at the Shafter Police Department. c. The right to payroll deductions made for payments or organization dues and for City approved programs. d. The use of City facilities for regular, normal and lawful Association activities, providing that approval of the City Manager or his/her designee has been obtained.
e. Reasonable access to employee work locations for officers of the Association and their officially designated representatives for the purpose of processing grievances or contacting members of the organization concerning business within the scope of representation. Access shall be restricted so as not to interfere with the normal operations of any department or with established safety or security requirements. f. Time off allowance to employee representatives shall be as afforded in section 3505.3 of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act. g. Reasonable notification of officer involved shootings and any incident during which a member requests representation by the Shafter Police Officers Association or Legal Counsel provided by the Shafter Police Officers Association.

SECTION 2.2 CITY RIGHTS
a. The rights of the City include, but are not limited to, the exclusive right to determine the mission of its constituent departments set standards and levels of service, determine employment standards, direct its employees, take disciplinary action, relieve its employees from duty because of lack of work or funds or for other legitimate reasons, maintain the efficiency of governmental operations, maintain fiscal integrity, determine the methods, means and personnel by which government operations are to be conducted, establish a classification plan, take all necessary actions to carry out its mission in emergencies, and exercise complete control and discretion over its organization and the technology of performing its work.
b. In addition, the City retains the exclusive right, subject to the provisions of this MOU, the Personnel Rules, and the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, to take other actions, make decisions, or set procedures or policies it deems appropriate.

ARTICLE III - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
SECTION 3.1 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
a. Purpose
In the belief that the resolution of grievances is a constructive management action, a grievance procedure is hereby established. Such a procedure will give permanent employees assurance that the City recognizes their right to be heard and assist them in achieving job satisfaction. The purpose of this procedure is to provide a just and equitable method for the resolution of grievances or complaints without prejudice. b. Representation

1. The employee has the right to the assistance of a representative of his/her choice in the investigation, preparation and presentation of a complaint or grievance.

SPOA MOU 2026 3

2. Representation may occur at any stage of the grievance procedure, provided, however, that prior to calling for representation at step one of the procedures the employee shall discuss his/her complaint or grievance with his/her supervisor. Upon conclusion of the discussion, the employee may request a continuation of the grievance process (step one), to a mutually agreeable time within five (5) working days, to have the assistance of a representative.

3. If the employee selects another employee as his/her representative, such representative shall not be released during working hours without the approval of his/her supervisor. c. Definition

1. A complaint is defined as an allegation or charge against a party that an error or wrong has been committed.

2. A grievance is defined as the expressed claim by an employee that the City, or one of its representatives has violated, misinterpreted, or misapplied the MOU provisions and/or City personnel ordinances, rules and regulations, or administrative directives.
d. Grievance Conferences
Grievance conferences between management and the employee will normally be conducted during management working hours at a mutually convenient time.
e. Grievance Investigation
The investigation of a complaint or grievance during working hours by an employee and his/her representative, if any, shall be in accordance with the following:

1. Prior to entering any job site, the representative shall obtain the approval of the job site supervisor.

2. There shall be no solicitation of grievances or employee organization membership.

3. The investigation shall be conducted in a reasonable amount of time and expeditiously with due regard for the work requirements of the City.

4. Where the investigation commences prior to the end of the regular workday, time spent after the close of the regular workday shall be the employee's own time.

5. Entry will not be permitted if it would unreasonably interfere with or delay City work.

6. All safety regulations relating to the presence and conduct of persons at the job site shall be complied with. f. Steps

1. Step One
A. The employee shall inform his/her supervisor of the complaint or grievance within five (5) working days after the employee knows, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known of the events giving rise to the complaint or grievance. Failure to complete this procedure will bar further consideration of the complaint or grievance.

B. The supervisor shall within five (5) working days of the discussion render a verbal decision to the employee.

2. Step Two
A. Within five (5) working days from receipt of the verbal decision from the supervisor, the employee, if he/she wishes to appeal the decision, shall notify the Department Head of his/her intent to appeal the decision. Failure to complete this procedure will bar further consideration of the complaint or grievance.

SPOA MOU 2026 4
B. The Department Head or his/her designated representative shall, within five (5) working days of the notification as required above, have a discussion with the employee concerning the complaint or grievance.

C. The Department Head or his/her designated representative shall, within five (5) working days of the discussion, render a written decision to the employee.

3. Step Three
A. Within five (5) working days from receipt of the written decision from the Department Head, the employee, if he/she wishes to appeal the decision, shall notify the City Manager in writing of his/her intent to appeal the decision. Failure to complete this procedure will bar further consideration of the complaint or grievance.

B. The City Manager or his/her designated representative shall, within five (5) working days of the written notice, render a written decision to the employee. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit more expeditious handling of the complaint or grievance. The decision of the City Manager shall be final and binding with regards to all complaints that reach this level.

4. Step Four
A. Within ten (10) working days from receipt of the written decision from the City Manager, the grievant, if he/she wishes to appeal the decision, shall file with the City Manager a written demand requesting a hearing before the City Council to review the decision reached regarding his/her grievance.

B. Upon the receipt of written demand for City Council review, the City Manager shall compile the entire record of the grievance along with whatever other data he/she deems pertinent for a fair and objective appraisal of the employee's appeal. The City Council shall investigate the case and, if the preliminary findings so warrant, may schedule a hearing. The City Council shall have at its discretion the power to adjudicate an appeal without a hearing.

C. When the City Council establishes a hearing date, the City Manager shall notify the affected parties of the date, time and place set by the City Council; and shall publicly post, at such places as the City Council may prescribe, a notice of the date, time and place of the hearing together with the names of the affected parties. Unless incapacitated, the employee shall appear personally before the City Council at the hearing and may be represented by any person or Attorney he/she selects.

The City Council shall administer oaths to witnesses testifying in said hearings. The hearing may be open or closed to the public at the option of either the employee or City Council unless the employee specifically requests a public hearing. Each member of the City Council shall have the power to cause subpoenas to be issued to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence relating to the hearing subject matter. Any Council member present at the hearing shall have the power to administer oaths to witnesses. The refusal of a City employee to testify under oath shall be grounds for disciplinary action. Service of subpoenas shall be made by the Police Chief or his/her subordinates.

D. The City Council through the Mayor shall conduct the grievance appeal hearing in the following manner:

1. The hearing shall be called to order by the Mayor at the scheduled time.

2. The aggrieved employee shall first present his/her grievance, together with whatever witnesses and evidence he/she may deem pertinent. The employee and his/her witnesses shall be subject to cross-examination by the representative of the City government administration.

3. Representative of the City government administration may present witnesses and evidence pertinent to and supportive of the City's position. The City's witnesses shall be subject to cross-examination by the aggrieved employee.

4. Closing arguments shall then be presented, with the employee or his/her representative preceding the representative of the City government administration in presentation.

SPOA MOU 2026 5

5. The City Council shall then formally adjourn the hearing. At any time during the hearing, the City Council may suspend the procedure to allow one or more Council members to interrogate a witness, one of the parties or one of the representatives of the parties.

E. Written findings and recommendations of the City Council shall be rendered within ten (10) calendar days from the date of the closing of the hearing, and shall thereupon be directed to the City Manager, the Department Head, the immediate Supervisor and the aggrieved employee. The decision of the City Council shall be final. A copy of the City Council's findings and recommendations shall be entered into the minutes of the Council, and a copy placed in the employee's personnel file.

ARTICLE IV - HOURS OF WORK AND OVERTIME
SECTION 4.1 HOURS OF WORK
a. Work Period

1. The normal work period shall be seven (7) days with a maximum non-overtime of forty (40) hours. The work period shall commence at 0000 hours Saturday and end at 2400 hours Friday.

2. When mutually agreed upon by both the City and the Association, employees may be placed on alternative work schedules. Use of an alternative work schedule shall be on a trial basis not to exceed three (3) months. Extension may be granted at the sole discretion of the Department Head. The City reserves the right to terminate this alternative work schedule anytime if it is found unsatisfactory at the sole discretion of the Department Head. Employees may terminate this alternative work schedule if it is found unsatisfactory by at least two-thirds of the recognized employees. Matters concerning alternative work schedules are not subject to the grievance procedure. The alternative work period shall be fourteen (14) consecutive days with a maximum non-overtime of eighty (80) hours. The work period shall commence at 0000 hours Saturday and end at 2400 hours Friday. Benefits such as vacation, holiday and sick leave accrue on an eight (8) hour day. Absences from a work day exceeding eight (8) hours require use of additional accrued leave. Only sworn employees are eligible for the 14-day work period in accordance with the 207(k) partial overtime exemption.

3. Non-sworn employees working a 3/12 work schedule will have an alternating regular day off every other week as determined by the City. For such employees working a 3/12 work schedule, each employee’s designated workweek shall begin exactly four hours after the start of his/her eight-hour shift. b. Shift Change Notification
Shift work employees shall be granted five (5) calendar days of advance notice of changes in scheduled shifts unless such change is due to illness or emergency.
c. Shift Employee Mealtime

1. Mealtime for shift employees is thirty (30) minutes of paid time, therefore shift employees shall be subject to call out during mealtime. Nothing in this section provides for or implies any additional compensation or benefit if a mealtime is not received.

2. Mealtime for non-shift employees is sixty (60) minutes of non-paid time. d. Rest Periods
Rest periods will normally be provided to employees at the rate of fifteen (15) minutes for each four (4) hours worked.

Rest periods are not to be construed as mealtime. Nothing in this section provides for or implies any additional compensation or benefits if a rest period is not received.

SPOA MOU 2026 6
e. Definition of Shift Employee
Shift employees include Animal Control Officers, Police Dispatchers, Police Officers, Police Sergeants, and Senior Police Officers regularly assigned to positions that require duties to be regularly performed on a twenty-four (24) hour day, seven (7) days a week basis.
f. Shift Trades
Employees of equal rank will be allowed to trade shifts from time to time if the following criteria are met:

1. The trade does not adversely impact the Department's operating needs.

2. The trade does not result in the payment of overtime to the trading employees.

3. The trade is by mutual consent of the employees involved.

4. The trade request must be submitted in writing to the employee’s supervisor, signed by both employees and approved by the Department Head or his/her designee.

5. The trade days occur within the same pay period.

SECTION 4.2 OVERTIME
a. Rate
Employees shall be paid overtime at the rate of time and one-half his/her regular rate of pay. All overtime shall be recorded and paid based on fifteen (15) minute increments. For each full fifteen (15) minute period worked, the employee shall be compensated for one quarter (1/4) hour of overtime.
b. Hours Paid
c. Overtime shall be paid for hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours in a normal 7-day work period. Sick leave shall not constitute hours worked. Vacation leave, and compensatory time off constitute hours worked. d. Overtime shall be paid for hours worked in excess of eighty (80) hours in an alternative 14-day work period. Sick leave shall not constitute hours worked. Vacation leave and compensatory time off constitute hours worked. c. Compensatory Time Off (CTO)
Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, employees may be granted CTO for overtime credit computed at time and one-half at the discretion of the Department Head and with due regard for the wishes of the employee. Requests to use CTO shall be granted with due regard for operational necessity such as staffing levels. Employees may accrue a maximum of two-hundred (200) hours in their CTO account. All CTO hours over one-hundred sixty (160) earned and accrued through June 30th, shall be paid at the employee’s current rate of pay on a one-time annual lump sum basis on or before July 31st.
d. Schools/Training/Qualifications/Department Meetings
All schools, training, qualifications, and department meetings required by the City or Department and attended by employees on off duty time shall be compensated by time and one-half rate of pay with a minimum compensation of two (2) hours.

SECTION 4.3 CALLBACK PAY
Employees who are called to duty at a time they are not working shall be compensated at one and one-half times the regular rate of pay with a minimum compensation of two (2) hours. This section does not apply to standby/court time, see section

4.4 for standby/court time pay.

SPOA MOU 2026 7
SECTION 4.4 STANDBY TIME/COURT TIME
a. Standby Pay
Employees placed on standby at a time they are not working shall receive two (2) hours pay at time and one-half. b. Court Subpoena Appearance Pay
Employees appearing in court pursuant to a subpoena from court standby shall receive three (3) hours pay or actual court time including travel, whichever is greater, at time and one-half. Court pay is in addition to standby pay, if any.

ARTICLE V - PAY PROVISIONS
SECTION 5.1 SALARY
a. Effective January 3, 2026, which represents the commencement of the first pay period of 2026, sworn and non-sworn recognized employees shall receive a three percent (3%) cost-of-living adjustment (COLA). The City and Association agree that the actual percentage may vary slightly due to rounding. b. Salary step increases to Steps B, C, D, and E shall be considered merit increases. Employees shall be eligible for salary advancement to the next step upon completion of twelve (12) months of satisfactory job performance and normally increasing job productivity at the present step, and upon recommendation of the Department Head and approval of the City Manager.

SECTION 5.2 EDUCATION INCENTIVE PAY
a. Employees shall be reimbursed up to three thousand dollars ($3000) in a calendar year for expenses incurred for taking college courses and other courses under the following conditions:

1. Prior Department Head and City Manager approval is obtained.

2. The course furthers a job related major as approved by the Department Head or his/her designee.

3. College courses require a minimum three (3) units completed with a grade of “C” or better.

4. Proof of course completion, including grades and appropriate receipts for eligible expenses, must be submitted to Human Resources no later than thirty (30) calendar days after the close of the calendar year in which the courses were completed.
b. POST Incentive Pay

1. Purpose
A. Employees with average or standard performance are a valued part of the City organization. The POST Incentive Pay is an incentive intended to reward sworn police officers and police dispatchers for extraordinary contributions to the safety and security of the community of Shafter.

2. The POST Incentive Pay is as follows:

A. Intermediate Certificate is five percent (5%) of base pay.

B. Advanced Certificate is an additional five percent (5%) of base pay, for a total of ten percent 10%.

C. Supervisor Certificate is an additional five percent (5%) of base pay, for a total of fifteen percent (15%).

3. Eligible employees must submit the certificate to Chief of Police for approval. Upon approval by the City Manager,

SPOA MOU 2026 8
the POST Incentive Pay shall become effective the first day of the pay period following the City Manager’s approval.

4. Eligibility
A. The employee must be employed as a full-time sworn Police Officer or a full-time Police Dispatcher authorized by Penal Code 830.1.

B. The employee must have been issued and possess a POST Intermediate or Advanced Certificate, prior to applying for the incentive pay.
c. College Degree Incentive Pay

1. The City shall provide an incentive to obtain a level of education beyond that of high school graduation provided the course of study is in a job-related subject. Job related subjects include Administration of Justice, Police Science, Police Administration, Criminology, or Criminal Justice. Other subject fields may be considered as qualifying on a case-bycase basis as approved by the Chief of Police and the City Manager. Compensation is as follows:

A. An employee with 60 or more semester units and currently enrolled and participating in courses normally required for, or included in the curriculum leading towards a degree, shall be compensated 2.5% of base salary.

B. An employee with an associate degree from an accredited college or university, shall be compensated 2.5% of base salary. An employee receiving the incentive for an associate degree shall not receive the incentive for having 60 or more semester units.

C. An employee with a qualified job-related bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university, shall be compensated 5% of base salary. An employee receiving the incentive for a bachelor’s degree shall not receive the incentive for having as associate degree or for having 60 or more semester units. The maximum education incentive pay is 5% of base salary.

D. Eligible employees must complete and submit the Education Incentive Pay Form along with official transcripts or proof of degree to the Chief of Police for review and approval. Upon approval by the Chief of Police and authorization by the City Manager, the College Degree Incentive Pay shall become effective on the first day of the pay period following the City Manager’s approval.

SECTION 5.3 BILINGUAL SPANISH INCENTIVE PAY
Employees designated by the Department Head or his/her designee to utilize Spanish bilingual skills, and who pass the City’s bilingual examination, shall receive incentive pay at five percent (5%) of base salary. The Bilingual Spanish Incentive Pay shall become effective on the first day of the pay period following the date the employee passes the bilingual examination.

SECTION 5.4 RETIREMENT
a. The City agrees to contract with California Public Employees Retirement System and recognized employees are responsible for paying the 9%-member contribution for Police Officers, Senior Police Officers, and Police Sergeants, for employees hired on or before December 31, 2012. The plan benefits consist of the 3% at 55 Full Formula; Limit Prior Service to Members Employed as of Contract Date (GC 20938); Credit for Unused Sick Leave (GC 20965); Local System Service Credit included in the basic death benefit (GC 21536); and One Year Final Compensation GC 20042. b. The City agrees to contract with California Public Employees Retirement System and recognized employees are responsible for paying the 7%-member contribution for the Animal Control Officers and Police Dispatchers, for employees hired on or before December 31, 2012. The plan benefits consist of the 2% at 55 Full Formula; Limit Prior Service to Members Employed as of Contract Date (GC 20938); Credit for Unused Sick Leave (GC 20965); Local System Service Credit included in the basic death benefit (GC 21536); and One Year Final Compensation GC 20042. c. Employees hired on or after January 1, 2013, who qualify as a “new member” in the California Public Employees Retirement System as defined in GC Section 7522.04(e,f), shall be subject to California Public Employees Retirement

SPOA MOU 2026 9
plans as follows:

1. Police Officers, Senior Police Officers, and Police Sergeants shall be subject to California Public Employees Retirement System 2.7%@57 Safety formula (GC Section 7522.25 (a,b,c,d)); three year final compensation (GG 7522.32(a)). Members shall contribute 50% of the annual normal cost rate to the retirement formula (GC Section 7522.30(c)). The contribution rate is subject to increase, decrease, or stay the same in any given year.

2. Animal Control Officers and Police Dispatchers shall be subject to California Public Employees Retirement System 2%@62 Miscellaneous formula (GC Section 7522.20 (a)); three-year final compensation (GG 7522.32(a)). Members shall contribute 50% of the annual normal cost rate to the retirement formula (GC Section 7522.30(c)). The contribution rate is subject to increase, decrease, or stay the same in any given year. d. Employees hired on or after January 1, 2013, who qualify as a “classic member” of the California Public Employees Retirement System as defined in GC Section 7522.04(e,f), shall be subject to the retirement formula available on December 31, 2012, as follows: Police Officers, Senior Police Officers and Police Sergeants, Local Safety 3%@55 full formula; Animal Control Officers and Police Dispatchers, Local Miscellaneous 2%@55 full formula. Employees are responsible for paying the employee's 9%-member contribution for Safety, and 7%-member contribution for Miscellaneous.

SECTION 5.5 SICK LEAVE
a. Sick leave accrues at a rate of 3.6923 hours bi-weekly. There is no limit to the accumulation, however, the maximum shall revert back to one hundred twenty (120) days in the event of legislation requiring cities to provide conversion rights. b. Employees with at least 480 hours of sick leave shall be eligible for the Stay Well Bonus. For purposes of sick leave accounting, the annual period shall be from the first payroll in December through the final payroll in November. All unused sick leave above 480 hours will be used for calculating the employee’s stay well bonus paid on or around December 15.

Net sick leave earned and not used during the annual period will be divided in half. One-half will be paid to the employee at the employee’s current base hourly rate and the remaining one-half shall remain as regular sick leave.

Except in the case of retirement, employees leaving City service who have at least 480 hours of accrued sick leave shall be paid a Stay Well Bonus, at the same time as their final payroll check, using the formula described above and based upon their accrued and used sick leave from the end of the last annual period through their date of separation. Employees may elect to be paid by direct deposit. Employees may also increase their contribution to the ICMA 457 Deferred Compensation Plan contemporaneously with the payment for sick leave by turning in an election form. c. Upon service retirement, disability retirement, or death, active employees will be paid for all sick leave hours accrued in excess of 720 hours at the rate for which it was earned. d. Employees may use sick leave as defined in the City of Shafter Administrative Policy Sick Leave. e. Employees employed as of July 1 who do not use any sick leave during the period July 1 through June 30 shall be credited by the second pay period of the following fiscal year, with one eight (8) hour floating holiday. Sick leave paid according to Section 5.5.b. shall not be considered as sick leave used for the purposes of determining eligibility for Section 5.5.e.

The floating holiday cannot be carried over to the next fiscal year. Use of a floating holiday must have prior department approval and shall be consistent with the efficient operation of the department.

SECTION 5.6 VACATION LEAVE
a. Employees having less than one (1) year continuous employment shall not be entitled to vacation with pay. b. Vacation days are based on an 8-hour day and shall be credited on a pro-rated basis as follows:

1. Ten days (80 hours) of vacation after one (1) year of service. Accruals begin on date of hire.

SPOA MOU 2026 10

2. Fifteen days (120 hours) of vacation after five (5) years of service. New accrual rate begins at the completion of the 5 th year of service.

3. Seventeen days (136 hours) of vacation after ten (10) years of service. New accrual rate begins at the completion of the 10th year of service.

4. Twenty days (160 hours) of vacation after fifteen (15) years of service. New accrual rate begins at the completion of the 15th year of service.

5. Twenty-five days (200 hours) of vacation after twenty (20) years of service. New accrual rate begins at the completion of the 20th year of service.
c. Employees hired prior to July 1, 2000, may accrue no more than three times the annual accrual at their current accrual rate. Employees hired on or after July 1, 2000, may accrue no more than two times their annual accrual at their current accrual rate. Employees reaching their maximum accrual limit will stop accruing until the balance is below the maximum accrual limit. The table below is provided as an example of accrual rates and maximum accrual limits and may not be all inclusive. Additional accrual rates will be subject to the two- and three-year maximum accrual limits based on date of hire indicted above unless otherwise noted.

Date of Hire Prior to July 1, 2000 Date of Hire on or after July 1, 2000 Bi-weekly Accrual Rate Maximum Accrual Bi-weekly Accrual Rate Maximum Accrual

3.077 240 Hours 3.077 160

4.615 360 Hours 4.615 240

5.231 408 Hours 5.231 272

6.154 480 Hours 6.154 320

7.692 600 Hours 7.692 400
d. The time during the year at which employees may take vacation shall be determined by the Department Head with regard for the wishes of the employee and particular regard for the needs of the City. e. Employees who terminate employment, shall be paid in a lump sum for all accrued vacation earned up to the effective date of termination.
f. Employees may cash out vacation leave annually under the conditions set forth below:

The amount of leave that can be cashed out will be based on one-half of the employee’s annual accrual rate in the year the election is made. For example, if an employee has worked for the City for 12 years, the employee will be eligible to cash out 68 hours of leave in the following calendar year. The amount will be based on the highest accrual rate that was in effect during the calendar year in which the election is made.

An employee wishing to cash out accrued vacation leave must submit an irrevocable written election by December 15th of the calendar year prior to the year in which the employee wishes to redeem accrued vacation leave. Irrevocable election forms are available in Human Resources. An employee who does not make an affirmative election by the end of the year shall be deemed to have irrevocably elected not to cash out vacation leave accrued in the following year. Late irrevocable election forms will not be accepted.

An employee’s written election must specify the number of accrued vacation hours which the employees wishes to redeem for cash in the following fiscal year, up to the limits and under the conditions specified above. Employees who do not meet the accrual thresholds at the time of cash out will be unable to cash out vacation leave.

Payment for redeemed vacation leave may be made twice per year, in July and November, at the employee's election, as either:

1. A single full payment in July or November; or

2. Two equal installments, half in July and half in November The election on how the payment will be made must be made at the time of the irrevocable election. The City will issue

SPOA MOU 2026 11
payment by separate direct deposit. The City retains the discretion to determine the exact date of payment within the selected month(s).

Employees may also increase their contributions to the ICMA 457 Deferred Compensation Plan contemporaneously with the payment for vacation leave by turning in an election form.

SECTION 5.7 HOLIDAYS
a. The following are paid city holidays:

Holiday Date Hours
New Year’s Day January 1 8
Washington’s Birthday 3
rd Monday in February 8
Memorial Day Last Monday in May 8
Independence Day July 4 8
Labor Day 1
st Monday in September 8
Thanksgiving Day 4
th Thursday in November 8
Day after Thanksgiving 4
th Friday in November 8
Christmas Eve December 24 8
Christmas Day December 25 8
New Year’s Eve December 31 8
Martin Luther King Jr. Floating Holiday 8
Veterans Day Floating Holiday 8
b. The two floating holidays listed above are earned on a fiscal year, July 1 to June 30, and do not carry over to the next fiscal year. Employees hired on or before November 11 shall receive two (2) floating holidays. Employees hired after November 11 shall receive one (1) floating holiday. Floating holidays must be used by June 30 with the approval of the department head and shall be consistent with the efficient operation of the department. Floating holidays are not reportable to CalPERS as special compensation. However, holidays taken may be reported as earnings under Government Code Section 20630. Unused floating holidays shall not be paid out upon separation from employment and are forfeited. c. In addition, any day proclaimed by the City Council as a holiday. d. The holiday is recognized beginning at 12 a.m. at the start of the day on the holiday it falls on until 12 a.m. at the end of the day on the holiday. The maximum holiday compensation is eight (8) hours at straight time when an employee does not work on the holiday. Holiday compensation when an employee works on the holiday shall be time and one-half (1/2) of his/her regular rate of pay for all hours worked during the holiday, in addition to the eight (8) hours straight time of holiday pay. The regular rate of pay, for the purpose of holiday compensation includes base pay plus the hourly equivalent of certain special pays (i.e., Longevity Pay, Education Incentive, POST Certificate Pay, Bilingual Incentive, Canine Officer Pay, Gang Detail Assignment Premium, Shift Differential, Training Officer Pay, Traffic Detail, and Detective Division Premium).

SECTION 5.8 BEREAVEMENT LEAVE
a. As required by law, employees shall be granted up to five (5) days of job protected leave for bereavement in the case of the death of his/her spouse, child, stepchild, parent, stepparent, grandparent, spouse’s grandparent, grandchild, son-inlaw, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother, stepbrother, sister, stepsister, and registered domestic partner. The days do not need to be consecutive but must be completed within three (3) months of the date of death. Up to three (3) working days of bereavement leave shall be with pay. Employees may use their accrual leave balances, such as sick, vacation, or CTO to cover the leave for the additional two (2) days. If the employee does not have the accrual hours to utilize, the employee must request a Leave of Absence Without Pay in accordance with Personnel System Rule 15.5.
b. Employees may be granted five (5) paid days of bereavement leave as approved by the City Manager in case of the death of an above-covered individual when the funeral takes place out of State or more than two hundred (200) miles from Shafter.
c. Employees shall provide documentation of the death within 30 days of the first day of leave. Examples of such

SPOA MOU 2026 12
documentation include a death certificate, published obituary, or written verification of death, burial, or memorial services from a mortuary, funeral home, burial society, crematorium, religious institution, or government agency.

SECTION 5.9 MILITARY LEAVE
Military leave shall be granted according to the provisions of State law. Employees shall give the Department Head an opportunity within the limits of military regulations to determine when such leave shall be taken.

SECTION 5.10 OUT-OF-CLASS PAY
To assure the orderly performance and continuity of public services, the City may be required to temporarily upgrade employees on an acting basis to positions of higher rank. For the purpose of this Section, it is understood that temporary upgrading may be required in order to fill or compensate for temporary vacancies.

In the case of a temporary upgrading for more than fifteen (15) consecutive workdays, said employee acting in the position of higher rank shall be compensated with Out-of-Class Pay at a rate of 5% of base salary or the A step of the temporary upgraded position, whichever is greater, commencing on the 15th consecutive workday.

Said employee shall be fulfilling all requirements of the position as approved by the City Manager to receive Out-of-Class Pay.

Should an assignment to a temporary upgraded position continue beyond 12 months, said employee shall be compensated at the next step in the salary schedule for the upgraded position, at the completion of 12 months in the temporary position, and annually thereafter while assigned in the upgraded position, until said employee attains the top step of the out-of-class salary range.

SECTION 5.11 CANINE HANDLER INCENTIVE PAY
The canine handler shall receive incentive pay at two and one-half percent (2 ½%) of base salary.

SECTION 5.12 TRAINING OFFICER PAY
Police Sergeants are not eligible for Training Officer Pay when assigned as training officers.

Should an employee holding the rank of Police Officer or Dispatcher be certified as a Field Training Officer (FTO) or Communications Training Officer (CTO), and approved by the Chief of Police for such assignment, said employee shall be compensated as follows:

1. Certification Incentive: Upon successful completion of the department’s Field Training Officer/Communications Training Officer certification process, approval by the Chief of Police, and maintenance of such certification in good standing, the employee shall receive additional compensation equal to two and one-half percent (2.5%) of base salary on a continuous basis.

2. Active Training Incentive: During periods in which a certified FTO/CTO is actively assigned a trainee, and such assignment is approved by the Chief of Police, the employee shall receive an additional two and one-half percent (2.5%) of base salary for the duration of the training assignment.

3. Incidental Assignments: Designation as a training officer on an incidental basis is excluded. “Incidental” is defined as three (3) consecutive shift assignments or less.

An employee holding the rank of Senior Police Officer shall be compensated as follows:

1. Active Training Incentive: During periods in which a Senior Police Officer is actively assigned a trainee, and such assignment is approved by the Chief of Police, the employee shall receive compensation equal to two and one-half percent (2.5%) of base salary for the duration of the training assignment.

SECTION 5.13 CELLULAR TELEPHONE PROVISION
The cellular telephone provisions shall be defined in the City of Shafter Administrative Policy Employee Use of City Owned and Privately-Owned Cellular Telephones and the Shafter Police Department Policy 702.

SPOA MOU 2026 13
SECTION 5.14 PAY SCHEDULE
a. Employee pay shall operate on a bi-weekly pay schedule, including 80-hour work periods with 26 work periods per year. b. The payroll cut-off for both, overtime and regular time, shall be one week prior to payday. c. Employees shall be paid for actual hours worked (or paid time off used) during the pay period. d. Payday shall be on the Friday following the payroll cut-off date. If payday falls on a holiday, employees shall be paid on the business day before the holiday.
e. Employees shall be subject to mandatory participation in the direct deposit of their City payroll checks to a bank account of their choice.
f. The Association agrees to meet in good faith and cooperate with the City during the implementation of the new timekeeping system.

SECTION 5.15 TAKE-HOME VEHICLE PROGRAM
a. Recognized Police Officers, Senior Police Officers, Police Sergeants, and Animal Control employees are eligible to participate in the take-home vehicle program that includes the following terms:

1. Employees must reside within a 50-mile radius from the Shafter Police Department.

2. Employees must have completed the Field Training Program (FTP). Absences in excess of fourteen (14) consecutive calendar days, for any reason, will extend this period on a day-by-day basis for each calendar day beyond the initial 14 days of absence.

3. Employees must not have any “at fault” accidents during the FTP and have completed the FTP. Absences in excess of fourteen (14) consecutive calendar days, for any reason, will extend this period on a day-by-day basis for each calendar day beyond the initial 14 days of absence.

4. The City Manager or Department Head may suspend or revoke any employees take home vehicle privilege as part of disciplinary action for that employee or in circumstances specific to that employee that, in the City’s determination, present a significant additional risk to the City’s property or liability exposure, In the case of suspension of this privilege due to disciplinary action, this privilege will be restored after twelve (12) months of continuous service free from additional disciplinary action. Absences in excess of fourteen (14) consecutive calendar days, for any reason, will extend this period on a day-by-day basis for each calendar day beyond the initial 14 days of absence. In the case of suspension of this privilege due to other circumstances, this privilege will be restored upon the City’s determination that those circumstances are no longer present or have been satisfactorily mitigated.

SECTION 5.16 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL
Sworn and Dispatch recognized employees shall receive shift differential pay at five percent (5%) of base pay for any hours worked during the following shifts:
• Sworn: 7 p.m. to 7 a.m.
• Dispatch: 6 p.m. to 6 a.m.

SECTION 5.17 LONGEVITY PAY
All recognized employees shall receive longevity pay (10% over 20 years) as set forth below based on their years of continuous full-time service with the City of Shafter as follows:
• 3 years of service: 2.5% of base pay
• 7 years of service: 2.5% of base pay
• 12 years of service: 2% of base pay
• 16 years of service: 2% of base pay
• 20 years of service: 1% of base pay

SPOA MOU 2026 14
SECTION 5.18 SPECIALTY PAY
Employees assigned to any of the specialty units below shall receive specialty assignment pay of up to three and a half percent (3.5%) of base pay. Employees may only receive one (1) specialty assignment pay at any given time, and it shall not be combined with other specialty assignment pays.

Traffic Detail
Employees who are routinely and consistently assigned to traffic detail will receive additional compensation in the sum of three and a half percent (3.5%). The Chief of Police shall determine the number of employees assigned to traffic detail.

Employees serving in this assignment will be subject to on-call or standby duty.

Detective Division Premium
Employees who are routinely and consistently assigned to detective detail will receive additional compensation in the sum of three and a half percent (3.5%). The Chief of Police shall determine the number of employees assigned to detective detail.

Employees serving in this assignment will be subject to on-call or standby duty.

Gang Detail Assignment Premium
Employees who are routinely and consistently assigned to Gang unit detail will receive additional compensation in the sum of three and a half percent (3.5%). The Chief of Police shall determine the number of employees assigned to the Gang unit detail. Employees serving in this assignment will be subject to on-call or standby duty.

Drone Operator Unit Assignment Premium
Employees who are routinely and consistently assigned as a Drone Operator will receive additional compensation in the sum of three and a half percent (3.5%). The Chief of Police shall determine the number of employees assigned to the Drone Operator unit detail. Employees serving in this assignment will be subject to on-call or standby duty.

ARTICLE VI - HEALTH AND WELFARE
SECTION 6.1 MEDICAL, DENTAL, VISION, AND LIFE INSURANCE COVERAGE a. The City agrees to pay one hundred percent (100%) of the medical, dental, and vision premiums on the base plans for employees and eligible dependents from January 1, 2026, through December 31, 2026. Employees electing to buy-up to the PPO plans shall pay a monthly contribution to the buy-up plans. b. The City shall provide employees a life insurance plan equal to the employee's annual base salary plus $17,000. c. Subject to IRS Code 125 and insurance plan eligibility, the City shall pay $353.00 monthly to employees who decline participation in the City’s medical insurance plan. Proof of other insurance coverage is required. Retired employees are excluded.

SECTION 6.2 UNIFORM/SAFETY EQUIPMENT ALLOWANCE
a. Employees who are required to furnish and maintain City uniforms shall be compensated annually as follows:

1. Animal Control Officers - $950.

2. Police Dispatchers - $575.

3. Police Officers, Senior Police Officers, and Police Sergeants - $1,100.

b. Sworn officers shall be paid four hundred dollars ($400) annually for standard uniform equipment. c. The City shall provide level IIIa or better, bulletproof vests to employees requiring such protection. The City shall also

SPOA MOU 2026 15
provide personal protective equipment in compliance with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements.
d. Employees shall seek restitution through the courts, with all practical diligence, to replace uniforms and standard uniform equipment damaged while on duty. If restitution is denied by the courts, the employee may submit a Damaged Equipment Claim Form to the Department Head or designee, for review and consideration of replacement by the City. Upon approval, the Department Head or designee shall determine the appropriate rate of reimbursement to replace the damaged uniform or standard uniform equipment.
e. Upon Assignment and at the approval of the Chief of Police, the following shall apply to sworn officers under PC 830.1, effective January 1, 2017:

1. Annual reimbursement up to $150 per collateral assignment, for collateral assignment uniform. f. Uniform and safety equipment allowance shall be paid in an annual lump sum on or near July 1 of each year. When employees leave city service, the annual uniform and safety equipment allowance is prorated, and any unearned portion shall be deducted from the final paycheck.

SECTION 6.3 PROBATION
The probationary period for new employees and promotions is twelve (12) months. However, based upon an unsatisfactory evaluation in an area that may be improved to satisfactory performance, probation may be extended a maximum of six (6) months. Employees who have their probation extended shall not have a salary step increase until successful completion of the probationary period. There is no appeal process to termination by probationary employees.

SECTION 6.4 RETIREE MEDICAL BENEFITS
For all employees who retire under CalPERS, the City will pay one hundred percent (100%) of the cost of COBRA continuation coverage for the City’s group medical, dental, and vision insurance plans, including the two percent (2%) administrative fee, for eligible retired employees plus one eligible dependent for a period of up to twelve (12) months immediately following the effective date of retirement.

For the purposes of this subsection, “eligible retired employees” are those who retire from active employment status under a normal service retirement or disability retirement (excluding deferred retirement) with at least ten (10) years of continuous full-time City service. “Continuous full-time City service” means uninterrupted employment as a full-time employee; authorized leaves of absence shall not be considered a break in service.

This benefit shall not apply to employees who are terminated from City employment for cause or who separate from employment for reasons other than retirement under CalPERS.

SPOA MOU 2026 16

ARTICLE VII - CLOSING PROVISIONS
SECTION 7.1 TERM
The term of this MOU shall commence on January 3, 2026, and expire on December 31, 2026.

SECTION 7.2 SIGNATURES
This MOU has been ratified and adopted on November 4, 2025, pursuant to the recommendation of the following representatives:

SPOA CITY
_____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ SPOA President Date Lance Lippincott, City Manager Date _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ SPOA Vice President Date Chad Givens, Mayor Date
_____________________________________________
SPOA Board Member Date
_____________________________________________
SPOA Board Member Date

CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY OF SHAFTER

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Michael James, Public Works Director, Ravi Pudipeddi, City Engineer
SUBJECT: STOP SIGN INSTALLATION – POSO AVENUE AT KERN STREET

RECOMMENDATION
Council find the requested action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; and authorize the installation of a stop sign for eastbound vehicular traffic at Poso Avenue before the intersection of Kern Street.

BACKGROUND
The Public Works Department conducted a stop sign warrant analysis for the intersection of Poso Avenue and Kern Street in response to a concern raised by a local business owner and based on engineering field observations. The intersection is part of a complex, triangular configuration involving three streets: Poso Avenue, Kern Street, and East Tulare Avenue.

While East Tulare Avenue functions as a collector street and should remain freeflowing, visibility limitations and nonstandard alignments between Poso Avenue and Kern Street have created confusion about right-of-way, particularly for drivers entering the intersection simultaneously.

Although the intersection does not meet standard multi-way stop warrants based on crash data or traffic volume thresholds, Section 2B.07 of the California MUTCD allows for stop sign installation where safety and visibility concerns exist. The findings of the Stop Sign Warrant Report support installing a stop sign on eastbound Poso Avenue to clarify right-of-way and enhance traffic safety without impeding collector traffic on East Tulare Avenue.

FISCAL IMPACT
The stop sign will be installed by the City’s Public Works Department using existing staff and materials. Costs are expected to be minimal and covered within the current fiscal year’s traffic control and maintenance budget. No additional appropriations are required.

CEQA ANALYSIS
This project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15301 (Class 1 – Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines.

STOP SIGN INSTALLATION – POSO AVENUE AT KERN STREET
- 2 -
The installation involves minor traffic control improvements at an existing intersection to improve safety and does not include expansion of the roadway.

APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY
Yes

ATTACHMENTS

1. Attachment 1 - Stop Sign Warrant Analysis for Poso Avenue at Kern Street

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
720 Commerce Way
Shafter, CA 93263
(661) 746-5004
ENGINEER’S REPORT

ASSESSMENT OF A POSSIBLE STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF

POSO AVENUE AT KERN STREET
Background
The City of Shafter Public Works Department conducted this stop sign warrant assessment in response to visibility concerns and right-of-way uncertainty at the intersection of Poso Avenue, Kern Street, and East Tulare Avenue. While three streets meet at this location, the assessment and recommendations focus on Poso Avenue and Kern Street.

East Tulare Avenue is designated as a collector roadway that facilitates east–west vehicle movement across the City and should remain free-flowing with minimal stop control.

Installing stop signs on this route could impede traffic operations and contradict functional classification standards. Its intersection with Kern Street and Poso Avenue forms a triangular configuration due to the differing alignments of the three streets. Specifically, Kern Street and Poso Avenue are parallel with and perpendicular, respectively, with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, while East Tulare Avenue follows a traditional street

grid. This geometric layout contributes to unusual angles of approach and non-standard turning movements, further justifying enhanced traffic control measures.

Considerations
The intersection recently had its pavement reconstructed with striping and signage improvements that left a stop sign on Kern Street immediately south of Poso Avenue.

Another stop sign was installed immediately south of East Tulare Avenue, for northbound traffic merging from Kern Street and Poso Avenue. Poso Avenue immediately south of Kern Street is currently uncontrolled, which can cause hesitation and confusion for drivers due to skewed geometry and unclear yielding behavior. Public Works staff conducted field observations in response to a concern raised by a resident and local business owner. The concern identified the potential for collisions where northbound traffic on Poso Avenue proceeds toward Kern Street at the same time that eastbound vehicles on East Tulare Avenue are turning right onto southbound Kern Street.

In addition, the geometry of the intersection presents unique alignment challenges. Kern Street and Poso Avenue are oriented parallel and perpendicular, respectively, with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, while East Tulare Avenue follows a traditional street grid. This offset alignment contributes to driver confusion, inconsistent yielding behavior, and limited sight lines.

Although no accident or citation data is available for this location, Section 2B.07 of the CA MUTCD permits consideration of stop signs where visibility is limited or driver confusion exists, even in the absence of formal crash history. Maintaining Tulare Avenue as the through street aligns with its collector designation.

Legal Authority
Under California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 21354, a local authority may designate any intersection under its exclusive jurisdiction as a stop intersection and may install stop signs at one or more approaches where necessary to enhance safety and traffic flow.

Summary
Although this intersection does not satisfy the minimum thresholds for multi-way stop control based on documented crash history or traffic volumes, engineering judgment supports proactive control measures due to the irregular geometry, observed driver hesitation, and sight line limitations. Additionally, a reported concern involving potential conflict between eastbound Poso Avenue traffic and right-turning Tulare Avenue vehicles further substantiates the need for clearer right-of-way controls.

To proactively improve intersection safety, Public Works recommends installing a stop sign for northbound Poso Avenue immediately before Kern Street.

These signs will clarify right-of-way responsibilities at each point of entry to the intersection, especially where unusual alignments and conflicting turning movements have

created potential collision risks. The recommended stop sign placements are based on engineering judgment, reported concerns, and field observations that highlight the need for improved control without impeding traffic flow along the collector-designated East Tulare Avenue.

The absence of traffic control on Poso Avenue and Kern Street creates ambiguity about which vehicle has the right-of-way, particularly where drivers approach simultaneously or during peak school and business activity. In such cases, the legal obligation under California Vehicle Code Section 21800 is for the driver on the left to yield to the vehicle on the right; however, this rule is frequently misunderstood or inconsistently applied by the public. This confusion is exacerbated by the irregular intersection geometry and proximity of East Tulare Avenue, which is not controlled by a stop sign and remains the primary east-west collector.

In the absence of clear signage, drivers on Poso Avenue and Kern Street may hesitate, misinterpret who should yield, or proceed simultaneously—particularly problematic when northbound Poso Avenue traffic and right-turning Tulare Avenue traffic attempt to navigate southbound Kern Street. These conditions represent a textbook example of right-of-way concerns warranting proactive intervention per MUTCD Section 2B.07.

Prepared By:

Ravi Pudipeddi
Date: ___________________
City Engineer
Approved By:

Michael James
Date: ___________________
Public Works Director

CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY OF SHAFTER

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Ravi Pudipeddi, City Engineer
SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION OF EASEMENT FOR STREET &

PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES FROM STEVE PORTENGA AND

WINDI PORTENGA, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS

RECOMMENDATION
Council find the action is not defined as a “project” per Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines; accept the dedication of easement, APN 091-280-06, for street and public utility purposes from Lerdo Land Company of California; and authorize the City Engineer to record said documents.

BACKGROUND
Lennar Homes of California will be the developer for Tract 7244, currently located on the north side of Seventh Standard Road between the Calloway and Friant Kern Canals. The City's conditions of approval require the oil lease at the northwest corner of Seventh Standard and Jewetta to have a masonry wall constructed along its perimeter.

City staff requested the portion of this wall along Seventh Standard Road be moved north to not interfere with an existing sewer main pipeline. Staff further requested an additional 15 feet of land be dedicated to the City to provide adequate space between the existing sewer main and the new wall.

The oil lease property in question belongs to Lerdo Land Company. At no cost to the City, they have consented to provide an easement for street and public utility purposes.

The dedications are profiled in Exhibit B of an easement agreement, included with this staff report.

FISCAL IMPACT
The dedication has been prepared at no cost to the City, and any recording costs will be nominal. No budget action is required.

CEQA ANALYSIS
The action is not defined as a “project” per Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines because the action is acceptance of dedication of an easement for street and public utilities purposes and therefore, it is an organizational and administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment and not subject to CEQA.

ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION OF EASEMENT FOR STREET & PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES

FROM STEVE PORTENGA AND WINDI PORTENGA, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS - 2 -

APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY
Yes

ATTACHMENTS

1. Signed Legal & Plat for Proposed Dedication

CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY OF SHAFTER

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Ravi Pudipeddi, City Engineer
SUBJECT: APPROVE THE FOLLOWING TWO AGREEMENTS WITH THE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(CALTRANS) FOR THE SANTA FE WAY ROUNDABOUT
PROJECT:

A. UTILITY AGREEMENT FOR RELOCATION OF THE CITY'S

WATER IMPROVEMENTS
B. COVER AGREEMENT FOR ADJUSTING THE CITY-OWNED

UTILITY MANHOLES AND VALVES TO GRADE

RECOMMENDATION
Council find the action has already be environmentally cleared per the California Environmental Quality Act; approve 1) Utility Agreement (No. 06-1500.52) and 2) Cover Agreement (Project ID 0620000038) with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans); and authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to execute said agreements on behalf of the City.

BACKGROUND
Since 2020, Caltrans has been designing a roundabout at the multi-leg intersection of Highway 43, Los Angeles Avenue, and Santa Fe Way. The roundabout aims to alleviate congestion and improve safety for the increasing amount of traffic. Although Caltrans is leading the project development, the funding strategy consists of the City covering design and right-of-way costs, with construction covered by Caltrans.

Caltrans has completed the design and is approaching the California Transportation Commission to request authorization to fund construction. Before meeting with CTC, the project must have the right-of-way certification completed. The right-of-way certification includes completing the property acquisitions required for the project and executing utility agreements that list the liability proportions between Caltrans and the utility owners/ companies for the relocation of utilities impacted by the project.

Now, the project is in the right-of-way acquisition phase, which includes acquiring the right-of-way and determining the liability of utilities that need relocation and are impacted by the project. There are City-owned sewer and water facilities that are within the project's footprint. At this time, the project requires relocation of the City-owned water improvements, for which the City will be fully reimbursed (100%) by Caltrans, which requires the execution of a utility agreement by both parties. Additionally, the

APPROVE THE FOLLOWING TWO AGREEMENTS WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) FOR THE SANTA FE WAY ROUNDABOUT PROJECT:

A. UTILITY AGREEMENT FOR RELOCATION OF THE CITY'S WATER IMPROVEMENTS B. COVER AGREEMENT FOR ADJUSTING THE CITY-OWNED UTILITY MANHOLES AND VALVES

TO GRADE
- 2 -
City to enter into a separate cover agreement that allows Caltrans to make such adjustments within the project contract.

FISCAL IMPACT
For the utility agreement, both City and Caltrans staff have determined and agreed that the costs associated with relocating City-owned water improvements will be fully reimbursed to the City by Caltrans. For the cover agreement, Caltrans is paying for adjusting utilities to grade with the construction contract, and therefore, there is no fiscal impact on the City. Reimbursements will be processed in accordance with the terms of the Caltrans Utility Agreement and subject to Caltrans audit requirements.

No budget action is required at this time.

CEQA ANALYSIS
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the roundabout project at Santa Fe Way and Highway 43, including utility relocation required. The project has already been environmentally cleared by Caltrans. Caltrans circulated a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH No. 2023110535) for 30-day public review from November 22, 2023 to December 22, 2023, and filed a Notice of Determination on June 17, 2024, for the project. The City of Shafter, acting as a responsible agency under CEQA, has reviewed the lead agency’s determination and finds that no further environmental review is required.

APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY
Yes

ATTACHMENTS

1. Attachment 1 – Utility Agreement No. 06-1500.52 (Water Improvements)

2. Attachment 2 – Cover Agreement (Project ID 0620000038)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EXHIBIT COVER AGREEMENT 13-EX-04 (NEW 05/2022)

Date:

PARTIES:

1. State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation (“Department”). “Department” includes the Department, its officers, agents, employees and contractors.

2. City of Shafter (“Owner”). “Owner” includes the Owner, its officers, agents, employees and contractors.

RECITALS:

A. Owner owns, operates or maintains underground utility facilities in the State of California.

B. In order to facilitate the planning, design and construction of Department’s projects, to ensure the safety of the traveling public, and to ensure the continuity of the roadway/highway, manhole and valve cover adjustments need to be made on a routine basis. Utility owners may or may not be responsible for the cost of performing such adjustments, depending upon the liability determination made by the Department, with the cost of such activities allocated as provided by California law, contracts and the Department’s policies.

C. The Department frequently needs to adjust said manhole and valve covers more expeditiously than Owner can readily or economically accomplish.

D. Department is willing to assume control of the operation and cost of such adjustments to certain manhole and valve covers in order to facilitate the Department’s project needs from time to time as provided herein.

THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

1. This Agreement for the Adjustment of Manhole and Valve Covers (“Agreement”) is made and executed by the parties hereto in connection with the provisions of Sections 680.5 and 707.5 of the California Streets and Highways Code. This Agreement shall exclusively govern the determination of the obligations and costs to be borne by each party hereto in regard to work described herein in lieu of determination in connection with and under the provisions of Sections 673, 680 and 700 to 707, inclusive, of said Streets and Highways Code, as now or hereafter existing, or under any other laws applicable to said subject matter.

EXHIBIT
COVER AGREEMENT (Cont.) 13-EX-04 (NEW 05/2022)

2. This Agreement shall apply throughout the State of California to all of the Department’s projects and related activities and to all of the Owner’s manhole and valve covers. With regard to any other agreements or parties, this Agreement is not intended to, and shall not, establish any precedent, principle, rule or guide to interpretation.

3. For purposes of this Agreement, manhole and valve cover adjustment is limited to the following: adjusting manhole frames and covers, replacing existing manhole frames, and adjusting manhole rings, valve covers and meter boxes.

This Agreement does NOT include the adjustment to grade of gas, electric or telephone vaults, or any other utility facility not mentioned in this agreement.

4. In the event that the Department initiates a project and the Department determines that some of the Owner’s manhole and valve covers are in physical conflict with Department’s highway project, the Department shall issue a conflict letter (“Conflict Letter”) to the Owner that (a) identifies the manhole and valve covers that are in physical conflict with Department’s highway project and (b) includes a document (the “Reply”) in which the Owner will designate the manhole and valve covers that the Owner agrees to be responsible to adjust. The Owner shall adjust the manhole and valve covers for which it agreed to be responsible within the Department’s project scheduling and other requirements. Owner shall return the Reply to the Department within 30 days of receipt of the Conflict Letter. The Department is authorized to adjust only the manhole and valve covers that are not designated by Owner as those for which the Owner is responsible. The work to be performed under this Agreement is expressly limited to the work required to adjust the manhole and valve covers that are listed in the Conflict Letter, and the Reply shall not and cannot expand the list of manhole and valve covers.

5. Notwithstanding the other terms of this Agreement, the Department may, at its sole option, elect to NOT adjust-to-grade manhole and valve covers that do not satisfy Caltrans standard specifications, as amended from time to time (including without limitation manhole and valve covers that do not use standard rings or covers).

6. This Agreement does not apply to the relocation, rearrangement, removal or protection of utility facilities.

EXHIBIT
COVER AGREEMENT (Cont.) 13-EX-04 (NEW 05/2022)

7. All existing manhole and valve covers will be reused unless the manhole or valve cover requires replacement. Replacement of manhole and valve covers with ancillary parts must meet Buy America compliance by the Department’s contractor. The Department’s contractor is to provide Buy America replacement manhole and valve covers per Owner’s specifications in response to the Cover Adjustment to Grade letter 13-EX-08. If no specifications are provided to the Department by Owner in the reply, the Department’s contractor is authorized to use a general specification attached to the Cover Adjustment to Grade letter 13-EX-08.

8. All work under this Agreement shall be preceded by the delivery of a written Notification to Owner (“NTO”) by the Department to the Owner. The Department shall list the manhole and valve covers that the Department is authorized to adjust pursuant to the Reply, and the Department will identify the manhole and valve covers that it elects to adjust. If the Department elects to not adjust manhole and/or valve covers which the Owner authorized the Department to adjust pursuant to the Reply, then the Owner shall be responsible for the adjustment of those manhole and valve covers in accordance with the provisions of the NTO, and the Owner shall allocate sufficient staff and resources to meet all of the schedules established for the project design and construction work.

9. Following receipt of the Cover Adjustment to Grade letter 13-EX-08, the Owner shall provide confirmation regarding the identity and typical characteristics (including size, material, contents, pressure or capacity) of Owner’s utility facility and related activities, including, but not limited to, inspection services at no expense to the Department, in accordance with the Department’s time schedule. Owner to provide its written confirmation to the Department within 30 days of the date that they receive the Cover Adjustment to Grade letter 13- EX-08.

10.When manhole and valve cover adjustment work is performed by the Department under this Agreement, the cost of the work shall be borne by the Department. When manhole and valve cover adjustment work is performed by the Owner under this Agreement, the cost of the work shall be allocated according to the liability determination made by the Department.

11. The Department may perform its work under this Agreement or it may perform the work through the services of a third-party contractor.

EXHIBIT
COVER AGREEMENT (Cont.) 13-EX-04 (NEW 05/2022)

12.It is intended that all work under this Agreement performed by the Department shall be performed using the contractors that are acceptable to the Department. Owner grants to Department, immediately upon receipt of the NTO and in accordance with the Department’s time schedule, permission to perform manhole and valve cover adjustments within Owner’s private rights of way and facilities, wherever located. Owner retains the right to require reasonable controls and restrictions provided such items are set forth in writing and delivered to the Department (in response to Cover Adjustment to Grade 13-EX-08 letter) at least 30 days from the receipt of the 13-EX-08 letter. a) As part of this Agreement, Owner shall submit, in writing, its preliminary specifications for the adjustment of manhole and valve covers to grade to the Department.
b) Owner will approve, in writing, the Department’s final specifications for the adjustment of manhole and valve covers to grade.

13.Owner shall have access to all phases of the work to be performed by the Department for the purpose of inspection in order to ensure that the work being performed for the Owner is in accordance with the specifications contained in the highway contract, provided such access is made at no cost to the Department. Owner will be notified by the Department’s Resident Engineer to schedule a final field inspection per the Department’s Notice to Owner.

14.Upon completion of the work performed by Department, Owner agrees to accept ownership and the responsibility for the maintenance of the manhole and valve covers.

15. This Agreement supersedes and replaces any previous agreement between the parties relating to the work required to adjust identified manhole and valve covers in physical conflict with Department’s highway projects.

16. This Agreement may only be amended, changed or altered by mutual written agreement of the parties.

17. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon ninety (90) days written notice from the terminating party to the other party.

18. Time shall be of the essence of this Agreement.

EXHIBIT
COVER AGREEMENT (Cont.) 13-EX-04 (NEW 05/2022)

For The Utility Owner: City of Shafter
_______________________________________ _______________ Date
Name: Ravi Pudipeddi
Title: City Engineer
For The State of California:
_______________________________________ _________________ Tiaira T. Moering, Chief Date
Office of Railroad and Utility Relocations
Division of Right of Way and Land Surveys
California Department of Transportation
DISTRIBUTION:
1 – HQ Right of Way, Office of Railroads and Utility Relocations 1 – District
1 – Utility Owner

CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY OF SHAFTER

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Ravi Pudipeddi, City Engineer
SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION OF ACCESS RIGHTS FROM

LERDO, LLC

RECOMMENDATION
Council find the action is not defined as a “project” per Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines; accept a dedication of access rights from Lerdo, LLC, a California limited liability company as depicted in Exhibit B of Parcel Merger 25-14; authorize the City Manager to execute said document; and authorize the City Engineer record said document.

BACKGROUND
The proposed parcels are located at the northwest corner of Central Avenue and Central Valley Highway (CVH), also referred to as State Route 43, which have been assigned County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 027-170-02 and 027-170-03. The owner of both parcels submitted site plan and parcel merger applications to the Planning Department, proposing a merger of the two parcels into a single parcel. The site plan review led to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process that ultimately conditioned the owner to dedicate the northerly frontage of the resulting merged parcel, waiving the right to access CVH directly from the parcel frontage. Essentially, the owner is giving up the right to construct a driveway or curb cut onto CVH. Instead of dedicating land, the owner is dedicating a right, the right of access to the City and, effectively, Caltrans, through City coordination.

At no cost to the City, the owners have consented to dedicate the Access Rights. The dedications are shown on Exhibit B of the agreement, included with this staff report.

FISCAL IMPACT
The dedication will be provided at no cost to the City. No budget action is required.

CEQA ANALYSIS
The action is not defined as a “project” per Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines because the action is acceptance of dedication of access rights and therefore, it is an organizational and administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment and not subject to CEQA.

APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY

ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION OF ACCESS RIGHTS FROM LERDO, LLC - 2 -
Yes

ATTACHMENTS

1. Waiver of Direct Access-Easement and City Acceptance

MANAGEMENT REPORT

CITY OF SHAFTER

CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Michael James, Public Works Director, Ravi Pudipeddi, City Engineer
SUBJECT: SAFE STREETS AND ROADS FOR ALL ACTION PLAN

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

RECOMMENDATION
Council find that the action is statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15262 of the CEQA Guidelines; accept proposals received for the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan; authorize the Public Works Director to award a professional services agreement to TJKM Transportation Consultants based on City staff’s ranking of proposals received; authorize execution of the agreement in an amount not to exceed $190,200.60; and approve a budget amendment to appropriate $160,000 in federal SS4A grant funds and $40,000 in local match funding from Traffic Impact Fee proceeds into the Capital Improvement Program, to cover the consultant contract and related contingencies.

BACKGROUND
In 2024, the City of Shafter was awarded up to $160,000 in federal funding through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grant program (Federal Award No. 693JJ32440592). The purpose of the SS4A program is to support planning and implementation projects that aim to significantly reduce and ultimately eliminate roadway fatalities and serious injuries. Shafter’s award focuses on the preparation of a comprehensive Action Plan to improve roadway safety for all users—including pedestrians, bicyclists, public transportation riders, motorists, micromobility users, and commercial operators.

The City’s Action Plan will build upon its previously adopted Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP), which identified high-risk intersections and roadway segments based on five years of collision data and community feedback. The Action Plan will evaluate these areas in greater detail, incorporating additional analysis of rights-of-way, safety risk factors, equity indicators, and environmental constraints. It will also include robust community engagement, a Safe Routes to School component, and development of an interactive safety dashboard to support implementation readiness and future grant competitiveness.

On March 4, 2025, the City Council authorized release of a Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit a qualified consultant to lead the development of the SS4A Action Plan.

SAFE STREETS AND ROADS FOR ALL ACTION PLAN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT - 2 -
Five proposals were received and evaluated by City staff using a weighted scoring rubric based on federal guidance. TJKM Transportation Consultants was ranked highest, demonstrating extensive SS4A experience, familiarity with Shafter’s prior safety efforts, and strong qualifications in safety analytics, public engagement, and grant acquisition. The proposed agreement with TJKM will not exceed their submitted cost estimate of $190,200.60.

FISCAL IMPACT
The total cost of the professional services agreement with TJKM Transportation Consultants is not to exceed $190,200.60. This includes $160,000 in federal funding awarded through the SS4A grant program (Federal Award No. 693JJ32440592) and a required local match of $30,200.60. Staff recommends that the local match be funded from Traffic Impact Fee proceeds. To ensure full project funding and allow for contingencies if necessary, staff further recommends establishing budget authority in the amount of $200,000—comprising $160,000 in federal funds and $40,000 in local funds. This amount will fully cover the consultant contract and any minor additional costs required to complete the Action Plan.

CEQA ANALYSIS
The action is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15262 of the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts feasibility and planning studies for possible future actions not yet approved, adopted, or funded. The proposed engineering services are limited to planning and design activities and do not constitute approval of a physical project.

APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY
Not Applicable

ATTACHMENTS

1. Professional Services Proposal Submitted by TJKM

2. Cost Proposal Submitted by TJKM

Proposal for
SAFE STREETS AND ROADS FOR ALL (SS4A)

PROGRAM ACTION PLAN
August 6, 2025

CALIFORNIA | FLORIDA | TEXAS
Corporate Office 4305 Hacienda Drive, Suite 550, Pleasanton, CA 94588 925.463.0611 www.TJKM.com
August 6, 2025
Alex Gonzalez
Public Works Director
City of Shafter
Public Works Department
720 Commerce Way
Shafter, CA 93263
Subject: Proposal for the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan Dear Alex Gonzalez:

TJKM Transportation Consultants (TJKM) is pleased to submit our Proposal for the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan to the City of Shafter.

Understanding
Our response to your Request for Proposals takes a comprehensive approach with TJKM leading the development of Action Plan.

The TJKM Team is committed to developing the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan (Action Plan) for the City of Shafter by taking a holistic approach. We will create an Action Plan that identifies roadway safety problems and identifies potential projects and strategies to remedy them. The Action Plan developed by the TJKM Team will focus on improving the infrastructure, with emphasis on neighborhood revitalization; maintaining long-term financial stability; improving the City’s technology; enhancing public safety; and enhancing community involvement and engagement. We will apply our extensive experience creating an Action Plan that fosters strategic partnerships, coordinate and equitably engages the community and key stakeholders, and identifies actions that are effective and implementable. This will serve as the foundation for achieving zero traffic deaths and severe injuries in the City of Shafter.

Project Team
TJKM provides a team that brings national expertise, deep capacity, specialized skills, and strong local knowledge to deliver this Action Plan to the City of Shafter. Our team includes planners, engineers, designers, engagement specialists, data analysts, graphic designers, consensus builders, grant writers, and a deep bench of technical and motivational staff who will bring life and passion into this project and enable the City to continue momentous safety and mobility efforts and compete for future federal, state, and local capital grants. We are ready to work seamlessly with you as an extension of your staff.

Example: SS4A Action Plan Components for
Waco MPO CSAP Project

Alex Gonzalez
August 6, 2025

To meet the specific needs of the City we are pleased to propose myself, Mr. Nayan Amin, TE as the Project Manager.

I bring to the team over 35 years of experience in the areas of traffic engineering, traffic operations, transportation planning, freeway and arterial management studies, signal coordination, traffic signal systems, traffic impact studies/Environmental Impact Reports and intelligent transportation systems planning, and construction oversight. I have extensive experience in macro and microscopic model development and application for analysis of traffic operations for express lane studies as well as multimodal operations, light-rail, bus rapid transit, pedestrian, bicyclists, and traffic safety studies. I have successfully delivered more than 70 Safety Action Plan as a Principal-in-Charge or as a Project Manager, including the Local Road Safety Plan for Kern Council of Governments and City of Shafter. As a project manager delivered Vision Zero Action Plan for City of Dinuba, CA, Comprehensive Safety Action Plan for City of Colusa, CA, Vision Rio Grande Valley MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Rio Grande Valley, TX.

The TJKM Team is the best team to support City for several particular, distinct reasons. The following is a summary of the key elements of our Proposal:
• Safety Expertise: TJKM has completed hundreds of safety-focused projects across the country and as a result have thorough understanding and knowledge of vulnerable users. We bring an acute awareness of the needs and current environment of vulnerable users in planning and infrastructure design and have deep, proven, and multifaceted expertise in building consensus, understanding behavioral change, identifying appropriate countermeasures, and defining ambitious yet realistic goals. The TJKM Team includes experienced and passionate planners and engineers. Our team’s breadth and depth in all elements of multimodal safety and mobility and applying innovative technology is unparalleled.
• Robust Analytics: Leveraging our extensive experience with safety plans, we have created an Interactive Safety Dashboard capable of generating rapid, safety-related analyses, including equity-based data assessments. In addition to assessing existing data, our team can use predictive modeling for proactive decision-making. We continue to stay current on the rapidly changing field of transportation analytics, and we can translate complex data into an engaging story. We have leveraged this expertise to propose several analytics tasks that enables us to better identify latent safety issues, increase competitiveness for implementation grant funding, and enable our clients to track and share progress with stakeholders and community. • Implementation-Focused: We understand how to get projects funded. Over the last three years, we have assisted our clients to secure more than $150 million in safety funds to implement safety projects to enhance safety and mobility for all modes of transportation. Beyond the technical components, our Action Plans emphasize robust community engagement and consensus building, prioritizing equity by actively connecting with underserved or overlooked communities. This approach ensures that the plans blend proactive strategies with reactive measures, addressing the unique needs of all community members.
• Value Added Tasks:
o Collision Dashboard - The Collision Dashboard that we propose to develop will support the City of Shafter to achieve its goal of safety providing foundational visibility into collision and infrastructure data. The Dashboard will consolidate historical collision database, existing GIS layers (roadway infrastructure data), and other relevant data providing the City to determine response strategies on proactive basis through Engineering, Enforcement and Education framework. The Dashboard will be a web-based, interactive data dashboard to assist the City in conducting collision analysis using GIS maps, implementable actions, and performance measures.

Alex Gonzalez
August 6, 2025

o Toolkit - TJKM will utilize an automated countermeasure selection Toolkit developed in-house for selecting feasible and proven countermeasures and strategies based on numerous data attributes, e.g., roadway characteristics: number of lanes, pavement conditions, and traffic control types; and collision information:
collision types, collision locations, and primary collision factors. Feasible and proven countermeasures will be based on Safe Systems Pyramid, FHWA Safe System Design Hierarchy, FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures, Caltrans Local Roadway Safety Manual and CMF Clearinghouse Toolkit has successfully assisted the project team to narrow down feasible countermeasures proposed for numerous jurisdictions. The toolkit will be integrated into the Dashboard developed for the project. We envision to integrate this toolkit into the Collision Dashboard for the project.
o Safe Routes to School - A total of 64 collisions occurred within a 0.25-mile buffer around schools, parks, and libraries in the City of Shafter. Of these, 7 collisions resulted in fatalities or severe injuries. Additionally, there were 5 bicycle-related collisions and 5 pedestrian-related collisions, with 10 collisions involving either a bicyclist or pedestrian. To enhance safety around schools, parks and libraries within the City limits as a part of the Action Plan we will develop Safe Routes to School Plan for all public schools within City of Shafter. o Grant Applications – We will develop one SS4A Implementation Grant Application and one HSIP Grant Application based on the projects identified within the Action Plan.

Our approach to the Action Plan will help you secure SS4A Demonstration and Implementation funding, HSIP, ATP funding, as well as other federal and local grant opportunities.

Commitment
As President of the firm, I am authorized to bind TJKM to a contract and you have my personal assurance that all the resources necessary to address your needs will be made available and ready to perform when the opportunity arises.

This Proposal is valid for 180 days. During the proposal process, please feel free to contact me via phone at (408) 410- 2977 or by email at [email protected]. Mailed correspondence can be sent to our corporate headquarters located at 4305 Hacienda Drive, Suite 550, Pleasanton, CA 94588.

We look forward to hearing from you regarding further steps in the consultant selection process.

Thank you for considering TJKM for this project.

Sincerely,
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Nayan Amin, TE, President

i
Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Scope of Work and Associated Work Plan ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Understanding....................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Approach................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Scope of Work/Plan............................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Schedule................................................................................................................................................................................................................12 Firm and Subconsultant Qualifications ...........................................................................................................................................................14 TJKM Overview ...................................................................................................................................................................................................14 TJKM’s Expertise on Safety Plans.................................................................................................................................................................14 Firm Organizational Chart and Proposed Staffing Plan.............................................................................................................................. 9 Employee Project Resumes and Qualifications ...........................................................................................................................................10 Team Qualifications ..........................................................................................................................................................................................10 Resumes ................................................................................................................................................................................................................12 Relevant Experience ..............................................................................................................................................................................................34 Financial Management and Accounting........................................................................................................................................................46 Required Forms .......................................................................................................................................................................................................47 Consultant in Management Support Role Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Statement (Exhibit 10-U).....48 Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Exhibit 10-Q)....................................................................................................................................49 DIR Registration Certification........................................................................................................................................................................50 References.................................................................................................................................................................................................................51

Proposal for Safe Streets and
Roads for all (SS4A) Program
Action Plan

1. Scope of Work & Associated Work Plan

1 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
TJKM Transportation Consultants (TJKM) is pleased to submit our Proposal for the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan to the City of Shafter.

SCOPE OF WORK AND ASSOCIATED WORK PLAN
Project Understanding
The City has been awarded an SS4A Planning Grant to develop a Safe Streets for All Plan. The Plan will identify safety enhancements for improvements at high volume pedestrian and bicyclist’s locations within the city, as well as location where pedestrian and bicycle collisions have occurred.

The SS4A Plan will enhance transportation safety for all road users by identifying high-risk locations and implementing effective countermeasures. This Plan will take a data-driven approach, leveraging crash analysis, community engagement, and equity considerations to develop strategies that address local safety concerns. A key focus will be on improving conditions for vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians, cyclists, and schoolchildren, while also ensuring safe mobility for residents, commuters, and visitors. By integrating engineering, education, enforcement, and emergency response strategies, the SS4A Plan will provide a clear roadmap for the City of Shafter to reduce fatalities and serious injuries, securing a safer and more accessible transportation network for all.

CRASHES IN SHAFTER
Based on our preliminary analysis between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2024, a total of 223 injury collisions were reported in the City of Shafter. Of these:
• Nine collisions (4 percent) resulted in fatalities
• 35 collisions (16 percent) resulted in severe injuries • 123 collisions (55 percent) resulted in visible injuries • 56 collisions (25 percent) resulted in complaints of pain A preliminary crash analysis within City of Shafter revealed the following:
• The top three types of collisions include: broadside (34 percent), rear-end (22 percent), and hitting an object (13 percent) • Out of the total collisions, eight collisions involved bicyclists and 10 involved pedestrians, totaling to 8 percent of all collisions • Automobile right-of-way accounted for the largest share on all collisions (27 percent), followed by unsafe speed (21 percent) and Improper Turning (16 percent) of all collisions TJKM had the privilege of working on the Local Road Safety Plan for the City of Shafter. As part of the study, we conducted collision analysis, identified high injury network, identified countermeasures to enhance safety for all modes of transportation, and developed grant ready materials to allow the City to pursue grants to implement safety measures to enhance safety. In addition, under the On-Call contract we conducted peer review of the Traffic Study for West Tulare Avenue between SR 43 and Poplar Avenue, and 2020 West Shafter Traffic Assessment – Loop of West Los Angeles Avenue, Poplar Avenue, West Lerdo Highway, and South Schnaidt Street. As a result, we have a deep understanding of the Shafter community and know that advancing safety requires buy in from political leaders and community. Our Stakeholder and Community Engagement plan proposed is developed to ensure that political leaders and the community are supportive of the Action Plan.

2 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Project Approach
Based on our background in roadway safety, TJKM understands that developing an Action Plan will require substantial planning, data collection efforts, a monitoring program, the development of a countermeasure toolbox, and revisions to policy and guidelines. The Action Plan will establish core principles, strategies, and goals. It will help align policies and develop a series of implementation actions based on proven data-driven methods and community input. Also, the Action Plan will create a road map for action and the tools to measure and assess progress toward the goal of reducing fatal and serious injury crashes for all roadway users.

Holistically speaking, the intent of an Action Plan is clear – “to reduce and eliminate serious injury and fatal crashes” (Source: USDOT). A successful plan looks to protect the health and safety of those involved by anticipating, assessing, and mitigating potential threats and hazards and then providing a methodical approach to addressing them.

A successful Plan for the City of Shafter must be sensitive to the unique needs, concerns, and goals of the stakeholders’ diverse neighborhoods and prioritize equity in outreach and outcomes. These considerations will be formed into the Plan so that it is an authentic reflection of the people it represents. A collaborative approach will lay the groundwork for an enduring legacy of a Safety Plan in the City.

We understand that the safety and mobility enhancements will require that infrastructure improvements include all modes of transportation (automobile, pedestrian, bicyclist, and transit), the non-engineering E’s of traffic safety (Engagement, Education, Enforcement, Equity, Evaluation, Encouragement, and Emergency Medical Services) to account for human factors (aggressive driving, driving under the influence, distracted driving or walking, etc.), and the use of the “Safe Systems Approach” principles for the Action Plan. The Action Plan will develop metrics for measuring progress towards collision reduction, a detailed HIN that focuses on both roadway segments and intersections, and tools with implementable actions easily adapted for the City to reach the goal of zero fatal and serious injuries in the future.

The TJKM Team has led numerous successful Comprehensive Safety Action Plans (CSAP) and Vision Zero efforts in California, Texas, and Florida, and will bring an unparalleled team of experts to help the City of Shafter achieve zero traffic deaths and serious injuries. Our team has developed the most progressive Safety Action Plans and VZAPs in the US, and we propose marrying this national best practice analysis with local knowledge, values, and priorities through a collaborative process.

TJKM’s approach is not just “crunching numbers” but also involves community interaction and engagement to allow for the true area experts - the residents, to provide their unique perspective of what are the issues along the roadways.

We listen to the community’s aspirations and concerns. We empathetically strive to understand, acknowledge, and validate the related concerns. During the community engagement process, TJKM merges technical information and community information to form the basis of our conclusions and recommendations.

Along with the Public Outreach and Comprehensive Analysis, the TJKM Team will be incorporating two distinct analyses: Equity and Land Use. The equity analysis will explore historic barriers to Transportation Accessibility and determining any correlation between transportation funding allocations and marginalized neighborhoods. The information will be based on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) environmental justice mapping and screening tool that provides the EPA with a nationally consistent dataset and approach for combining environmental and
demographic socioeconomic indicators.

3 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Lastly, the Land Use analysis will study its relationship with Land and the transportation network to determine if there is any cohesion between the two and if there are any barriers. The intent is that the results of the Land Use analysis can be used to help guide future Land Use efforts that are embarked in the future within the City of Shafter.

Upon completion of the project, the City will have a Final Action Plan developed by the TJKM Team, vetted by community, stakeholders, the project steering committee, and City’s policy board. The document will represent a shared understanding and consented direction for City to follow. In addition, City will have a safety toolkit that lists different countermeasures for future projects, an interactive Dashboard that integrates different types of data to help guide future projects, and a grant application for the SS4A implementation grant and other safety related grants.

Realistically, almost all projects may run into issues that may cause a project to either slow down or come to a complete halt. The one major concern for a CSAP is a slow down due to lack of community and/or political consensus. To avoid this issue from happening, the TJKM Team, on proactive basis provides complete transparency throughout the project including how the project selections were chosen, explanation of the methodology used, and overall consistent communication with all users and stakeholders. Although not a guarantee, it does help mitigate this type of miscommunication and build consensus at the onset of the project.

Given this significant overlap between high-injury crash locations and community destinations particularly schools we propose to develop a Comprehensive Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Plan for all public schools within the City limits as a core component of the Action Plan. This SRTS Plan will identify safety concerns, assess current travel patterns, conduct community engagement, and provide infrastructure and non-infrastructure recommendations to improve walking and biking conditions for students and families.

Together, the CSAP, and SRTS Plan will equip the City of Shafter with a robust, equity-driven framework to prioritize investments, strengthen grant competitiveness, and improve safety and mobility for all road users - particularly youth, seniors, and other vulnerable populations.

Key highlights of our proposed approach include:
• Development of the Action Plan will include projects and strategies by mode allowing the city to apply for different funding sources
• The Action Plan developed by TJKM will include roadways and intersections throughout the city • Develop an integrated collision and GIS dashboard for the city • Develop an SRTS Plan for all public schools within the city Scope of Work/Plan
TASK 1 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Subtask 1.1 Project Kick-Off Meeting
Within three weeks of Notice-To-Proceed, TJKM will facilitate a kick-off meeting with the City’s Project Manager and staff to discuss:
• Project goals and objectives
• Scope of Work and Schedule
• Timeline and identify key milestones/critical path
items
• Critical data needs and data sharing protocol
• Internal meeting schedule/invoicing/progress
updates
• Any other relevant information
TJKM will prepare kick-off meeting materials including an agenda, sign-in sheets, and related handouts. After the meeting, we will summarize the meeting notes and action items in a Google doc that can viewed and edited by TJKM and City staff. The TJKM Team will also initiate development of the project website detailed in Task 5.2 of the scope.

4 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Subtask 1.2 Project Administration and Coordination
Throughout the project, TJKM expects ongoing emails and conference calls with the City’s Project Manager to keep the project on track and to meet City’s expectations during the creation of the Action Plan. We will facilitate bi-monthly meetings to ensure the project is on track and within budget. All meetings will be through virtual conferencing with screen sharing capability (Zoom or similar). TJKM will also maintain all agendas, meeting notes, and action items through a Google doc, which will be a living document throughout the life of the project and will provide an open and up-to-date communication platform. This will also assist in overseeing the Action Plan development and ensure that all measures of the project's scope of services are completed in a timely and professional manner with an emphasis on providing the City with a high-quality product. TJKM will prepare monthly invoices in accordance with the City’s invoicing and reporting requirements. TJKM will obtain any templates or protocols from City staff, as available. Most importantly, all reporting will follow the FHWA SS4A reporting requirements. We anticipate each meeting to last one hour or less.

Deliverables: Bi-weekly Meetings; Monthly Invoices and Progress Reports; Meeting Notes; Kick-Off Meeting; Meeting Agenda and related handouts; Meeting Notes
TASK 2 – DATA COLLECTION AND SAFETY ANALYSIS
The TJKM Team will collect and analyze existing crash history and historical trends throughout the city.

Subtask 2.1 Collision Data
TJKM will collect and analyze data for severe and fatal crashes that have occurred over the past five years in the City of Shafter. We will obtain the most recent five years of crash data from multiple sources, including the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS), Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), and Crossroads for crossverification. In addition, we will cross-reference any available supplemental data provided by the City, such as local collision databases, complaint logs, and enforcement reports to develop a comprehensive dataset of collisions. We recognize that collision records are lagging indicators for roadway safety and analyzing leading indicators associated with exposure, likelihood and severity is crucial to proactively addressing roadway safety.

Our team has extensive experience working with diverse traffic safety databases and understands the interrelationships among data attributes. To strengthen our analysis, we will also incorporate informal sources of information, including community complaints, input from public meetings, and field observations shared by traffic patrol officers, paramedics, and street maintenance staff.

TJKM will further enhance these formal and informal datasets with our own field observations to confirm patterns, clarify inconsistencies, and supplement data gaps. Our experience has shown that collision records often lack key details, and some crashes may not be formally recorded making in-depth review and cross-analysis essential prior to initiating any crash trend or hotspot analysis. Some of the data we will collect will include intersection controls, intersection density, crossing types, sidewalks and bicycle lane gaps, bicycle facility type, posted speed limits, streetlights presence, number of vehicle travel lanes, and characteristics of surrounding areas.

For mapping and analysis, we will use the City’s functionally classified road data, along with datasets for transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Where available, this will be supplemented with roadway volume, speed, and horizontal curvature data to provide a complete picture of the transportation network.

Subtask 2.2 Collision Dashboard (Value Added Task)
TJKM understands that after the project is complete, the City will take on the responsibility of updating the information and tracking progress over the years. Recreating content and analysis can be a tedious and long endeavor for any staff member, regardless of their expertise. To streamline the process and make this task easier, TJKM will develop Collision Dashboard for the City. The Dashboard will be a web-based, interactive data dashboard to assist the City in conducting collision analysis using GIS maps, implementable actions, and performance measures.

5 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
The Collision Dashboard that we propose to develop will support the City of Shafter to achieve its goal of safety providing foundational visibility into collision and infrastructure data. The Dashboard will consolidate historical collision database, existing GIS layers (roadway infrastructure data), and other relevant data providing the City to determine response strategies on proactive basis through Engineering, Enforcement, and Education framework. Some of the key features of the Dashboard that we will have include:
• Collision Analysis
• Injury Network and Countermeasure Integration
• Real-Time Analytics and Forecasting for Law Enforcement • Project Identification
• Integration with Infrastructure and Asset Inventory
• Countermeasure Mapping
Subtask 2.3 Existing Five or 10-Year Crash Analysis (Systemic Analysis) The TJKM Team will conduct a Citywide safety analysis for all collisions, with an emphasis on fatal and serious injury crashes for at least the past five or 10 years. At the onset of the project, we will discuss the time period for collision analysis and based on City’s direction the collision analysis will be conducted. This will be a data-driven process including the following steps:
• Collision Trend: Analyzing and summarizing collision distribution including severity, travel mode, trend over time, lighting conditions, weather conditions, time of day, collision type, and violation category.
• Collision Profile: Combining collision factors to identify prominent collision types.

We will produce GIS-based mappings, charts, and other visualizations to help inform decision-making. We will summarize the collision analysis and maps in a Technical Memorandum.

Subtask 2.4 Identify High Injury Network
TJKM will identify High Injury Networks (HINs) by ranking collision rates over the roadway network for the entire city. These are the corridors responsible for the greater numbers of people killed or seriously injured. This is a critical step to identify locations throughout the city that are collision-prone, so that future collisions can be prevented. Primarily, TJKM will identify the City’s HINs by ranking collision rates over roadway network. These are the corridors, intersections, and crash cluster areas responsible for Killed and Seriously Injured (KSI) on roadways.

In addition, we will use the roadway context to generate a High-Risk Network (HRN) based on leading indicators for safety risk. Using the HIN and HRN we will identify priority locations for safety enhancements to reduce risk and enhance safety for all modes.

6 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Subtask 2.5 Community Data
TJKM will collect information regarding traffic safety from the community at large. While much of the information may be anecdotal, it provides important insight into the history and trends, as people perceive them. Community feedback helps us to mitigate locations that need attention and have characteristics like other high injury locations but have not had any collisions. This approach helps us in proactive implementation of countermeasures systemically rather than traditional reactive approach.

Deliverables: Citywide collision data analysis summary for the most recent five years of available data; Technical Memorandum summarizing the findings and analysis; Citywide HIN GIS Map; corridors and intersections on the HIN; Crash cluster areas; Summary of community data
TASK 3 – EQUITY ANALYSIS
Our team is committed to equity as both a process and an outcome of the CSAP. Equity is integrated throughout the project, playing a role in the Safety Analysis, Engagement and Collaboration, Policy and Process Changes, and Strategy and Project Selections tasks. The TJKM Team will work closely with the local partners to consider how every project decision supports more equitable safety outcomes.

The equity analysis will be designed to help Shafter stakeholders better understand who benefits and burdens from transportation and land use planning decisions and where and what to prioritize to meet safety and equity goals; it will consider who is over-represented in fatal and serious injury crashes, where there are populations living or congregating who are most susceptible to serious injury in traffic crashes (the very old and the very young, for example). The analysis will also describe whether there are neighborhoods who are over-exposed to frequent crashes, long distances between safe crossings, or other sub-optimal conditions for walking along and across streets.

Furthermore, acknowledging exclusionary planning and past injustices is important for establishing trust and developing a comprehensive understanding of inequities in the transportation system.

Incorporating equity indicators into the safety analysis is key to addressing the root causes of crashes and their disproportionate impacts. We anticipate analyzing the following data sources:
• Socio-economic characteristics from U.S. Census such as race, income, language spoken at home, household vehicle access, and individuals with a disability
• Health and environmental indicators such as asthma rates or flood risk • Transit, walking, and bike access; and access to jobs or other key destinations • Trip characteristics, including purpose, mode, and length • Transportation burden comparing commuting/trip costs to household income • Past 20 years of infrastructure investments to identify gaps and mobility barriers Deliverables: Technical Memorandum summarizing Equity Analysis, Equity Metrics for Engagement, and Equity Metrics for Project Prioritization
TASK 4 – STAKEHOLDER AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Engagement and outreach must be at the forefront in order for the Shafter Safe Streets for All planning effort to be fully successful. Each of our team members believes in meaningful community engagement, translating complex data into practical, safety-focused solutions, and building healthy, positive, and purposeful partnerships in the process. Our approach includes creative public workshops, walk audits, and pop-up events in familiar spaces – schools, community centers, neighborhood meetings, among others.

Subtask 4.1 Establish Safety Action Plan Task Force
This task includes establishing Safety Action Plan Task Force (SAPTF). It is envisioned that the SAPTF will be comprised of City staff from various departments, law enforcement, and public health. We envision the SAPTF to serve as the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the project. The composition of the SAPTF will be determined collaboratively with the city staff. The SAPTF will guide the study throughout the development of the Plan.

7 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Subtask 4.2 Stakeholder and Public Outreach Plan
The TJKM Team will prepare a detailed outreach plan and assist with implementation in close coordination with the City and in consultation with the stakeholder advisory group to inform and engage the public. It will include an outreach schedule, stakeholder and target audience contact list, and methods, channels, venues, and activities to engage diverse segments of the community for input and feedback. Forums will include an online public engagement platform, surveys, community workshops, focus group meetings, and a project website. Opportunities for tabling at community events will also be included. Means will be identified for direct engagement with disadvantaged community members. Printed outreach and input options will be provided as appropriate for people without access to technology.

Subtask 4.3 Project Website
To complement the community planning activities and to generally inform the public and stakeholders about the project, our team will work with the city to create a project webpage. The webpage will include the online surveys that complement the in-person activities – including an interactive online map of each community with a questionnaire that residents and stakeholders can use to provide detailed comments and concerns – along with a second survey to provide feedback on safety improvements and policy recommendations. The webpage will include detailed information about the project including fliers for pop-up events, and a sign-up form to receive updates about the project. The project webpage will be used to post updates on the planning effort and copies of the draft and final versions of the Plan.

Subtask 4.4 Online Surveys
The TJKM Team will coordinate with the project team’s technical experts to develop and distribute multilingual surveys with Safety Action Plan subject matter and topics. Surveys will be hosted online through SurveyMonkey but also be created for physical distribution at outreach meetings. Drawing upon the City’s Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter/X accounts, a simple post that can be shared across all these platforms with a link to the survey, and project webpage would be easy to develop. All physical surveys will also have QR Codes assigned to make it easier for individuals to participate if they are on the go at Outreach meetings.

Subtask 4.5 Stakeholder and Public Outreach Meetings
The TJKM Team will work closely with the city to conduct an iterative series of listening sessions and forums to engage the residents and stakeholders, particularly vulnerable road users such as people with disabilities, youth, seniors, and those without access to a car or are unable to drive, and those located in the most underserved areas of the community.

Activities will be conducted in English and Spanish as needed, and focus on conversations and answers to questions such as:
• Where do people need or prefer to walk, bike, take the bus, or drive? • What location, routes, and types of travel do they feel unsafe or avoid? • What areas and locations have they seen, experienced or believe are the most dangerous, have the most crashes, or highest potential for crashes?
• How are existing transportation infrastructure and systems structured and what options are currently available? Who has access to the current options?
• What populations and areas in the community have been traditionally underrecognized, underheard or underserved?
• What are community perspectives on transportation needs, preferences, and input on potential mobility solutions?

8 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Some of the specific activities we will conduct are Stakeholder Focus Groups, Mobility Needs, and Opportunities Workshops.

Stakeholder Focus Groups
The TJKM Team will arrange and conduct two stakeholder meetings to learn about transportation safety and mobility needs across sectors and representative population segments.

Mobility Needs and Opportunities Workshops
The TJKM Team will work closely with the team and the City to conduct forums that engage community members in activities and conversations to learn about transportation needs, safety concerns, and priorities for improvements. Two rounds of meetings are planned to be held. The conceptual scope of events includes:
• First Round – Needs and Possibilities. This workshop will be focused on education and collection and integration of community-reported safety issues and concerns. The TJKM Team, with other members of our team, will present principles of a Safe Systems Approach to roadway safety for active and motor vehicle transportation, facilitate walking audits of key locations, and facilitate small group breakout around table maps where participants identify safety issues, location hotspots, and ideas for improvements to inform solutions that reflect local needs and aspirations.
• Second Round – Recommendations and Prioritization. TJKM will review the community input to date, present traffic safety and crash analysis findings and recommendations, and obtain feedback and gauge preferences to ensure that countermeasures reflect community needs and lived experiences, and that community engagement and equity considerations help shape the selection of priority implementation- ready projects.

Council Meetings
TJKM will also attend three Council Meetings. We will prepare all materials for the Council Meetings for the project.

We envision the first meeting with the Council to present the project, second meeting to present the Draft Action Plan, and third meeting for adoption of the Action Plan.

Deliverables: Stakeholder and Public Outreach Plan; Project Website; Online Survey; Stakeholder Focus Meetings (two); and Mobility Needs; Opportunity Workshops (two); and Council Meetings (three) TASK 5 – POLICY AND PROCESS RECOMMENDATIONS
Subtask 5.1 Review Current Policies and Processes to Address Safety The purpose is to ensure the Safety Action Plan visions and goals are aligned with prior planning efforts. The TJKM Team will collect and review existing programs, policies, and activities, and provide a summary of current efforts to address transportation safety in the City. The team will also review strategies that other cities and counties are using to address safety, identify programs that have evidence of measurable success, and provide an assessment of the most effective and efficient methods used to achieve outcomes. We will review at a minimum the following documents:
• City’s General Plan
• Specific Plans (if any)
• Design Guidelines
• Engineering Standard Plans
• Capital Improvement Programs
The review will assess the alignment of existing plans and practices with best practices and state and federal safety imperatives, racial equity, and positive health outcomes. We will highlight the safety-related elements of adopted documents and related initiatives and identify how they can better tie to predominant collision types and risks and proven or promising safety countermeasures.

We will summarize the contents and key transportation and safety elements of the aforementioned documents in a Technical Memorandum. TJKM will research other jurisdictions and programs statewide and nationally to identify and share best practices and strategies.

9 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Subtask 5.2 Develop Recommended Changes
After our team catalogs the existing policies and practices that contribute or distract from reaching zero KSI crashes, we will recommend the most effective approach for filling in missing elements, amplifying existing ones, and eliminating those that are undermining Safe Systems for all. This work will include a discussion on safety vision and current state, an examination of relevant factors involved in the gap, and specific action-oriented proposals to influence these factors.

The result will be a matrix illustrating policy, plan, legislative, design standard changes, and procedural language that should be included in the Action Plan with guidance as to whether they should be adopted at the time of completion, considered in future plans, or as amendments to current documents. We will use the Racial Equity Toolkit from the Government Alliance on Race and Equity as the framework for confirming that proposed policy changes will have positive health, economic, and mobility outcomes for those who need them most.

The review and recommendations for putting safety first will reflect not only best practices, but also the safety analysis and engagement tasks. Recommendations are anticipated to be multi-disciplinary, including (but not limited to) engineering, enforcement, education, outreach, and emergency response. These recommendations will conform to the guidelines of the Safe System approach adopted as part of the USDOT’s National Roadway Safety Strategy.

Deliverables: Technical Memorandum summarizing Current Policies and Practices, Matrix of Policy and Practice Memorandum, and three work sessions
TASK 6 – FOCUS AREAS AND STRATEGIES
Based on the work completed in earlier tasks and in consultation with SAPTF and TAC, we will identify the Emphasis Area to enhance within the city. The emphasis area will be identified to represent the local context of the City of Shafter based on the collisions that have occurred.

Based on the collision analysis and HIN identified, the TJKM Team will work with the City, to identify emphasis areas and develop the corresponding collision profiles. The collision profiles will include description and goals of the emphasis areas, indicating the primary risk factors, collision types, facility type, and related collision statistical summary. The emphasis areas will inform the identification of countermeasures, policy strategies, and safety projects in later stages of the project. Countermeasures and strategies will be identified based on “5 E’s” of traffic safety.

Collision profiles will be developed consistent with the Safe Systems Approach, by pairing collision data with contextual factors and socio-demographic data to identify top Safety Profiles that capture the most common and most severe collision patterns and contexts in the City of Shafter.

Toolkit (Value Added Service)
TJKM will utilize an automated countermeasure selection Toolkit developed in-house for selecting feasible and proven countermeasures and strategies based on numerous data attributes, e.g., roadway characteristics: number of lanes, pavement conditions, and traffic control types; and collision information: collision types, collision locations, and primary collision factors. Feasible and proven countermeasures will be based on Safe Systems Pyramid, FHWA Safe System Design Hierarchy, FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures, Caltrans Local Roadway Safety Manual, and CMF Clearinghouse Toolkit has successfully assisted the project team to narrow down feasible countermeasures proposed for numerous jurisdictions. The toolkit will be integrated into the Enhanced Dashboard developed for the project. We envision to integrate this toolkit into the Collision Dashboard for the project.

Deliverables: Emphasis Area; Toolkit for sharing information regarding traffic safety strategies and performing alternatives analysis for applicable safety enhancement strategies

10 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
TASK 7 – INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Based on the work completed in earlier tasks, the TJKM Team will identify infrastructure and engineering solutions using Safe Systems Pyramid and Safe Systems Approach that change the built environment and provide latent safety benefits to manage speeds and where needed separate users in space and time. For each solution, we will document relevant information such as ease of implementation, effectiveness of solutions, relative costs, etc. We will also evaluate and provide the City of Shafter specific recommendations of any applicable smart traffic technologies to enhance safety and mobility for all modes.

Implementation Plan will be developed under this task to address safety issues throughout the city that allows for:
• Continuous activity to demonstrate that what can be done is being done. • A phased approach to planning, design, and implementation of improvements. • Budget forecasting to minimize adverse impacts on public funding of other needed project and programs. • Readily implementable improvements that provide benefits immediately in response to documented concerns. • A tiered approach to project planning and implementation that is flexible and responsive to changes in stated public needs and opportunistic to utilize whatever funding is available at a given time.

The TJKM Team will also create a staged improvement plan that outlines projects in short-term (less than two years) mid-term (two to three years), long-term (three to five years), and capital projects (five to 10 years and more) project delivery. The plan will be in line with the overall project’s vision, goals, and community feedback.

The TJKM Team will also identify and recommend non-infrastructure solutions to address behaviors that lead to crashes such as risky speeding, lack of yielding, violating traffic controls, and contra-flow bicycling. All the recommendations will be related to the E’s identified as part of this project: equity, education, enforcement, encouragement, evaluation, emergency response, and emerging technologies.

Safe Routes to School (Value Added Task)
A total of 64 collisions occurred within a 0.25-mile buffer around schools, parks, and libraries in the City of Shafter. Of these, seven collisions resulted in fatalities or severe injuries. Additionally, there were five bicycle-related collisions and five pedestrian-related collisions, with 10 collisions involving either a bicyclist or pedestrian. To enhance safety around schools, parks, and libraries within the city limits as a part of the Action Plan we will develop SRTS Plan for all public schools within the City of Shafter.

Deliverables: Implementation Strategy for proposed recommendations, safety improvements and project list; Programming Matrix; and Safe Routes to School Plan
TASK 8 – PERFORMANCE MONITORING
Subtask 8.1 Develop a Scorecard to Track Status
TJKM will develop a scorecard to track the status or performance of the Safety Action Plan, which highlights clear safety goals and objectives, identifies key performance indicators to measure progress, and allows for regularly updating with data to monitor and report on the project's progress. This approach provides rapid identification of possible concerns and data-driven decision-making, ensuring that the projects meet their safety objectives.

Subtask 8.2 Develop Website Content to Display Actual versus Targets TJKM understands that after the project is complete, the city will take on the responsibility of updating the information and tracking progress over the years. Recreating content and analysis for projects can be a tedious and long endeavor for any staff member, regardless of their expertise. To streamline the process and make this task easier, we can provide tools within the Enhanced Dashboard to evaluate the performance in actual versus targets.

Deliverables: Scorecard to Track Status; Dashboard that allows for sharing of collision and injury data in forms that are easily accessible and understandable to the different stakeholders (e.g., summary data for community members, condensed details for staff and policy makers)

11 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
TASK 9 – DRAFT AND FINAL SAFETY ACTION PLAN
A detailed Draft Safety Action Plan, including an executive summary, will be developed that incorporates a summary of the crash data evaluated, summarizes stakeholder involvement and contribution, incorporates public outreach and involvement in shaping focus areas and strategies, describes the proposed focus areas and strategies to reduce fatal and serious injuries crashes and crash rates, describes how these strategies may assist the City in meeting safety performance targets, discusses the impacted people and areas that experience inequity in transportation safety, and identifies a list of projects, programs, and strategies that are potentially eligible for implementation through SS4A, and other Federal and State safety grants.

The Draft Safety Action Plan will be submitted for review and comment to the SAPTF and TAC. A revised draft will then be prepared for public review and posted to the project website.

Following a public comment period, the TJKM Team will prepare a Draft Final Safety Action Plan. We will develop appropriate presentation materials for final review and approval of the Action Plan by the City Council. We will make presentation of the Action Plan to the City Council. All final deliverables will be provided to City staff with reasonable time for review prior to acceptance. All project files associated with final deliverables shall be provided to City prior to contract closeout.

Under this task, we will also develop on behalf of the city, one SS4A Implementation Grant Application and one HSIP Grant Application (Value Added Deliverable).

Deliverables: Draft and Final Plan, City Council Presentations, and SS4A Implementation Grant Application

12 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Schedule
Our proposed team is an experienced team with specific strengths in each of the areas required to deliver this project on schedule and within budget to the satisfaction of the City of Shafter. Our proposed team has a proven track record of successful similar projects and is dedicated to providing high-quality products. With our available resources and experience, TJKM is equipped to provide the level of responsiveness required by the city, all while providing professional and quality services. The personnel listed in our organization chart are available to work on the project for the entire duration of the project.

Our proposed staff have the availability to accept and complete this key project on schedule and within budget. It should be noted that the TJKM Team is available and have the resources to deliver the Action Plan by end of May 2026, if the city desires to do so in order to position itself to apply for SS4A Implementation Grant, anticipated to be due in June 2026.

We have provided our anticipated schedule in the requested format below and we have provided a detail schedule following.

Task Name Duration Start Finish
Task 1. Project Management 276 days Thu 11/6/25 Thu 11/26/26

1.1 Project Kick-Off Meeting 1 day Thu 11/6/25 Thu 11/6/25 Task 2. Data Collection & Safety Analysis 150 days Fri 11/14/25 Thu 6/11/26

2.1 Collision Data 45 days Fri 11/14/25 Thu 1/15/26

2.2 Collision Dashboard (Value Added Task) 45 days Fri 12/26/25 Thu 2/26/26

2.3 Existing Five or 10-Year Crash Analysis (Systemic Analysis) 45 days Fri 2/27/26 Thu 4/30/26

2.4 Identify High Injury Network 30 days Fri 5/1/26 Thu 6/11/26

2.5 Community Data 15 days Fri 5/22/26 Thu 6/11/26
Task 3. Equity Analysis 60 days Fri 5/1/26 Thu 7/23/26
Task 4. Stakeholder & Community Engagement 215 days Fri 11/7/25 Thu 9/3/26

4.1 Establish Safety Action Plan Task Force 7 days Fri 11/7/25 Mon 11/17/25

4.2 Stakeholder & Public Outreach Plan 15 days Fri 11/7/25 Thu 11/27/25

4.3 Project Website 30 days Fri 11/7/25 Thu 12/18/25

4.4 Online Surveys 120 days Fri 12/19/25 Thu 6/4/26

4.5 Stakeholder & Public Outreach Meetings 210 days Fri 11/14/25 Thu 9/3/26 Task 5. Policy & Process Recommendations 75 days Fri 5/1/26 Thu 8/13/26

5.1 Review Current Policies & Processes to Address Safety 45 days Fri 5/1/26 Thu 7/2/26

5.2 Develop Recommended Changes 30 days Fri 7/3/26 Thu 8/13/26 Task 6. Focus Areas & Strategies 30 days Fri 6/12/26 Thu 7/23/26 Task 7. Infrastructure & Engineering Solutions Implementation Plan 60 days Fri 6/12/26 Thu 9/3/26 Task 8. Performance Monitoring 30 days Fri 7/24/26 Thu 9/3/26

8.1 Develop a Scorecard to Track Status 15 days Fri 7/24/26 Thu 8/13/26

8.2 Develop Website Content to Display Actual versus Targets 15 days Fri 8/14/26 Thu 9/3/26 Task 9. Draft & Final Safety Action Plan 90 days Fri 7/24/26 Thu 11/26/26

13 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter

2. Firm & Subconsultant Qualifications
Proposal for Safe Streets and
Roads for all (SS4A) Program
Action Plan

14 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter

FIRM AND SUBCONSULTANT QUALIFICATIONS
TJKM Overview
TJKM, founded in 1974, is a firm that provides professional services locally in California, Texas, and Florida. We serve a full range of clients, including municipalities, congestion management agencies, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), transportation agencies, private developers, other consulting firms, and attorneys.

Our planners and engineers have worked on the public side of the desk for years as municipal engineers, developing superior skills in collaborating with the public and city councils and, more importantly, crafting excellent relationships with the right people.

We have hands-on experience and understand the latest requirements, technologies, trends, and standards. Our experience with local agency processes keeps projects moving faster, and our expertise from thousands of engagements helps us complete projects within budget.

Our motivation comes from satisfying clients’ objectives and improving communities.

Our goal is to provide the most cost-effective implementable solutions that meet the unique needs of each client while keeping within budget and on schedule. We are professionals with a passion for safe and sustainable transportation - fully committed to the highest client satisfaction.

As a testament to these principles, in the last three years, TJKM has completed more than 70 safety-related planning and design projects. We have also helped our clients with grant applications, resulting in our clients being awarded approximately $150 million in grants. Our proposed team has successfully delivered Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Safety Action Plans and Vision Zero Action Plans (VZAPs) for Cities of Colusa, Cupertino, South Lake Tahoe; Waco MPO and Rio Grande Valley MPO in Texas; and Village of Wellington in Florida. In addition, we are currently working on SS4A Safety Action Plans and Vision Zero Plans for Cities of Livermore, Pleasanton, Pomona, and Monrovia; Counties of Fresno and Calaveras; and City of Port Richey, FL.

TJKM is a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) #40772 and Small Business Enterprise (SBE) #38780.

TJKM’s Expertise on Safety Plans
Safety Analysis
TJKM has conducted safety analyses for a wide variety of projects spanning multiple jurisdictions and states. TJKM’s approach to safety analysis is based on the following items:
• Identify crash types based on collision data
• Identify risk factors that can be used to prioritize high-risk locations • Determine safety trends to see what features are contributing to crashes • Identify, map, and prioritize locations for implementation with funding • Identify low-cost countermeasures to maximize on safety investments You need an Implementable
Safety Action Plan to improve
safety for citizens traveling by
any mode. We will be your
partner in realizing your vision.

15 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
TJKM has extensive experience in developing safety programs and viable safety projects for small, medium, and large agencies across the US. Below shows the Safety Projects we have helped our clients with.

16 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Comprehensive Safety Action Plans
TJKM offers a multidisciplinary team with the expertise needed to develop a CSAP tailored to your community. Our data-driven approach identifies ways to reduce crash risk by analyzing interactions among roadway users, environmental and organizational factors, and infrastructure dependencies.

The CSAP we prepare highlights key safety issues and provide actionable recommendations for improving mobility for all users: motorized and non-motorized, across transportation network, taking into considerations land use, transit, freight, and community-specific needs.

CSAPs prepared by us outlines a strategic implementation plan aligned with community’s goals. Leveraging our indepth knowledge of state and federal funding programs, we ensure that CSAP is fully compliant with SS4A grant requirements and includes competitive project concepts for funding.

Please visit https://www.tjkmsafetyactionplans.com/ to learn more about how we can help your agency.

Vision Zero Action Plans
TJKM has partnered with dozens of agencies across the U.S. to develop VZAPs, bringing extensive experience and proven strategies to every project. We apply this collective knowledge to each new plan, aiming to reduce roadway conflicts and build transportation networks that prioritize safety for all users while also enhancing sense of place within communities.

A critical component of any VZAP is robust coordination with agency staff, stakeholders, and the community by establishing a Vision Zero Task Force, to ensure that the plan reflects the unique needs, values, and challenges of the jurisdiction.

TJKM conducts a comprehensive literature review and detailed analysis of your existing transportation networks. We collect and evaluate demographic data, and conduct field observations to ensure that recommended strategies and countermeasures are equitably applied across all communities. Our team analyzes collision patterns and trends to develop targeted, evidence-based recommendations that maximize safety outcomes.

Local Road Safety Plans
A Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) offers public agencies a structured framework to identify, analyze, and prioritize safety improvements on local roads. TJKM has successfully completed more than 50 LRSPs for agencies of all sizes, each tailored to meet the specific needs, challenges, and dynamics of the local community.

We develop LRSP that reflects community’s priorities and safety goals, ensuring that the projects identified within the plan meet the eligibility requirements for funding through the SS4A and HSIP, increasing competitiveness for implementation grants.

Grants
TJKM has consistently supported agencies in preparing grants for a wide range of transportation safety funding programs, including HSIP, ATP, SS4A, and others. We ensure that all safety plans and documents include the recommended strategies and fully comply with federal, state, and local requirements, positioning your agency for current and future grant opportunities.

With our deep expertise in transportation funding, TJKM guides public agencies through every step of the application process to help secure funding for critical safety projects that protect all road users.

TJKM develops LRSPs that will
accommodate all users

17 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Some of our relevant experience include:
• ATP Grants: TJKM assisted the City of Dinuba in preparation and submittal of an application, and they successfully received $18 million. • Safety Projects implementation Grants: Based on Safety Plans completed by TJKM, we assisted our clients with submitting Grant Applications for the implementation of safety measures to enhance safety for all modes of transportation, resulting in more than $150 million funds being awarded. • SS4A Implementation/Planning and Demonstration Grants: In 2024, TJKM assisted clients with preparing applications and successfully securing approximately $25 million ($18 million on Implementation Grants) for various agencies.

Collision Analysis Dashboard
TJKM specializes in developing interactive Collision Analysis Dashboards designed to support agencies in achieving their goal of enhancing traffic safety for all modes of transportation. Our Dashboards are Geographic Information System (GIS)-based mapping tools that integrate multiple attribute charts to provide a comprehensive view of traffic safety conditions. Using collision data, these Dashboards offer an interactive platform for: Collision analysis, Data visualization, Trend identification, and High-Injury Network (HIN) development and monitoring.

These features enable agencies to allocate resources strategically, prioritize high-benefit safety projects, and measure the effectiveness of implemented safety measures. The Dashboard is integrated with network performance tracking tools to assist in the formulation of evidence-based safety policies and procedures. A key example is the Collision Analysis Dashboard developed for the City of Concord, which allows staff to visualize and analyze collision data in real time. Other agencies currently utilizing TJKM’s Collision Analysis Dashboards include Waco MPO, TX; Rio Grande Valley MPO, TX, and Village of Wellington, FL.

Collision Analysis Dashboards developed by TJKM, empower agencies to make informed, data-driven decisions that support long-term safety improvements across their transportation networks.

18 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Public Engagement
TJKM project managers have a combined total experience of about 70 years in community engagement. We value the diversity of the community’s views by promoting public engagement and feedback. TJKM actively works with agencies and stakeholders to make sure the entire community is involved in the process.

This allows the community to express their concerns and feel heard when it comes to the improvements in their community. We are comfortable in this setting and skilled in presenting technical information clearly and concisely for a non-technical audience. We have successfully conducted virtual and in person meetings on hundreds of past safety projects and know the below events are essential for a positive project:
• Public workshops
• Focus groups
• Hosting walking/biking tours
• Websites for announcements/ feedback
• Pop-up events/tactical urbanism
• Printed and/or online surveys
Equity Considerations
TJKM understands that social equity is highly context-specific, and we are committed to integrating equity considerations into all aspects of our work. Through years of experience, we’ve learned that each community has its own unique definitions, concerns, and priorities when it comes to equity.

Equity is not just a guiding principle, it is essential to the success and sustainability of every project. TJKM actively engages populations that have historically been underserved or marginalized, including people with disabilities, low-income individuals, Native American communities, people of color, women, LGBTQ+ individuals, non-English speakers, and those experiencing homelessness.

We are intentional about including these voices throughout the planning process to ensure the outcomes reflect the needs and realities of all community members especially those most vulnerable.

TJKM explores the topic of equity and seeks to identify how a particular definition may best represent the needs of the community, while at the same time, aligning with definitions and expectations of grant funding sources.

Familiarity with local, State, and Federal Procedures and Processes TJKM has successfully delivered numerous projects by adhering to all applicable state and federal procedures and requirements. Our team understands what it takes to ensure your project complies with federal, state, and local laws, permits, and regulations from start to finish.

We are well-versed in key guidance and regulatory frameworks, including the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) clearance, and regulations set forth by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), state departments of transportation, and the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). TJKM’s deep familiarity with these requirements and the processes used to secure a variety of funding sources, enables us to efficiently navigate and satisfy all city, state, and federal procedural expectations, ensuring your project moves forward smoothly and remains fully compliant.

WE STRIVE TO REACH

ALL POPULATIONS

9 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Below is a graphic highlighting our experience

3. Firm Organizational Chart & Proposed Staffing Plan
Proposal for Safe Streets and
Roads for all (SS4A) Program
Action Plan

9 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter

FIRM ORGANIZATIONAL CHART AND PROPOSED STAFFING PLAN
Our Team Organization Chart illustrates our proven “chain of command” for performance on similar projects. Work will be conducted under the supervision/direction of our Project Manager, Mr. Amin, who will be responsible for dayto-day coordination and activities, maintaining the effectiveness and efficiency of the work, schedule, and will be the point of contact ensuring the work products are to the satisfaction of the city and stakeholders.

All the task leads identified will report to Mr. Amin. Our proposed key personnel will be made available to the City of Shafter as needed for the duration of Project. The key team members identified in this proposal shall not change without prior authorization.

Below is our Organization Chart showing the proposed staffing for the different tasks associated with your project.

4. Employee Project Resumes & Qualifications
Proposal for Safe Streets and
Roads for all (SS4A) Program
Action Plan

10 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter

EMPLOYEE PROJECT RESUMES AND QUALIFICATIONS
Team Qualifications
The proposed Key Personnel on this TJKM Team are the most qualified professionals in their respective areas of specialization. The TJKM Team has been carefully crafted to provide City of Shafter with the full range of expertise needed to and deliver your SS4A Program Action Plan project successfully. Below a table showing the key team members team qualifications.

Name, Role, &Years of
Experience
Registration
Number Qualifications & Experience
Ruta Jariwala, PE, TE
Principal-In-Charge &
QA/QC
25 Years of Experience
CA TE 2465
CA CE 73840
TX CE 135281
FL CE 100796
 Waco MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Waco, TX
 Rio Grande Valley MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Weslaco, TX
 Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan, Cupertino
 Safe Streets & Roads for All Vision Zero Action Plan, Dinuba  Safe Streets & Roads for All Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Colusa
 Collision Analysis Dashboard, Concord
 Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan, South Lake Tahoe
 Local Roadway Safety Plans, Kern County
 Local Road Safety Plan, Santa Cruz
 Update/Expand Local Road Safety/Action Plans, Mendocino County
 Safety Action Plan & Bike Master Plan, Monrovia
 Development of a Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Port Richey, FL
Nayan Amin, TE
Project Manager
35 Years of Experience
CA TE 2290  Waco MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Waco, TX  Rio Grande Valley MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Weslaco, TX
 Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan, Cupertino
 Safe Streets & Roads for All Vision Zero Action Plan, Dinuba  Safe Streets & Roads for All Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Colusa
 Collision Analysis Dashboard, Concord
 Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan, South Lake Tahoe
 Local Roadway Safety Plans, Kern County
 Local Road Safety Plan, Santa Cruz
 Update/Expand Local Road Safety/Action Plans, Mendocino County
 Safety Action Plan & Bike Master Plan, Monrovia
 Development of a Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Port Richey, FL

11 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Program Action Plan City of Shafter
Name, Role, &Years of
Experience
Registration
Number Qualifications & Experience
Mark Doty
Task Lead
19 Years of Experience
N/A  Waco MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Waco, TX  Rio Grande Valley MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Weslaco, TX
 Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan, Cupertino
 Safe Streets & Roads for All Vision Zero Action Plan, Dinuba  Safe Streets & Roads for All Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Colusa
 Collision Analysis Dashboard, Concord
 Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan, South Lake Tahoe
 Local Roadway Safety Plans, Kern County
 Local Road Safety Plan, Santa Cruz
 Update/Expand Local Road Safety/Action Plans, Mendocino County
 Safety Action Plan & Bike Master Plan, Monrovia
 Development of a Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Port Richey, FL
Pranav Happa, PE
Task Lead
19 Years of Experience
TX CE 119973  Waco MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Waco, TX  Rio Grande Valley MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Weslaco, TX
 Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan, Cupertino
 Safe Streets & Roads for All Vision Zero Action Plan, Dinuba  Safe Streets & Roads for All Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Colusa
 Collision Analysis Dashboard, Concord
 Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan, South Lake Tahoe
 Local Roadway Safety Plans, Kern County
 Local Road Safety Plan, Santa Cruz
 Update/Expand Local Road Safety/Action Plans, Mendocino County
 Safety Action Plan & Bike Master Plan, Monrovia
 Development of a Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Port Richey, FL
Rutvij Patel
Task Lead
18 Years of Experience
CA EIT 154117  Waco MPO Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, Waco, TX  Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan, Cupertino
 Safe Streets & Roads for All Vision Zero Action Plan, Livermore  Collision Analysis Dashboard, Concord
 Local Roadway Safety Plans, Kern County
 Local Road Safety Plan, Santa Cruz
 Update/Expand Local Road Safety/Action Plans, Mendocino County
 Safety Action Plan & Bike Master Plan, Monrovia
 Vision Zero Action Plan, Wellington, FL