St. Helena City Council
February 11, 2025

City of St. Helena
Regular City Council Meeting
Tuesday, February 11, 2025 @ 6:00 PM
Vintage Hall Board Room - Second Floor
465 Main Street, St. Helena

PLEASE NOTE: Any person who wishes to speak regarding an item on the agenda or make a comment under the "Oral Communication" portion of the agenda may do so, but please observe the time limit of four minutes. The Mayor may reduce the four minute time limit for all speakers in circumstances where a large number of citizens intend to make public comment.

The City Council meeting will be live-streamed on Comcast 28 and on the City's website.

Public comment for meetings will be accepted via email to [email protected]. All public comments must be received three hours prior to the meeting. All other public comments received after the deadline will be attached to the item the next business day or soon thereafter. Public comments will not be read out loud but will be publicly available and attached to the on-line agenda.

The schedule of upcoming meetings and published meeting agendas can be found on the City of St. Helena website at https://sthelena.civicweb.net/portal/.

Page

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL
Mayor: Paul Dohring, Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy, City Council Members:

Aaron Barak, Kate Spadarotto, Billy Summers

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

5. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Estimated start time: 6:05 p.m.

5.1. Consideration and proposed approval of Regular Meeting Minutes of January 28, 2025
Regular City Council - 28 Jan 2025 - Minutes
7 - 15

6. PUBLIC FORUM:

Members of the public are entitled to speak on matters of municipal concern not on the agenda during Public Forum. Each person’s comments shall be limited to 4 minutes. Each person is entitled to speak on any non-agendized item only once at any meeting. Brief questions by Council Members for clarifications may be posed and answered, and Council Members may make requests that items be placed on future agendas, but in accordance with state law, no substantive discussion or action may take place unless and until the matter properly appears on the agenda.

Estimated start time: 6:10 p.m.

6.1. Public Comment.Mary Stephenson
Public Comment.Patrick Kenealy
17 - 20

7. REPORTS BY STAFF AND CITY COUNCIL, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, AND AB 1234 REPORTS:

Reports by staff and/or Council Members on items of general interest. Brief questions for clarification may be posed and answered, and Council Members may request that items be placed on a future agenda. Except under certain circumstances, the Brown Act prohibits any other discussion or action by the City Council.

Estimated start time: 6:20 p.m.

7.1. Grapevine 1 Year Update 21 - 30

8. PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLIC RECOGNITIONS
Estimated start time: 6:30 p.m.

8.1. Planning Commission Chair Report
Planning Commission Report Presentation
31 - 35

9. STAFF BRIEFING

10. CONSENT ITEMS
Members of the Council or the public (present at the meeting) may ask that any items be considered individually for purposes of considering alternative action, for extended discussion, or for public comment. Unless that is done, one motion may be used to adopt all recommended actions. (Roll Call Vote) Estimated start time: 6:40 p.m.

10.1. Authorization for 1) Emergency Generator Rental Services from C&D Power for the Wastewater Treatment Plant MBR Facility for an additional $87,2834 for a Not-to-Exceed cost of $238,520 and 2) A Budget increase in the amount of $37,284 utilizing Fund 571 Wastewater Operations fund balance.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Lesley Milton, Deputy City Manager
Recommendation:

Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution.

Staff Report - Pdf
37 - 40

10.2. Consideration and adoption of a Resolution authorizing 1) Amendment #1 to St. Helena Contract FY2025-017 with M-Group to obtain planning expertise and consulting for an additional $50,000 for a total contract amount not to exceed $75,000; and 2) A budget increase in the amount of $5,000 using General Fund Reserves.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Maya DeRosa, Community Development Director 41 - 63

Recommendation:

Staff recommends Council adopt the attached resolution.

Staff Report - Pdf

11. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.

12. OLD BUSINESS
Estimated start time: 6:55 p.m.

12.1. Consideration and adoption of a Resolution (follows previous Council actions on water meter replacement program) to (1) Award the CIP Project W24-04 SMART Meter Deployment to Professional Meters, Inc. in the amount of $565,063; (2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the Construction Contract with Professional Meters, Inc.;(3) Authorize the Director of Public Works to approve Change Orders not to exceed 15% of the contract amount; and (4) Authorizing a project budget amendment of $333,105.

CEQA Determination: Class I Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 of CEQA
Prepared By: Lesley Milton, Deputy City Manager
Recommendation:

Approve the attached Resolution.

Staff Report - Pdf
SMART Meter Deployment Presentation
Public Comment.Kelly Wheaton
65 - 117

12.2. Consideration and proposed approval of a Resolution appointing 5 Members and 1 Alternate to the Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee and 1 member to the vacant opening on the Library Board of Trustees.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Erika Opp, Administrative Analyst
Recommendation:

Appoint one member to the Library Board of Trustees and appoint five regular members and one alternate member to the Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee.

Staff Report - Pdf
119 - 122

13. NEW BUSINESS
Estimated start time: 7:35 p.m.

13.1. Receive status report on Action Items detailed in the adopted 2024 Flood Project Condition Assessment Report.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Lesley Milton, Deputy City Manager
Recommendation:
123 - 228

Receive the report and provide direction as necessary.

Staff Report - Pdf
Flood Protection Update Presentation

13.2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing participation in the PARS PostEmployment Benefits Trust Program to be administered by Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) and U.S. Bank, appointing the City Manager as the City’s Plan Administrator, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the documents to implement the Program to set aside funds to offset the City's pension liability.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Mandy Kellogg, Administrative Services Director Recommendation:

Approve the attached resolution.

Staff Report - Pdf
PARS Presentaton
229 - 425

14. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:

14.1. A. Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) - Executive Board B. Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) - General Assembly C. Napa Valley Tourism Corporation (Umbrella for Napa County) D. League of California Cities – North Bay Division
E. Napa County City Selection Committee
F. Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District G. Napa County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) H. Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA)
I. Napa County Watershed Information Center & Conservancy (WICC) J. Upper Valley Waste Management Agency
K. Napa County Groundwater Sustainability Plan Advisory Committee L. Napa County Regional Climate Action Committee
M. Council Ad Hoc and Standing Committee Reports

15. ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular City Council meeting is scheduled for February 25, 2025 at 6:00 p.m.

This agenda was posted at City Hall, 1088 College Avenue, and at Vintage Hall, 465 Main Street, St. Helena, California on February 6, 2025.

Cindy Tzafopoulos, City Clerk
In Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please call the City Clerk’s Office (707) 967-2792. Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

CHALLENGING DECISIONS OF CITY ENTITIES
The time limit within which to commence any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City of St. Helena is governed by Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a shorter limitation period is specified by any other provision, including without limitation Government Code section 65009 applicable to many land use and zoning decisions, Government Code section 66499.37 applicable to the Subdivision Map Act, and Public Resources Code section 21167 applicable to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Under Section 1094.6, any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which such decision becomes final. Any lawsuit or legal challenge, which is not filed within that 90-day period, will be barred. Government Code section 65009 and 66499.37, and Public Resources Code section 21167, impose shorter limitations periods and requirements, including timely service in addition to filing.

If a person wishes to challenge the above actions in court, they may be limited to raising only those issues they or someone else raised at the meeting described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of St. Helena, at or prior to the meeting. In addition, judicial challenge may be limited or barred where the interested party has not sought and exhausted all available administrative remedies.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL RECEIVED AFTER THE POSTING OF THE AGENDA
Any supplemental writings or documents distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review in the City Clerk’s Office located at 1088 College Avenue, St. Helena, California, during normal business hours and by appointment. In addition, such writings or documents will be made available on the City’s web site at https://sthelena.civicweb.net and will be available for public review at the respective meeting.

MINUTES
City of St. Helena
Regular City Council Meeting
Tuesday, January 28, 2025 @ 6:00 PM
Vintage Hall Board Room - Second Floor
465 Main Street, St. Helena
A complete video recording of this meeting, except for closed session, can be found at https://sthelena.civicweb.net/Portal/ or by calling the City Clerk at (707) 968-2742. The City Council video is the official record of the Council meeting.

Present: Mayor Paul Dohring, Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy, Council Member Aaron Barak, Council Member Kate Spadarotto, and Council Member Billy Summers

Absent:

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

4.1 Council Member Billy Summers moved to adopt the agenda. The motion was seconded by Council Member Michelle Deasy and on voice vote carried by the following vote:

AYES: Mayor Paul Dohring, Council Member Aaron Barak, Council Member Michelle Deasy, Council Member Kate Spadarotto, and Council Member Billy Summers
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RECUSE: None

5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

5.1 Consideration and proposed approval of Regular Meeting Minutes of January 14, 2025 and the Special Meeting Minutes of January 10, 2025 and January 11, 2025.

Council Member Billy Summers moved to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of January 14, 2025, the Special Meeting Minutes of January 10, 2025 and the Special Meeting Minutes of January 14, 2025.

The motion was seconded by Council Member Aaron Barak and on roll call Agenda Item #5.1.

Regular City Council
January 28, 2025
carried by the following vote:

AYES: Mayor Paul Dohring, Council Member Kate Spadarotto, Council Member Billy Summers, Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy, and Council Member Aaron Barak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RECUSE: None

6. PUBLIC FORUM:

Lorraine Stuart, Jenny Ocon, Michelle Grupe and Glenn Smith addressed the City Council.

6.1 7. REPORTS BY STAFF AND CITY COUNCIL, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, and AB 1234 REPORTS:

7.1 Deputy City Manager, Lesley Milton reported on the status of the Meily Park turf rehabilitation project and that the project is now underway.

City Council Member Aaron Barak requested two items be added to future agendas.
(1) The first proposed item is to discuss and review the current and proposed water rates with the goal of significantly reducing the financial burden on residents. Discussion should include but not be limited to:
 reviewing allocation of administrative salaries currently funded by the water and wastewater enterprise fund and consider a shift to the general fund where appropriate.
 examine the City's water and wastewater reserve policies  evaluating current reserve levels and determining whether adjustments to the reserve targets are feasible without compromising financial stability.
 analyzing the CIP to access prioritization phasing and potential restructuring of projects to control costs and reduce ratepayer impact  exploring immediate strategies to avoid the scheduled 8% rate increase in the physical year 2025 and assessing long-term options to lower future rate adjustments for residents
(2) The second proposed item for a future agenda would be to discuss and consider issuing a temporary freeze on all new hires, salary increases not contractually obligated, reclassifications and discretionary spending until the City's financial situation is clarified, and sustainable funding solutions are in place to address the deficits. Additionally, proposing that the City Council would retain authority to approve exceptions on a caseAgenda Item #5.1.

Regular City Council
January 28, 2025
by-case basis when such actions are deemed critical for public safety, legal compliance or liability or other urgent needs at the council's discretion where delaying action would result in significant harm to the City or its residents.

All Council members agreed to add items to a future agenda.

City Attorney, Ethan Walsh reported on the Special City Council Closed Session meeting of January 21, 2025 noting no reportable action.

8. PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLIC RECOGNITIONS

8.1 Swearing in of New Police Officer Angel Maldonado
CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Chris Hartley, Chief of Police

9. STAFF BRIEFING

10. CONSENT ITEMS
Members of the Council or the public may ask that any items be considered individually for purposes of considering alternative action, for extended discussion, or for public comment. Unless that is done, one motion may be used to adopt all recommended actions. (Roll Call Vote)

10.1 Quarterly Grant Report for FY 2024-25 Q2 for the reporting period ending December 31, 2024.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Martin Beltran, Senior Management Analyst

10.2 This item was pulled.

Consideration and adoption of a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with BluePoint Planning for parks and recreation master planning services

10.3 Adopt resolution authorizing the acceptance of the improvements at 601 and 603 Fulton Lane and filing of Notice of Acceptance and acceptance.

CEQA Determination: Exempt
Prepared By: Eric Janzen, Assistant Public Works Director Recommendation:

Approve "Resolution Accepting the Completion of Public Improvements at 601 Fulton Lane and 603 Fulton Lane and Directing the Filing of the Notice of Acceptance for the Fulton Lane Estates Subdivision Improvement Agreement." Agenda Item #5.1.

Regular City Council
January 28, 2025

10.4 Water Supply and Forecasting - November 2024
CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Ian Dale, Environmental Services Tech
Recommendation:

Receive and file.

10.5 Water Supply and Forecasting - December 2024
CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Ian Dale, Environmental Services Tech
Recommendation:

Receive and file.

Council Member Billy Summers moved to approve item 10.1, 10.3, 10.4 and

10.5. The motion was seconded by Council Member Kate Spadarotto and on roll call carried by the following vote:

AYES: Mayor Paul Dohring, Council Member Kate Spadarotto, Council Member Billy Summers, Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy, and Council Member Aaron Barak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RECUSE: None

10.2 Consideration and adoption of a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with BluePoint Planning for parks and recreation master planning services
CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Dave Jahns, Director of Community Services Recommendation:

Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with BluePoint Planning for Parks and Recreation Master Planning Services.

Community Services Director Dave Jahns provided Council with further information on the item.

Public Comment was received by Elaine de Man.

Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy moved to approve item 10.2. The motion was seconded by Council Member Billy Summers and on roll call carried by the following vote:

AYES: Mayor Paul Dohring, Council Member Kate Spadarotto, Council Agenda Item #5.1.

Regular City Council
January 28, 2025
Member Billy Summers, Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy, and Council Member Aaron Barak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RECUSE: None

11. PUBLIC HEARINGS

12. OLD BUSINESS

12.1 Approval of a Resolution Updating the Composition of the Finance Committee Members and Appointing Applicants to the Finance Committee.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: April Mitts, Assistant City Manager
Recommendation:

Adopt the attached resolution updating the composition of the Finance Committee as directed by City Council on January 14, 2025 and adopt a resolution appointing applicants to the Finance Committee.

Assistant City Manager, April Mitts reported on the item.

No public comment was received.

It was the consensus of Council to approve Arlene Corsetti, Chris Warner, Garry Rose and Mark Smithers to the two-year term and George Schisler, Richard Garber and Gregg Dawley to the one-year term.

Mayor Paul Dohring moved to adopt the resolution updating the composition of the Finance Committee and appointing applicants. The motion was seconded by Council Member Billy Summers and on roll call carried by the following vote:

AYES: Mayor Paul Dohring, Council Member Kate Spadarotto, Council Member Billy Summers, Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy, and Council Member Aaron Barak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RECUSE: None

12.2 City Council discussion and direction on water penalty appeal by Dr. Dante Bini.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: April Mitts, Assistant City Manager
Agenda Item #5.1.

Regular City Council
January 28, 2025
Recommendation:

Staff recommends City Council reduce, but not eliminate, water penalties incurred by Dr. Bini.

The recommendation made on January 14, 2025, utilized the 7-year average water use (excluding 2021) for the calculation of penalties, resulting in a penalty reduction of $35,817 with the Bini's responsible for $5,825.08 in penalties.

Assistant City Manager, April Mitts reported on the item.

No public comment was received.

It was the consensus of the Council to reduce the water penalty incurred by Dr.

Bini to an amount of $20,821.04.

Council Member Billy Summers moved to approve a penalty waiver in the amount of $20,821.04 The motion was seconded by Council Member Aaron Barak and on roll call carried by the following vote:

AYES: Mayor Paul Dohring, Council Member Kate Spadarotto, Council Member Billy Summers, Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy, and Council Member Aaron Barak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RECUSE: None
Mayor Dohring called for a 10-minute recess at 7:30 p.m.

12.3 Update to Sub-Committee Assignments
CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: April Mitts, Assistant City Manager
Recommendation:

Discuss and assign City Council members to the Finance Committee (liaison) and the Ad Hoc Housing and Economic Development Committee and to recognize Mayor Dohring's appointment as Alternate to the ABAG Executive Board.

City Manager, Anil Comelo reported on the item.

No public comment was received.

It was the consensus of the Council to amend the Council liaison on the Ad Hoc Housing and Economic Development Committee from Council Member Agenda Item #5.1.

Regular City Council
January 28, 2025
Spadarotto to Mayor Dohring and to recognize Mayor Dohring's appointment as an Alternate to the ABAG Executive Board.

Council Member Kate Spadarotto moved to accept the Committee assignments as amended. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy and on roll call carried by the following vote:

AYES: Mayor Paul Dohring, Council Member Kate Spadarotto, Council Member Billy Summers, Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy, and Council Member Aaron Barak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RECUSE: None

13. NEW BUSINESS

13.1 Provide information on the process and timeline to complete an updated analysis of the City's revenues and expenditures to determine the extent of the structural deficit.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: April Mitts, Assistant City Manager
Recommendation:

None, informational update only.

City Manager Comelo informed the council that work had begun on the analysis and will likely bring back the report to city council on March 11, 2025 if not February 25.

No public comment was received.

13.2 Provide information to City Council on the process and timeline to conduct a review of city processes, practices, structure, and service delivery with the goal of 5% in savings in the General Fund expenditures.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: April Mitts, Assistant City Manager
Recommendation:

Provide direction to staff.

City Manager Comelo informed the council that work had begun on the analysis and will likely bring back the report to city council on March 11, 2025 if not February 25.

Agenda Item #5.1.

Regular City Council
January 28, 2025
No public comment was received.

Council directed staff to continue work with Council Members Barak and Deasy on item and to develop a scope of work.

13.3 Consideration of the Vice Mayor Nomination Made by the Mayor and Requiring Council Approval.

CEQA Determination: Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: April Mitts, Assistant City Manager
Recommendation:

Mayor nominates Vice Mayor for Council approval.

No public comment was received.

Mayor Paul Dohring moved to nominate Council Member Michelle Deasy to the role of Vice Mayor. The motion was seconded by Council Member Aaron Barak and on roll call carried by the following vote:

AYES: Mayor Paul Dohring, Council Member Kate Spadarotto, Council Member Billy Summers, Vice Mayor Michelle Deasy, and Council Member Aaron Barak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RECUSE: None

14. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:

14.1 A. Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) - Executive Board B. Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) - General Assembly C. Napa Valley Tourism Corporation (Umbrella for Napa County) D. League of California Cities – North Bay Division
E. Napa County City Selection Committee
F. Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District G. Napa County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) H. Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA)
I. Napa County Watershed Information Center & Conservancy (WICC) Agenda Item #5.1.

Regular City Council
January 28, 2025
J. Upper Valley Waste Management Agency
K. Napa County Groundwater Sustainability Plan Advisory Committee L. Napa County Regional Climate Action Committee
M. Council Ad Hoc and Standing Committee Reports

15. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Dohring adjourned the meeting at 8:08 p.m.

CHALLENGING DECISIONS OF CITY ENTITIES
APPROVED:
______________________________
Paul Jamison Dohring, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Cindy Tzafopoulos, City Clerk
Agenda Item #5.1.

1 February 6, 2025
TO: The St Helena City Council
FROM: Mary Stephenson (speaking as a private citizen)
A Different Perspective on Local Housing
As you begin to develop your Strategic Plan for the coming Fiscal Year, I ask you to consider a more proactive approach to city government’s involvement in developing a housing strategy that will curb our population decline and keep our town economically viable.

This is a financial issue - as the population decreases, the per capita cost of running the city increases and the economic opportunities diminished. According to US Census data, St Helena lost 394 residents between 2010 and 2020 and another 153 people between 2020 and 2023. That’s about 238 households or an average of 18 households per year.

I am not asking you to form a standing Housing Committee, but I do request that a strategy be considered that lays out the City’s plan to do more than “encourage” housing. For instance, what if the City would set a goal such as this:

To strengthen our economic and social environment, the City of St Helena will increase our full-time resident population of individuals and families who work locally by 20% in the next 10 years. [Numbers are for example only.] To reach such a goal, two questions would be pertinent:
• What size, type and variety of rental and for-sale housing units are needed to accommodate this goal?
• How can the City work with, and provide incentives for this type of residential development?
It has been said that we cannot address housing until we solve budget, water, infrastructure and fires issues. Instead of viewing housing as an unsurmountable challenge, what if our city viewed it as an economic tool? What if it was considered as an integral component of all our other goals?
These are the City’s stated Strategic Goals:
• Financial Sustainability
• Infrastructure and Environment
• Quality of Life
• Water Security
• Community Engagement and Education
• Organizational Effectiveness & Service
Agenda Item #6.1.

2 A quantitative housing goal could be incorporated into the Work Plans of each of these areas without requiring substantial staff time or consultants. For instance, when the City is considering adding more Short-Term Rental permits to increase TOT revenue – how does that affect the goal of incremental housing units for working residents? What are the economic trade-offs for this strategy?
Or, as you consider the use of surplus land, as you negotiate development agreements or create a Park and Rec Master Plan, or make plans to recruit and retain city staff, what role can local workforce housing play in these strategies?
It’s Time
In the 16 years since a group of residents started campaigning for a proactive city housing strategy, St Helena has had at least eight City Managers, four different Mayors and nine City Council elections. The Housing Element has been updated twice. The City has formed standing committees for Parks and Recreation and Active Transportation and has created several ad hoc committees to address finance, water, fire and other concerns. The City has also conducted numerous community surveys in which, not surprisingly, housing affordability was always one of the top concerns.

I ask that this newly seated Council and the City Staff consider how expanding housing for people making $50k to $150k annually could be a positive influence on our business sustainability, on our water rates, on our traffic congestion, on our ability to run the city in an efficient manner. Surely curtailing a further drop in our population should be a significant goal in increasing our town’s economic vitality, and housing will play a major role in stabilizing our community.

One last thought. I applaud your stated goal of deep diving into the City finances to become more efficient. But I urge you not to place our very real housing challenge on the back burner yet again as you do this.

It is time to bring housing into the financial discussions.

Thank you for your consideration.

Mary Stephenson
2683 Chablis Court
St Helena, Ca 94574
707 849 2583
[email protected]
Agenda Item #6.1.

Agenda Item #6.1.

Agenda Item #6.1.

St. Helena Grapevine
Data Insights of St. Helena’s
Public Service Request and
Management System
City Council Meeting
February 11, 2025
Agenda Item #7.1.

St. Helena Grapevine Overview
Purpose: A dedicated platform for reporting non-emergency city issues, designed to catalog and address necessary repairs, hazards, and other public concerns efficiently.

Vis ion: To create a responsive and citizen-centric city environment.

Mis s ion: To address and resolve city complaints efficiently, fostering trust and satisfaction among residents.

Agenda Item #7.1.

Grapevine Data Overview
187
65 62
44 39
39 26
26 26
23 22
20 19
17 17
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Water Quality
Facility Maintenance Issue
Water - Foul Odor/Taste
Pothole
Other Public Works Request
Street or Traffic Sign Issue
Building Maintenance Request
Leaf Blower Complaint
Trees
Street Light Issue
Sidewalk Damage or Issue
Junk, Trash, Debris or Illegal Dumping
Water Leak
Drainage or Flooding Issue
Park Maintenance Concern
Number of Requests
Request Categories
Top 15 Categories Per Number of Requests
Total Number
of Requests
Reported
(12 Months)
772
Total Number
of Closed/
Completed
Requests
729
Agenda Item #7.1.

Monthly Comparison of Requests:

Insights from November 2023 to October 2024
Monthly Comparison of Requests:

January 1 to December 31, 2024
82 49
46 38 40
67 111
77 120
76 44 46
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Number of Requests
Month
Agenda Item #7.1.

Top Request Categories Snapshot
62% 17%
11%
10%
Water Quality
Facility Maintenance Issue
Pothole
Street Or Traffic Sign Issue
Agenda Item #7.1.

Regular Request vs Water Requests
518 (67%)
254 (33%)
Regular Requests
Water Requests
Agenda Item #7.1.

Water Quality Requests vs Water Taste/Odor Requests
187 (74%)
62 (24%)
5 (2%)
Water Quality
Water Taste/Odor
Water Meter
Agenda Item #7.1.

How to Report
Agenda Item #7.1.

Agenda Item #7.1.

Thank You, Community!
• We appreciate your engagement with Grapevine.
• Your feedback helps us improve our community and
services.
• Together, we can make our city a better place for
everyone!
Agenda Item #7.1.

City of St. Helena Planning Commission
City Council Yearly Report
2024 Accomplishments and Permit Report
Community Development Department February 11, 2025 Agenda Item #8.1.

Key 2024 Planning Commission
Accomplishments
Housing Element
recertification
Housing Element
required zoning
map amendments
adoption
February 11 City Council Meeting
Annual Governance
Training completed
Agenda Item #8.1.

Agenda Item #8.1.

84 Planning Applications Submitted in 2024
Agenda Item #8.1.

Thank You
Agenda Item #8.1.

Agenda Report to the City Council
Agenda Section: CONSENT ITEMS
Department: Public Works
DATE: February 11, 2025
FROM: Lesley Milton, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: Authorization for 1) Emergency Generator Rental Services from C&D Power for the Wastewater Treatment Plant MBR
Facility for an additional $87,2834 for a Not-to-Exceed cost of $238,520 and 2) A Budget increase in the amount of
$37,284 utilizing Fund 571 Wastewater Operations fund
balance.

RECOMMENDED
ACTION:

Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

On July 23, 2024 the Council authorized expenditures for a not to exceed amount of $150,000 for rental of the
generator.

STATEMENT OF THE
PURPOSE:

Authorize additional funds for rental of a temporary
emergency generator at the Wastewater Treatment Plant.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: Generator rental costs are $21,184 per month. Total fiscal impact for additional 3 months of generator rental
expenditures is $79,349 plus a 10% contingency for
service and maintenance for a total cost of $87,284. This expenditure will transfer $50,000 from unspent accounts in the 571 Wastewater Operating Budget, with the remaining $37,284 covered by the Wastewater Enterprise Fund
balance.

BACKGROUND:

The City Council authorized Capital Improvement Project S-52 upgrading the wastewater treatment plant to a Membrane Bioreactor Facility which requires a higher quantity of energy to operate.

On July 25, 2023, the City Council approved the Emergency Back-Up Power Project.

The order was placed for the generator in August 2023, however the generator had a 12- to 18-month lead time and has not yet been received. To ensure continuity of essential services during a disaster without interruption, staff has been renting a generator. The FY 24 and FY 25 budget included funds for rental of an emergency generator at the Wastewater Treatment Plant through July of 2024.

On July 23, 2024 the City Council approved additional funding due to the delay of the generator arrival to December 2024 and the start of commissioning of the new Agenda Item #10.1.

Wastewater Treatment Facility which required a larger generator. Monthly rental costs of the larger 1,000KW generator is $21,578 per month including taxes and fees.

DISCUSSION:

Procurement delays have again revised delivery with a new installation date of March 2025. Therefore, additional funds are needed for rental service. This piece of equipment is required as part of the commissioning and operations of the new MBR facility.

Staff is requesting authorization to transfer $50,000 from unspent accounts in the 571 Wastewater Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25 and asks that the remaining $37,284 be covered by Wastewater Enterprise Fund balance 571, to include the cost of generator rentals and routine maintenance through March 2025 for a total additional cost of $87,284 which includes a 10% contingency.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This is not a project that requires review under CEQA.

GOAL:

Goal 3: Pursue Water Security & Sustainable Management of Water Resources Goal 8: Implement Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) Projects Miscellaneous/Other DOCUMENTS ATTACHMENTS:
20240326 Generator Rental Resolution (1)
Agenda Item #10.1.

CITY OF ST. HELENA
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST.

HELENA AUTHORIZING AUTHORIZATION FOR 1)

EMERGENCY GENERATOR RENTAL SERVICES FROM C&D

POWER FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT MBR
FACILITY FOR AN ADDITIONAL $87,283.90 NOT-TO-EXCEED
COST OF $238,519.90 AND 2) A BUDGET INCREASE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $37,283.90 UTILIZING FUND 571 WASTEWATER
OPERATIONS FUND BALANCE.

RECITALS
A. WHEREAS, On July 25, 2023, the City Council approved the Emergency Back-Up Power Project which included the purchase of a permanent generator for the Wastewater Treatment Plant; and
B. WHEREAS, The order was placed for the generators in August of 2023, however due to procurement issues, the generators have not yet been received; and
C. WHEREAS, to ensure continuity of essential services during a disaster without interruption, a rental generator is required.

D. WHEREAS, due to the delay of the generator arrival and the delay of the MBR Treatment Facility commissioning, additional funds are needed to for rental services for continuity of operations; and
E. WHEREAS, The monthly cost to rent a generator for the WTP is $21,184 per month and staff had retained the services through the appropriate procurement process.

RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of St. Helena resolves as follows:

1. Approval Rental Agreement with CD Power for emergency generator rental services for a not-to-exceed cost of $238,519

2. Funding is provided as follows:

Funding Details Fund GL Account Amount
Budget Increase using
Fund Balance
Wastewater
Operations Fund 571-50-29-21-45 $37,284
Agenda Item #10.1.

Approved at a Regular Meeting of the St. Helena City Council on February 11, 2025, by the following vote:

Mayor Dohring: ______
Vice Mayor Deasy: ______
Council Member Barak: ______
Council Member Spadarotto: ______
Council Member Summers: ______
APPROVED: ATTEST:
______________________ ________________________
Paul Jamison Dohring, Mayor City Clerk
Budget Transfer From Wastewater
Operations Fund 571-50-29-21-25 ($40,000)
Budget Transfer From Wastewater
Operations Fund 571-50-29-23-12 ($10,000)
Budget Transfer To Wastewater
Operations Fund 571-50-29-21-45 $50,000
Total $87,284
Agenda Item #10.1.

Agenda Report to the City Council
Agenda Section: CONSENT ITEMS
Department: Planning
DATE: February 11, 2025
FROM: Maya DeRosa, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consideration and adoption of a Resolution authorizing 1) Amendment #1 to St. Helena Contract FY2025-017 with
M-Group to obtain planning expertise and consulting for an additional $50,000 for a total contract amount not to
exceed $75,000; and 2) A budget increase in the amount
of $5,000 using General Fund Reserves.

RECOMMENDED
ACTION:

Staff recommends Council adopt the attached resolution.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
PURPOSE:

To continue to provide planning support services to the City primarily for development projects and entitlement applications with a developer funded deposit account.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: The financial impact to the General Fund is $5,000. The additional authorization of $50,000 is being requested for a total contract not-to-exceed $75,000,. However $45,000 is anticipated to reimbursed through developer deposit
accounts. Therefore, the only additional funding required from the General Fund is the remaining $5,000 related to ministerial SB 330 affordable housing project noted below to complete that project through to building permit
submittal. This will require a budget increase to GL
Account 101-45-00-21-45 using General Fund Reserves.

BACKGROUND:

On September 30, 2024, the City entered into a PSA with M-Group for $25,000 to provide professional services in connection with on call planning consulting services.

Since the time of authorization of that PSA, M-Group has assisted with four planning applications as well as provided a part time Associate Planner to support the daily operations of the Planning Division due to the vacant Senior Planner position. The PSA amount has now been reached however there still remains additional work to be done with the current submittals that will extend into 2025 which is the basis for this PSA amendment.

DISCUSSION:

Agenda Item #10.2.

M-Group consultants are currently assisting the City of St. Helena with processing of two SB 330 applications for multi-family housing projects as well as other applications including Design Review and a pending application for a CUP amendment and zoning ordinance amendment. With the exception of an infill rental affordable housing SB 330 submittal which requires no discretionary approvals, all of the projects that M-Group is assisting with are more complex and require a more involved entitlement process and have or will have a reimbursement agreements in place with the developer prior to any invoices are paid which will help offset direct costs for staff time. The City intends to continue to use M-Group to maintain continuity in staffing the projects currently under review and also because their staff have expertise in processing SB 330 applications in other jurisdictions.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Not a CEQA project
GOAL:

Goal 7: Enhance Organizational Effectiveness
DOCUMENTS ATTACHMENTS:

Executed STH Contract FY2025-017
STH Contract FY2025-17 M Group with Exhibit A
Attachment 1 Resolution m Group PSA amendment _1
Agenda Item #10.2.

i- _ .
.
- ~- war: ~
a?t?'?g 1* .
- g; _"--'-'-""~$~**.~-r~+='~:~¢$'§-'+
'-.'-".§"F'-
' --'I-.'_'=':-'::- ' '
' ' T.--- LI_-|-l1r.: _ _._
a- Ifl' __I_I:II
.I.J.-..-
- . - I.|
{Eli-Ii"?
:I-I-Il-Iul-I—
.-.
' ..
n.-
STHcontmot FTZU’lG
‘ 0"]

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on September 30, 2024 by and between the City of St. Helena, located in the County of Napa, State of California (City), and MGroup(Consultant).

RECITALS:

A. City desires to employ Consultant to furnish professional services in connection with the project described as on call planning consulting services.

B. Consultant has represented that Consultant has the necessary expertise, experience, and quali?cations to perform the required duties.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual premises, covenants, and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as follows:

SECTION 1 - BASIC SERVICES
Consultant agrees to perform the services set forth in Exhibit A, “Scope of Services” and made part of this Agreement.

SECTION 2 — ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement that are in addition to or outside of those set forth in this Agreement or Exhibit A, “Scope of Services” (the “Services”), unless such additional Services and compensationare authorized in advance and in writing by the City Council or City Manager of the City.

SECTION 3 — TIME FOR COMPLETION
The time for completion of Services shall be as identi?ed in Exhibit A, “Scope of Services”. The parties expressly agree that time is of the essence in the performance of this SECTION 4
— COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT A. Subject to any limitationsset forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay consultant the amount speci?ed in Exhibit A, “Compensation” attached hereto and made a part hereof. Total compensationshall not exceed $25,000 unless additional compensation is approved in accordance with Section 2. B. Consultant shall furnish to City an original invoice for all work performed and expenses incurred during the preceding month. The invoice shall detail charges by the following categories if applicable: labor (by sub-category), travel, materials, equipment, supplies, subconsultant contracts, and miscellaneous expenses. Each original invoice furnished shall include the expenses incurred during the preceding month, the cumulative Agreement amount, and the Page 1 of 13 [M-Group 9-30-2024 ] Agenda Item #10.2.

amount remaining on the Agreement. City shall independentlyreview each invoice submitted to determine whether the work performed and expenses incurred are in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. If no charges or expenses are disputed,the invoice shall be approved, and City will use its best efforts to cause Consultant to be paid within 30 days of receipt of invoice.

If the City disputes any charges or expenses, the City will return the original invoice to Consultant for correction and resubmission. If the City reasonably determines, in its sole judgment, that the invoiced charges and expenses exceed the value of the Services performed to date and that it is probable that the Agreement will not be completed satisfactorily within the contract price, City may retain all or a portion of the invoiced charges and expenses. Within thirty (30) days of satisfactory completion of the project, City shall pay the retained amount, if any, to Consultant.

C. Payment to the Consultant for work performed pursuant to this Agreement shall not be deemed to waive any defects in work performed by Consultant.

SECTION 5 — STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE
A. Consultant represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities necessary to properly perform the Services required under this Agreement in a thorough, competent and professional manner. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of its ability, experience and talent, perform all Services described herein. In meeting its obligations under this Agreement, Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons in the same or similar geographical area engaged in providing Services similar to those required of Consultant under this Agreement.

B. In order to induce City to enter into this Agreement, Consultant represents that it is duly organized, existing and in good standing under applicable state law; Consultant is licensed to perform all aspects of the Services; Consultant will employ only persons and Subconsultantswith all required licenses and certifications;that Consultant is duly qualified to conduct business in the State; that Consultant has duly authorized the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the Services to be performed herein; and that the Agreement does not violate or create a default under any instrument,agreement, order or decree binding on Consultant.

SECTION 6 — INSPECTION AND FINAL ACCEPTANCE
either during performance or when completed. City shall reject or ?nally accept Consultant’s work within sixty (60) days after submitted to City, unless the parties mutually agree to extend such deadline. City shall reject work by a timely written explanation,otherwise Consultant’s work shall be deemed to have been accepted. City’s acceptance shall be conclusive as to such work except with respect to latent defects and fraud. Acceptance of any of Consultant’s work by City shall not constitute a waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement including, but not limited to, the sections pertaining to indemnification and insurance.

S
E
C
TI
O
N
—7INSURANC REQUIRED
E
Pag
e
of 13
[M-Group] Agenda Item #10.2.

_ u
l n.-
I
I l
-I"'"
—_I-L
._ , 7‘ 'L-i-III-l'?I
r . -..:-—
" it.

I 1I .
=--
A -...
_I a: _
1—:-l-—-—I-—,-ul—i-I‘!;I gilIF-rq—F-u-I_L7
u
I u -- - -_— u . _ £137”. u . -. -
'
_
_ ?ll—w -_'.-I- 1," . - :l
— —I m .
’
J.
_ . _. _I_ .
'E‘Dé';-i1—!l-'I " 3-! _r
‘ .
.-_-j-r
1 .
:$ _
I? _
- a -
7%". Wm? --- - I'd-3'- - PEI.

IIj-F'tig..—-r-g. Inn-{- a-I' .HI-- =..-:-I..
‘lfLr-Id'F‘rt-_ [Fl-nu-rr .IS'W-Ig.
'“IFW . _- - . — I:
'r-j‘ ”Jung-1'.
._r_,“1-1:!"
'i
_ < I|- - -.. -' - -II- .E
7 {'7 #?h§::? war-“q- ""
_
..—I"-_—- IIL‘II'I‘-I'r.""'
51- A -'- —.--|.r-s-Iu-.ir|-I--'91- 'd‘lh mini—1&-
'
-— mI-I _ dig-HIE yT-E-r1:17::7»?
-—I-'..l":1f'§:IPtr" "L-‘? IT;--I1-II;‘I IT:- :E’H'LH
_-I.n.'I|—I-r—' “TI-lira»!-
-r
I-l W
r—---- —..——‘A.I-:.— _ I"- '-
' - _, _--:I;l."'J'I::E-'
‘
' nl.
'—I'1
I *‘I I‘ll-
- _
_.I
- I I I. :
i' .I-
.
-. i
'I
Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claimsfor injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunderby the Consultant,its agents, representatives, or employees, as indicated:

A. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

1. Insurance Services Of?ce Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001).

2. Insurance Services Of?ce form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto).

3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance.

B. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:

1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage including operations, products and completed operations, as applicable.If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

3. Employer’s Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.

C. Professional Liability Insurance. When Consultant under this Agreement is duly licensed under California Business and Professions Code as an architect, landscape architect, environmental engineer or other professional engineer, or land surveyor (“design professional”), Consultant shall maintain at least $2,000,000 of professional liability insurance. When Consultant is not a design professional, Consultant shall maintain at least $1,000,000 of professional liability insurance combined single limit for each occurrence, insuring against professional errors and omissions in the Services performed by Consultant under this Agreement, including, without limitation,claims for negligence, misrepresentation,violation of good faith and fair dealing, and inaccurate advise arising out of, resulting from, or in connection with Services performed by Consultant under this Agreement.

If than the minimumsshown above, City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the speci?ed minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City. E. Primag Coverage. For any claims related to this contract the Consultants insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects to City, its of?cers, of?cials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its of?cers, of?cials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of Consultants insuranceand shall not contribute with it. F. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions of $25,000 or greater must be declared to and approved by the City. Page 3 of 13 [M-Group 9-30—2024] Agenda Item #10.2.

I
.
.
.
-
l .
.
-.

II
' .
"'1.

Iii-7 Is—EI Fif- m:—_- h;-
I
I
-
I-IJ—I. Lyi-lall?ai—al
'-
f
' [1'57“ '3 wig-d:
a”. . _. _ . , ,_ . .
_
I 5-1;,“ LEI
q_— 1+ ___-Ef|
him]; dial III- :'
-
h' .JJ'I . _ _
'I-i-
'
- Er.
_ 1| .
:1- .
--"J|’
l
.
ad...—
._.
'-. "--.
.J _' -.
.
.'.-._.-
.

L-u
d—Iir'
._-!+
-'
G. Other Insurance Provisions. The commercial general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

1. The City, its agent, of?cers, of?cials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insured as respects: liability arising out of work or operations performed by the Consultant or Consultant’s subconsultants,or automobile owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant.

2. For any claims related to Consultant’s conduct while performing the work of this project, the Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its agents, of?cers, of?cials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its agents, of?cers, of?cials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.

3. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certi?ed mail, return receiptrequested, has been given to the City.

4. Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of the additional insured in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional insured would be invalid under Subsection (b) of Section 2782 ofthe Civil Code.

H. Waiver of Subrogation. Consultant’s commercial general liability, automobile liability, workers’ compensation, and employer’s liability policies shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation. The insurance company, in its endorsement, agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its agents, of?cers, of?cials, employees and volunteers for losses paid under the terms of this policy which arises from the work performed by the named insured for the City.

I. The Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance isto be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A: VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.

J. Veri?cation of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original certi?cates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements should be on forms provided by the City or on forms that conform to City requirements. All certi?cates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.

The City reserves the right to require complete, certi?ed copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these speci?cations at any time. — A. To the fullest extent allowed by law (including without limitation California Civil Code Sections 2782 and 2782.8), as may be applicable, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City, its agents, of?cers, of?cials, employees, representatives, and volunteers from any and all claims, demands, suits, loss, damages, injury, and/or liability (including any and all costs and expenses in connection therewith, including legal fees and expert witness costs) (collectively, “Liabilities”), incurred by reason of any negligent or otherwise wrongful act or omission of Consultant, its of?cers, agents, employees, subconsultants, and subcontractors,or any of them, under or in connection with this Agreement; and Consultant agrees at its own cost, expense and risk to defend any and all claims, actions, suits, or other legal proceedings brought or instituted against City, its agents, of?cers, of?cials, employees and volunteers, or any of them, arising out Page 4 of 13 [M-Group 9-30-2024 ] Agenda Item #10.2.

.11.
'-"-
_'-'-'-"=.I_-'r'1'I"-.-4.'-'
-'=._--
1431‘ _._..-_ -
-
' " "1.4...—
? ..-'I_I'
I-I- 'l-ln'. r191w13:“
~ “in
II _- I_.'_.,- I'HL- "" 1'
II
I'l'l, ll-L'I-I-‘ru'l?'
-
-.
""1". 1—" J'l'I—F'Ji-T-s Ind-r
- 7. '5 . "3'
1 ‘
. ’ |FlllltlllL-'|-*.'I'1|FII-—
-I. rI_
' *?i?r?-?
*l
.
'T'II-I
of, pertaining to, or relating to such negligent or otherwise wrongful act or omission, and to pay and satisfy any resultingjudgments.

B. When Consultant under this Agreement is duly licensed under California Business and Professions Code as an architect, landscape architect, professional engineer, or land surveyor (Le, a “design professional,” pursuant to Civil Code § 2782.8(c)), the provisions of this section regarding Consultant’s duty to defend and indemnify apply only to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant.

C. If any action or proceeding is brought against lndemnitees by reason of any of the matters against which Consultant has agreed to indemnify lndemnitees as provided above, Consultant, upon notice from City, shall defend lndemnitees at Consultant’s expense by counsel acceptable to City, such acceptance not to be unreasonably withheld. lndemnitees need not have ?rst paid for any of the matters to which lndemnitees are entitled to Indemni?cation in order to be so indemni?ed. The insurance required to be maintained by Consultant shall ensure Consultant’s obligations under this section, but the limits of such insurance shall not limit the liability of Consultant hereunder. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.

D. The provisions of this section do not apply to claimsto the extent occurring as a result of the City’s sole negligence, active negligence, or willful acts or misconduct.

E. Duty to Cooperate. Each party shall notify the other party immediatelyin writing of any claim or damage related to activities or Services performed under this Agreement. The parties shall cooperate with each other in the investigation and disposition of all Liabilities arising out of the activities or Services under this Agreement.

F. In the event that Consultant executes any subconsultingagreements in connection with the Services performed under this Agreement, Consultant shall place in all such subconsulting agreements, and cause its subconsultantsto agree to, the indemnity and insurance obligations in favor of City and other lndemnitees, as provided herein, in the exact form and substance of those contained in this Agreement.

SECTION 9 — INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
A. Consultant is and shall at all times remain a wholly independentcontractor and not an of?cer, employee or agent of City. Consultant shall have no authority to bind City in any manner or to incur an obligation, debt or liability of any kind on behalf of or against City, whether by contract or otherwise, unless such authority is expressly conferred under this Agreement or is otherwise expressly conferred in writing by City. B. The personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant’s exclusive direction and control. Neither City, nor any elected or appointed boards, of?cers, of?cials, employees or agents of City, shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant’s of?cers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Consultant or any of Consultant’s of?cers, employees or agents are in any manner of?cials, of?cers, employees or agents of City. Page 5 of 13 [M-Group 9-30—2024] Agenda Item #10.2.

thras-
C. Neither Consultant, nor any of Consultant’s of?cers, employees or agents, shall obtain any rights to retirement, health care or any other bene?ts which may otherwise accrue to City’s employees. Consultant expressly waives any claim Consultant may have to any such rights.

SECTION 10 — CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND ANTI-FRAUD AND ANTICORRUPTION POLICIES A. Consultant covenants that neither it, nor any of?cer or principal of its ?rm, has or shall acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, which would con?ict in any manner with the interests of City or which would in any way hinder Consultant’s performance of Services under this Agreement. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it as an of?cer, employee, agent, or subcontractor without the express written consent of the City Manager. Consultant agrees to at all times avoid con?icts with the interests of City in the performance of this Agreement.

B. City understands and acknowledges that Consultant is, as of the date of execution of this Agreement, independently involved in the performance of non—relatedServices for other governmental agencies and private parties. Consultant is aware of any stated position of City relative to such projects. Any future position of City on such projects shall not be considered a con?ict of interest for purposes of this section.

C. Consultant understands and acknowledges City maintains an anti-fraud and anticorruption policy to protect the City, its operations, and its employees from and against ?nancial risks, operational breaches, and unethical, fraudulent and corrupt activities. Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant, itssubcontractor(s) / subconsultant(s) and their respective employees providing Services pursuant to the Agreement are (1) in good standing; (2) have not been previously investigated, convicted, or debarred for fraudulent or corrupt activities; (3) will not participate in fraudulent or corrupt activities, and (4) will take steps to ensure that its employees and subcontractor(s) / subconsultant(s) employees do not participate in any fraudulent or corrupt activities. Consultant acknowledges and agrees further that it has a duty to and will report to City any information or incident(s) about possible fraudulent or corrupt activities Consultant may discover, and will cooperate in any fraud or corruption investigation conducted, with respect to Consultant’s service provided pursuant to this Agreement. — A. All original maps, models, designs, drawings, photographs, studies, surveys, reports, data, notes, computer ?les, ?les and other documents prepared, developed or discovered by Consultant in the course of providing any Services pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by City without the permission of the Consultant. When requested by City, but no later than three years after project completion, Consultant shall deliver to City all such original maps, models, designs, drawings, photographs, studies, surveys, reports, data, notes, computer ?les, ?les and other documents. B. All copyrights, patents, trade secrets, or other intellectual property rights associated with any ideas, concepts, techniques, inventions, processes, improvements, developments, works of authorship, or other products developed or created by Consultant during the course of providing Services (collectively the “Work Product”) shall belong exclusively to City. The Work Product Page 6 of 13 [M-Group 9-30-2024 ] Agenda Item #10.2.

..1-';.,_
'rl‘.’
.

J”
_ I.
1 'I—
"?t“ 1.1.”;
Jun-E"
t;
"1
shall be considered a “work made for hire” within the meaning of Title 17 of the United States Code. Without reservation, limitation, or condition, Consultant hereby assigns, at the time of creation of the Work Products, without any requirement of further consideration,exclusively and perpetually, any and all right, title, and interest Consultant may have in the Work Product throughout the world, including without limitation any copyrights, patents, trade secrets, or other intellectual property rights, all rights of reproduction, all rights to create derivative works, and the right to secure registrations, renewals, reissues, and extensions thereof.

SECTION 12 — CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION' RELEASE OF -——_—___1—

INFORMATION
A. All information gained or work product produced by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered con?dential, unless such information is in the public domain or already known to Consultant. Consultant shall not release or disclose any such information or work product to persons or entities other than City without prior written authorization from the City Manager, except as may be required by law.

B. Consultant, its of?cers, employees, agents or subcontractors,shall not, without prior written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney of City, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement.

Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered “voluntary” provided consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena.

C. If Consultant, or any officer, employee, agent or subcontractorof Consultant, provides any information or work product in violation of this Agreement, then City shall have the right to reimbursement and indemnity from Consultant for any damages, costs and fees, including attorneys’ fees, caused by or incurred as a result of Consultant’s conduct.

D. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractorsbe served with any summons, complaint,subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant or be present at any deposition, However, this right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite such response.

SECTION 13 — SUS
PEN
SIO
N

OF WORK
City may, at any tim
e,
bten (10) written days notice suspend further performance by y Consultant. All suspensio
ns
shextend theime schdule for performance inamutually
al
l
satisfactory manner and C
o
n
s
ul
ta
nt
shall bepaid for Services performed and reimbursable
expenses incurred prior to t
h
e
sudate.
sp
enPage of 137
si
o
[M-Group 930—2024] n
Agenda Item #10.2.

ll
.
_ _HA_I-I]:_h3l‘_.=.:l1."_?lr
'- _ ?irt-Lin; 1 *—*h;.. I“. .II- . .- ... fl. : r L _ r h I -
I J.H;.~I;i—l-.‘I tqu-I'l'?r._prl?.

I
' u‘.iI-I.-_-'I-I__I_-.'I.I.|.I_u-I-_‘-.*I.! I..-I_'.'.._.-| '-
'du—u-n—I-Ii".‘u_'.__1."—'-l+.'ii-:IHA -'...I_.I.._l.'--.I_r .-?-'.-_'II.I1?-.-I' Igl‘hit'I?l-J-thlaJt—é-qu I _ _"li.'- _I-.v.-.-.-,-.-I, J n—ql'quq- m _-._;u ' —I-.-I--I_il-|Iq i—ht??qrh-I'J'Ii—ldldh'r?a
- Jun-mi "-1.I.'.I.—I
"2-ir
H “III-I
i
-
' r.._u|..:._-;-’. Elfli _'-%-.'rrf-';'_FE1'I.'H. .II-lI-r—l?h-I'I; .J-IEI'IJi|_
.
.‘1 -:.-.- 1-._
H-
- _
-' I :5|a.q.-:.._.u.
'
.

I.II..
. .
-‘ I I. a"
'
-
SECTION 14 — COMPLIANCE WITH LAW
Consultant shall keep itself informed of and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, statutes, codes, ordinances, regulations and rules in effect during the term of this Agreement. Consultant shall obtain any and all licenses, permits and authorizations necessary to perform the Services set forth in this Agreement. Neither City, nor any elected or appointed boards, of?cers, of?cials, employees or agents of City, shall be liable, at law or in equity, as a result of any failure of Consultant to comply with this section.

SECTION 15 — COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS
During the performance of this contract, Consultant agrees as follows:

A. Equal Employment Opportunity. In connection with the execution of this Agreement, Consultant shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, ancestry, age, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity and gender expression as protected categories speci?cally and expressively in that category, physical handicap,medical condition, marital status, sex, or national origin. Such actions shall include,but not be limited to, the following: employment, promotion, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rate of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training including apprenticeship.

B. Nondiscrimination Civil Rights Act of 1964. Consultant will comply with all federal regulations relative to nondiscriminationto federally-assisted programs.

C. Solicitations for Subcontractors including Procurement of Materials and Equipment.

In all solicitations, either by competitive bidding or negotiations, made by Consultant for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurement of materials or leasesof equipment, each potential subcontractor, supplier, or lessor shall be noti?ed by Consultant of Consultant’s obligations under this Agreement and the regulations relative to nondiscrimination.

SECTION 16 — COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE

RE UIREMENTS
requirementson certain “public works” and “maintenance” projects (“Prevailing Wage Laws”). If the services are being performed as part of an applicable “public works” or “maintenance” project, as de?ned by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Consultant agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its of?cials, of?cers, employees and agents free and harmlessfrom any claims, liabilities, costs, penalties or interest arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. It shall be mandatory upon the Consultant and all subconsultantsto comply with all California Labor Code provisions, which include but are not limited to prevailing wages (Labor Code Sections 1771, 1774 and 1775), employment of apprentices(Labor Code Section 1777.5), certi?ed payroll records (Labor Code Sections 1771.4 and 1776), hours of labor (Labor Code Sections 1813 and 1815) and debarment of contractors and subcontractors (Labor Code Section 1777.1). The requirement to submit certi?ed payroll records Page 8 of 13 [M-Group 9—30-2024] Agenda Item #10.2.

”‘1!- I1-x. law-:{?‘I—EI
-; 1rI-rj.lri
;_r _7 Hiya-LIL-
'l'— —I-I-'r' -- 'I‘I'J'I-‘l'h - 5- - - --h
--.r. -!&1h5=_'ih-1Fluv-.1
d?l-Li._'nfl- a“: II.
"—_=’:.-,_""“-!I-EI--'r.I-'II-_I--I.: ill--
'1'

5...: . p. - - .-
— - _ _ _.._ .__
T -- -
I k. Lina-u ”'7
_
' ="“""I.
' "‘"..'. lilli' ?. .

I LI
l—
I
- - l I l
n' I
'I'“l\.i1"'ir I 1 —I u I !
'.-Il'-I -. m: -.=.'.I-=-
'13 ’... . ' _- —' n- -'.
- -.-
‘.. ?gul;_-r1.:-rr':d.+h 1."‘.' :—
— *-
_;_
.!'.a - I 'Irl- hi4
M .- L-' T-".
-.'. .- .
i1“: ur'lu'illF-‘iflur-
-"!'.
-I 3“
J u
- -
.
-'.i .
r .I'
directly to the Labor Commissioner under Labor Code section 1771.4 shall not apply to work performed on a public works project that is exempt pursuant to the small project exemption speci?ed in Labor Code Section 1771.4.

B. If the services are being performed as part of an applicable “public works” or “maintenance” project, then pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, the Consultant and all subconsultants performing such services must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations. Consultant shall maintain registration for the duration of the Project and require the same of any subconsultants, as applicable. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the contractor registration requirements mandated by Labor Code Sections 1725.5 and 1771.] shall not apply to work performed on a public works project that is exempt pursuant to the small project exemption speci?ed in Labor Code Sections 1725.5 and 1771.].

C. This Agreement may also be subject to compliancemonitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations. It shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility to comply with all applicable registration and labor compliance requirements. Any stop orders issued by the Department of Industrial Relations against Consultant or any subcontractorthat affect Consultant’s performanceof services, including any delay, shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility. Any delay arising out of or resulting from such stop orders shall be considered Consultant caused delay and shall not be compensable by the City. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its of?cials, of?cers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of stop orders issued by the Department of Industrial Relations against Consultant or any subcontractor.

SECTION 17 — AUDIT AND INSPECTION OF RECORDS
A. Records of Consultant’s direct labor costs, payroll costs, and reimbursable expenses pertaining to this project covered by this Agreement will be kept on a generally recognized accounting basis and made available to City if and when requiredfor a period of up to 3 years from the date of Consultant’s ?nal invoice.

B. Consultant shall maintain all documents and records prepared by or furnished to Consultant during the course of performing the Services for at least three (3) years following completionof the Services. Such records include, but are not limited to, correspondence, internal data related to matters covered by this Agreement. C. Consultant shall permit City to audit, examine and make copies, excerpts and transcripts from such records, and the Consultant shall in no event dispose of, destroy, alter, or mutilate said books, records, accounts, and data in any matter whatsoever for three (3) years after City makes the ?nal or last payment or within three (3) years after any pending issues between City and Consultant with respect to this Agreement are closed, whichever is later. A. W Consultant agrees that any liability of City arising in connection with this Agreement shall be limited exclusively to the City-entity identi?ed as the “City” under this Contract. Under Page 9 of 13 [M-Group 9-30-2024 ] Agenda Item #10.2.

IMno circumstance shall any other City-entity be liable to Consultant whether theory, any in contract, tort, or otherwise, and Consultant waives unconditionally suc claims. Consultant h hereby waives and release other City-entites from any liability und er
thAgree
isment.

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreeme
nt,
shall inevent nobeCity
liable,regardless of whether any claim is based on contract or tort, f o
r
aspeci consequential
n,al,
y
indirect or incidental damages, including, but not limited to, lost p r
o
f
i
t
s
arising orut revenue,
of or in connection with this Agreement or the Services performed SECTION 19 — COOPERATION BY CITY
All public information, data, reports, records, and maps as exis andvailable to ting City as public records, and which are necessary for carrying out the outline the asinExhibit d A, “Scope of Services”, shall be furnished to Consultant in every toway facilitate, without undue delay, the work to be performed under this Agreeme nt.

SECTION 20 — NOTICES
All notices required or permitted to be given under this Agr eem
ent
shall beinwriting and
shall be personally delivered, or sent by facsimile or ?rst class mail ,
follows: as
To City: City Manager
1088 College Avenue
St. Helena, California 94574
To Consultant: M-Group c/o Olivia Ervin
51 East Campbell Ave
#1247
Campbell, CA 95009
Notice shall be deemed effective on the date personally del ive
red
transmitte or by
d facsimile, or, if mailed, three (3) days after deposit in the custody of the Post Service. al
SECTION 21 — TERMINATION
A. City may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, time giving byten an y (10) days written notice of termination to Consultant. If such notice gshall Consulta ivnt
e
n,
cease immediately all work in progress.

B. If either Consultant or City fail to perform any materi al
under obthis
lig
ati
on
Agreement, then, in addition to any other remedies, either Consultant, Cterminate this may it
y
Agreement immediately upon written notice.

C. Upon termination of this Agreement by either Consulta nt
City, all or poperty
belonging to City which is in Consultant’s possession shall be deliveredCit shall Consulta nt y. furnish to City a ?nal invoice for work performed and expenses incurre d
bCon prepared
ysulta
nt,
as set forth in this Agreement.
of 103Page
9-30-2024 Group ] Agenda Item #10.2.

._... +1.2“;
' .--.. --.. ~—
(@131?.I-Li-i-i-i I-r—a—IIP'“ .I.‘ 1—;
I
I
I—
-r - . .'—'
._
II-Il
: 'l'l ""' q".

I I'I'J I:I -- _-.I:- Hi.
- I."I.'."'
-..
-II
- -.
-
- nil-"3a“—
I.
'
'-
SECTION 22 — ATTORNEYS’ FEES
If litigation or other proceeding is required to enforce or interpret any provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation or other proceeding shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses, in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled. In addition, any legal fees, costs and expenses incurred to enforce the provisions of this Agreement shall be reimbursed to the prevailing party.

SECTION 23 — ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement, including the attached Exhibits, is the entire, complete, ?nal and exclusive expression of the parties with respect to the matters addressed therein and supersedes all other agreements or understandings, whether oral or written, or entered into between Consultant and City prior to the execution of this Agreement. No statements, representations or other agreements, whether oral or written, made by any party which are not embodied herein shall be valid and binding unless in writing duly executed by the parties or their authorized representatives.

SECTION 24 — SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
This Agreement shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties. However, this Agreement shall not be assigned by Consultant without written consent of the City.

SECTION 25 — CONTINUITY OF PERSONNEL
Consultant shall make every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of Consultant’s staff assigned to perform the Services required under this Agreement. Consultant shall notify City of any changes in Consultant’s staff assigned to perform the Services required under this Agreement, prior to any such performance.

SECTION 26 — DEFAULT
In the event that Consultant is in default under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall not have any obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after SECTION 27
— WAIVER Waiver by any party to this Agreement of any term, condition, or covenant of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant. Waiver by any party of any breach of the provisions of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision, or a waiver of any subsequentbreach or violation of any provision of this Agreement. Acceptance by City of any work or Services by Consultant shall not constitute a waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement. SECTION 28— LAW TO GOVERN; VENUE Page 11 of13 [M-Group 9-30-2024 ] Agenda Item #10.2.

f
This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed and governed according to the laws of the State of California. In the event of litigation between the parties, venue in state trial courts shall lie exclusively in the County of Napa. In the event of litigation in a US. District Court, venue shall lie exclusively in the Northern District of California in San Francisco.

SECTION 29 — SEVERABILITY
If any term, condition or covenant of this Agreement is declared or determined by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and the Agreement shall be read and construed without the invalid, void or unenforceable provision(s).

W
Consultant’s subconsultants shall agree to be bound to the terms of the Agreement to the extent of their scope of Services, including but not limited to, terms regarding indemnity and dispute resolution, and shall agree that City is deemed an express third party bene?ciary of their subconsultant agreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement, however, shall operate to confer such or similar rights or bene?ts on persons or entities not party to this Agreement.

SEQTION31 — STA!UTESOF LIMITATION
As between the partiesto this Agreement, any applicable statute of limitations for action arising out of, pertaining to, or relating to any act or failure to act in connection with this Agreement shall commence to run on the date of City’s issuance of the ?nal Certi?cate for Payment, or termination of this Agreement, whichever is earlier, except for latent defects and or de?ciencies, for which the applicable statute of limitation shall begin to run upon discovery of the defect and/or de?ciency and its cause.

SECTION 32 — SPECIAL PROVISIONS
This Agreement is subject to the following special provisions: none.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have accepted, made, and executed this Consultant: City: By: By: Name: Heather Hines Name: Anil Comelo Title: Principal Title: City Manager Approved as to Na By: : Ethan Walsh Title: City Attorney Page 12 of13 [M-Group 9-30-2024 ] /
/‘
/ Agenda Item #10.2.

September 25, 2024
Maya DeRosa, AlCP
Community Development Director
City of St. Helena
Subject: M-Group On-Call Planning Services Contract
Maya,
I am pleased to submit this letter proposal for M-Group to provide on-call planning services for the City of St. Helena. M-Group willprovide on—callprofessional planning services for projects assigned by the City and agreed to by M-Group, with the understanding that a majority of the wok will occur remotely with occasional in person meetings for site visits, major milestone review meetings, and for public hearing(s). Based on our understanding ofthe City's current needs, Senior Planner MikeJanusek willbe available on a project-by-project basis to assist the Planning Division. Additionally,as requested by the City, other M-Group planners (Assistants, Associates, Seniors, and Principals) and Specialists (Environmental, Historic Preservation, and Public Art Specialists) can be available on an on-call basis.

Planning services to be provided by M-Group may include but are not limited to the following: . Process Development Review Applications . Prepare Staff Reports . Maintain Administrative Files 0 Assist with city led advanced planning and policy efforts . Manage/Assist with various Community Development Department priorities . Attend/present at Board, Committee, Commission, and Council Meetings remotely or in person, as requested . Other planning and environmental tasks requested by the City To accommodate the range of work listed above and to ensure flexibility based on specific city needs, M-Group willprovide on-call professional planning services for projects assigned bythe Cityand under the City's cost recovery agreement with developers. M-Group will bill on-call services on a time and materials basis consistent with M-Group’s 2024/2025 billing rates (attached), with a not to exceed budget of $25,000. On call services, under this contract will extend through June 30, 2025, with an option for time and budget extensions upon request.

Itrust that this proposal to provide on-call planning services meets the City of St. Helena's immediate needs. Please do not hesitate to contact me to discuss any revisions or refinements. Thank you, livia Ervin, rincipal-ln-Charge 707.540.0723 X 202 policy planni
ng
design urba environmental revuew historic preservation community staf?ng engagement solutions n

EXHIBIT A
o
ervi n
a new
onurban nplaning
u
cam
pb
ell
santa rosa hayward
YO
U
Agenda Item #10.2.

HOURLYRATES
2024 2025
Admin Analyst 95 Planning Tech
$ $95
Assistant Planner
Assistant Urban Designer $115 $120
Social Media Coordinator
Associate Planner
Associate Urban Designer $145 $150
GIS Services
Environmental Planner
Historic Preservation Specialist $160 $165
Public Art Specialist
Senior Planner
Senior Urban Designer $175 $180
Senior Environmental Planner
Principal Planner
Principal Environmental Planner
195 200 Principal Policy Planner $ $
Director of Urban Design
* Hourly rates are subject to annual adjustment on January 1“. * M-Group willinvoice the client by billable hours per month or percentage of task completed. * M-Group adds a 10% administration fee to Subconsultant rates 2 0
2 4
-2
0 2
5 SHEET RAT
STAFF
Agenda Item #10.2.

First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement STH Contract: FY 2025-017 M-Group AMENDMENT #1
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH M-GROUP; STH CONTRACT NO:
2025-17 PERTAINING TO ON CALL PLANNING SERVICES TO CITY FOR AN ADDITIONAL $50,000 FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $75,000.

This First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with M-Group STH Contract: FY 2025- 017 dated September 30, 2024 ("Agreement") is made as of this ____ day of _______, 2025 by and between the City of St. Helena and M-Group, Inc.

RECITALS
A. On September 30, 2024, the city entered into an agreement with M-Group for planning related support services for a not to exceed cost of $25,000; and B. M-Group has provided planning support to the Community Development Department since September 2024 and the City desires to continue this support through 2025 with a number of entitlement applications under review; and
C. The City has expended the budget from the current PSA and in order to have M-Group continue to assist the City, a budget amendment is necessary; and D. The City of St. Helena and M-Group now desire to amend the Agreement for an additional $50,000 for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $75,000. .

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, for good and valuable consideration, the adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

1. Section 4.A. The total compensation that may be paid under the Agreement as set forth in Section 4.A is hereby amended to an amount that shall not exceed $75,000.

2. Scope of Services. The Scope of Services as set forth in the Agreement is hereby amended to include the additional scope of work attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A.

3. All other terms of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have accepted, made and executed this Agreement upon the terms, conditions, and provisions above stated, the day and year first above written.

Agenda Item #10.2.

First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement STH Contract: FY 2025-017 M-Group

M-GROUP
By: _____________________________

Print Name:_______________________
Title: ____________________________
CITY OF ST. HELENA
a Municipal Corporation
By:_________________________________
Print Name: Anil Comelo
Title: City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
Ethan Walsh, City Attorney, St. Helena
ATTEST:
____________________________
City of St. Helena City Clerk
Cindy Tzafopolous
Agenda Item #10.2.

First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement STH Contract: FY 2025-017 M-Group

EXHIBIT A
Agenda Item #10.2.

m-group a new design on urban planning
policy planning  urban design  environmental review  historic preservation  community engagement  staffing solutions m-group.us campbell  santa rosa  hayward
December 12, 2024
Maya DeRosa, AICP
Community Development Director
City of St. Helena
Subject: M-Group On-Call Planning Services Contract (Augment #1) Maya,
As requested, M-Group is submitting this Augment #1 to our On-Call Planning Services Contract to increase the not to exceed budget from $25,000 to $75,000. Under Augment #1, M-Group will continue to provide on-call professional planning services for projects assigned by the City and agreed to by MGroup, in accordance with our Planning Services Contract.

M-Group will bill on-call services on a time and materials basis consistent with M-Group’s 2024/2025 billing rates, with a not to exceed budget of $75,000. On call services, under this Augment #1 to the Planning Services contract will extend through June 30, 2025, with an option for time and budget extensions upon request.

I trust that this proposes Augment #1 meets the City of St. Helena’s needs. Please do not hesitate to contact me to discuss any revisions or refinements.

Thank you,
Olivia Ervin, Principal-In-Charge
[email protected]
707.540.0723 x 202
Agenda Item #10.2.

M-GROUP STAFF

HOURLY RATES
2024 2025
Admin Analyst
Planning Tech $95 $95
Assistant Planner
Assistant Urban Designer
Social Media Coordinator
$115 $120
Associate Planner
Associate Urban Designer
GIS Services
$145 $150
Environmental Planner
Historic Preservation Specialist
Public Art Specialist
$160 $165
Senior Planner
Senior Urban Designer
Senior Environmental Planner
$175 $180
Principal Planner
Principal Environmental Planner
Principal Policy Planner
Director of Urban Design
$195 $200
Principal
Interim CDD $280-$300 $230-$350
* M-Group will invoice the client by billable hours per month or percentage of task completed. * Hourly rates are subject to annual adjustment on January 1st. * M-Group adds a 10% administration fee to Subconsultant rates.

Agenda Item #10.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA
RESOLUTION NO 2025-
AUTHORIZING 1) AMENDMENT #1 FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MGROUP CONSULTANTS FOR CONTINUED PLANNING ENTITLEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES FOR AN ADDITIONAL $50,000 FOR A TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $75,000; AND 2) A BUDGET INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,000 USING GENERAL FUND RESERVES.

RECITALS
A. On September 30, 2024, the city entered into an agreement with M-Group for planning related support services for a not to exceed cost of $25,000; and B. M-Group has provided planning support to the Community Development Department since September 2024 and the City desires to continue this support through 2025 with a number of entitlement applications under review; and
C. The City has expended the budget from the current PSA and in order to have M-Group continue to assist the City, a budget amendment is necessary; and D. The City of St. Helena and M-Group now desire to amend the Agreement for an additional $50,000 for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $75,000.

RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of St. Helena resolves as follows:

1. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to STH Contract FY2025-017 with M-Group in the amount of $50,000 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $75,000.

2. Funding is as follows:

Funding Details Fund GL Account Amount
Reimbursed through
Developer Accounts General Fund 101-23-55-00-00 $45,000 Budget Increase
Using Fund Balance General Fund 101-45-00-21-45 $5,000
TOTAL $50,000
Approved at a Regular Meeting of the St. Helena City Council on February 11, 2025, by the following vote:

Mayor Dohring: __________
Vice Mayor Deasy: __________
Agenda Item #10.2.

Council Member Barak: __________
Council Member Spadarotto: __________
Council Member Summers: __________
APPROVED: ATTEST:
__________________________ __________________________
Paul Jamison Dohring, Mayor Cindy Tzafopoulos, City Clerk Agenda Item #10.2.

Agenda Report to the City Council
Agenda Section: OLD BUSINESS
Department: Public Works
DATE: February 11, 2025
FROM: Lesley Milton, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration and adoption of a Resolution (follows previous Council actions on water meter replacement
program) to (1) Award the CIP Project W24-04 SMART
Meter Deployment to Professional Meters, Inc. in the
amount of $565,063; (2) Authorize the City Manager to
execute the Construction Contract with Professional
Meters, Inc.;(3) Authorize the Director of Public Works to approve Change Orders not to exceed 15% of the contract amount; and (4) Authorizing a project budget amendment
of $333,105.

RECOMMENDED
ACTION:

Approve the attached Resolution.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

City Council previously approved the following actions
related to project W24-04:

1. Resolution 2023-067 on June 13, 2023, Adopting
the Five-Year CIP Program for Fiscal Years 2023-
24 to 2027-28 including Project W24-04

2. Resolution 2023-81 on June 27, 2023, Approving
revised water rate schedules, of which this project
was included.

3. Resolution 2024-056 on May 14, 2024, Approving
Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Haley
and Aldrich for engineering and construction
management services for this project.

4. Resolution 2024-067 and 2024-068 on May 28,
2024, Approving installment sale of bonds, of which
this project was included.

5. Resolution 2024-101 on June 25, 2024, Authorizing
bid advertisement for Project W24-04.

6. Resolution 2024-100 on June 25, 2024, Authorizing
the purchase of water meters from Badger Meter.

7. Resolution 2024-145 on October 22, 2024,
Authorizing the purchase of meter box lids from
PACE Supply.

8. Resolution 2024-146 on October 22, 2024,
Approving and authorizing contractor prequalification of bidders for this Project.

STATEMENT OF THE Award a contract to Professional Meters, Inc. to perform Agenda Item #12.1.

PURPOSE: the water meter installation work for W24-04 SMART Meter Deployment Project.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: CIP Project W24-04 has been approved with a funding allocation of $1.97 million, secured through bond
proceeds. The construction contract awarded to
Professional Meters Inc. totals $491,359, with an
additional 15% contingency of $73,704, resulting in a total construction contract authorization of $565,063. Resolution 2024-145 previously approved the initial purchase of water meter lids. To complete the procurement of the remaining meter box lids, an additional $132,600, along with a 15% contingency of $18,890, is required, bringing the total cost to $151,490. This action requires a project budget
amendment in the amount of $333,105 in Fund 763 to be
funded with Water Revenue Bonds.

BACKGROUND:

The City of St. Helena provides essential drinking water services to over 2,600 residents and businesses within its service area (i.e. within city limits and various locations outside city limits). Drinking water is sourced and treated by the City’s Water Treatment Division and distributed by the Water Distribution Division of the Public Works Department. These services are operated under the City's Water Enterprise Fund, a "business-like" fund that ensures water services are self-sustaining through user fees, separate from general government funds.

Enterprise funds operate like private sector businesses in that they must cover their costs through fees charged for services provided. For St. Helena’s water system, these fees are collected from water system customers. The City Council regulates and establishes the water rates, ensuring that the system is financially stable and able to meet operational and capital needs.

The City's water enterprise has recently faced challenges with revenue generation due to non-revenue water loss, where approximately 30% of water produced is unaccounted for. This loss is attributed to aging infrastructure, including outdated water meters that fail to accurately track water consumption. These meters, some of which are over 16 years old, lead to lost revenue, increased operational costs, and inefficiencies in water resource management.

Modernizing the water infrastructure, including upgrading or replacing outdated meters with SMART technology, is crucial for the long-term fiscal health of the Water Enterprise Fund. This modernization will reduce non-revenue water, improve accuracy in billing, and allow for better management of water resources, including real time customer monitoring of their consumption.

Agenda Item #12.1.

PROJECT NEED AND BENEFITS:

To address these issues, the City has included Project W24-04, the SMART Meter Deployment Project, in its current 5-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). This project involves replacing existing disc technology water meters with state-of-the-art ultrasonic meters that utilize Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). AMI technology captures data every 15 minutes, enabling real-time reporting through cellular communication. This system will provide more accurate data on water usage, improve billing accuracy, reduce operational costs, and minimize water loss from leaks or faulty meters.

Replacing and upgrading these meters will bring several benefits:
 EyeOnWater Web Portal: The EyeOnWater platform enables utility customers to proactively manage their water consumption through user-friendly graphs and customizable leak alerts, providing timely and clear insights into usage patterns.

Additional details about the platform can be found in Attachment D.  Accurate Billing: New meters will eliminate discrepancies caused by aging equipment and provide more reliable data for billing purposes.  Water Loss Reduction: The new system will help identify leaks and water losses for customers in real-time, reducing waste and ensuring that the city’s water resources are used efficiently.
 Operational Efficiency: Automated data reporting reduces the need for manual readings/re-readings and enhances staff efficiency, allowing resources to be directed to other important areas of water system maintenance.  Improved Water Quality Management: Over the past two years, the City has taken significant steps to address water discoloration issues by improving its water treatment processes, which are funded through the Water Enterprise Fund.

The SMART metering system will support continued improvements by offering better monitoring and management over water consumption patterns.

This SMART Meter Deployment Project is a critical step needed to implement a modern, efficient, and sustainable water management system. Once completed, the City will be poised to improve customer service, increase operational efficiency, and further protect its water resources for the future.

PREVIOUS STEPS TAKEN:

Several important steps have already been completed to prepare for the implementation of the SMART Meter Deployment Project:
 Bond Financing: On June 28, 2024, the City Council and the St. Helena Financing Authority approved the installment sale of bonds, with the first series allocated to funding the SMART Meter Deployment Project.  Professional Services Agreement: On May 14, 2024, the City Council authorized a professional services agreement with Haley & Aldrich, Inc., a consulting firm, to assist with project implementation.

Agenda Item #12.1.

 Meter Procurement: On June 25, 2024, the City Council approved the procurement of advanced SMART metering infrastructure from Badger Meter, Inc. In addition, water meter lids were purchased from Pace Supply Inc. to mitigate any potential delays due to shipping issues. The meters have already been received and are on site ready for deployment.
 Prequalification Process: In October 2024, a prequalification process was conducted to identify qualified contractors capable of delivering the project. Two firms, Concord Utility Services and Professional Meters Inc., were selected as eligible to bid.

DISCUSSION:

Concern has been raised regarding what would occur if a new ultrasonic water meter were to fail. Since the ultrasonic meter is designed with literally zero internal moving parts, if it were to completely fail, it would stop reading the volume of water passing through the meter body and the customer’s water consumption would not be accounted for until the meter was repaired. There was an assumption proposed that a failed ultrasonic meter would stop water flow to the customer. This is untrue. Water would remain flowing freely to the customer through a failed water meter.

To ensure that contractors bidding on the CIP W24-04 SMART Water Meter Deployment Project possessed the necessary qualifications and expertise to successfully execute all components of the project, the City implemented a comprehensive prequalification process. This initiative was designed to identify contractors with the skills, experience, and resources needed to meet the project's specific requirements, ensuring a high standard of execution and timely completion. The process was conducted in accordance with procedures formally adopted by the City Council on October 22, 2024.

H&A initiated the advertisement for the prequalification process on Monday, October 28.

This step was carried out as outlined in the Resolution Authorizing the Solicitation of Requests for Prequalification of Bidders for CIP Project W24-04 SMART Meter Deployment. Interested contractors were invited to submit detailed applications demonstrating their qualifications, capabilities, and relevant experience.

Following a thorough review and evaluation of the submitted applications, H&A determined that two firms, Concord Utility Services and Professional Meters Inc., met the established prequalification criteria. Both companies were deemed eligible to proceed to the bidding phase, having demonstrated the requisite technical expertise and operational capacity to successfully undertake the project.

Subsequently, formal bid invitations were issued to the prequalified contractors on November 25.

Agenda Item #12.1.

The bid results are as follows:

Company Base Bid
Concord Utility Services $894,210.00
Professional Meters Inc. $491,359.23
City staff, in collaboration with H&A, conducted a review of the submitted bids. After careful evaluation, Professional Meters Inc. was identified as the lowest responsive and responsible prequalified bidder. This determination was based on several factors, including Professional Meters Inc. valid Class A Contractor’s license (License No. 1019233), issued by the California Contractors State License Board and expiring on October 31st, 2026. Additionally, Professional Meters Inc. has successfully completed three or more comparable projects within the last five years, showcasing its ability to manage projects with similar scopes and complexities effectively.

Given Professional Meters Inc. demonstrated qualifications, relevant experience, and adherence to all bidding requirements, City staff have determined that Professional Meters Inc. is well-suited to undertake and complete the CIP W24-04 SMART Water Meter Deployment Project. Their expertise and proven track record provide confidence in their ability to deliver a high-quality outcome aligned with the City's expectations and objectives.

The SMART Meter Deployment Project is being funded through bond proceeds authorized by Resolution 2024-067 and 2024-068 on June 28, 2024. To complete the project, an amendment to the Council-approved budget will be necessary. The current budget, expenditures, and necessary budget amendment are outlined in the following tables.

Adopted Capital Improvement Project Budget Table
Expenditures Project Total
3110 – Design $150,000
3150 – Construction Management $150,000
3160 – Construction Contract $1,500,000
3170 – Contingency $170,000
Expenditures Totals $1,970,000
Funding Source: 763 – Water Revenue
Bonds $1,970,000
Funding Totals $1,970,000
Project Expenditure Table
Project Expenditure Total Cost Date Approved
Project Management
Professional Services $406,000 May 14, 2024
Agenda Item #12.1.

Project Expenditure Total Cost Date Approved
Badger Meter Purchase $1,056,966 July 15, 2024
Initial Pace Lid Purchase $123,586 October 22, 2024
Construction for Meter
Replacement Base Bid $491,359
Recommended Approval
on
February 11, 2025
15% Contruction
Contingency $73,704 -
Remain Lid Purchase $132,600 -
15% Materials
Contingency $18,890 -
Total Cost of Project $2,303,105
Funding approved in the
2025 Adopted Capital
Improvement Project
Budget:
$1,970,000
Project Shortfall: ($333,105.11)
There will be one additional Council action coming forward to complete the materials purchases for this project. In an effort to reduce contractor overhead and profit, while proactively managing material order lead times, City Council approved the direct purchase of the first tranche of 1,791 replacement meter lids by Resolution 2024-145.

The second tranche of meter lids still is required to be purchased and will be brought to Council for approval after the contractor has completed their initial priority to survey the outstanding meters, boxes, meter lids to determine the numbers and dimensions of the outstanding lids. Once the contractor survey has been completed, staff will return to Council seeking authorization to proceed with placing the order. An estimated cost of the additional meter lids is included in the proposed budget amendment.

The construction phase of the project is projected to take approximately six months, with full implementation slated to begin in Spring 2025. During this phase, meters across the city will be replaced and upgraded, paving the way for the new system to become fully operational.

With the budget amendment in place and the prequalification/contracting process complete, this project is now ready to move forward to the implementation phase. The construction phase will take less than six months, and upon completion, the City will have a modernized water metering system that will provide long-term benefits for both residents and the City’s water enterprise fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Class 1 Categorical Exemption per CEQA.

GOAL:

Agenda Item #12.1.

Goal 2: Improve Infrastructure & Further Environmental Sustainability Goal 3: Pursue Water Security & Sustainable Management of Water Resources Goal 7: Enhance Organizational Effectiveness
Goal 8: Implement Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) Projects Miscellaneous/Other DOCUMENTS ATTACHMENTS:
2025-01-23.Resolution_AwardContract_H_A
Attachment_D_EyeOnWater
Attachment_C_SpecificationSheets
Contract_ProMeters - PMI SIGNED 2025-01-29
Agenda Item #12.1.

CITY OF ST. HELENA
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION (1) AWARDING THE CIP PROJECT W24-04 SMART METER DEPLOYMENT TO PROFESSIONAL METERS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $565,063; (2) AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH PROFESSIONAL METERS, INC.;(3)

AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDERS NOT TO EXCEED 15% OF THE CONTRACT AMOUNT; AND (4) AUTHORIZING A PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $333,105.

RECITALS
A. On June 13, 2023, the City adopted the comprehensive Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which includes Project W24-04: SMART Meter Deployment (the “Project”). This initiative aims to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of the City’s water monitoring and billing systems through advanced metering technology; and
B. On June 27, 2023, the City Council approved updates to water base rates, water use rates, fire line rates, and the overall rate structure to align with system improvements; and
C. On May 28, 2024, the City Council approved installment sale financing to support water system enhancements. The initial bond series will fund $10.5 million in capital improvements, including the Bell Canyon Intake Tower Replacement, Kearney and Andrea Water Main Replacement, and the SMART Meter Deployment Project; and
D. To facilitate timely implementation of the Project, the City entered into a contract with the on-call engineering firm Haley and Aldrich on May 14, 2024, for engineering and construction management services related to Project W24-04; and
E. On June 25, 2024, the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the bid advertisement for CIP Project W24-04: SMART Meter Deployment; and F. At the same meeting on June 25, 2024, the City Council approved a sole-source purchase of SMART Advanced Meter Infrastructure from Badger Meter, Inc. for retrofitting or replacing existing utility meter infrastructure. This purchase was approved for a total cost not to exceed $1,056,966, as budgeted under CIP Project W24-04; and
G. On October 22, 2024, the City Council authorized the purchase of 1,791-meter box lids for the Project at a cost of $123,586; and
Agenda Item #12.1.

H. During the same meeting, the City Council approved a solicitation request to prequalify bidders for the Project to ensure qualified contractors were identified; and
I. The City issued a Request for Bids for the Project on December 23, 2024; and J. On January 17, 2025, two bids were received and evaluated by Haley and Aldrich and City Staff based on the criteria outlined in the bid documents, including cost, timeline, and prior experience; and
K. Following the evaluation process, Professional Meters Inc. was identified as the lowest responsive and responsible prequalified bidder for the Project, with a total bid amount of $491,359.

RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of St. Helena resolves as follows:

1. The CIP Project W24-04 SMART Meter Deployment is hereby awarded to Professional Meter Inc. in the amount of $565,063.

2. Professional Meter Inc. is authorized to proceed with the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in their proposal and the bid documents.

3. The City Manager of the City of St. Helena is hereby authorized to execute the Construction Contract with Professional Meters Inc.

4. The Director of Public Works is authorized to approve Change Orders not to exceed 15% of the Contract amount.

5. The Project budget is amended to include an additional $333,105, bringing the total project cost to $2,303,105.

6. A budget amendment of $333,105 to be added to the Water Capital Improvement Fund 261 and to project W24-04 as follows:

Funding Details Fund Project GL Account Amount
Water Revenue
Bonds
Water Capital
Improvement W24-04 763-50-30-31-60 $283,140
Water Revenue
Bonds
Water Capital
Improvement W24-04 763-50-30-31-70 $49,965
TOTAL $333,105

7. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Approved at a Regular Meeting of the St. Helena City Council on February 11, 2025, by the following vote:

Mayor Dohring: ______
Vice Mayor Deasy: ______
Council Member Barak: ______
Council Member Spadarotto: ______
Council Member Summers: ______
APPROVED: ATTEST:
____________________________ _______________________
Paul Jamison Dohring, Mayor City Clerk
Agenda Item #12.1.

EyeOnWater (EOW) Overview
The EyeOnWater (EOW) web portal and mobile applications offer customers convenient access to their water consumption data, empowering them to create custom alerts for potential leaks without waiting for notifications from the City of St. Helena or an unexpectedly high-water bill. EOW provides detailed water usage information at 15- minute, hourly, daily, monthly, and yearly intervals, enabling customers to monitor and manage their consumption effectively.

By promoting awareness of water usage patterns and potential leaks, EOW encourages proactive engagement in water conservation and leak prevention efforts. Customers receive timely leak alerts and usage trends through their preferred communication method, including email, text messages, or notifications on smart devices.

EOW enhances transparency by delivering real-time consumption data and early leak alerts, improving the customer experience while reducing service calls to the City of St.

Helena, resolving issues more quickly, and minimizing high-bill adjustments. The platform’s intuitive graphs and configurable notifications offer customers a clear and actionable view of their water usage, empowering them to manage it more effectively.

City of St. Helena Implementation
Currently, the City of St. Helena has eleven (11) water meters across city facilities connected to the EyeOnWater web portal. The attached exhibits provide screenshots demonstrating the information available through the EOW portal for one of these meters.

Figure 1- EOW Online Portal
Agenda Item #12.1.

EOW offers a user-friendly interface organized into four distinct modules: Leaks, At a Glance, Your Meter, and Historical Consumption Graphs.

Figure 2 - Leaks
By clicking on the blue “Set Leak Alert”, the alter configuration wizard appears. This wizard simplifies the process, making it convenient for users to set up alerts according to user’s preferences. For residential users, where continuous flow is not expected, the flow type should be set to intermittent flow. Users will then need to enter a flow threshold value. Badger recommends setting this value between 1 to 5 gallons per hour.

Once the threshold is set, an alert will be sent if the flow exceeds the threshold for 24 consecutive hours, indicating a potential leak. This proactive approach empowers users to take prompt action and mitigate any water-related issues effectively.

Figure 3 - At a Glance
The At a Glance module allows users to quickly assess their water consumption trends.

With just a glance, users can see whether they’re using more water than in the previous seven days.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Figure 4 - Your Meter
In the Your Meter module users can see how often their meter is read, the last time it was read and when the next reading is scheduled.

Figure 5 – Historical Consumption Graphs
The Historical Consumption Module allows users to see their water usage for specific period of time.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

E-Series®
Ultrasonic Flow Meters
Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

m H. E a. :mi ““3 Hanna SCI ED 7'0 Flow Rate {IEPM]: 10 EU Jun
ms
95 97
as
5/8 x 3/4 in. E-Series Accuracy
001 n 1
Flow me (5PM!
m 1m:

I... I:H97
'rI
I
I
1 in. E-Series Illlccuralc'ggr
—:_____£I
I-——
————————————————.l

0.I11 I11 1 Flow Rate [GPM]
1!} 100
Agenda Item #12.1.

E-Series®
Ultrasonic Flow Meters
Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

E-Seriesf
Ultrasonic Flow Meters
®
Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

10 100 200 300 400 500 700 800 1000 1100 1200 1300
in: $9 ”gammy:

FLOWRATE(GPM)

95.00 96.00

97.00 98.00

99.00 100.00 101.00
102.00
103.00
104.00 105.00

0.3 30 300 3000
11>u<mDuu<

FLOWRATE(GPM)
3in.EE-Series Meter Accuracy

95.00 103.00

0.5 SO 500 5000 FLOWRATE(GPM)
4in.EE-Series Meter Accuracy

95.00 96.00

97.00 98.00

99.00 100.00
101.00
102.00
103.00
104.00
105.00
10 100 1000 10000

1.1. >U<zDUU<

FLOWRATE(GPM)
6in.EE-Series Meter Accuracy

95.00 96.00

97.00 98.00

99.00 100.00
101.00
102.00
103.00
104.00
105.00
10 100 1000 10000
1( 1(

FLOWRATE(GPM)
8in.EE-Series Meter Accuracy
Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Signature
Agenda Item #12.1.

:15 'HAI'EENC4ULIIII
:15H;:!: IIIIIIL E-LEIIE: {:1 "WE
3m UI'E‘Irli'IIFIEIcar'Eilil' 'hi'r“ P'ahmarmaaar/ W .I_-I-r.. ?- ll'II .-.-'.I I}.

I __ Kari/tili?’lDL-‘L:
r"1
I'llI ure of Notary Pub IC
Agenda Item #12.1.

SMART Meter
Replacement
Project
CIP Project W24-04
City Council Meeting
February 11, 2025
Agenda Item #12.1.

Purpose of W24-04
City provides water to
2,600+ residents and
businesses
30% non-revenue
water loss due to aging
infrastructure
Meters over 16 years
old, causing revenue
loss and inefficiencies
Enterprise Fund model
requires accurate
billing
Agenda Item #12.1.

Benefits
Water Loss Reduction:

Identifies leaks early
Operational Efficiency:

Eliminates manual
readings
Accurate Billing:

Reduces errors from
aging meters
EyeOnWater Portal:

Real-time monitoring
for customers
Water Quality
Management: Supports
system improvements
Agenda Item #12.1.

Previous Council Actions
Adoption of 5-Year
CIP (Incl. W24-04)
13 June 2023
Approved revised
water rates
27 June 2023
PSA with Haley &
Aldrich for
Engineering &
Project Management
14 May 2024
Approved installment
sale of bonds, of
which this project was
included
28 May 2024
Authorized bid
advertisement &
Authorized meter
purchase
25 June 2024
Authorized meter lid
purchase
22 Oct. 2024
Prequalified bidders
for Construction
Contract
22 Oct. 2024
Agenda Item #12.1.

Real-Time Monitoring
Alerts & Notifications
Usage Trends
Conservation Tools
Accessible Phone, Tablet, PC
Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Impacts
387 383 420 451
498 530
686 661
739
903
800
844
909
1028 1052
1136
1204
1272
1365
1406
0 200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1 Number of Manual Meter Re-Reads,
By Month June 2023 to Feburary 2025
June 2023
July 2023
August 2023
eptember 2023
October 2023
November 2023
December 2023
January 2024
February 2024
March 2024
April 2024
May 2024
June 2024
July 2024
August 2024
eptember 2024
October 2024
November 2024
December 2024
January 2024
Agenda Item #12.1.

Financial
Summary
(as proposed)
Total Project Cost: $2.3 million
Funding secured through Water
Revenue Bonds
Project Expenditure Total Cost Date
Approved
Project Management Professional
Services
$406,000 May 14,
2024
Badger Meter Purchase $1,056,966 July 15,
2024
Initial Pace Lid Purchase $123,586 October 22,
2024
Total Spent to date: $1,586,552
Construction for Meter
Replacement Base Bid
$491,359 Proposed
Tonight
Construction Contingency 15% $73,704 Proposed
Tonight
Remaining Lid Purchase $132,600 TBD
Lid contingency 15% $18,890 TBD
Total Cost of Project $2,303,105
Funding Approved 2025 CIP Budget $1,970,000
Project Shortfall ($333,105.11)
*Project Savings:
• Staff Coordinated inventory
• Purchase of lids and meters outside of construction
contract
Agenda Item #12.1.

Implementation
Timeline Feb. 2025
Council approval &
contract execution
Spring 2025
Begin installation of
SMART meters
Late 2025
6-month timeline: Full
project completion by late
2025
Agenda Item #12.1.

Bid Results &
Contractor
Selection
Concord Utility Services: $894,210
Professional Meters Inc.: $491,359
(Lowest Responsive Bidder)
Meets all prequalification requirements &
has proven experience
Agenda Item #12.1.

Council Options:

The Council Could Choose to:
1) Approve Staff Recommendation,
awarding contract & modifying project
budget
2) Deny recommendation and direct staff
to implement meter project internally,
extend timeline & approve additional
material cost impacts
3) Status Quo (No Action) – Keep the
existing meters and system in place,
continue unbilled water and maintain
staff time for manual reads.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Option 1: Approve Project As
recommended
Benefits
Purchased meters/lids outside of
construction contract to save 5%-
15% mark up
6-month implementation removes
manual reads and inaccurate reads
(aka water loss)
Staff regain time (100+ hours/mo)
for preventative maintenance and
water quality improvements
Trade Offs
Cost overruns will impact other
project budgets
Working with outside contractor
Agenda Item #12.1.

Option 2: Deny Contractor,
Inhouse Completion
Benefits
Meters and first portion of
lids are purchased and on site
Install meters as staff
available
Other project budgets are not
impacted by project overrun
Replace meters as they die,
Prioritize with those already
not reading digitally
Trade Offs
• Still need to purchase lids
• Could take 24-36 additional months
• Revenue loss until meter replacement
complete
• Continued manual re-reads every
month until complete
• Manual reads have higher error rates
• Storage of all products on site create
space issues for operations
• Meters are different styles, and
additional data entry is needed until
full system conversion
• Limited Staff time will impact ability
to complete other necessary tasks
(preventative and routine
maintenance)
Agenda Item #12.1.

Utilities Current Staffing
Utilities
Superintendent
(Vacant/Frozen)
Maintenance Worker
II Underground
Utilities
Maintenance Worker
I Underground
Utilities
Maintenance Worker
I Underground
Utilities
Underground
Utilities Lead
Agenda Item #12.1.

Meter Installation Process
Meter Box Cleaning • 20
Minutes
Meter Removal &
Installation
• 15 -30
minutes
Record Into
Database, Activate
the endpoint, & Data
Transferred to Utility
Software
• 30
Minutes
Data Verification •15
minutes
1 hours 20 minutes
per meter
2600 meters
Agenda Item #12.1.

Impacts
387 383 420 451
498 530
686 661
739
903
800
844
909
1028 1052
1136
1204
1272
1365
1406
0 200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1 Number of Manual Meter Re-Reads,
By Month June 2023 to Feburary 2025
June 2023
July 2023
August 2023
eptember 2023
October 2023
November 2023
December 2023
January 2024
February 2024
March 2024
April 2024
May 2024
June 2024
July 2024
August 2024
eptember 2024
October 2024
November 2024
December 2024
January 2024
Agenda Item #12.1.

Option 3: Status Quo – Deny
Project
Benefits
Other project budgets are not
impacted by project overrun
Trade Offs
Manual Reads increase by ~ 8% per
month, Currently 54% manual
Meters will continue to die
Manual reads have higher error
rates
Continued increase in unbilled water
Not sure if we can return meters,
likely at a cost to the City
Meters are different styles, and
additional data entry is needed until
full system conversion
Agenda Item #12.1.

From: Kelly Wheaton
To: City Clerk
Subject: [External] Item 12.1 public Comment
Date: Monday, February 10, 2025 2:20:36 PM
Mayor Dohring and City Councilmembers,
I wish to put on the record my opposition to an increased expenditure of $333,105 for SMART METERS. I spoke out against this when it was originally proposed. This was misrepresented to the council and the public as a needed fix for leaks. It was not ever intended to fix any leaks. It is intended to increase the mesurement of flows over that of old meters. The previous council never asked critical issues about ongoing costs or why we were spending $1.9 on something we didn't need rather on critical infrastructure we do.

This is one of those difficult situations where the council has to decide to keep spending bad after bad in a never ending spiral. Other recent examples are the less than 1 million (original estimate) for City Hall renovations that ballooned to 3 Million. Or the Vine trail at $300+k that is reaching a million shortly. Or the epoxy coating of a concreye tank that then needs to be recoated every 7 years or so. Ongoing costs should be calculated into the real cost of these items. The failure of the staff to highlight only posituves and not ongoing costs needs to ve underlined. And who approves SMART Meters without Lids? The City cannot afford these squishy agreements and cost overruns. At some point you just need to say NO. With the dumb decision on SMART Meters this was an expenditure in search of a problem. And it was misrepresented in actual Cost and Benefit.

Sincerely,
Kelly Wheaton
1335 Inglewood Ave
Agenda Item #12.1.

Agenda Report to the City Council
Agenda Section: OLD BUSINESS
Department: Administration
DATE: February 11, 2025
FROM: Erika Opp, Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: Consideration and proposed approval of a Resolution appointing 5 Members and 1 Alternate to the
Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee and 1 member to
the vacant opening on the Library Board of Trustees.

RECOMMENDED
ACTION:

Appoint one member to the Library Board of Trustees and appoint five regular members and one alternate member to the Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
1/14/25 - City Council Approved the Formation of
Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee and Began
Recruitment Process.

STATEMENT OF THE
PURPOSE:

Appoint one member to the vacant position on the Library Board of Trustees. Appoint five regular voting members
and one alternate to the Water/Wastewater Advisory
Committee.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: No direct impact.

BACKGROUND:

The City Clerk advertised a recruitment seeking applicants from the community to fill vacant Board, Committee and Commission terms of office. The Boards, Committees, and Commissions that have vacancies include the Library Board of Trustees and the newly formed Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee.

DISCUSSION:

The recruitment for the Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee was advertised seeking applicants from the community to fill five regular seats and 1 alternate seat. The City received a total of 6 applications.

The Library Board of Trustees had an ongoing recruitment and received 1 application.

Per City Council Rules of Procedure appointments shall be made by interview and the Mayor shall nominate applicants with the appointments subject to approval by the majority of Council. The City Council will convene an applicant interview special City Council meeting on February 11, 2025 at 5:00 pm.

The following lists the vacancies, expiring terms, and names of applicants.

Library Board of Trustees
Agenda Item #12.2.

One Library Board of Trustees vacancy with the term of office expiring June 30, 2025.

One application was received from Juana Navarro.

Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee
The committee will consist of five members and one alternate. One member may be a ratepayer residing outside City limits. The Committee will operation on a 24- month trial period starting in March of 2025, meeting every two months (minimum of 10 meetings) with more frequent meeting initially. If committee is extended beyond the 24-month trial period, it is anticipated committee members will serve four-year staggered terms.

Six applications were received from: Jay Kouba, Brent Randol, Mario Trinchero, Peter White, Garry Rose and Carl Myers.

Should Council decide not to appoint someone from the current applicants, staff would re-advertise for the position to fill the vacancy.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A
GOAL:

Goal 1: Strengthen Financial Sustainability
Goal 2: Improve Infrastructure & Further Environmental Sustainability Goal 3: Pursue Water Security & Sustainable Management of Water Resources Goal 4: Provide Effective Community Information & Opportunities for Engagement Goal 7: Enhance Organizational Effectiveness
Goal 8: Implement Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) Projects Miscellaneous/Other DOCUMENTS ATTACHMENTS:

Water Wastewater Committee Library Board Appointments Resolution Agenda Item #12.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
Appointing applicants to the Library Board of Trustees and the Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee

RECITALS
A. There are vacant positions on the Library Board of Trustees and the newly formed Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee; and
B. Applications have been received from community members; and C. Per City Council Rules of Procedure appointments shall be made by interview and the Mayor shall nominate applicants with the appointments subject to approval by the majority of Council; and
D. An applicant interview meeting is scheduled to be held on February 11, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.

RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of St. Helena resolves as follows:

Library Board of Trustees

1. __________ is appointed to the St. Helena Library Board of Trustees to fill vacant position that expires on June 30, 2025.

Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee

2. __________, __________, __________, __________, __________ are appointed as regular members of the Water/Wastewater Advisory Committee and __________ as an alternate member. This committee will operate on a 24- month trial period starting in March 2025 and ending in March 2027, unless continued by City Council.

Approved at a Regular Meeting of the St. Helena City Council on February 11, 2025, by the following vote:

Mayor Dohring: __________
Vice Mayor Deasy: __________
Council Member Barak: __________
Council Member Spadarotto: __________
Agenda Item #12.2.

Council Member Summers: __________
APPROVED: ATTEST:
________________________ ________________________
Paul Jamison Dohring, Mayor Cindy Tzafopoulos, City Clerk Agenda Item #12.2.

Agenda Report to the City Council
Agenda Section: NEW BUSINESS
Department: Public Works
DATE: February 11, 2025
FROM: Lesley Milton, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: Receive status report on Action Items detailed in the adopted 2024 Flood Project Condition Assessment Report.

RECOMMENDED
ACTION:

Receive the report and provide direction as necessary.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

June 11, 2024 the City Council received the final report and adopted Resolution 2024-093 accepting the St.

Helena Flood Project Condition Assessment Report.

STATEMENT OF THE
PURPOSE:

Receive report and provide direction as necessary.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: While routine maintenance is covered under the current Public Works budget, specific projects such as
geotechnical assessments and caulking replacements will require additional funding. Staff will pursue cost estimates and, if necessary, request budget allocations in the
upcoming fiscal cycle.

BACKGROUND:

The St. Helena Flood Protection Project has been a critical component of the city’s infrastructure since its completion in 2011. The project consists of multiple systems, including the levee embankment, floodwall, interior drainage, pump stations, and flood damage reduction channels. In October 2023, the City engaged Mead & Hunt to conduct a comprehensive condition assessment of the system. On June 11, 2024 the City Council received and accepted the final report. This report provides an update on the findings, inspections, and actions taken to address concerns recently raised by community members.

DISCUSSION:

Findings from Mead & Hunt Condition Assessment
The Mead & Hunt assessment, based on a November 13, 2023, field inspection, evaluated key components of the flood protection system:
 Levee Embankment System: Rated Acceptable with no immediate structural concerns.
 Floodwall System: Rated Minimally Acceptable due to minor vegetation growth and settlement at the transition between "T" and "I" walls.

Agenda Item #13.1.

 Interior Drainage System: Rated Minimally Acceptable, with culverts and discharge pipes requiring CCTV inspection.
 Pump Station System: Rated Minimally Acceptable due to tilting in CMU perimeter walls requiring monitoring.
 Flood Damage Reduction Channels System: Rated Acceptable with no corrective action required.

Actions Taken and Scheduled Work
The following actions have been implemented or are scheduled to be performed:

1. Levee Embankment System
 Coordination with NapaRCD to install owl boxes for rodent management (Installation: March 2025).
 Filling of rodent burrows with gravel (March 2025).

2. Floodwall System
 Vegetation within 15 feet of the water side was removed in late 2023 and another round in October 2024. Additional work will occur upon completion of seasonal rains.
 Public Works staff started joint caulking replacement in January 2025. Full Completion scheduled by May 2025 or earlier as weather permits.  Concrete spalling at handrails is being remedied as an amendment to the Downtown Paver Rehab project. Work was started in January 2025. Expected completion in February 2025.
 Engineering staff is monitoring wall settlement at the T-wall/I-wall transition, with a geotechnical consultant assessment planned for March 2025.

3. Interior Drainage System
 Inspection of discharge pipes (i.e. 48-inch reinforced concrete gravity pipe inspected via staff walking in pipe and 12-inch steel "forcemain" was partially inspected via CCTV) was completed in October 2024. No significant defects were initially observed. Completion of evaluation scheduled by March 2025.

4.Pump Station System
 Electrical testing of motors and power cables was completed in October 2024.  Staff is collaborating with geotechnical consultant on agreement language and should have an assessment of masonry wall settlement completed by May 2025.

Public Engagement and Transparency
In response to concerns regarding accessibility of reports and updates, the Public Works Department is implementing the following improvements:
 Ensuring inspection reports are uploaded to the City’s website within 30 days of completion. Reports are located here: https://www.cityofsthelena.gov/326/FloodControl-River-Restoration-Project  Providing quarterly updates to the City Council on flood protection system maintenance.

Agenda Item #13.1.

 Enhancing coordination with community members to address concerns in a timely manner.

Conclusion
The City remains committed to maintaining the integrity of the Flood Protection Project and addressing public concerns proactively. Staff will continue executing the scheduled maintenance activities and provide regular updates to the Council and community.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This not a CEQA project.

GOAL:

Goal 2: Improve Infrastructure & Further Environmental Sustainability Goal 3: Pursue Water Security & Sustainable Management of Water Resources Goal 4: Provide Effective Community Information & Opportunities for Engagement Goal 5: Enhance Quality of Life
Goal 8: Implement Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) Projects Miscellaneous/Other DOCUMENTS ATTACHMENTS:
2024 Levee condition assessment Staff Report
Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Report to the City Council
Agenda Section: NEW BUSINESS
Department: Public Works
DATE: June 11, 2024
FROM: Joseph Leach, Public Works Director and City Engineer SUBJECT: Receive report and adopt a Resolution accepting the St.

Helena Flood Project Condition Assessment Report.

RECOMMENDED
ACTION:

Receive report and adopt associated Resolution.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

Reso 2004-015 adopted on 2/24/04: Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report for the Comprehensive
Flood Protection Project.

Reso 2004-016 adopted on 2/24/04: Council selected the
Flood Control Project, adopted the Mitigation & Monitoring Reporting Plan, etc. and directed staff to commence
funding and permitting of the preferred project.

Reso 2006-071 adopted on 6/27/06: Council adopted an
amendment to the CEQA document.

Reso 2006-091 adopted on 7/11/06: Council authorized
execution of a professional services agreement with Mead & Hunt.

Reso 2007-007 adopted on 1/9/07: Council authorized
execution of Amendment 1 of the professional services
agreement with Mead & Hunt.

Reso 2023-132 adopted on 10/10/23: Council authorized
execution of professional services agreement with Mead & Hunt to perform a Condition Assessment.

STATEMENT OF THE
PURPOSE:

Accept a Report documenting the condition of the St
Helena Flood Project as evaluated professional
engineering firm Mead & Hunt.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: Beyond the continued monthly inspection by staff, monthly pest management services and seasonal maintenance of
the facility/systems, staff has not determined the fiscal impacts to address the various recommended actions
associated with this report.

BACKGROUND:

The St. Helena Flood Project has extensive history dating back to 1998. During the approval of the Hunter Subdivision in Fall 2023, a number of community members expressed concern over the integrity of the Flood Project. As noted above, at the October 10, 2023 Council meeting, the City Council authorized the execution of a professional services agreement with Mead & Hunt (MH), the original Engineer of Agenda Item #13.1.

Record for the Flood Project. The Presentation (Attachment 2) includes a brief summary of the actions taken to develop this critical piece infrastructure that greatly benefits the community.

DISCUSSION:

The St Helena Flood Project Condition Assessment (Attachment 1) was based upon the following:

Pre-Inspection Document Review:
 Record Drawings
 Operations and Maintenance Manual
 City’s Periodic Inspection Reports (10/30/2015 – 10/31/2023)  Conservation Easement Monitoring Report (dated 11/12/2023)  Pest Control Inspection and Treatment Reports
Field Inspection/Coordination with St Helena Public Works Staff:
 November 13, 2023
Consistent with the form utilized by City Staff to conduct the monthly inspection reports, MH followed the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Guidance for Periodic Inspection Procedures, including the systems and number of detailed items evaluated:
 Levee Embankment Systems (15 items)
 Floodwall Systems (9 items)
 Interior Drainage Systems (15 items)
 Pump Station Systems (21 items)
 Flood Damage Reduction Channels Systems (11 items)
The presentation and report provide details on the evaluation process and the rating system outcomes (i.e. "Acceptable", "Minimally Acceptable", "Unacceptable" or "Not Applicable") for the systems and the items that comprise that system. Other than the items noted below, the items for the various systems received either "Acceptable" or "Not Applicable" rankings.

The items below received a "Minimally Acceptable" ranking:
 Floodwall System, Component Item 1. Unwanted Vegetation Growth  Floodwall System, Component Item 5. Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete Structures
 Floodwall System, Component Item 7. Monolith Joints
 Pump Station System, Component Item 6. Fencing and Gates The following item received an "Unacceptable" ranking:

Agenda Item #13.1.

 Interior Drainage System, Component Item 9. Culverts/Discharge Pipes Below represents the System, Component Item number, and proposed action from staff consistent with the recommendations in the Report.
 Floodwall System, Component Item 1. Unwanted Vegetation Growth. Staff will remove waterside vegetation within fifteen feet of the waterside face of the floodwall.
 Floodwall System, Component Item 5. Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete Structures. Staff will closely monitor this area during and directly after high-water events and document conditions. Additionally, staff will initiate a detailed study of this area to evaluate the need and extent of bank stabilization required.  Floodwall System, Component Item 7. Monolith Joints. Staff will put into place a repair/replacement program for the monolith joints in the floodwall. Additionally, Staff will regularly inspect the joints for continued deterioration. Specifically, where the handrail anchors were installed close to a floodwall joint, staff will pursue repairs to remove the spalled concrete, coat any exposed reinforcement to prevent reinforcement corrosion, patch the concrete, and re-secure the handrail.
 Pump Station System, Component Item 6. Fencing and Gates. Staff will monitor the walls on the south side of the pump station on an annual basis for further tilting of the walls towards the inlet. If the cracks at the southeast and southwest corners continue to open further, staff will retain a consultant to perform a more detailed study to determine an appropriate course of action.  Interior Drainage System, Component Item 9. Culverts/Discharge Pipes. Staff will pursue CCTV of the outfall/discharge pipes/culverts and provide the report to Mead & Hunt for review.

As noted under Fiscal Impacts, staff does not know the costs associated with the various mitigation measures but will follow city procedures to retain vendors (contractors or consultants) to remedy the items consistent with the recommendations.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

The original development of the Flood Control Project was subject to CEQA and was approved by Council with associated amendments. The acceptance of the report is not subject to CEQA action.

GOAL:

Goal 1: Strengthen Financial Sustainability
Goal 2: Improve Infrastructure & Further Environmental Sustainability Goal 5: Enhance Quality of Life
DOCUMENTS ATTACHMENTS:

Agenda Item #13.1.

Resolution - Accepting St Helena Flood Project Condition Assessment Report 01 - St Helena FPP - Assessment Report_041224
02 - St Helena Flood Project Assessment Presentation_050624 Agenda Item #13.1.

CITY OF ST. HELENA
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-
ACCEPTING THE 2024 CITY OF ST. HELENA FLOOD

PROJECT CONDITION ASSESSMENT REPORT

RECITALS
A. With history dating back to 1998, the St. Helena Flood Project has extensive history from preliminary development, CEQA certification, permitting and funding processing and flood plain modification processing through the Federal Emergency Management Agency, etc.; and
B. On October 10, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-132 authorizing the execution of a professional services agreement with Mead & Hunt, the original Engineer of Record for the Flood Project, to perform a Condition Assessment; and C. On November 13, 2023, representatives from Mead & Hunt and the City of St Helena Underground Utilities Division of the Public Works Department conducted a field inspection of the project; and
D. Utilizing inspection and evaluation criteria established by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Guidance for Periodic Inspection Procedures, Mead & Hunt evaluated five project systems with a number of items within each system; and E. Pages 1 and 2 of the Report delineate recommended actions.

RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of St. Helena resolves as follows:

The City Council accepts the 2024 City of St. Helena Flood Project Condition Assessment (Attachment 1) as a final document.

Approved at a Regular Meeting of the St. Helena City Council on June 11, 2024, by the following vote:

Mayor Paul Dohring:

Vice Mayor Eric Hall:

Council Member Anna Chouteau:

Council Member Patrick Kenealy:

Council Member Billy Summers:

APPROVED: ATTEST:

Agenda Item #13.1.

________________________ ________________________
Paul Jamison Dohring, Mayor Cindy Tzafopoulos, City Clerk Agenda Item #13.1.

Project Assessment Report

FINAL REPORT

P R E P A R E D
BY

ST HELENA FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT

CITY OF ST HELENA
PROJECT NUMBER 1950000-232215.01
April 12, 2024
© 2024 MEAD & HUNT, INC.

Agenda Item #13.1.

PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
i CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary.........................................................................................1

2. Inspection Team and Date of Inspection .........................................................3 A. System Assessment ........................................................................................................... 3 B. Pre-Inspection..................................................................................................................... 3 C. Field Inspection .................................................................................................................. 3 D. Inspection Team ................................................................................................................. 3 E. Date of Inspection............................................................................................................... 3

3. System Background Information......................................................................4 A. Project Background and Purpose....................................................................................... 4 B. System Descriptions........................................................................................................... 5

4. Inspection Findings and Evaluations ...............................................................7 A. Levee Embankments System............................................................................................. 9 B. Floodwall System ............................................................................................................. 10 C. Interior Drainage System.................................................................................................. 14 D. Pump Station System ....................................................................................................... 15 E. Flood Damage Reduction Channel System ..................................................................... 16

5. Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................17 A. Levee Embankment System............................................................................................. 17 B. Floodwall System ............................................................................................................. 17 C. Interior Drainage System.................................................................................................. 18 D. Pump Station System ....................................................................................................... 18 E. Flood Damage Reduction Channel System ..................................................................... 19

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Exhibit
APPENDIX B Photographs
APPENDIX C References
Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
ii
The following individuals contributed to the development of this document and assessment presented herein:

Jeff Kashiwada, PE
Todd Petrik, PE
Stephen Sullivan, PE
Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
1 The Comprehensive Flood Protection Project (Project) is located within the City of St. Helena in Napa County. The Project is divided into five Systems, including the Levee Embankment, Floodwall, Interior Drainage, Pump Station, and Flood Damage Reduction Channel. Construction of the Project was completed in 2011, and the Project is operated and maintained by the City.

A visual field inspection was performed by Mead & Hunt engineers to evaluate the physical condition of the five Project Systems. In order to determine the rating of each Project System, the individual Components of each System were rated in accordance with the Project’s Flood Damage Reduction Segment/System Inspection Forms.
• Acceptable System: All Components are rated as Acceptable. • Minimally Acceptable System: If one or more Components are rated as Minimally Acceptable or one or more Components are rated as Unacceptable, and an engineering determination concludes that the Unacceptable items would not prevent the System from performing as intended during the next flood event.
• Unacceptable System: If one or more Components are rated as Unacceptable and would prevent the System from performing as intended, or a serious deficiency noted in past inspections (which had previously resulted in a minimally acceptable System rating) has not been corrected within the established timeframe, not to exceed two years.

The Levee Embankment System received an Acceptable rating because all system Components received an Acceptable rating.

The Floodwall System received a Minimally Acceptable rating because the system had Components that received Minimally Acceptable ratings. The Components that received less than acceptable ratings during the visual inspection are:
• Floodwall System, Component Item 1. Unwanted Vegetation Growth – Minimally Acceptable
Minimal vegetation growth was observed on the waterside of the floodwall, within fifteen feet of the floodwall.

Recommendation: Remove waterside vegetation within fifteen feet of the waterside face of the floodwall.
• Floodwall System, Component Item 5. Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete Structures – Minimally Acceptable
The tilting, sliding, and settlement of the “T” wall section at the interface with the “I” wall section just upstream of STA 37+23.50 was observed to be Minimally Acceptable. The tilting, sliding, and settlement of this “T” wall section is evidence that this section of wall has rotated towards Sulphur Creek in relation to the adjacent “I” wall section.

Recommendation: It is recommended that City staff closely monitor this area during and directly after a highwater events and document conditions. It is further recommended that a detailed study of this area be initiated in the near-term to evaluate the need and extent of bank stabilization required.

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
2 • Floodwall System, Component Item 7. Monolith Joints – Minimally Acceptable There are sixty-six joints from the start to the end of the floodwall. Thirty-seven of the sixty-six joints showed a slight widening of the joint and had some type of repair or addition of the sealant at the surface of the joint. Of those thirty-seven joints, about half have some type of sealant repair completed by adding additional sealant. Many of these sealant repairs were completed in a way that did not result the joint sealant being put back to its original condition and still leaving the sealant with cracks. In addition, a single location was identified where the top handrail anchors of the baseplate were installed close to a joint in the concrete wall. The movement of the joint in the plane of the wall in combination with the stiff handrailing has caused the concrete to pop and spall off the top corner of the joint.

Recommendation: It is recommended that City staff put in place a repair/replacement program for the monolith joints in the floodwall. Further, City staff should regularly inspect the joints for continued deterioration. At the location where the handrail anchors were installed close to a floodwall joint, it is recommended to remove the spalled concrete, coat any exposed reinforcement to prevent reinforcement corrosion, patch the concrete, and re-secure the handrail.

The Interior Drainage System received a Minimally Acceptable rating because the system had a Component that received an Unacceptable rating, but it was determined this Component would not prevent the System from performing as intended.
• Interior Drainage System, Component Item 9. Culverts/Discharge Pipes – Unacceptable The interior of the drainage culvert that passes through the levee embankment has not been visually inspected or inspected by video recording equipment within the past five years.

Recommendation: Perform a visual inspection and provide the report to the inspector for review.

The Pump Station System received a Minimally Acceptable rating because the system had a Component that received Minimally Acceptable rating. The Component that received a less than acceptable rating during the visual inspection is:
• Pump Station System, Component Item 6. Fencing and Gates – Minimally Acceptable The Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) perimeter wall (fence) is a Proto II wall system. Most of the wall is in good condition except for the short wall sections on the inlet (south) side of the pump station. The CMU Proto II walls on the south side of the pump station were tilting away from the interior of the compound and resulted in a crack at the top of the wall at each of the southeast and southwest corners.

Recommendation: The City staff should monitor the walls on the south side of the pump station on an annual basis for further tilting of the walls towards the inlet. If the cracks at the southeast and southwest corners continue to open further, a more detailed study is recommended.

The Flood Damage Reduction Channels System received an Acceptable rating because all system Components received an Acceptable rating.

Based on the results of the Project System ratings, our opinion is that the Project is in sound condition.

The minimally acceptable Systems were found to not pose a significant risk to the integrity of the flood protection facilities.

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
3 A. System Assessment
Due to heavy rainfall events since the Comprehensive Flood Protection Project’s (Project) completion and the age of the facility, the City requested an assessment of the Project’s flood protection features. To complete the Project assessment, Mead & Hunt, Inc. (Mead & Hunt) performed a visual inspection of the Project features. This inspection included the levee, floodwall, bank protection, detention basin, outlet culvert, pump station, and related drainage features.

B. Pre-Inspection
Pre-inspection documents of the Project were compiled and reviewed by the inspection team prior to the visual inspection. The documents included design documents, the operations and maintenance manual, previous periodic inspection reports (10/30/2015 to 10/31/2023), Conservation Easement Monitoring Report (dated 11/12/2023), Pest Control inspection and treatment reports, and record drawings.

C. Field Inspection
A visual field inspection was performed to evaluate the physical condition of the Project features. This inspection was performed by a multidisciplinary team of engineers. City maintenance crews were present during the field inspection to provide access to the stormwater pump station facility and answer questions during the inspection of the levee and floodwall.

D. Inspection Team
Jeff Kashiwada, PE – Civil Engineer, Mead & Hunt
Stephen Sullivan, PE – Senior Civil Engineer, Mead & Hunt Todd Petrik, PE – Senior Engineer, Mead & Hunt
Brian Arroyo – City of St. Helena Operations
Dave Valerga – City of St. Helena Operations
E. Date of Inspection
November 13, 2023
Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
4 A. Project Background and Purpose
Floods in 1986 and 1995 overtopped existing flood control structures along the Napa River, causing significant damage to the Vineyard Valley Mobile Home Park (VVMHP) and Hunts Grove Apartments, ultimately resulting in over $50 million in damages to the City. In March 1998, with the passage of Measure A, a countywide 0.5 cent flood protection sales tax initiative, the City had the resources necessary to effectively study and implement a flood protection strategy. In October 1998, the City joined in a collaborative effort with the Napa County Board of Supervisors and the Napa County Flood Control District (NCFCD) to perform a joint study of the Napa River to better understand the hydraulics of flood flows in the Napa River from Deer Park Road to below Pope Street. The study’s conclusions indicated a more serious flood hazard to the community than previously established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and resulted in the enlargement of the 100-year flood plain.

Subsequently, the City received a grant from FEMA to further study potential ways to reduce flood damages, which the City used to conduct the Comprehensive Flood Protection Study (Study). The Study evaluated over 20 project elements and combinations of project elements involving the entire Napa River reach within the City’s jurisdictional boundaries. The results of the Study led the City to focus on the most vulnerable reach, located between Pratt Avenue and the Pope Street Bridge.

The City conducted three years of consultations with the community and developed several possible alternatives. In January 2003, the City released a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyzing three flood protection plans. Based on the comments received on the Draft EIR, the City decided to release a revised Draft EIR in August 2003, which analyzed the potential impacts of one of the plans. The City adopted the Final EIR in February 2004 with a preferred plan called the Enhanced Minimum Plan Modification A (EMP A), which involved:
• relocation of mobile homes,
• construction of a floodwall and levee system,
• excavation of flood overflow channels to increase flood conveyance, • removal of hard bank protection structures and replacement with natural shoreline and aquatic/riparian habitat,
• planting of native riparian plant communities, and
• installation of bioengineered bank stabilization.

Shortly following the City Council’s approval of the 2004 Plan, an environmental advocacy organization called Living Rivers Council (LRC) filed litigation against the City, alleging that the EIR certified by the City Council prior to project approval failed to satisfy the mandates of CEQA. Pursuant to settlement negotiations in 2005 between the City and LRC, a series of project refinements, proposed by LRC as part of a proposed Settlement Agreement between the parties, were considered and ultimately adopted by the City Council. These refinements were studied in an Addendum, which was considered by the City Council, along with the original EIR, prior to adopting the changes. The Addendum found, and the City Council concurred, that the refinements did not result in any new significant impacts nor any substantially more severe significant impacts than those disclosed in the original EIR, referred to as the "2005 Plan".

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
5 In 2006, the City identified a funding shortfall that would make the full implementation of the 2005 Plan impossible for the foreseeable future. As a result of this fiscal reality, and because of the pressing need to obtain improved flood control for St. Helena, the City out of necessity examined design alternatives that could substantially reduce project costs. A revised plan, referred to as the “2006 Plan,” embodied the project refinements adopted by the City in response to these changed circumstances. Notably, the City developed these refinements to be fully consistent with the express terms of the Settlement Agreement reached between the City and LRC to settle the CEQA litigation filed by LRC.

The 2006 Plan became the Comprehensive Flood Protection Project, and the design was prepared by Mead & Hunt, Inc. (Mead & Hunt) and SH+G Engineering (now Waterways Consulting, Inc.). The City was the Construction Manager with the primary responsibility of verifying that the work was constructed according to the plans and specifications. The City also provided full time construction inspection and verified that the environmental training and monitoring were being performed. Kleinfelder, Inc. provided sampling and testing services. The Project construction was completed in two phases, which were mainly conducted in the 2009 and 2010 construction seasons; however, limited construction activities extended into the following calendar year for both phases. The construction contract was awarded on April 14, 2009 and the City Council adopted Notice of Completion on April 12, 2011.

B. System Descriptions
The Comprehensive Flood Protection Project included construction of the following Systems. Refer to the Exhibit in Appendix A that outlines the locations of the Project Systems.

Levee Embankment – A new levee was constructed to the east along the alignment of Adams Street between the extension of Starr Avenue and the existing VVMHP floodwall on the north side of the park.

Adams Street was not extended (as a road) along the levee as part of this project, but non-paved, gated gravel driveway was built to provide the required maintenance and emergency access to the Project area.

The levee is approximately 2,000 lineal feet in length and was built with waterside and landside slopes of 3H:1V and a top width that varies from 20- to 48-feet wide.

Floodwall – A new setback floodwall was constructed to surround the remaining homes within the VVMHP. The floodwall was extended from the existing VVMHP floodwall location to the Sulphur Creek confluence with the Napa River, and upstream along the Sulphur Creek north bank for an approximate distance of 250 feet to the Paseo Grand Drive bridge. Approximately 1,350 feet of compaction grouting soil stabilization and ground improvement measures were completed along the floodwall alignment adjacent to the Napa River to establish the proper foundation conditions. The cast-in-place concrete floodwall is approximately 2,000 lineal feet long. The floodwall was constructed as a “T-wall,” except for a portion of the floodwall along Sulphur Creek/Napa River confluence and upstream along the creek which was constructed as an “I-wall.” The “I-wall” is 198 lineal feet long and supported on 2-foot diameter castin-place concrete piers.

Interior Drainage System – A detention basin and pump station (see separate System below) was constructed inboard of the new levee northwest of the existing VVMHP floodwall. The two existing storm Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
6 drains were diverted into this basin and the two existing storm drain outfalls into the Napa River were removed. A new storm drain culvert with a positive closure gate structure was constructed through the levee embankment. A collection pipe along the inboard side of the floodwall is routed to the storm drain manhole for the gravity culvert at the pump station.

Pump Station – A pump station was constructed to evacuate stormwater from the Interior Drainage System when the water surface elevation within the Napa River is too high to allow for gravity flow through the levee culvert.

Flood Damage Reduction Channel – A drainage ditch was constructed along the outboard edge of the new levee and connected to the existing ditch from Fulton Lane. The existing drainage ditch was diverted at this point northward into the vegetated swale that flows to the Napa River. A 36-inch storm drain was also constructed to route storm water from Starr Avenue west to near the start of the Adams Street Levee and discharges into the vegetated drainage ditch waterward of the levee.

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
7 A rating summary of the Project System Components based on our visual inspection are provided in the table below. The ratings were determined in accordance with the criteria set forth in the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Inspection Forms, which are the same forms used by City staff during their monthly inspections of the Project condition. The Exhibit in Appendix A outlines the Project Systems and locations of our visual inspection observations, and Appendix B includes select photographs of our visual inspection.

The condition of each Project System is determined based on the rating of the individual Components of each System, in accordance with the Project’s Flood Damage Reduction Segment/System Inspection Forms.
• Acceptable System: All Components are rated as Acceptable. • Minimally Acceptable System: If one or more Components are rated as Minimally Acceptable or one or more Components are rated as Unacceptable, and an engineering determination concludes that the Unacceptable items would not prevent the System from performing as intended during the next flood event.
• Unacceptable System: If one or more Components are rated as Unacceptable and would prevent the System from performing as intended, or a serious deficiency noted in past inspections (which had previously resulted in a minimally acceptable System rating) has not been corrected within the established timeframe, not to exceed two years.

CITY OF ST HELENA COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT NOVEMBER 2023 VISUAL INSPECTION RATING SUMMARY
A=Acceptable; M=Minimally Acceptable; U=Unacceptable; N/A=Not Applicable System Component Rating
Levee
Embankments
Item 1. Unwanted Vegetation Growth A
Item 2. Sod Cover A
Item 3. Encroachments A
Item 4. Closure Structures N/A
Item 5. Slope Stability A
Item 6. Erosion/Bank Caving A
Item 7. Settlement A
Item 8. Depressions/Rutting A
Item 9. Cracking A
Item 10. Animal Control A
Item 11. Culverts/Discharge Pipes N/A
Item 12. Riprap Revetments and Bank Protection N/A
Item 13. Revetments Other than Riprap N/A
Item 14. Underseepage Relief Wells/Toe Drainage Systems N/A Item 15. Seepage N/A
Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
8 CITY OF ST HELENA COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT NOVEMBER 2023 VISUAL INSPECTION RATING SUMMARY
A=Acceptable; M=Minimally Acceptable; U=Unacceptable; N/A=Not Applicable System Component Rating
Floodwalls
Item 1. Unwanted Vegetation Growth M
Item 2. Encroachments A
Item 3. Closure Structures N/A
Item 4. Concrete Surfaces A
Item 5. Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete Structures M Item 6. Foundation of Concrete Structures A
Item 7. Monolith Joints M
Item 8. Underseepage Relief Wells/Toe Drainage Systems A Item 9. Seepage A
Interior
Drainage
System
Item 1. Vegetation and Obstructions A
Item 2. Encroachments A
Item 3. Ponding Areas A
Item 4. Fencing and Gates N/A
Item 5. Concrete Surfaces A
Item 6. Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete and Sheet Pile Structures A Item 7. Foundation of Concrete Structures A
Item 8. Monolith Joints A
Item 9. Culverts/Discharge Pipes U
Item 10. Sluice/Slide Gates A
Item 11. Flap Gates/Flap Valves/Pinch Valves A
Item 12. Trash Racks A
Item 13. Other Metallic Items A
Item 14. Riprap Revetments of Inlet/Discharge Items A
Item 15. Revetments Other than Riprap N/A
Pump
Station
Item 1. Pump Stations Operating, Maintenance, Training, and Inspection Records A
Item 2. Pump Station Operations and Maintenance Equipment Manuals A Item 3. Safety Compliance N/A
Item 4. Communications A
Item 5. Plant Building N/A
Item 6. Fencing and Gates M
Item 7. Pumps A
Item 8. Motors, Engines, Fans, Gear Reducers, Back Stop Devices, etc. A Item 9. Sumps/Wet Well A
Item 10. Mechanical Operating Trash Rakes N/A
Item 11. Non-Mechanical Trash Racks A
Item 12. Fuel System for Pump Engines N/A
Item 13. Power Source A
Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
9 CITY OF ST HELENA COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT NOVEMBER 2023 VISUAL INSPECTION RATING SUMMARY
A=Acceptable; M=Minimally Acceptable; U=Unacceptable; N/A=Not Applicable System Component Rating
Item 14. Electrical Systems A
Pump Station
(Continued)
Item 15. Megger Testing on Pump Motors and Critical Power Cables A Item 16. Enclosures, Panels, Conduits and Ducts A
Item 17. Intake and Discharge Pipelines A
Item 18. Sluice/Slide Gates N/A
Item 19. Flap Gates/Flap Valves/Pinch Valves A
Item 20. Cranes N/A
Item 21. Other Metallic Items A
Flood Damage
Reduction
Channels
Item 1. Vegetation and Obstructions A
Item 2. Shoaling A
Item 3. Encroachments A
Item 4. Erosion A
Item 5. Concrete Surfaces A
Item 6. Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete Structures A Item 7. Foundation of Concrete Structures A
Item 8. Slab and Monolith Joints A
Item 9. Flap Gates/Flap Valves/Pinch Valves N/A
Item 10. Riprap Revetments and Banks A
Item 11. Revetments Other than Riprap N/A
A. Levee Embankments System
The visual inspection of the levee began at the transition of the levee and floodwall on the waterside. The inspection team proceeded southwesterly to the beginning of the levee. Once inspection of the waterside slope was completed, the inspection team crossed the levee and inspected the landside slope, terminating at the transition of the levee and floodwall on the landside.

No unwanted vegetation growth was observed on either the waterside or landside of the levee. The levee slopes were recently mowed, and no trees or bushes were observed within the vegetation free zone (which extends 15 feet from the toe of the levee embankment). There was adequate coverage of sod over the waterside and landside levee slopes. Refer to Levee Photo 1 in Appendix B-1.

No encroachments to the levee embankment were observed.

There are no closure structures along the levee segment of the Project.

No slides, sloughs, tension cracking, slope depressions, bulges, or any other slope stability issues of the levee embankment were observed.

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
10 No erosion or bank caving of the levee embankment was observed.

No depressions of the levee embankment that would indicate settlement were observed. The levee embankment was well established without any indications of surface irregularities which would cause water to pond.

Longitudinal cracking was observed in the upper portion of the landside slope. The cracking began approximately 350 feet north of the beginning of the levee and extended in segments along the levee approximately 150 feet in length. The cracking was observed to be less than an inch wide and less than 3 inches deep, well within the surface of the widen levee embankment. No vertical movement or sloughing was observed above or below the longitudinal cracking along the slope. In our opinion, these observed longitudinal cracks are normal desiccation cracking resulting from low surface moisture in the clay embankment soils that will close when the material expands during saturation. There is no indication of embankment deterioration or movement, and the surficial cracking does not pose any risk to the levee integrity. Refer to Levee Photo 8 in Appendix B-1.

Evidence of burrowing animal activity was observed in both the waterside and landside slopes of the levee, in areas as identified on Exhibit A. The animal burrow holes were typically less than 2-inches in diameter and less than 6-inches deep. The City contracts with a commercial pest control company to routinely treat the levee embankment, and City staff routinely fills existing burrows with soil material. In our opinion, since the animal burrows were observed to be less than 6-inches deep and are well outside the core of the levee embankment, they do not pose any risk to the levee integrity. Refer to Levee Photos 2 through 7 in Appendix B-1.

There are no revetments (riprap or other non-riprap) for the levee segment of this Project.

There are no under-seepage relief wells or toe drainage systems for the levee segment of this Project.

There were no areas of observed seepage for the levee segment of this Project.

B. Floodwall System
No unwanted vegetation growth was observed on the landside of the floodwall. There were no trees or bushes observed within the easement area on the landside of the floodwall (which typically extends 12 feet from the landside face of the wall).

Minimal vegetation growth was observed on the waterside of the floodwall, within 15 feet of the floodwall.

No encroachments to the floodwall system were observed.

There are no closure structures along the floodwall segment of the Project.

Concrete Surfaces: The concrete surfaces of the floodwalls were in good condition. There was no visible concrete spalling or corrosion of reinforcing bars. A survey of both the water-side and dry-side of the walls shows little to no cracking in the walls. The small cracks that were visible were very tight and did not have Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
11 any associated spalling of concrete on either side of the crack. There were a few locations along the length of the wall where a caulking sealant had been placed into the wider concrete cracks. This sealant was applied on the surface, and it appeared that the sealant had not been injected into the crack.

Tilting, Sliding or Settlement: The “T” wall section of the floodwall had no visible Tilting, Sliding, or Settlement for the entire length of the wall except for a short distance upstream of the transition point between the “T” wall and the “I” wall at STA 37+23.50 (see below Details of the “T” wall and “I” wall from the Project Record Drawings, and refer to Floodwall Photos 5 through 9 in Appendix B-2. At the transition from “T” wall to “I” wall, the following was observed in the “T” wall section:
• The top of the “T” wall is approximately 1-1/2” lower than the top of the “I” wall. This implies the “T” wall is settling or has settled.
• The top of the “T” wall is tilting towards Sulphur Creek approximately 1-1/2”. The 1-1/2” distance is the difference measured between the face of the “T” wall and the adjacent “I” wall at the top of the wall. Since the “T” wall section offset is combined with 1-1/2” settlement stated above, this implies that the foundation and wall are rotating towards Sulphur Creek. • A determination of the “T” wall sliding towards Sulphur Creek was not determined by direct measurements during this inspection. However, when the bottom of the “T” wall to “I” wall transition at ground level is viewed from the creek side, it appears that the faces of both walls are in the same plane. This too, supports the concept that the wall is tilting, or rotating towards Sulphur Creek.

FIGURE 1. "T" WALL DETAIL (REFER TO RECORD DRAWINGS FOR CLARITY) Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
12 FIGURE 2. "I" WALL DETAIL (REFER TO RECORD DRAWINGS FOR CLARITY) Foundations: The only foundations that are visible along the entire section of the floodwalls are short top sections of the drilled, cast-in-place concrete piers along the length of the “I” wall. There was no visual cracking or spalling of concrete, or corrosion of reinforcement visible in any of the piers that could be seen above grade.

Monolith Joints: For the purposes of this report, Monolith Joints are defined as joints between concrete placements. These joints in this floodwall vary in width between 1/2" to 1” with waterstops at the core and are filled with preformed expansion joint filler and sealed at the outside face of the concrete section with a joint sealant (see Detail below from the Project Record Drawings).

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
13 FIGURE 3. MONOLITH JOINT DETAILS
There are a total of sixty-six joints from the start to the end of the floodwall. Thirty-seven of the sixty-six joints showed a slight widening of the joint and had some type of repair or addition of the sealant at the out face of the joint. The in-plane widening of the joints is to be expected over time as the in-plane lengths of the concrete panel sections continue to expand and contract due to temperature changes. In about half of the joints, the sealant was able to stretch such that the sealant was still intact and did not show cracking or stretching. In the thirty-seven joints noted above, the in-plane widening resulted in the sealant tearing of varying degree. Refer to Floodwall Photos 1 and 2 in Appendix B-2. Of those thirty-seven joints, about half have some type of sealant repair completed by adding in additional sealant. Many of these sealant repairs were surficial and did not result the joint sealant being put back to its original condition and still leaving the joint seals with cracks.

One other issue worth mentioning under Joints is a single location where the top handrail anchors of the baseplate were installed close to a joint in the concrete wall. The concrete joint is opening ever so slightly as the walls shrink in the plane of the wall and the stiff solid pipe handrailing stays fixed, which puts pressure on the anchor bolts against the joint face. The movement of the joint in the plane of the wall in combination with the stiff handrailing has caused the concrete to pop and spall off the top corner of the joint. Refer to Floodwall Photos 3 and 4 in Appendix B-2.

Visible portions of the floodwall toe drainage piping appeared to be in acceptable condition. There were no visible issues with the piping and the inlets were free from debris.

There were no areas of observed seepage for the floodwall segment of this Project.

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
14 C. Interior Drainage System
For this assessment, the components of the Interior Drainage System include the storm drain pipeline parallel to Del Rio Court that connects to the detention basin and continues through the levee embankment (levee culvert), the detention basin, the levee culvert positive closure gate structure within the levee embankment, and the storm drain outfall structure. Refer to Appendix A for component locations.

The vegetation around the interior drainage system was well maintained, except for the area around the levee culvert outfall structure. The levee culvert outfall structure was not visible from the waterside bench between the toe of levee and terrace excavation. However, the inspection team was able to access the outfall structure from within the terrace excavation and determined the vegetation was adequately setback to allow for proper operation of the flap gate mounted to the outfall structure and drainage out of the levee culvert was not restricted. Refer to Levee Photo 9 in Appendix B-1.

No encroachments to the interior drainage system were observed.

No areas of significant surface irregularities which would cause water to pond were observed for the interior drainage system.

There are no fences or gates as part of the interior drainage system.

The reinforced concrete detention basin weir, levee culvert positive closure structure, and levee culvert outfall structure were all in acceptable condition. There were no visible issues with the concrete surfaces, no observed tilting, sliding, or settlement, no observed issues with the structure foundations, and no observed issues with the structure joints.

Visible portions of reinforced concrete storm drain piping appeared to be in acceptable condition.

However, the culverts received an Unacceptable rating because the condition of the pipe interiors has not been verified using television camera videotaping or other visual inspection methods within the past five years.

The slide gate within the positive closure structure appeared to be in acceptable condition. City operations staff indicated the slide gate is trial operated annually, prior to the beginning of the rainy season in accordance with the Operations & Maintenance Manual.

The flap gate mounted to the reinforced concrete outfall structure was in acceptable condition. The vegetation is maintained to allow unrestricted operation of the flap gate.

The galvanized steel trash rack for the detention basin weir was observed to be in acceptable condition, without any signs of damage or rust.

The detention basin weir metal grating and steel access cover for the positive closure gate structure at top of levee were observed to be in acceptable condition.

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
15 The rip rap in the detention basin around the weir structure, the pump station sump, and drainage ditches/swales were all in stable condition and well keyed into the surrounding grade. There were no signs of rip rap movement or settlement. At the levee culvert outfall structure, there was an observed void in the riprap behind the back wall of the structure on the westside. Refer to Levee Photo 10 in Appendix B-1, but this appears to have been intentionally moved due to installation of the irrigation system for the terrace excavation plantings, with no evidence of adverse impact. No riprap movement, settlement, or erosion was observed.

There are no revetments other than riprap for the interior drainage system.

D. Pump Station System
The perimeter chain link vehicle and pedestrian gates were observed to have no damage and to be in good working order.

The Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) perimeter wall (fence) is a Proto II wall system. The majority of the wall is in good condition except for the short wall sections on the inlet (south) side of the pump station.

The CMU Proto II walls on the south side of the pump station were tilting away from the interior of the compound and resulted in a crack at the top of the wall at each of the southeast and southwest corners.

The Proto II wall systems do not include any horizontal reinforcement extending around each of the corners in the top course of the wall. As such, the south-side walls tilt outward, and this opens the crack at the top of the wall. Refer to Pump Station Photos 4 and 5 in Appendix B-3.

The pumps and motors appeared to be in adequate operational condition. City staff reported that the pumps and motors were last trial operated in October 2023. For the trial operation of the pump station, the system was set to “Automatic” mode and the floats were manually lifted to simulate high water conditions to allow the pump station programming to activate the pumps. Drawdown of the water inside the pump station sump was observed. The 60 HP lead and lag pumps both had adequate levels of oil.

Refer to Pump Station Photo 1 in Appendix B-3.

The reinforced concrete pump station sump was in acceptable condition. Minor cracking was observed at the corners of the elevated deck access hatch opening and along the interface of the elevated deck and the concrete wingwalls on both sides of the pump station inlet, including visible concrete repair work on the exterior face of both walls. Refer to Pump Station Photos 2 and 3 in Appendix B-3.

The galvanized steel trash rack was observed to be in acceptable condition, without any signs of damage or rust.

The main power source for the pump station is provided by overhead utility service. An on-site generator was installed after completion of construction for the Project that can operate the pump station during instances of utility power outage. The on-site generator is trial operated monthly, with the last operation performed in October 2023 during the pump station operation as discussed above.

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
16 The pump station electrical and controls (including visible panels and conduits) appeared to be in sound operational condition. In October 2023, the City’s electrician was on-site to perform re-wiring of the control panel. After completion of the work, the system was trial operated without issues.

Visible portions of the pump station discharge piping appeared to be in adequate condition. A portion of the protective tape wrap on the western discharge pipe within the vault on the top of the levee was peeling off but appears to be original construction with no signs of corrosion attack. Refer to Pump Station Photo 6 in Appendix B-3. The pump station outfall structure was not visible during the visual inspection due to the vegetation growth. Following the site inspection, City staff cleared the vegetation and provided photographs of the outfall structure. Refer to Pump Station Photo 7 in Appendix B-3. Based on the photographs, the flap gates mounted to the reinforced concrete outfall structure were in acceptable condition, and the vegetation is maintained to allow unrestricted operation of the flap gate.

The pump station sump metal access hatch and grating were observed to be in acceptable condition.

E. Flood Damage Reduction Channel System
For this assessment, the components of the Flood Damage Reduction Channel include the junction structure that combines stormwater from the storm drain pipeline routed from Starr Avenue and the existing ditch from the Fulton Lane, the outlet of the junction structure to the vegetated swale, and the vegetated swale that flows through the excavated terrace.

No unwanted vegetation growth was observed in the vicinity of the junction structure or swale.

No shoaling (sediment deposition) was observed in the swale.

No unwanted encroachments were observed in the vicinity of the junction structure or swale.

No erosion was observed in the vicinity of the junction structure or within the swale.

The reinforced concrete junction structure was observed to be in acceptable condition. There were no visible issues with the concrete surfaces, no observed tilting, sliding, or settlement, no observed issues with the structure foundations, and no observed issues with the structure joints.

There are no flap gates, flap valves, or pinch valves for the flood damage reduction channel system.

The rip rap at the outlet of the junction structure into the vegetated swale was in stable condition and well keyed into the surrounding grade. There were no signs of rip rap movement or settlement.

There are no revetments other than riprap for the flood damage reduction channel system.

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
17 A. Levee Embankment System
The Levee Embankments System received an Acceptable rating since all Components were observed to be in Acceptable condition. The City staff should continue to maintain the system in accordance with the Project Operations and Maintenance Manual and current practices. Continue to monitor the desiccation cracking to confirm there is no vertical movement of the levee embankment along the crack, the cracking is limited to the levee surface (less than 6 inches deep), and the cracking does not extend continuously through the levee crest. Continue the current animal burrow control program and monitor the depth of burrow holes to confirm the holes are limited to the levee surface (less than 6 inches deep).

Consider the enhancement of predator activity by establishment of perches for bird species to control rodent populations.

B. Floodwall System
The Floodwalls System received a Minimally Acceptable rating because the system had Components that received Minimally Acceptable ratings, as discussed below.

The landside vegetation growth, encroachments, concrete surfaces, foundations, underseepage relief wells/toe drainage systems, and visible seepage Components were all observed to be in Acceptable condition. The City staff should continue to maintain and inspect these elements of the flood wall system in accordance with the Project Operations and Maintenance Manual and current practices.

Vegetation growth on the waterside of the floodwall was observed within 15 feet from the waterside face of the floodwall, resulting in a Minimally Acceptable rating. City staff should remove vegetation within this 15-foot zone on the waterside of the floodwall. While this vegetation should be removed, the vegetation does not currently threaten the operation or integrity of the floodwall.

The concrete surfaces of the Floodwall were observed to be in Acceptable Condition. The small, tight cracks in the surfaces of the wall are a common occurrence in concrete and likely occurred during the initial drying of concrete after placement. It is recommended that the City staff inspect the wall surfaces on a regular basis for any new cracks or to determine if any existing cracks are opening further.

The tilting, sliding, and settlement Component of the “T” wall section just upstream of STA 37+23.50 was observed to be Minimally Acceptable. The tilting, sliding, and settlement of this “T” wall section is evidence that this section of wall is gradually rotating towards Sulphur Creek. In the short term, City staff should monitor the slope downhill of the wall for further erosion and movement of the soils into the creek.

It is recommended that the City closely monitor this area during and directly after a highwater events and document conditions. It is further recommended that a detailed study of this area be initiated in the nearterm to evaluate the need and extent of bank stabilization required.

The monolith joints Component were observed to be Minimally Acceptable. Many of the joints have sealant that has deteriorated to the point where the sealant should be completely removed and replaced.

It is recommended that City staff put in place a repair/replacement program for the monolith joints in the flood wall. Further, City staff should regularly inspect the joints for continued deterioration. It is important Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
18 to note that the joint sealant has no direct effect upon the watertightness of the floodwall during high water events, as the joint waterstops provide the water barrier. The sealant protects the waterstop from exposure that could deteriorate the waterstop material over time.

The joint at the handrailing anchor bolts was observed to be Minimally Acceptable. The spalled concrete should be removed and repaired. We recommend coating any exposed reinforcement to prevent any possible reinforcement corrosion prior to patching the concrete. The rail should be resecured to concrete.

Modifications to the railing/anchorage should be made to provide for some in-plane movement to prevent future concrete damage.

C. Interior Drainage System
The Interior Drainage System received a Minimally Acceptable rating because the system had a Component that received an Unacceptable rating, but it was determined this item would not prevent the System from performing as intended.

With the exception of the reinforced concrete levee culvert, the Components of the Interior Drainage System were observed to be in Acceptable condition. The City staff should continue to maintain the system in accordance with the Project Operations and Maintenance Manual and current practices.

Continue the routinely trial operation of the levee culvert slide gate located in the positive closure gate structure and exercise the flap gate located on the outfall structure in the terrace excavation to confirm proper function. Maintain vegetation within the terrace excavation to avoid growth that would restrict free discharge and routinely clear outfall structures to prevent development of any restrictions to flap gate opening and closing. It is recommended that the vegetation around the outfall structure be cleared to provide line of sight to the outfall structure from the bench at the top of the terrace excavation.

The culverts Component received an Unacceptable rating due to lack of visual inspection of the reinforced concrete levee culvert. However, since there was no evidence of any embankment depressions or irregularities that would signify an issue with the culvert condition, it was determined that there is no reason to believe the culvert is not capable of functioning as intended, and therefore the Interior Drainage System would receive a Minimally Acceptable rating. The condition of the culvert interiors shall be examined using television camera videotaping (i.e., CCTV) or by other visual inspection methods. Perform the visual inspection and provide the report to the inspector for their review during future periodic inspections.

D. Pump Station System
The Pump Station System received a Minimally Acceptable rating because the system had a Component that received Minimally Acceptable rating, as discussed below. The City staff should continue to maintain the system in accordance with the Project Operations and Maintenance Manual and current practices, including performing megger tests on pump motors and power cables during the annual load tests of the generator.

The perimeter chain link vehicle and pedestrian gates were observed to be in Acceptable Condition. City staff should continue with periodic maintenance to keep the gates in working order.

Agenda Item #13.1.

© 2024 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
19 The Proto II Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) perimeter wall (fence) was found to be in suitable condition except for the short wall sections on the inlet (south) side of the pump station, which were found to be in Minimally Acceptable condition. The City staff should monitor the walls on the south side of the pump station on a regular basis for further tilting of the walls towards the inlet. If the cracks at the southeast and southwest corners continue to open further, a more detailed study of this issue is recommended.

The concrete elevated deck and inlet walls in the Pump Station were observed to be in Acceptable condition. While there are small cracks in the elevated deck as noted above, these cracks are narrow, tight cracks that do not appear to be significant enough to be of concern at this time. The cracking and spalling of concrete on the upper corners of the wingwalls where they meet the elevated deck are considered negligible. The City staff should continue to monitor the cracking in the elevated deck and the upper corners of the wingwalls on a regular basis for further crack widening or continued spalling of the concrete on the wingwalls.

E. Flood Damage Reduction Channel System
The Flood Damage Reduction Channels System received an Acceptable rating because all system Components received an Acceptable rating. The City staff should continue to maintain the system in accordance with the Project Operations and Maintenance Manual and current practices. Continue to routinely mow grass and weeds, remove unwanted vegetation growth, and monitor for and repair any damage caused by erosion or other causes. No updates to the current operations, maintenance, and inspection program are recommended.

Agenda Item #13.1.

APPENDIX A Exhibit
Agenda Item #13.1.

600 ft
N
➤Agenda Item #13.1.

APPENDIX B Photographs
Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Levee Photo 1: Waterside levee slope recently mowed with adequate vegetation setback.

Levee Photo 2: Typical rodent hole less than 3” in diameter and less than 6” deep.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Levee Photo 3: Typical rodent hole less than 3” in diameter and less than 6” deep.

Levee Photo 4: Typical rodent holes in top of levee. Holes are less than 3” in diameter and less than 6” deep.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Levee Photo 5: Typical rodent hole less than 3” in diameter and less than 6” deep.

Levee Photo 6: Typical rodent hole less than 3” in diameter and less than 6” deep.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Levee Photo 7: Rodent activity on waterside of levee near the Oak trees adjacent to the storm drain outfall to terrace excavation.

Levee Photo 8: Typical minor dessication crack on the landside of the levee, less than 6 inches in depth.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Levee Photo 9: Levee culvert outfall structure. Vegetation maintaned to allow flap gate operation and free discharge.

Levee Photo 10: Southwest corner of levee culvert outfall structure. Rock moved for irrigation piping; no scour observed.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall Photo 1: Typical floodwall joint with caulking separation and previous repair work.

Floodwall Photo 2: Typical floodwall joint with caulking separation and previous repair work.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall Photo 3: Floodwall crack at handrail baseplate (waterside pictured) Floodwall Photo 4: Floodwall crack at handrail baseplate (landside pictured) Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall Photo 5: Joint movement at interface of T-wall and I-wall, Sta 37+23.5 (landside pictured).

Floodwall Photo 6: Joint movement at interface of T-wall and I-wall, Sta 37+23.5. Measured approximately 1.5” vertical deflection.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall Photo 7: Joint movement at interface of T-wall and I-wall, Sta 37+23.5. Measured approximately 1.25” horizontal offset.

Floodwall Photo 8: Joint movement at interface of T-wall and I-wall, Sta 37+23.5 (waterside pictured) Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall photo 9: Joint movement at interface of T-wall and I-wall, Sta 37+23.5 (waterside pictured) Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Pump Station Photo 1: Lead and Lag Pumps, with Kohler generator and contol panel in the background.

Pump Station Photo 2: Minor cracking along interface of pump sump elevated deck and wingwall with visible concrete repair work.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Pump Station Photo 3: Minor cracking along interface of pump sump elevated deck and wingwall with visible concrete repair work.

Pump Station Photo 4: Southeast corner of CMU perimeter wall cracking.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Pump Station Photo 5: Southwest corner of CMU perimeter wall cracking.

Pump Station Photo 6: West pump station discharge pipe inside valve vault with pipe tape wrap peeling off.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Pump Station Photo 7: Pump station discharge pipes concrete outfall structure with flap gates.

Agenda Item #13.1.

APPENDIX C References
Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Service Report
INVOICE #:

WORK DATE:
34367958
11/09/2023
CA - FR43382
CA - QAL120991
License #:

Ronald Vale
Time In:

Time Out:
11/9/2023 7:04:00 AM
11/9/2023 8:42:47 AM
Technician Signature
Customer Signature
Customer is unavailable to sign
LOCATION 3483750
707-339-1053
City of St. Helena Flood Wall
Flood Wall Zone A
1572 Railroad Ave
Saint Helena, CA 94574-1169
Phone:

BILL-TO 3483750
707-339-1053
City of St. Helena Flood Wall
Flood Wall Zone A
1088 College Ave
Saint Helena, CA 94574-1169
Phone:

Alt. Phone: 707-968-2750 xAP
Purchase Order Terms Service Description Quantity Amount None DUE UPON RECEIPT Burrowing Pest Control 1.00 640.00 Subtotal
Tax
640.00

0.00 Total 640.00
Prior Balance: 0.00
Total Due: 640.00

GENERAL COMMENTS / INSTRUCTIONS
Inspected and found gopher activity in Levi wall. Treated accordingly with Percmachine. Thank you have a wonderful day.

CONDITIONS / OBSERVATIONS Reported Severity Responsibility Reviewed None Noted.

PRODUCTS APPLICATION SUMMARY
None Noted.

PEST ACTIVITY # Areas # Devices Pest Totals
None Noted.

DEVICE INSPECTION SUMMARY

AREA COMMENTS
None Noted.

DEVICE INSPECTION EXCEPTIONS
None Noted.

Printed: 12/06/2023 Page: 1/2
Agenda Item #13.1.

Service Report
INVOICE #:

WORK DATE:
34367958
11/09/2023

DEVICE INSPECTION EXCEPTIONS

INSPECTION DETAIL
None Noted.

PRODUCTS APPLIED
None Noted.

Printed: 12/06/2023 Page: 2/2
Agenda Item #13.1.

Service Report
INVOICE #:

WORK DATE:
34367961
11/09/2023
CA - FR43382
CA - QAL120991
License #:

Ronald Vale
Time In:

Time Out:
11/9/2023 7:04:00 AM
11/9/2023 8:43:09 AM
Technician Signature
Customer Signature
Customer is unavailable to sign
LOCATION 3484243
707-339-1053
City of St. Helena Flood Wall
Flood Wall Zone B
1572 Railroad Ave
Saint Helena, CA 94574-1169
Phone:

BILL-TO 3484243
707-339-1053
City of St. Helena Flood Wall
Flood Wall Zone B
1088 College Ave
Saint Helena, CA 94574-1169
Phone:

Purchase Order Terms Service Description Quantity Amount None DUE UPON RECEIPT Burrowing Pest Control 1.00 640.00 Subtotal
Tax
640.00

0.00 Total 640.00
Prior Balance: 0.00
Total Due: 635.00
Payment Date Method Reference Payment Amount Applied Amount 10/27/2023 Check Scanned Payment $645.00 $5.00

GENERAL COMMENTS / INSTRUCTIONS
Inspected this whole area on foot found no activity in this area at this time. Thank you have a wonderful day.

CONDITIONS / OBSERVATIONS Reported Severity Responsibility Reviewed None Noted.

PRODUCTS APPLICATION SUMMARY
None Noted.

PEST ACTIVITY # Areas # Devices Pest Totals
None Noted.

DEVICE INSPECTION SUMMARY

AREA COMMENTS
None Noted.

Printed: 12/06/2023 Page: 1/2
Agenda Item #13.1.

Service Report
INVOICE #:

WORK DATE:
34367961
11/09/2023

DEVICE INSPECTION EXCEPTIONS
None Noted.

INSPECTION DETAIL
None Noted.

PRODUCTS APPLIED
None Noted.

Printed: 12/06/2023 Page: 2/2
Agenda Item #13.1.

Service Report
INVOICE #:

WORK DATE:
34367959
11/09/2023
CA - FR43382
CA - QAL120991
License #:

Ronald Vale
Time In:

Time Out:
11/9/2023 7:04:00 AM
11/9/2023 8:41:45 AM
Technician Signature
Customer Signature
Customer is unavailable to sign
LOCATION 3484258
707-339-1053
City of St. Helena Flood Wall
Flood Wall Zone C
1572 Railroad Ave
Saint Helena, CA 94574-1169
Phone:

BILL-TO 3484258
707-339-1053
City of St. Helena Flood Wall
Flood Wall Zone C
1088 College Ave
Saint Helena, CA 94574-1366
Phone:

Purchase Order Terms Service Description Quantity Amount None DUE UPON RECEIPT Burrowing Pest Control 1.00 960.00 Subtotal
Tax
960.00

0.00 Total 960.00
Prior Balance: 1934.40
Total Due: 2894.40

GENERAL COMMENTS / INSTRUCTIONS
Walked entire length of floodwall found minor go for activity at and treated with Percmachine. Thank you have a wonderful day.

CONDITIONS / OBSERVATIONS Reported Severity Responsibility Reviewed None Noted.

PRODUCTS APPLICATION SUMMARY
None Noted.

PEST ACTIVITY # Areas # Devices Pest Totals
None Noted.

DEVICE INSPECTION SUMMARY

AREA COMMENTS
None Noted.

DEVICE INSPECTION EXCEPTIONS
None Noted.

Printed: 12/06/2023 Page: 1/2
Agenda Item #13.1.

Service Report
INVOICE #:

WORK DATE:
34367959
11/09/2023

DEVICE INSPECTION EXCEPTIONS

INSPECTION DETAIL
None Noted.

PRODUCTS APPLIED
None Noted.

Printed: 12/06/2023 Page: 2/2
Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Flood Protection Project System Assessment
City of St. Helena
May 2024
Agenda Item #13.1.

Assessment Report Overview
Introduction & History
Process to Evaluate
Assessment Ratings & Recommendations
Agenda Item #13.1.

Introduction
Agenda Item #13.1.

Project Team
Jeff Kashiwada, PE
Design Engineer
Steve Sullivan, PE
Project Manager
Todd Petrik, PE
Structural Design
Agenda Item #13.1.

History of the Project
Agenda Item #13.1.

Project History
• In October 1998, the City kicked off a flood study in collaboration with Napa County.
• This study culminated in the “2001 Minimum Plan.”
• The City approved the Final EIR in Feb 2004, later amended (adopted July 2006).
• The “2006 Plan” was permitted in 2007.
• The permitting culminated with FEMA issuance of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) on November 30, 2007.
• Project Bid and Construction Contract was awarded on April 14, 2009. • Notice of Completion adopted by City April 12, 2011.
• LOMR requested by the City on December 11, 2011.
• LOMR adopted on June 19, 2012, effective November 5, 2012.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Process to Evaluate
Agenda Item #13.1.

Project Assessment
Pre-Inspection Review of:
• Record Drawings
• Operations and Maintenance Manual
• City’s Periodic Inspection Reports (10/30/2015 – 10/31/2023) • Conservation Easement Monitoring Report (dated 11/12/2023) • Pest Control Inspection and Treatment Reports
Field Inspection:
• November 13, 2023
• M&H team and City Operations Staff
Agenda Item #13.1.

Flood Protection Project Systems
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Guidance for Periodic Inspection Procedures
• Levee Embankment Systems
• Floodwall Systems
• Interior Drainage Systems
• Pump Station Systems
• Flood Damage Reduction Channels Systems
Agenda Item #13.1.

Sample System Inspection Checklist
Agenda Item #13.1.

System Ratings
Acceptable System Minimally Acceptable
System
Unacceptable System
All items or components are
rated as Acceptable.

One or more items are rated as
Minimally Acceptable, or one or
more items are rated as
Unacceptable and an
engineering determination
concludes that the Unacceptable
items would not prevent the
system from performing as
intended during the next flood
event.

One of more items are rated as
Unacceptable and would prevent
the system from performing as
intended, or a serious deficiency
noted in past inspections (which
had previously resulted in a
minimally acceptable system
rating) has not been corrected
within the established timeframe,
not to exceed two years.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Assessment Ratings
and Recommendations
Agenda Item #13.1.

Levee Embankments System - Acceptable
Agenda Item #13.1.

Levee Embankment Photos
• Levee Vegetation, Sod Cover, and
Encroachments (Acceptable)
Field Inspection
November 13, 2023 Agenda Item #13.1.

Levee Embankment Photos
• Cracking (Acceptable)
Field Inspection
November 13, 2023 Agenda Item #13.1.

Levee Embankment Photos
• Rodent Control (Acceptable) − Less than 2 inches diameter − Less than 6 inches deep Field Inspection
November 13, 2023
Field Inspection
November 13, 2023
Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwalls System – Minimally Acceptable
Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall Photos
• Tilting, Sliding or Settlement
(Minimally Acceptable)
Field Inspection
November 13, 2023 Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall Photos
• Tilting, Sliding or Settlement (Minimally Acceptable) Field Inspection
November 13, 2023
Field Inspection
November 13, 2023 Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall Photos
• Monolith Joint (Minimally Acceptable)
Field Inspection
November 13, 2023
Field Inspection
November 13, 2023
Agenda Item #13.1.

Interior Drainage System – Minimally Acceptable
Agenda Item #13.1.

Pump Station System – Minimally Acceptable
Agenda Item #13.1.

Pump Station Photos
• Fences and Gates – Minimally Acceptable
Field Inspection
November 13, 2023
Field Inspection
November 13, 2023
Agenda Item #13.1.

Flood Damage Reduction Channels System
– Acceptable
Agenda Item #13.1.

Recommendations
Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall System – Component Item 1
Unwanted Vegetation Growth – Minimally Acceptable
Minimal vegetation growth was observed on the waterside of the floodwall, within fifteen feet of the floodwall.

Recommendation: Remove waterside vegetation within
fifteen feet of the waterside face of the floodwall.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall System – Component Item 5
Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete Structures – Minimally Acceptable
The tilting, sliding, and settlement of the “T” wall section at the interface with the “I” wall section just upstream of STA 37+23.50 was observed to be Minimally Acceptable. The tilting, sliding, and settlement of this “T” wall section is evidence that this section of wall has rotated towards Sulphur Creek in relation to the adjacent “I” wall section.

Recommendation: It is recommended that City staff closely monitor this area during and directly after a highwater event and document conditions. It is further recommended that a detailed study of this area be initiated in the nearterm to evaluate the need and extent of bank stabilization required.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Floodwall System – Component Item 7
Monolith Joints – Minimally Acceptable
Over half of the floodwall joints showed a slight widening of the joint and had some type of repair or addition of the sealant at the surface of the joint. Many of these sealant repairs were completed in a way that did not result in the joint sealant being put back to its original condition. In addition, a single location was identified where the top handrail anchors of the baseplate were installed close to a joint in the concrete wall, causing the concrete to pop and spall off the top corner of the joint.

Recommendation: It is recommended that City staff put in place a repair/replacement program for the monolith joints in the floodwall. Further, City staff should regularly inspect the joints for continued deterioration. At the location where the handrail anchors were installed close to a floodwall joint, it is recommended to remove the spalled concrete, coat any exposed reinforcement to prevent reinforcement corrosion, patch the concrete, and resecure the handrail.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Interior Drainage System – Component Item 9
Culverts/Discharge Pipes – Unacceptable
The interior of the drainage culvert that passes through the levee embankment has not been visually inspected or
inspected by video recording equipment within the past five years.

Recommendation: Perform a visual inspection and
provide the report to the inspector for review.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Pump Station System – Component Item 6
Fencing and Gates – Minimally Acceptable
The Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) perimeter wall (fence) is a Proto II wall system. The CMU Proto II walls on the south side of the pump station were tilting away from the interior of the compound and resulted in a crack at the top of the wall at each of the southeast and southwest corners.

Recommendation: The City staff should monitor the walls on the south side of the pump station on an annual basis for further tilting of the walls towards the inlet. If the cracks at the southeast and southwest corners continue to open further, a more detailed study is recommended.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Questions?
Agenda Item #13.1.

City of St. Helena
Flood Protection
Project Update
City Council Meeting
February 11, 2025
Agenda Item #13.1.

Background
• 1986 & 1995: Vineyard Valley Flooded
• 2011: The St. Helena Flood Protection
Project was completed.
• October 2023: Mead & Hunt
conducted a comprehensive condition
assessment.
• June 2024: Council received the final
report and adopted Resolution 2024-
093.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Overview of the Flood Project
- Large levees and floodwalls
- Bank stabilization measures
- Channel modifications to improve water flow
- Removal of obstructions in the river channel
- Stormwater management systems
Agenda Item #13.1.

Key Findings from Assessment
Levee Embankment
System
Rated: Acceptable. Floodwall System
Rated: Minimally
Acceptable due to
minor vegetation
growth and settlement.

Interior Drainage
System
Rated: Minimally
Acceptable; culverts
require further
inspection.

Pump Station System
Rated: Minimally
Acceptable; minor tilting
of walls noted.

Flood Damage
Reduction Channels
Rated: Acceptable.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Actions Performed/Scheduled by Staff
Levee Embankment
Levee Embankment:

Coordinating with NapaRCD for
rodent management; burrow
filling scheduled for March 2025.

Interior Drainage System
Interior Drainage: CCTV
inspection in October 2024; full
evaluation by March 2025.

Floodwall System
Floodwall: Vegetation removal
completed in 2023 and October
2024; joint caulking replacement
underway (completion by May
2025).

Pump Station System
Pump Station: Electrical testing
completed; geotechnical
assessment scheduled for May
2025.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Public
Engagement
&
Compliance
Inspection reports uploaded
to the City’s website within
30 days of completion.

Regular updates provided to
the City Council &
Community
Enhanced coordination with
community members to
address concerns.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Financial
Considerations
Routine maintenance is
funded within the current
Public Works budget.

Additional funding required
for geotechnical assessment.

Staff will pursue cost estimates
and request budget allocations
in the next fiscal cycle.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Next Steps
Complete
scheduled
maintenance
actions as planned.

Continue
monitoring and
reporting to
Council.

Identify funding
sources for
additional
improvements.

Maintain
transparency and
engagement with
the public.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Agenda Report to the City Council
Agenda Section: NEW BUSINESS
Department: Finance
DATE: February 11, 2025
FROM: Mandy Kellogg, Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution authorizing participation in the PARS Post-Employment Benefits Trust Program to be
administered by Public Agency Retirement Services
(PARS) and U.S. Bank, appointing the City Manager as
the City’s Plan Administrator, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the documents to implement the
Program to set aside funds to offset the City's pension liability.

RECOMMENDED
ACTION:

Approve the attached resolution.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
PURPOSE:

The purpose is to the establish a Section 115 Trust to
manage and offset the city's pension obligations.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: Establishing the Trust in and of itself does not have any financial impact; however, establishing and funding a trust has the potential for significant long-term positive impact on the City’s finances. When funds are deposited into the trust, they have the effect of offsetting the pension liability.

The fees are based on a sliding scale indicated in Table 1 and Table 2 of the staff report below.

BACKGROUND:

The City of St. Helena provides pension benefits to employees and retirees through the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS). The amount the City has to pay to CalPERS largely depends on CalPERS's investment earnings which can be extremely volatile. Below is a summary of the investment return over the past five years:

Fiscal Year Investment Return
2019-20 4.7%
2020-21 21.3%
2021-22 -6.1%
2022-23 5.8%
2023-24 Preliminary 9.3%
Agenda Item #13.2.

Based on a 20-year average ending June 30, 2024, for every dollar CalPERS pays in pensions:
 55 cents from investment earnings
 34 cents from employer contributions
 11 cents from employee contributions
In other words, 66 cents out of every public employee pension dollar is funded by CalPERS' own investment earnings and member contributions. In the fiscal year ended June 2024, CalPERS paid out more than $ 32 billion in pension benefits.

Most retirement systems were negatively impacted by the great recession and are still recovering from the losses sustained during the downturn. Since the percentage of employee contributions is generally fixed, losses in investment returns require increases in employer contributions. This severally impacts public sector budgets. While investment returns have been generally good since the downturn, the spreading of the previous losses continues to have an effect on the rates public agencies pay to ensure adequate funding of current and future pensions.

To help public agencies address and manage their pension liabilities, establishment of a Section 115 Irrevocable Trust (Trust) offers assistance with prefunding these long-term financial obligations. Prefunding long-term financial obligations like retirement benefits is a financial management best practice and establishing and funding a Trust will provide an additional tool to help the City manage its pension costs. Based on the June 2023 CalPERS Valuation Reports, the City has an estimated $16.3 million in unfunded pension obligations.

In 2024, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for establishment, administration, and management services of a Section 115 Trust for pension. The City received a total three proposals from the following firms:
 CalPers
 Keenan
 Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS)
All responses were received by the deadline and included establishment of a Section 115 Trust. The submitted responses were reviewed and graded based on the criteria outlined in the RFP by the Assistant City Manager and the Administrative Services Director. In addition, the City consulted with a neighboring agency with similar demographics that has already established a 115 Trust to make the final decision.

Based on the overall analysis PARS was selected based on the determination that they would provide the best services relative to the cost.

DISCUSSION:

PARS has assembled leading professionals to provide the City with the necessary services required under one program to pre-fund both pension and retiree health care liabilities. This would provide the City with greater local control over assets, investment by a professional fund management team selected and monitored by the City, with contributions and distributions from the trust determined at the discretion of the City.

Agenda Item #13.2.

PARS services include the following:
 Signature-ready implementation documents which enable implementation to be completed within 5-7 business days of executed plan documents being received by PARS.
 Ongoing document management and compliance monitoring in conjunction with PARS attorneys, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLC.
 Maintenance of detailed accounting records, including any sub-accounting, which includes individual recordkeeping of the City’s contributions, earnings, and assets.
 Reconciliation of contributions to the trust account.  Coordination of distributions from the City’s trust account, which includes receiving distribution documentation and directing the trustee to make distributions.
 Monthly, quarterly, and annual reporting to the City including online portal and reporting and any customized reports as requested.
 All necessary forms, handbooks, training, and technical support.  Administrative training meeting at implementation as well as ongoing training as necessary.
 Onsite client service reviews to ensure the City’s ongoing satisfaction with the program.
 Participation at meetings and assistance in education/presentation preparation for City’s Council or staff when requested.
 Attendance at City’s Council meetings when contract is scheduled for approval and for ongoing updates of the plan.
 Coordination of annual trust-wide audit.
 Preparation and submission of documents as required by the City’s auditors for GASB 67/68 reporting.

After establishing the Trust, the City would deposit funds into it and invest in various instruments (a combination of cash, fixed income, and equities) that have the potential to earn more than can be achieved in the City’s investment pool. Once funds are deposited into the Trust, they can only be used towards pension costs. Along with the potential for increased returns, the investment options offered by PARS also carry the risk of losses, unlike the City’s typical investments, where losses are only realized if sold before maturity. Additionally, the City will have the flexibility to use these funds when it needs them most instead of giving them to CalPERS.

Fees are solely based on the City’s asset balance, therefore there is no fee to establish the Trust, and include all services identified above. In addition, there are no minimum fees. Once funds are deposited, fees for the PARS Section 115 Pension Trust services to the City are broken down by: Trust administration (paid to PARS) and Investment advisory/management and trustee/custodial services (paid to U.S. Bank/PFMAM).

Agenda Item #13.2.

Table 1 - PARS Fees
Plan Assets Ongoing Fee
Under $10 million 0.25%
$10 million to $15 million 0.20%
$15 million to $50 million 0.15%
Over $50 million 0.10%
Table 2 - U.S. Bank/PFMAM Fees
Plan Assets Ongoing Fee
Under $5 million* 0.35%
$5 million to $10 million 0.25%
$10 million to $15 million 0.20%
$15 million to $50 million 0.15%
Over $50 million 0.10%
During the January 30,2025 Finance Committee Meeting, the committee members agreed to provide assistance in developing a funding plan for the Section 115 Trust that will be presented at a future council meeting for review.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

None.

GOAL:

Goal 1: Strengthen Financial Sustainability
DOCUMENTS ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Resolution Authorizing 115 Trust
Agreement for Administrative Services
RFP - Section 115 Trust
PARS RFP Response
CalPERS RFP Response
Keenan RFP Response
Agenda Item #13.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ST. HELENA APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF THE

PUBLIC AGENCIES POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS

TRUST ADMINISTERED BY PUBLIC AGENCY
RETIREMENT SERVICES (PARS).

RECITALS
A. PARS has made available the PARS Public Agencies Post-Employment Benefits Trust (the “Program”) for the purpose of prefunding pension obligations and/or OPEB obligations; and
B. The City of St. Helena (“City”) is eligible to participate in the Program, a tax-exempt trust performing an essential governmental function within the meaning of Section 115 of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and the Regulations issued there under, and is a tax-exempt trust under the relevant statutory provisions of the State of California; and
C. The City’s adoption and operation of the Program has no effect on any current or former employee’s entitlement to post-employment benefits; and D. The terms and conditions of post-employment benefit entitlement, if any, are governed by contracts separate from and independent of the Program; and E. The City’s participation in the Program does not, and is not intended to, create any contractual obligation or new vested right to any benefit to a current or former employee nor does it strengthen any existing vested right currently held by a current or former employee; and
F. The City reserves the right to make contributions, if any, to the Program and to terminate its pension obligations and/or OPEB obligations for which the City’s Agency Account was established under the Program in accordance with the conditions and limitations set forth therein.

RESOLUTION
The City Council of the City of St. Helena hereby resolves as follows:

1. The City Council hereby adopts the PARS Public Agencies Post-Employment Benefits Trust; and
Agenda Item #13.2.

2. The City Council hereby appoints the City Manager, or their successor or their designee as the City’s Plan Administrator for the Program; and

3. The City’s Plan Administrator is hereby authorized to execute the PARS legal and administrative documents on behalf of the City and to take whatever additional actions are necessary to maintain the City’s participation in the Program and to maintain compliance of any relevant regulation issued or as may be issued; therefore, authorizing him/her to take whatever additional actions are required to administer the City’s Program.

Approved at a Regular Meeting of the St. Helena City Council on February , 2025 by the following vote:

Mayor Dohring: __________
Vice Mayor Deasy: __________
Councilmember Barak: __________
Councilmember Spadarotto __________
Councilmember Summers: __________
AYES:_____ NOES: _____ ABSENT: _____ ABSTAIN: _____
APPROVED:
_____________________________
Paul Jamison Dohring, Mayor

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF NAPA
____________________, the City Clerk of the City of St. Helena, State of California, hereby certifies that the above foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by said City at a regular meeting thereof held on the __________ and passed by a __________ vote of said Council.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and seal this _______________, 2025.

Agenda Item #13.2.

________________________________
City Clerk
Agenda Item #13.2.

AGREEMENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
This agreement (“Agreement”) is made this _____ day of _____________, 2025, between Phase II Systems, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, doing business as Public Agency Retirement Services and PARS (hereinafter “PARS”) and the [Agency Name] (“Agency”).

WHEREAS, the Agency has adopted the PARS Public Agencies Post-Employment Benefits Trust for the purpose of prefunding pension obligations and/or Other Post-Employment Benefits (“OPEB”) obligations (“Plan”) and is desirous of retaining PARS as Trust Administrator to the Trust, to provide administrative services.

NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree:

1. Services. PARS will provide the services pertaining to the Plan as described in the exhibit attached hereto as “Exhibit 1A” (“Services”) in a timely manner, subject to the further provisions of this Agreement.

2. Fees for Services. PARS will be compensated for performance of the Services as described in the exhibit attached hereto as “Exhibit 1B”.

3. Payment Terms. Payment for the Services will be remitted directly from Plan assets unless the Agency chooses to make payment directly to PARS. In the event that the Agency chooses to make payment directly to PARS, it shall be the responsibility of the Agency to remit payment directly to PARS based upon an invoice prepared by PARS and delivered to the Agency. If payment is not received by PARS within thirty (30) days of the invoice delivery date, the balance due shall bear interest at the rate of 1.5% per month. If payment is not received from the Agency within sixty (60) days of the invoice delivery date, payment plus accrued interest will be remitted directly from Plan assets, unless PARS has previously received written communication disputing the subject invoice that is signed by a duly authorized representative of the Agency.

4. Fees for Services Beyond Scope. Fees for services beyond those specified in this Agreement will be billed to the Agency at the rates indicated in the PARS’ standard fee schedule in effect at the time the services are provided and shall be payable as described in Section 3 of this Agreement. Before any such services are performed, PARS will provide the Agency with a detailed description of the services, terms, and applicable rates for such services. Such services, terms, and applicable rates shall be agreed upon in writing and executed by both parties.

5. Information Furnished to PARS. PARS will provide the Services contingent upon the Agency providing PARS the information specified in the exhibit attached hereto as “Exhibit 1C” (“Data”). It shall be the responsibility of the Agency to certify the accuracy, content, and completeness of the Data so that PARS may rely on such information without further audit. It shall further be the responsibility of the Agency to deliver the Data to PARS in such a manner that allows for a reasonable amount of time for the Services to be performed. Unless specified in Exhibit 1A, PARS shall be under no duty to question Data received from the Agency, to compute contributions made to the Agenda Item #13.2.

Plan, to determine or inquire whether contributions are adequate to meet and discharge liabilities under the Plan, or to determine or inquire whether contributions made to the Plan are in compliance with the Plan or applicable law. In addition, PARS shall not be liable for nonperformance of Services to the extent such nonperformance is caused by or results from erroneous and/or late delivery of Data from the Agency. In the event that the Agency fails to provide Data in a complete, accurate and timely manner and pursuant to the specifications in Exhibit 1C, PARS reserves the right, notwithstanding the further provisions of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement upon no less than ninety (90) days written notice to the Agency.

6. Records. Throughout the duration of this Agreement, and for a period of five (5) years after termination of this Agreement, PARS shall provide duly authorized representatives of Agency access to all records and material relating to calculation of PARS’ fees under this Agreement. Such access shall include the right to inspect, audit and reproduce such records and material and to verify reports furnished in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. All information so obtained shall be accorded confidential treatment as provided under applicable law.

7. Confidentiality. Without the Agency’s consent, PARS shall not disclose any information relating to the Plan except to duly authorized officials of the Agency, subject to applicable law, and to parties retained by PARS to perform specific services within this Agreement. The Agency shall not disclose any information relating to the Plan to individuals not employed by the Agency without the prior written consent of PARS, except as such disclosures may be required by applicable law.

8. Independent Contractor. PARS is and at all times hereunder shall be an independent contractor. As such, neither the Agency nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have the power to control the conduct of PARS, its officers, employees, or agents, except as specifically set forth and provided for herein. PARS shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due its employees in connection with this Agreement and shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting them, such as social security, income tax withholding, unemployment compensation, workers’ compensation, and similar matters.

9. Indemnification. PARS and Agency hereby indemnify each other and hold the other harmless, including their respective officers, directors, and employees, from any claim, loss, demand, liability, or expense, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, incurred by the other as a consequence of, to the extent, PARS’ or Agency’s, as the case may be, negligent acts, errors or omissions with respect to the performance of their respective duties hereunder.

10. Compliance with Applicable Law. The Agency shall observe and comply with federal, state, and local laws in effect when this Agreement is executed, or which may come into effect during the term of this Agreement, regarding the administration of the Plan.

PARS shall observe and comply with federal, state, and local laws in effect when this Agreement is executed, or which may come into effect during the term of this Agreement, regarding Plan administrative services provided under this Agreement.

Agenda Item #13.2.

11. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In the event any party institutes legal proceedings to enforce or interpret this Agreement, venue and jurisdiction shall be in any state court of competent jurisdiction.

12. Force Majeure. When a party’s nonperformance hereunder was beyond the control and not due to the fault of the party not performing, a party shall be excused from performing its obligations under this Agreement during the time and to the extent that its performance is prevented by such cause. Such cause shall include, but not be limited to:
any incidence of fire, flood, acts of God or unanticipated communicable disease, acts of terrorism or war commandeering of material, products, plants or facilities by the federal, state or local government, a material act or omission by the other party or any law, ordinance, rule, guidance or recommendation by the federal, state or local government, or any agency thereof, which becomes effective after the date of this Agreement that delays or renders impractical either party’s performance under the Agreement.

13. Ownership of Reports and Documents. The originals of all letters, documents, reports, and data produced for the purposes of this Agreement shall be delivered to and become the property of the Agency. Copies may be made for PARS but shall not be furnished to others without written authorization from Agency.

14. Designees. The Plan Administrator of the Agency, or their designee, shall have the authority to act for and exercise any of the rights of the Agency as set forth in this Agreement, subsequent to and in accordance with the written authority granted by the Governing Body of the Agency, a copy of which writing shall be delivered to PARS.

Any officer of PARS, or his or her designees, shall have the authority to act for and exercise any of the rights of PARS as set forth in this Agreement.

15. Notices. All notices hereunder and communications regarding the interpretation of the terms of this Agreement, or changes thereto, shall be effected by delivery of the notices in person or by depositing the notices in the U.S. mail, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows:
(A) To PARS: PARS; 4350 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 100, Newport Beach, CA 92660; Attention: President
(B) To Agency: [Agency]; [Agency Address]; Attention: [Plan Administrator Title] Notices shall be deemed given on the date received by the addressee.

16. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall remain in effect for the period beginning _______________, 2025 and ending _____________, 2028 (“Term”). This Agreement may be terminated at any time by giving thirty (30) days written notice to the other party of the intent to terminate. Absent a thirty (30) day written notice to the other party of the intent to terminate, this Agreement will continue unchanged for successive twelve-month periods following the Term.

17. Amendment. This Agreement may not be amended orally, but only by a written instrument executed by the parties hereto.

Agenda Item #13.2.

18. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including exhibits, contains the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter set forth in this Agreement.

In the event a conflict arises between the parties with respect to any term, condition or provision of this Agreement, the remaining terms, conditions, and provisions shall remain in full force and legal effect. No waiver of any term or condition of this Agreement by any party shall be construed by the other as a continuing waiver of such term or condition.

19. Attorneys Fees. In the event any action is taken by a party hereto to enforce the terms of this Agreement the prevailing party herein shall be entitled to receive its reasonable attorney’s fees.

20. Counterparts. Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, and in that event, each counterpart shall be deemed a complete original and be enforceable without reference to any other counterpart. The words “execution,” “signed,” “signature,” and words of like import in this Agreement or in any other certificate, agreement or document related to this Agreement, shall include digital electronic signatures (e.g., DocuSign). The use of digital electronic signatures and electronic records (including, without limitation, any contract or other record created, generated, sent, communicated, received, or stored by electronic means) shall be of the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as a manually executed signature or use of a paper-based record-keeping system to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.

21. Headings. Headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be used to interpret or construe its provisions.

22. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be effective on the date first above written, and also shall be the date the Agreement is executed.

AGENCY:

BY:

Plan Administrator Name
TITLE:

DATE:

PARS:

BY:

Tod Hammeras
TITLE: Chief Financial Officer
DATE:

Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT 1A

SERVICES
PARS will provide the following services for the [Agency Name] Public Agencies PostEmployment Benefits Trust:

1. Plan Installation Services:
(A) Meeting with appropriate Agency personnel to discuss plan provisions, implementation timelines, actuarial valuation process, funding strategies, benefit communication strategies, data reporting, and submission requirements for contributions/reimbursements/distributions;
(B) Providing the necessary analysis and advisory services to finalize these elements of the Plan;
(C) Providing the documentation needed to establish the Plan to be reviewed and approved by Agency legal counsel. Resulting final Plan documentation must be approved by the Agency prior to the commencement of PARS Plan Administration Services outlined in Exhibit 1A, paragraph 2 below.

2. Plan Administration Services:
(A) Monitoring the receipt of Plan contributions made by the Agency to the trustee of the PARS Public Agencies Post-Employment Benefits Trust (“Trustee”), based upon information received from the Agency and the Trustee;
(B) Performing periodic accounting of Plan assets, reimbursements/distributions, and investment activity, based upon information received from the Agency and/or Trustee;
(C) Coordinating the processing of distribution payments pursuant to authorized direction by the Agency, and the provisions of the Plan, and, to the extent possible, based upon Agency-provided Data;
(D) Coordinating actions with the Trustee as directed by the Plan Administrator within the scope of this Agreement;
(E) Preparing and submitting a monthly report of Plan activity to the Agency, unless directed by the Agency otherwise;
(F) Preparing and submitting an annual report of Plan activity to the Agency; (G) Facilitating actuarial valuation updates and funding modifications for compliance with the applicable GASB pronouncements and/or statements, if prefunding OPEB obligations;
(H) Coordinating periodic audits of the Trust;
(I) Monitoring Plan and Trust compliance with federal and state laws.

3. PARS is not licensed to provide and does not offer tax, accounting, legal, investment or actuarial advice.

Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT 1B

FEES FOR SERVICES
PARS will be compensated for performance of Services, as described in Exhibit 1A based upon the following schedule:

An annual asset fee shall be paid from Plan assets based on the following schedule:

For Plan Assets from: Annual Rate:
$1 to $10,000,000 0.25%
$10,000,001 to $15,000,000 0.20%
$15,000,001 to $50,000,000 0.15%
$50,000,001 and above 0.10%
Annual rates are prorated and paid monthly. The annual asset fee shall be calculated by the following formula [Annual rate divided by 12 (months of the year) multiplied by the Plan asset balance at the end of the month]. Trustee and Investment Management Fees are not included.

Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT 1C

DATA REQUIREMENTS
PARS will provide the Services under this Agreement contingent upon receiving the following information. Agency is solely responsible for ensuring that all information and documentation provided to PARS is true, correct, and authorized:

1. Executed Legal Documents:
(A) Certified Resolution
(B) Adoption Agreement to the Public Agencies Post-Employment Benefits Trust (C) Trustee Investment Forms

2. Contribution – completed Contribution Transmittal Form signed by the Plan Administrator (or authorized Designee) which contains the following information:
(A) Agency name
(B) Contribution amount
(C) Contribution date
(D) Contribution method (Check, ACH, Wire)

3. Distribution – completed Payment Reimbursement/Distribution Form signed by the Plan Administrator (or authorized Designee) which contains the following information:
(A) Agency name
(B) Payment reimbursement/distribution amount
(C) Applicable statement date
(D) Copy of applicable premium, claim, statement, warrant, and/or administrative expense evidencing payment
(E) Signed certification of reimbursement/distribution from the Plan Administrator (or authorized Designee)

4. Other information pertinent to the Services as reasonably requested by PARS and Actuarial Provider.

Agenda Item #13.2.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS:

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Establishment, Administration, and Management
Services of a Section 115 Trust for Pension
DATE ISSUED: Wednesday, March 27, 2024
DATE DUE: Monday, April 29, 2024, 5PM
CONTACT: Mandy Kellogg, Administrative Services Director [email protected]
The City is only accepting proposals electronically via email to [email protected] Only emails sent to [email protected] will be considered as responsive to the request for proposals. Emails sent to other City emails may be considered as non-responsive and may not be reviewed.

CITY OF ST. HELENA
Agenda Item #13.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................... 3 II. GENERAL INFORMATION ..................................................................................................................... 3 III. SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................................................................ 3 IV. SCOPE OF WORK ................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

V. SCHEDULE ............................................................................................................................................. 5 VI. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND FORMAT................................................................... 5 PART 1 | General Information – Form 1................................................................................................ 6 PART 2 | PROJECT APPROACH AND WORK PLAN .............................................................................. 6 PART 3 | CONSULTANT IDENTIFICATION AND TEAM – Form 2............................................................. 6 PART 4 | RELATED PROJECT EXAMPLES AND REFERENCES – Form 3.................................................. 7 PART 5 | RATES – Form 4 ......................................................................................................................... 7 VII. SELECTION PROCESS............................................................................................................................ 7 VIII. PROPOSAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS ................................................................................................ 8

1. EXAMINATION OF PROPOSAL MATERIALS............................................................................. 8

2. ADDENDA INTERPRETATIONS .................................................................................................. 8

3. DESIGNATED CONTACT .......................................................................................................... 8

4. PUBLIC RECORDS..................................................................................................................... 8

5. PROPOSAL COSTS.................................................................................................................... 8

6. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS ........................................................................................................ 9

7. PRODUCT OWNERSHIP ............................................................................................................ 9

8. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT.................................................................................. 9

9. CAUSES FOR DISQUALIFICATION............................................................................................ 9

EXHIBITS
Exhibit A: City of St. Helena Professional Services Agreement Agenda Item #13.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 3
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of St. Helena, California is located in the center of the world-famous wine growing Napa Valley, 65 miles north of San Francisco. The area was settled in 1834 as part of General Vallejo’s land grant. The City of St. Helena was incorporated as a City on March 24, 1876 and reincorporated on May 14, 1889.

The City, from its inception, has served as a rural agricultural center. Over the years, with the growth and development of the wine industry, St Helena has become an important business and banking center for the wine industry. The City also receives many visitors as a result of the wine industry and the area’s scenic qualities. The City’s goal is to maintain a small-town atmosphere and to provide quality services to its citizens.

The official population of the City of St. Helena as of 2019 is 6,133 (CA Department of Finance). St. Helena is a full-service city and encompasses an area of four square miles.

The City’s General Fund Budget is approximately $15 million.

II. GENERAL INFORMATION
The City of St. Helena is seeking proposals from eligible and qualified interested firms to provide comprehensive services for the establishment, administration, and management of an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) approved Section 115 Trust relating to the City’s pension pre-funding, as required to be reported under Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements No. 74 and No. 75.

The City’s goal is to enter into a long-term relationship to obtain the required Section 115 Trust management (including establishment and administration) services in the most efficient and cost-effective manner available. This will be a competitive negotiation process. Qualified individuals, firms, consultants, or entities (hereinafter “Consultant(s)”).

That meet the requirements set forth in this Request for Proposals (hereinafter “RFP”) and are capable of providing the services requested are encouraged to participate.

BACKGROUND
The City employs 93.7 full-time equivalent employees and participates in the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) for both Miscellaneous employees and Safety employees. The City’s pension liability amount is approximately $15.4 million in unfunded pension accrual liability per current actuarial analyses. Information related to the City’s pension liability can be found in Notes to the Financial Statements, Note 2, beginning on page 47 of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report on the City’s website at https://www.cityofsthelena.org/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/501.

III. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The City is exploring various options for managing its unfunded long-term pension liabilities.

One of the strategies being considered is the establishment of an Internal Revenue Code Section 115 Trust to hold assets aside to fund future pension obligations and expenditures.

The objectives of the proposed trust are to provide reasonable returns and maximum flexibility in terms of beneficiaries of trust assets.

Agenda Item #13.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 4
The City is seeking a qualified firm to provide the services as outlined below. Best industry practices and/or best management practices may require additional services not explicitly enumerated. Proposers should identify and price any additional services required and explain them in their response.

Services requirements shall include, but are not limited to:

1. Offer an IRS-approved irrevocable funding vehicle to protect the City’s assets.

2. Implement the Section 115 trust program within 90 days of contract execution.

3. In partnership with City staff, develop an Investment Policy for the Section 115 Trust Pension Fund, and prepare asset allocation guidelines for the trust based on the City’s investment objectives and risk tolerance, and in compliance with the City’s Investment Policy.

4. Provide a full-service program that includes trust administration, trustee, and investment management services.

5. Provide assurance of portfolio compliance with applicable policies and laws.

6. Provide education and presentations regarding the pension trust program to City staff and the City Council.

7. Provide quarterly and annual comparative performance analyses and evaluation reports of the investments of the trust.

8. Coordinate all contributions into the trust and process any requests for appropriate distribution.

IV. ASSURANCE OF DESIGNATED PROJECT TEAM
The consultant shall assure that a designated project team, including sub-consultants or sub-contractors (if any), is used for this project. Departure or reassignment of, or substitution for, any member of the designated project team, sub-consultant(s) or sub-contractor(s) shall not be made without the prior written approval of the City.

Agenda Item #13.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 5
V. SCHEDULE
Responses to the RFP must be submitted to the City of St. Helena as outlined in this section.

Responses are due no later than
MONDAY, APRIL 29, 2024 AT 5:00 PM
Responses received after this date and time will not be considered.

PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR THE REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS

AND DESIRED TIMELINES FOR DELIVERABLES

MILESTONE DATE TIME
Release RFP March 27, 2024 10:00AM
Question submittal deadline April 12, 2024 4:00PM
Questions posted on City website (cityofsthelena.org/rfps) April 15, 2024 5:00PM Proposal due date April 29, 2024 5:00PM
Review and scoring of submittals Week of April 29
Award of Agreement May 14, 2024 6:00 PM
The schedule may be modified and/or extended if necessary.

VI. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND FORMAT
If interested in this RFP, please notify Mandy Kellogg by email at [email protected] so you may be added to the notification list for addendums.

Failure to notify could result in missing important and required information and could result in disqualification.

Format
All submittals must follow the format described in this section. Respondents are encouraged to submit clear and concise responses to the RFP. The City of St. Helena reserves the right to include or exclude any part of the submittals in the final agreement with the selected consultant.

All submittals must be received by 5:00 PM on April 29, 2024 via e-mail as follows:

1. Submittals must be e-mailed to: [email protected]

2. Subject line of e-mail must read: RFP – Section 115 Trust for Pension Services

3. The submittals shall be in PDF format with search capability to endure readability and compatibility. All submitted material will be retained by the City of St. Helena and considered public information.

It is the sole responsibility of the Proposer to ensure timely delivery. Late proposals shall not be considered. Proposals will not be accepted at any other location other than the address specified above. Faxed or emailed proposals will not be accepted.

Agenda Item #13.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 6
Content
The content of your proposal should include the following in summary form:

Part 1: Cover Letter/Executive Summary
Part 2: Firm Qualifications and Experience
Part 3: Consultant Identification and Team
Part 4: Proposed Project Workplan
Part 5: Total Cost and Hourly Rates
PART 1 | COVER LETTER/EXECUTIVE SUMARY
In no more than three (3) pages, the Cover Letter and Executive Summary shall include:

1. The names of the key members of the consultant team.

2. The mailing address, telephone number, and the name of the main point of contact for the consultant team.

3. A summary of the consultant’s experience and qualifications and the significant advantages to selecting the consultant.

4. An acknowledgment of receiving and addendum(s) to the RFP document sent out by the City.

PART 2 | FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
The proposal should state the size of the Firm, the size of the Firm’s staff, the location of the office from which the work on this engagement is to be performed.

For the Firm’s office assigned responsibility for the Section 115 Trust for Pension Services, list the most significant engagements (maximum of 5) performed in the last five (5) years that are similar in organizational type, size and complexity to the engagement described in this request for proposal. These engagements should show experience with local governments establishing, administering, and management services of a Section 115 Trust for Pension.

Indicate the scope of work, date engagement partners, total hours, and the name and telephone number of the principal client contact and, if available, a link to the final published report.

PART 3 | CONSULTANT IDENTIFICATION AND TEAM
The Firm shall identify the principal supervisory and management staff, including engagement partners, managers, other supervisors, and specialists, who would be assigned to the rate study. The Firm should also provide information on direct Section 115 Trust for Pension services experience, including the scope of services requested by the City, of each person, and information on relevant continuing professional education for the past three (3) years and membership in professional organizations relevant to the performance of this service.

The Firm should provide as much information as possible, including resumes, regarding the number, qualifications, experience, and training of the specific staff to be assigned to this agreement. The Firm should also indicate how the quality of staff over the term of the agreement will be assured.

Engagement partners, managers, other supervisory staff, and specialists may be changed if those personnel leave the Firm, are promoted, or are assigned to another office. These personnel may also be changed for other reasons with the express prior written permission of the City of St. Helena. However, in either case, the City of St. Helena reserves the right Agenda Item #13.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 7
to approve or reject replacements. This shall also apply to the consultants and firm specialists mentioned in response to this request for proposal.

Other personnel may be changed at the discretion of the Firm provided that replacements have substantially the same or better qualifications or experience and there is continuity of key staff to ensure an efficient process.

PART 4 | PROPOSED PROJECT WORKPLAN

1. Provide a plan as to how you will administer the requested services outlined in this RFP.

2. Describe the firm’s approach and timeframes to completing the services described in Section III. Scope of Services.

3. Describe the firm’s approach to onboarding and transitioning a new client.

4. Include thorough discussions of methodologies you believe are essential to accomplishing this project including your firm’s philosophy, including your approach to managing Section 115 trust programs. Please address the following questions in the response:
a. What are your approaches to rebalancing or reallocating asset classes, styles, and sectors? How do you add value in this process? b. Describe the investment options available. Please provide 1, 3, and 5-year return history and underlying expense ratios for each fund/portfolio. Do your total portfolio returns comply with Global Investment Performance Standards?
c. How are portfolios managed (e.g. by team, individua manager)? d. Describe your firm’s in-house technical and research capabilities. Are outside sources used by the firm on a regular basis?
e. What technical analysis (if any) do you use?
f. Briefly describe your firm’s investment management philosophy, including your approach to managing governmental portfolios.

5. Identify the staff who would be assigned to each task, including sub-consultants and sub-contractors.

6. List any necessary equipment, training, or installation services required.

PART 5 | TOTAL COST AND HOURLY RATES
The proposal should contain all pricing information related to establishing, administering, and management services of a Section 115 Trust for Pension as described in this request for proposal. The total all-inclusive maximum cost to be proposed is to contain all direct and indirect costs including all out-of-pocket expenses.

VII. EVALUATION PROCESS
The proposals for the City’s Section 115 Trust for Pension Services will be reviewed by a committee selected by the City Manager and Administrative Services Director. Proposers may be required to make oral presentations as a supplement to their proposals. These presentations would only be held subsequent to the receipt of the proposals and will be part of the evaluation/interview process to determine the qualifications of the firm. The City will schedule a time and location for each oral presentation that it requests. Should a proposer refuse to honor the request for a presentation or interview, it may result in the City’s rejection of the proposal.

Agenda Item #13.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 8
Evaluation considerations may include, by way of illustration and not by limitation, the following:
a. Responsiveness of the proposal in clearly stating the understanding of the work to be performed and in demonstrating the intention and ability to perform the work. b. Consultant’s experience in conducting rate studies for cities of a similar nature, size, and complexity, and the consultant’s commitment to maintaining technical expertise in the Section 115 Trust environment.
c. Technical experience and professional qualifications of the team. The number of key and supervisory personnel who will directly participate in the requested services.
d. Size and structure of the Firm’s office from which the work is to be done and continuity in staff. The City is looking for a highly qualified team that is able to meet the requirements specified in this document.
e. Cost. Although a significant factor, cost will not be the primary factor in the selection of a firm.

VIII. PROPOSAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. EXAMINATION OF PROPOSAL MATERIALS
The submission of a proposal shall be deemed a representation and warranty by the proponent that it has investigated all aspects of the RFP, that it is aware of the applicable facts pertaining to the RFP process and its procedures and requirements, and that it has read and understands the RFP. No request for modification of the provisions of the proposal shall be considered after its submission on the grounds the proponent was not fully informed as to any fact or condition.

2. ADDENDA INTERPRETATIONS
If it becomes necessary to revise any part of this RFP, a written addendum will be provided to each firm that requested to be added to the notification list, and said addenda will be uploaded to the City website. The City of St. Helena is not bound by any oral representations, clarifications, or changes made in the RFP by the City or its agents, unless such clarifications or change is provided in written addendum from the City of St. Helena.

3. DESIGNATED CONTACT
For the purposes of this RFP, the Administrative Services Director is designated as the contact person. Any questions concerning the scope of work and the selection process shall be directed to Mandy Kellogg at [email protected]. Any and all questions and responses concerning this RFP will only be accepted in writing, via email. All questions must be received by April 15, 2024 by 5:00PM.

Responses to questions will be posted on the City’s website, cityofsthelena.org/rfps, and will become part of the RFP. It is the consultant’s responsibility to check the website for updates.

4. PUBLIC RECORDS
This RFP document and all submittals in response thereto are public records. Prospective consultants are cautioned not to include any material into the proposal that is strictly proprietary in nature.

5. PROPOSAL COSTS
All costs associated with the preparation of RFP submittals shall be borne by the respondent. This RFP does not constitute any form of offer to contract.

Agenda Item #13.2.

CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 9

6. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
The City reserves the right, for any reason, to accept or reject any one or more proposals; to negotiate the terms and specifications of the proposal; to modify any part of the RFP; or issue a new RFP.

7. PRODUCT OWNERSHIP
Any documents resulting from the contract will be the property of the City.

8. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
All Proposers must identify in their proposal any terms and conditions of the sample Professional Service Agreement (Exhibit B) that they wish to negotiate. Insurance is required as outlined in Section 7 of the sample agreement.

9. CAUSES FOR DISQUALIFICATION
Any of the following may be considered cause to disqualify a proponent without further consideration:
- Evidence of collusion among proponents;
- Any attempt to improperly influence any member of the evaluation panel; - A proponent's default in any operation of a professional services agreement which resulted in termination of that agreement; and/or
- Existence of any lawsuit, unresolved contractual claim, or dispute between proponent and the City.

Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 10
Exhibit A – Sample Professional Services Agreement

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 11

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on [ENTER DATE] by and between the City of St. Helena, located in the County of Napa, State of California (City), and [ENTER CONSULTANT NAME] (Consultant).

RECITALS:

A. City desires to employ Consultant to furnish professional services in connection with the project described as Section 115 Trust Pension Services.

B. Consultant has represented that Consultant has the necessary expertise, experience, and qualifications to perform the required duties.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual premises, covenants, and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as follows:

SECTION 1 – BASIC SERVICES
Consultant agrees to perform the services set forth in Exhibit A, “Scope of Services” and made part of this Agreement.

SECTION 2 – ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement that are in addition to or outside of those set forth in this Agreement or Exhibit A, “Scope of Services” (the “Services”), unless such additional Services and compensation are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Council or City Manager of the City.

SECTION 3 – TIME FOR COMPLETION
The time for completion of Services shall be as identified in Exhibit A, “Scope of Services”. The parties expressly agree that time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.

SECTION 4 – COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
A. Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay consultant the amount specified in Exhibit A, “Compensation” attached hereto and made a part hereof. Total compensation shall not exceed [ENTER COST] unless additional compensation is approved in accordance with Section 2.

B. Consultant shall furnish to City an original invoice for all work performed and expenses incurred during the preceding month. The invoice shall detail charges by the following categories if applicable: labor (by sub-category), travel, materials, equipment, supplies, subconsultant Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 12
contracts, and miscellaneous expenses. Each original invoice furnished shall include the expenses incurred during the preceding month, the cumulative Agreement amount, and the amount remaining on the Agreement. City shall independently review each invoice submitted to determine whether the work performed and expenses incurred are in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. If no charges or expenses are disputed, the invoice shall be approved, and City will use its best efforts to cause Consultant to be paid within 30 days of receipt of invoice. If the City disputes any charges or expenses, the City will return the original invoice to Consultant for correction and resubmission. If the City reasonably determines, in its sole judgment, that the invoiced charges and expenses exceed the value of the Services performed to date and that it is probable that the Agreement will not be completed satisfactorily within the contract price, City may retain all or a portion of the invoiced charges and expenses. Within thirty (30) days of satisfactory completion of the project, City shall pay the retained amount, if any, to Consultant.

C. Payment to the Consultant for work performed pursuant to this Agreement shall not be deemed to waive any defects in work performed by Consultant.

SECTION 5 – STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE
A. Consultant represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities necessary to properly perform the Services required under this Agreement in a thorough, competent and professional manner. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of its ability, experience and talent, perform all Services described herein. In meeting its obligations under this Agreement, Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons in the same or similar geographical area engaged in providing Services similar to those required of Consultant under this Agreement.

B. In order to induce City to enter into this Agreement, Consultant represents that it is duly organized, existing and in good standing under applicable state law; Consultant is licensed to perform all aspects of the Services; Consultant will employ only persons and Subconsultants with all required licenses and certifications; that Consultant is duly qualified to conduct business in the State; that Consultant has duly authorized the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the Services to be performed herein; and that the Agreement does not violate or create a default under any instrument, agreement, order or decree binding on Consultant.

SECTION 6 – INSPECTION AND FINAL ACCEPTANCE
City may inspect and accept or reject any of Consultant’s work under this Agreement, either during performance or when completed. City shall reject or finally accept Consultant’s work within sixty (60) days after submitted to City, unless the parties mutually agree to extend such deadline. City shall reject work by a timely written explanation, otherwise Consultant’s work shall be deemed to have been accepted. City’s acceptance shall be conclusive as to such work except with respect to latent defects and fraud. Acceptance of any of Consultant’s work by City shall not constitute a waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement including, but not limited to, the sections pertaining to indemnification and insurance.

Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 13
SECTION 7 – INSURANCE REQUIRED
Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees, as indicated:

A. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001).

2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto).

3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance.

B. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:

1. General Liability: $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage including operations, products and completed operations, as applicable. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

2. Automobile Liability: $2,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

3. Employer’s Liability: $2,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.

C. Professional Liability Insurance. When Consultant under this Agreement is duly licensed under California Business and Professions Code as an architect, landscape architect, environmental engineer or other professional engineer, or land surveyor (“design professional”), Consultant shall maintain at least $2,000,000 of professional liability insurance. When Consultant is not a design professional, Consultant shall maintain at least $1,000,000 of professional liability insurance combined single limit for each occurrence, insuring against professional errors and omissions in the Services performed by Consultant under this Agreement, including, without limitation, claims for negligence, misrepresentation, violation of good faith and fair dealing, and inaccurate advise arising out of, resulting from, or in connection with Services performed by Consultant under this Agreement.

D. Excess Limits. If Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.

E. Primary Coverage. For any claims related to this contract the Consultants insurance Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 14
coverage shall be primary insurance as respects to City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of Consultants insurance and shall not contribute with it.

F. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions of $25,000 or greater must be declared to and approved by the City.

G. Other Insurance Provisions. The commercial general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

1. The City, its agent, officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insured as respects: liability arising out of work or operations performed by the Consultant or Consultant’s subconsultants; or automobile owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant.

2. For any claims related to Consultant’s conduct while performing the work of this project, the Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its agents, officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its agents, officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.

3. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.

4. Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of the additional insured in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional insured would be invalid under Subsection (b) of Section 2782 of the Civil Code.

H. Waiver of Subrogation. Consultant’s commercial general liability, automobile liability, workers’ compensation, and employer’s liability policies shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation. The insurance company, in its endorsement, agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its agents, officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses paid under the terms of this policy which arises from the work performed by the named insured for the City.

I. The Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A: VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.

J. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements should be on forms provided by the City or on forms that conform to City requirements. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.

The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications at any time.

SECTION 8 – INDEMNIFICATION
The Consultant shall be responsible for its acts of negligence, and the City shall be responsible for its acts of negligence. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless from Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 15
any and all claims, demands, actions and causes of action to the extent caused by the negligent acts of the Consultant, its officers, agents and employees, by reason of the performance of this agreement. This indemnity shall not be construed to require indemnification of others.

SECTION 9 – INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS
Consultant is and shall at all times remain a wholly independent contractor and not an officer, employee or agent of City. Consultant shall have no authority to bind City in any manner or to incur an obligation, debt or liability of any kind on behalf of or against City, whether by contract or otherwise, unless such authority is expressly conferred under this Agreement or is otherwise expressly conferred in writing by City.

The personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant’s exclusive direction and control. Neither City, nor any elected or appointed boards, officers, officials, employees or agents of City, shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant’s officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Consultant or any of Consultant’s officers, employees or agents are in any manner officials, officers, employees or agents of City.

Neither Consultant, nor any of Consultant’s officers, employees or agents, shall obtain any rights to retirement, health care or any other benefits which may otherwise accrue to City’s employees. Consultant expressly waives any claim Consultant may have to any such rights.

SECTION 10 – CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND ANTI-FRAUD AND ANTICORRUPTION POLICIES Consultant covenants that neither it, nor any officer or principal of its firm, has or shall acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, which would conflict in any manner with the interests of City or which would in any way hinder Consultant’s performance of Services under this Agreement. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it as an officer, employee, agent, or subcontractor without the express written consent of the City Manager. Consultant agrees to at all times avoid conflicts with the interests of City in the performance of this Agreement.

City understands and acknowledges that Consultant is, as of the date of execution of this Agreement, independently involved in the performance of non-related Services for other governmental agencies and private parties. Consultant is aware of any stated position of City relative to such projects. Any future position of City on such projects shall not be considered a conflict of interest for purposes of this section.

Consultant understands and acknowledges City maintains an anti-fraud and anti-corruption policy to protect the City, its operations, and its employees from and against financial risks, operational breaches, and unethical, fraudulent and corrupt activities. Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant, its subcontractor(s) / subconsultant(s) and their respective employees providing Services pursuant to the Agreement are (1) in good standing; (2) have not been Agenda Item #13.2.

EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | SECTION 115 TRUST FOR PENSION SERVICES PAGE 16
previously investigated, convicted, or debarred for fraudulent or corrupt activities; (3) will not participate in fraudulent or corrupt activities, and (4) will take steps to ensure that its employees and subcontractor(s) / subconsultant(s) employees do not participate in any fraudulent or corrupt activities. Consultant acknowledges and agrees further that it has a duty to and will report to City any information or incident(s) about possible fraudulent or corrupt activities Consultant may discover, and will cooperate in any fraud or corruption investigation conducted, with respect to Consultant’s service provided pursuant to this Agreement.

SECTION 11 – OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
All original maps, models, designs, drawings, photographs, studies, surveys, reports, data, notes, computer files, files and other documents prepared, developed or discovered by Consultant in the course of providing any Services pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by City without the permission of the Consultant. When requested by City, but no later than three years after project completion, Consultant shall deliver to City all such original maps, models, designs, drawings, photographs, studies, surveys, reports, data, notes, computer files, files and other documents.

All copyrights, patents, trade secrets, or other intellectual property rights associated with any ideas, concepts, techniques, inventions, processes, improvements, developments, works of authorship, or other products developed or created by Consultant during the course of providing Services (collectively the “Work Product”) shall belong exclusively to City. The Work Product shall be considered a “work made for hire” within the meaning of Title 17 of the United States Code. Without reservation, limitation, or condition, Consultant hereby assigns, at the time of creation of the Work Products, without any requirement of further consideration, exclusively and perpetually, any and all right, title, and interest Consultant may have in the Work Product throughout the world, including without limitation any copyrights, patents, trade secrets, or other intellectual property rights, all rights of reproduction, all rights to create derivative works, and the right to secure registrations, renewals, reissues, and extensions thereof.

SECTION 12 – CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION; RELEASE OF

INFORMATION
All information gained or work product produced by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential, unless such information is in the public domain or already known to Consultant. Consultant shall not release or disclose any such information or work product to persons or entities other than City without prior written authorization from the City Manager, except as may be required by law.

Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not, without prior written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney of City, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement.

Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered “voluntary” provided consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena.

Agenda Item #13.2.