Sutter Creek City Council
June 3, 2024

City Council Meeting Agenda
Monday, June 03, 2024 at 6:00 PM
33 Church Street, Sutter Creek, CA 95685
The Agenda can be found on the City’s Website: www.cityofsuttercreek.org The City of Sutter Creek City Council Meeting will be available via Zoom and in person.

Join Zoom meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/9568520224 Please note: Zoom participation is only available for viewing the Council meeting. *Public Comment will not be taken from Zoom*
Or Dial by phone: 301-715-8592 | Meeting ID: 956 852 0224 Unless stated otherwise on the agenda, every item on the agenda is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c), 15061(b)(3), 15273, 15378, 15301, 15323 and/or Public Resources Code Section 21065.

1. Call to Order and Establish a Quorum for Regular Meeting

2. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag

3. Public Forum
At this time, the public is permitted to address the City Council on items not appearing on the agenda.

Comments may not exceed 5 minutes. In accordance with State Law, however, no action or discussion may take place on any item not appearing on the posted agenda. The City Council may respond to statements made or questions asked or may request Staff to report back at a future meeting on the matter. The exceptions under which the City Council may discuss and/or take action on items not appearing on the agenda are contained in Government Code §54954.2. Public comment on any item listed below shall be limited to five minutes, unless additional time is permitted by the Mayor/Council.

4. City Manager’s Report
This section is an opportunity to provide Council members with a brief status update on staff activities. No action is expected to be taken by the Council.

5. Presentations
1 A. Fuel Break Overview by Steve Cannon, Foothill Resource Management

6. Approval of Minutes
A. City Council Minutes of May 20, 2024
Recommendation: By motion approve minutes as presented.

7. Consent Agenda
Items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine and shall be enacted in one motion. Any item may be removed for discussion at the request of Council or the Public.

A. Adopt Resolution 23-24-* Calling for an election, requesting consolidation of its general municipal elections with the statewide presidential general election, filing a notice of election with the registrar of voters, submitting an incumbent list and terms of office, requiring that a candidate’s statements be paid by the candidate, certifying the jurisdictions boundary map, determining a coin toss as the tie breaking method, authorizing Amador county elections department to conduct the election and canvass the returns, and expressing intent to reimburse Amador County fort the actual costs of the election.

8. Ordinances and Public Hearing
A. Public Hearing to consider increase in rates for sewer service

1. Consider whether a majority protest exists as to the above rate increases per Proposition 218. The City has sent hearing notices to 1475 parcels. A majority protest would exist if 738 ratepayers submit written protests to the proposed rate increase. Only one written protest may be filed per parcel. (Gov.

Code, § 53755(b).)
If a majority protest is successful, the Council may not approve the proposed rate adjustments. Conversely, if no majority protest exists, the adjustments may be approved.

2. If no majority protest exists, consider whether to approve the requested rate increase.

3. Adopt Resolution 23-24-* approving sewer service rate increase pursuant to Proposition 218.

9. Administrative Agenda
A. Eureka Road Overlay Project
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 23-24-* Awarding the construction contract for the Eureka Road overlay project.

B. Oro Madre Way Asphalt Concrete Overlay Project
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 23-24-* Awarding the construction contract for the Oro Madre Way Asphalt Concrete Overlay Project to the low bidder for the Base Bid and Additive Alternative #1.

C. Adopt Resolution 23-24-* Authorizing the City Manager to execute a Real Property Donation Agreement conveying 18.3 acres of real property to the City of Suter Creek (APN’s 018-020-031 and 018-020-032).

D. Proposed support letter for Amador City fuel break - for discussion and staff direction. 2 E. Submission of a Notice of Exemption for the lake or streambed alteration permit for the creek clearing project.

10. Mayor and Council Member Reports
This section is to provide Council members an opportunity to present updates on their activities and to request items be placed on future agendas.

11. City Attorney’s Report
This section provides an opportunity for the City Attorney to report on any activities or upcoming legislation of importance to the City. No action is expected to be taken by the Council.

12. Future Agenda Items
This section provides an opportunity for Council members to request items to be added to the agenda in the future with a majority Council vote.

13. Information and Correspondence

14. Closed Session
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION
(Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Gov. Code Section 54956.9) SEIU Local 1021 v. City of Sutter Creek, Pub. Emp. Rel. Bd.

Case No. SA-CE-1244-M
B. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
Agency Negotiator: Tom DuBois, City Manager
Employee Organizations: Sutter Creek POA

15. Report from Closed Session

16. Adjournment
The next scheduled meeting is June 24th.
3 Foothill Resource Management
Steve Q. Cannon, RPF #2316
P.O. Box 818, Pine Grove, CA 95665
[email protected]
http://www.foothillresource.com
(209)419-1569
Amador Fire Safe Council
Proposal for Amador City Fuelbreak
Landowner name: C.J. & Lisa Rendic
Mailing address: 17 St. Lucia Place, Tiburon, CA 94920 email:[email protected] Phone: (415)328-3214
Project Location: Township 7 North, Range 11 East, Sections 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 MDB&M Turner Road, Amador City, CA
At the gate on Turner Road: Lat. 38o25’ 05”, Lon. 120o48’ 33” APNs: 015-210-002 (264.16 ac.), 015-210-012 (480 ac.), 015-220-002 (156.88 ac.), total acres = 901 ac.

Project Description: Construct a shaded fuel break of approximately 3 miles in length by 300-400 feet wide for an estimated acreage of 125 acres. The fuel break would be strategically located and constructed on primary ridges, most of which are northwest/southeast trending ridges. The vegetation types on the ridges where the fuel break would be constructed are oak woodland (interior live oak, buckeye, gray pine) interspersed with heavy whiteleaf manzanita, toyon and ceanothus brush.

Brush and smaller hardwood trees would be removed, leaving live oaks and occasional conifers with diameters >12” DBH spaced from 20 to 30 feet apart. Residual trees would be pruned to an approximate height of 10 feet. No streamcourses exist on the area to be included in the fuel break.

The fuel break will be constructed using masticating machines, hand falling and lopping, tractor piling and burning of some slash.

Amador City and Sutter Creek are both within 1.5 miles of the central portion of the proposed fuel break. The vegetation types that are between the Rendic property and the proposed fuel break are oak woodland and oak savannah. The oak woodland type is highly flammable and has a high resistance to control under wildfire conditions. The oak savannah type will burn intensively in a wildfire, but has a lower resistance to control. The Rancheria Fire of 1961 burned over the entire area of Amador City, Sutter Creek and the Amador Creek and Rancheria Creek watersheds. North wind events are particularly dangerous in this area and the towns of Amador City and Sutter Creek would be susceptible to catastrophic losses in the event of a wildfire that originated to the east and northeast of those two towns.

The benefits that will accrue from the construction of this fuel break are that the towns of Amador City and Sutter Creek will gain an increased measure of fire hazard protection. In combination with the Rendic’s plan to initiate a total property vegetation management plan wherein areas outside of the fuel break will also be thinned and have the oak woodland made more fire safe and productive for livestock, a large area will be established with reduced fuel loading from which a wildfire originating to the east and/or northeast of the Rendic property could be more successfully attacked. Firewise Communities to the north, south and east (Cassineli, Quartz Mountain and Burke Ranch) have organized to work on fuel hazard reduction. This project helps to connect the dots between those Firewise Communities.
4 Section 5, Item A.

Maintenance of the fuel break will be accomplished by the landowners using targeted grazing by horses and cattle. The Rendics are initiating a fencing project to allow them to utilize grazing in a prescribed manner. The goals of the Rendic’s ownership are to ensure sustainable rangeland management, high quality forage production for livestock, soil and water protection, wildlife habitat protection and fuels management.

The city councils of Amador City and Sutter Creek will be approached to ask for their support of this project. Adjacent landowners will be approached where their properties constitute a logical and strategic extension of the fuel break.
5 Section 5, Item A.
6 Section 5, Item A.
7 Section 5, Item A.

City Council Meeting Minutes
Monday, May 20, 2024 at 6:00 PM
33 Church Street, Sutter Creek, CA 95685
The Agenda can be found on the City’s Website: www.cityofsuttercreek.org The City of Sutter Creek City Council Meeting was available via Zoom and in person.

Unless stated otherwise on the agenda, every item on the agenda is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c), 15061(b)(3), 15273, 15378, 15301, 15323 and/or Public Resources Code Section 21065.

1. Call to Order and Establish a Quorum for Regular Meeting Mayor Gunselman called the meeting to order at 6 p.m.

PRESENT
Mayor Claire Gunselman
Vice Mayor Julia Sierk
Council member Jim Swift
Council member Dan Riordan
ABSENT
Council member Susan Feist

2. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag

3. Public Forum
Jim McKeon noted that he was speaking as a citizen and not as a Sutter Creek Police Officer. He referenced the Council's discussion at the May 6th meeting in regard to a grant for a police vehicle and questioned why the Council would consider turning down any grant money for a police car that the officers need to do their job.
8 Section 6, Item A.

4. City Manager’s Report
City Manager Tom DuBois gave a presentation providing updates based on Council 2024 priorities on the following:

Repaving bids, fixing sinkholes, draft budget, closing ARSA financials, land near WWTP, the pool contract and city clean-up efforts.

City Manager's Report Presentation

5. Presentations
A. Audit Review- Maze & Associates
Vikki Rodriguez of Maze & Associates presented the Audit Report.

6. Approval of Minutes
A. City Council Minutes of May 6, 2024
Recommendation: By motion approve minutes as presented.

Motion made by Vice Mayor Sierk, Seconded by Council member Swift.

Voting Yea: Mayor Gunselman, Vice Mayor Sierk, Council member Swift, Council member Riordan

7. Consent Agenda
Motion made by Vice Mayor Sierk, Seconded by Council member Riordan.

Voting Yea: Mayor Gunselman, Vice Mayor Sierk, Council member Swift, Council member Riordan A. Use of SB-1 fund for transportation purposes.

Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 23-24-28 Approving the Use of SB1 funds for rehabilitation improvements for fiscal year 2024-2025.

8. Ordinances and Public Hearing – None

9. Administrative Agenda
A. Local Transaction and Use Tax Update - for discussion and staff direction Council member Riordan commented that this is the best way forward and continues to support the tax.

He noted that the polling results show that the difference in support between the 1% and 1.5% is negligible and that the tourists will share the burden.

Council member Sierk noted that she has received positive feedback from the business owners.

Mayor Gunselman suggested including residents as stakeholders in the staff report. She noted that this is the least detrimental option for residents on a budget, as it will have less of an effect on locals than it does on tourists. She also commented that the timing has to be in a Presidential Election year.

The Council directed staff continue to move forward with the 1.5% option. 9 Section 6, Item A.

B. Adopt Resolution 23-24-29 authorizing the City of Sutter Creek to submit an application to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for funding under the CPLHA Competitive Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program
Council member Swift stepped down from this item due to a conflict of interest.

City Manager Tom DuBois explained that there is no impact or cost to the city, that it is just a pass through.

Motion made by Council member Riordan, Seconded by Vice Mayor Sierk.

Voting Yea: Mayor Gunselman, Vice Mayor Sierk, Council member Riordan Abstain: Council member Swift

10. Mayor and Council Member Reports
Council member Riordan reported that he attended a meeting with volunteers to talk about potential volunteer opportunities. The status of the emergency sirens was brought up and they expect to meet again soon.

Council member Sierk reported that ACRA approved the pool agreement, there was some concern about the school district's role with the pool and they finished their audit that went well.

Council member Swift noted that the is a Fire District meeting tomorrow and that he will ask for an update on the status of the sirens.

11. City Attorney’s Report - None

12. Future Agenda Items
Council member Sierk asked about the progress of the radar sign installation, the plan for providing bike racks and about changing the crosswalk at Gopher Flat and Main. St.

Public Works Director Dan Lafontaine noted that Public Works has installed one sign and is working on installing the rest of the radar signs and they plan to do the crosswalk striping once school is out for the summer. He also reported that the Foundry will be making bike racks, and that staff is looking into the implications of altering the crosswalk at Gopher Flat and Main Street.

Council member Swift suggested discussing moving money into the LAIF account that yields higher interest.

Mayor Gunselman suggested a regional equipment share agreement since each of the cities have equipment that is not always in use and could be utilized by neighboring departments.

13. Information and Correspondence
So Noted.

A. Monthly Police Report
B. Monthly Public Works Report
C. Treasurer’s Report
10 Section 6, Item A.

D. Monthly Administrative Services Report
E. Monthly Finance Department Report
F. Warrants
G. Monthly Engineer's report
H. Monthly Planning Report
I. General Election Information

14. Closed Session
Adjourned into Closed Session at 7:22 p.m.

A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION
(Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Gov. Code Section 54956.9) SEIU Local 1021 v. City of Sutter Creek, Pub. Emp. Rel. Bd.

Case No. SA-CE-1244-M

15. Report from Closed Session
No reportable action and staff were given direction.

16. Adjournment
___________________________________
Claire Gunselman, Mayor
___________________________________
Karen Darrow, City Clerk
Date Approved:
11 Section 6, Item A.
1 RESOLUTION23-24-*

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUTTER CREEK

CALLING FOR AN ELECTION, REQUESTING CONSOLIDATION OF ITS GENERAL

MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS WITH THE STATEWIDE PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION,

FILING A NOTICE OF ELECTION WITH THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS, SUBMITTING AN INCUMBENT LIST AND TERMS OF OFFICE, REQUIRING THAT CANDIDATE’S STATEMENTS BE PAID BY THE CANDIDATE, CERTIFYING THE JURISDICTION’S

BOUNDARY MAP, DETERMINING A COIN TOSS AS THE TIE-BREAKING METHOD,

AUTHORIZING AMADOR COUNTY ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT TO CONDUCT THE

ELECTION AND CANVASS THE RETURNS, AND EXPRESSING INTENT TO REIMBURSE AMADOR COUNTY FOR THE ACTUAL COSTS OF THE ELECTION.

WHEREAS, on June 27th, 2022, the City of Sutter Creek adopted Resolution 21-22-44, Requesting the Amador County Board of Supervisors to permit the county official to render elections services to the City; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Election must be filed with the Amador County Registrar of Voters specifying which offices are to be filled at this election; and WHEREAS, the City of Sutter Creek boundary map has not changed since the last election held in 2022; and
WHEREAS, Amador County intends to conduct a consolidated election on November 5, 2024; and WHEREAS, the consolidation of elections may serve to reduce election expenses to taxpayers and may increase voter turnout; and
WHEREAS, a Candidate’s statement, if desired, is to be paid by the Candidate; and WHEREAS, the Amador County Elections Department must be Authorized to conduct the election and to canvass all returns; and
WHEREAS, Amador County should be reimbursed for the actual costs of the election; and WHEREAS, a pre-determined tie-breaking method should now be designated to prevent any possible dispute as to the final outcome of the election; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Sutter creek does hereby,
(1.) Call for an Election to be held to elect three council members; (2.) Request that its General Municipal Elections to elect three council members be Consolidated with the Presidential General Election scheduled for November 5, 2024; (3.) File it is Notice of Election with the Registrar of Voters specifying the elective offices to be filled;
(4.) Submit a list of incumbents and terms of offices;
(5.) Require that a Candidate’s Statement, if desired, is to be paid by the Candidate; (6.) Certify the current boundary map is without change since the last election; 12 Section 7, Item A.
2 (7.) Sets a coin-toss as its tie-breaking method for this election. (8.) Authorizes Amador County Elections Department to conduct the election and canvass the returns; and (9.) Intends to reimburse Amador County for the actual costs of this election.

The foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sutter Creek on the 3rd day of June 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

THE CITY OF SUTTER CREEK
____________________________
Claire Gunselman, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Karen Darrow, City Clerk
13 Section 7, Item A.
4876-2300-9725.1 1
18 Main St., Sutter Creek, CA 95685 • Telephone: (209)267-5647 • Fax: (209)267-0639 • TTY: 711 The City of Sutter Creek is an equal opportunity service provider and employer

STAFF REPORT
TO: CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: JUNE 3, 2024
FROM: DEREK COLE, CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER INCREASES IN RATES
FOR SEWER SERVICE FOR FIVE-YEAR PERIOD (2024-
2028)

BACKGROUND
At its April 15, 2024 meeting, the City Council received a 2024 Sewer Rate Study prepared by Mark Hildebrand. The Study outlines a plan for continued sewer rate increases beginning July 1 of this year. The Study follows from a previous five-year plan the City Council adopted, following a Proposition 218 process, in 2019.

It is the intention of the 2024 Rate Study to continue to develop a multiyear management plan that includes both operational and capital projects, identifies future adjustments to sewer rates and service charges, determine the cost of providing sewer service to the City’s retail customers and wholesale customers, and to recommend specific modifications to the City’s existing rate structure to ensure the City covers the costs of operating the system.

Before 2019, City sewer rates had not been adjusted since 2009. The increases proposed in the 2024 Sewer Rate Study, as in the 2019 study, are necessary to keep the sewer system operational and in compliance with required state standards.

Public notices were sent to sewer service ratepayers at least 45 days before the date of this public hearing. In terms of methodology, sewer customers are charged based on equivalent singlefamily units (ESFUs) which reflects the average volume of flows from residential dwellings during the winter months of January, February, and March (131 gallons per day (gpd)). All residential accounts pay a Sewer Service Charge rate of 1 ESFU per dwelling unit (which includes multifamily dwelling units and accessory dwelling units (ADUs)). Commercial customers are assigned an ESFU value based on the respective account’s average daily winter water usage (per 14 Section 8, Item A.
4876-2300-9725.1 2
18 Main St., Sutter Creek, CA 95685 • Telephone: (209)267-5647 • Fax: (209)267-0639 • TTY: 711 The City of Sutter Creek is an equal opportunity service provider and employer Amador Water Agency water usage records) divided by 131 gallons. Commercial accounts are assigned a minimum value of one (1) ESFU.

The proposed rates for the five-year cycle consider are as follows:

Proposed Sewer Service Charge Rate Schedule
APPLICABILITY OF PROPOSITION 218
Proposition 218, the “Right to Vote on Taxes Act,” was approved by California voters in November 1996. The initiative generally requires that all special assessments and “property related fees” be approved by local voters.

Under Proposition 218, sewer service charges are considered “property related fees” and are thus subject to the procedure set forth in California Constitution Article XIIID, Section 6(a).

This section provides that proposals concerning property-related fees must be considered in a public hearing, known as a “majority protest hearing,” at which ratepayers may register their opposition to the proposed rate increase. Prior to this hearing, Proposition 218 requires that notice be mailed to all property owners and/or ratepayers at least 45 days in advance. If, following the hearing, a majority of the owners or ratepayers submit written protests to the proposed fee (i.e., there is a “majority protest”), the fee may not be approved. If there is no majority protest, approval of the fee is authorized.

NOTICE OF MAJORITY PROTEST HEARING
Regarding the proposed rate adjustment, the City has complied with its obligation to mail notice of the June 3, 2024 protest hearing to all ratepayers of sewer service. Following a provision in the Proposition 218 implementation legislation, the City has mailed notice of the hearing to all sewer service ratepayers. (Gov. Code, § 53755(a).)
Current July 1,
2024*
July 1,
2025
July 1,
2026
July 1,
2027
July 1,
2028
ESFU Rate: $76.93 $111.55 $133.86 $145.91 $159.04 $162.22 ESFU Rate Increase: (na) 45.0% 20.0% 9.0% 9.0% 2.0%
Vacancy Rate:** $52.31 $75.85 $91.02 $99.21 $108.14 $110.30 * The proposed rate increase replaces the 2% increase that was previously adopted for this date ** Based on 68% of standard ESFU rate, based on utility fixed costs. Vacancy rate goes into effect six months after notifying the City.
15 Section 8, Item A.
4876-2300-9725.1 3
18 Main St., Sutter Creek, CA 95685 • Telephone: (209)267-5647 • Fax: (209)267-0639 • TTY: 711 The City of Sutter Creek is an equal opportunity service provider and employer

DETERMINATIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE
At the June 3, 2024 meeting, the Council should hold a public hearing to:

1. Consider whether a majority protest exists as to the above rate increases per Proposition 218. The City has sent hearing notices to 1475 parcels. A majority protest would exist if 738 ratepayers submit written protests to the proposed rate increase. Only one written protest may be filed per parcel. (Gov. Code, § 53755(b).) If a majority protest is successful, the Council may not approve the proposed rate adjustments. Conversely, if no majority protest exists, the adjustments may be approved.

2. If no majority protest exists, consider whether to approve the requested rate increases. A proposed resolution is provided to the Council should it wish to authorize the rate adjustments.

HEARING PROCESS
As for how to conduct the hearing concerning the sewer service rate adjustments, the City attorney recommends, based on prior majority protest proceedings the City has conducted, that the Council proceed as follows:

1. Call this item when it arises on the agenda.

2. Staff will make its presentation and the Council may ask Staff questions.

3. Open the public hearing and allow comment by all interested parties. A motion should be made to formally close the public hearing. Under Proposition 218, no protests may be counted once the public hearing has closed.

4. Following the conclusion of the public hearing, count all written protests received prior to the meeting and prior to the close of the hearing. The City has sent notices to 1475 parcels. If the number of written objections to the proposed increases does not exceed 738, the Council may find that a majority protest does not exist as to that increase. (In the event the 738 threshold is not reached, the City Attorney recommends that the Council deem all protests to be validly submitted rather than take the time necessary to verify that each protest meets Proposition 218 requirements.)

5. If more than 738 written protests are received as to the proposed adjustments, have the City Clerk verify each protest to ensure it is submitted by the ratepayer of record, contains the information required by Proposition 218, and that no more than one protest 16 Section 8, Item A.
4876-2300-9725.1 4
18 Main St., Sutter Creek, CA 95685 • Telephone: (209)267-5647 • Fax: (209)267-0639 • TTY: 711 The City of Sutter Creek is an equal opportunity service provider and employer has been submitted per property. If following this verification process, there still are 738 or more written protests, the Council must find that a majority protest exists.

6. If no majority protest exists, the Council should consider the accompanying resolution approving the proposed rate adjustments.
17 Section 8, Item A.

RESOLUTION 23-34-*

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF SUTTER CREEK APPROVING SEWER SERVICE RATE INCREASE PURSUANT TO PROPOSITION 218
WHEREAS, the City of Sutter Creek (“City”) provides sewer collection, treatment, and conveyance/disposal services to residential and business accounts located within the City as well as to the City of Amador and the Martell wastewater service areas of the Amador Water Agency; WHEREAS, on April 15, 2024, the City Council received the 2024 Sewer Rate Study, which proposes increases in sewer-service rates to accomplish a multi-year management plan for both capital and operational projects;
WHEREAS, the City timely mailed notices to ratepayers of proposed increases in the rate schedule for the sewer services it provides in accordance with California Constitution, Article XIII, § 6(a), and Government Code section 53755(a);
WHEREAS, pursuant to Proposition 218, the City duly noticed and held a “majority protest hearing” on June 3, 2024 regarding its intention to approve the requested rate increases; WHEREAS, as verified by the counting of protests following the June 3, 2024 public hearing in which this matter was considered, a majority protest was not made prior to the close of the hearing in opposition to the proposed rate increases stated in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act is not applicable to the proposed rate increase because the increase is not a “project,” as defined by California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 15378(a), and because of the exceptions set forth in California Code of Regulations, Title 14 (CEQA Guidelines), section 15378(b)(3) and (4) for proposals submitted to voters and fiscal decisions.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that effective January 1, 2020, the City may begin charging customers the rates set forth in Exhibit A, determined on an equivalent single-family unit (“ESFU”) basis, and pursuant to the methodology specified therein.

The foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sutter Creek on June 3, 2024, by the following vote.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:
____________________________________
Claire Gunselman, Mayor
______________________________________
Karen Darrow, City Clerk
18 Section 8, Item A.

EXHIBIT A

APPROVED RATE INCREASE
Sewer Service Charge Rate Schedule
Sewer customers are charged based on equivalent single-family units (ESFUs) which reflects the average volume of flows from residential dwellings during the winter months of January, February, and March (131 gallons per day (gpd)). All residential accounts pay a Sewer Service Charge rate of 1 ESFU per dwelling unit (which includes multifamily dwelling units and accessory dwelling units (ADUs)). Commercial customers are assigned an ESFU value based on the respective account’s average daily winter water usage (per Amador Water Agency water usage records) divided by 131 gallons. Commercial accounts are assigned a minimum value of one (1) ESFU.

Current July 1,
2024*
July 1,
2025
July 1,
2026
July 1,
2027
July 1,
2028
ESFU Rate: $76.93 $111.55 $133.86 $145.91 $159.04 $162.22 ESFU Rate Increase: (na) 45.0% 20.0% 9.0% 9.0% 2.0%
Vacancy Rate:** $52.31 $75.85 $91.02 $99.21 $108.14 $110.30 * The proposed rate increase replaces the 2% increase that was previously adopted for this date ** Based on 68% of standard ESFU rate, based on utility fixed costs. Vacancy rate goes into effect six months after notifying the City.
19 Section 8, Item A.

Staff Report
To: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Meeting Date: June 3, 2024
From: Matt Ospital, City Engineer
Subject: Eureka Road Overlay Project
Recommendation: Award of Construction Contract
Type: Roadway Rehabilitation
Recommendation:

Approve the resolution awarding the construction contract for the Eureka Road Overlay Project to the low bidder.

Background:

The City prepared a Project Study Report (PSR) for Eureka Road in October 2023 to the Amador County Transportation Commission (ACTC) for roadway rehabilitation funding. On January 22, 2024 John Gedney of ACTC notified the City that construction funding was approved for a maximum amount of $405,000 as identified in the PSR.

Due to escalating construction costs in recent years, the project was broken out into a base bid with an additive alternate. The base bid project consisted of drainage improvements and an asphalt concrete overlay. Additive Alternate #1 consisted of installing a paving grid underneath the asphalt concrete overlay to provide additional roadway strength and increase the life of the asphalt concrete.

Discussion:

The City of Sutter Creek conducted the bid opening for the Eureka Road Overlay Project at 10:00 a.m. on May 8, 2024. The City received five bids for the project as follows:

Base Bid Add. Alt. #1 Total

1. Consolidated Engineering, Inc. $226,627.00 $29,250.00 $255,877.00

2. Dirt Dynasty, Inc. $243,912.00 $28,125.00 $272,037.00

3. RNR Paving, Inc. $296,766.00 $30,757.50 $327,523.50

4. George Reed, Inc. $308,195.00 $33,750.00 $341,945.00

5. Campbell Construction $309,644.00 $33,000.00 $342,644.00 20 Section 9, Item A.

Based upon the attached bid summary, I hereby recommend the City Council of the City of Sutter Creek award the contract for the Base Bid and Additive Alternate #1 to the low bidder, Consolidated Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $255,877.00. Construction is anticipated to start on/around June 17th and end on/around July 26th.

Budget Impact:

Low Bidder Costs Estimated in
PSR
Construction Funds $ 255,875.00 $300,000.00
Estimated Contingency Funds
(20%)
$ 51,175.00 $ 60,000.00
Construction Management $ 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00
Total Project Cost $ 352,050.00 $405,000.00
With the low bidder’s construction cost, this would allow the City to be under the allotted $405,000 approved by ACTC.

Attachments:

Bid Summary
Draft Resolution
21 Section 9, Item A.

RESOLUTION 23-24-*

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUTTER CREEK

AWARDING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE

EUREKA ROAD OVERLAY PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Sutter Creek conducted the bid opening for the Eureka Road Overlay Project at 10:00 a.m. on May 8, 2024; and
WHEREAS, The City received five bids for the project; and WHEREAS, no discrepancies were noted in the bid review; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Sutter Creek hereby awards the contract in the amount of $255,877.00 to Consolidated Engineering, Inc. in accordance with the contract documents.

The foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sutter Creek on the 3
rd day of June 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

THE CITY OF SUTTER CREEK
______________________________
Claire Gunselman, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Karen Darrow, City Clerk
22 Section 9, Item A.

BASE BID:
$/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $29,000.00 $29,000.00 2 LOCATE & PROTECT EXISTING UTILITIES LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $5,600.00 $5,600.00 3 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $4,400.00 $4,400.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $15,647.00 $15,647.00 $28,000.00 $28,000.00 $12,500.00 $12,500.00 4 CLEARING & GRUBBING LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $15,500.00 $15,500.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $5,465.00 $5,465.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 5 15-INCH DIAMETER STORM DRAIN LF 82 $250.00 $20,500.00 $141.00 $11,562.00 $190.00 $15,580.00 $347.00 $28,454.00 $180.00 $14,760.00 $212.00 $17,384.00 6 CLASS 4 BACKFILL CY 25 $300.00 $7,500.00 $218.00 $5,450.00 $208.00 $5,200.00 $457.00 $11,425.00 $275.00 $6,875.00 $222.00 $5,550.00 7 STORM DRAIN INLET EA 1 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $4,700.00 $4,700.00 $7,202.00 $7,202.00 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $9,500.00 $9,500.00 8 CONCRETE FLARED END SECTION EA 3 $3,000.00 $9,000.00 $1,500.00 $4,500.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,750.00 $5,250.00 $1,400.00 $4,200.00 $3,500.00 $10,500.00 9 ROCK SLOPE PROTECTION TON 30 $180.00 $5,400.00 $215.00 $6,450.00 $200.00 $6,000.00 $272.20 $8,166.00 $190.00 $5,700.00 $400.00 $12,000.00 10 AGGREGATE BASE TON 230 $125.00 $28,750.00 $68.00 $15,640.00 $140.00 $32,200.00 $150.70 $34,661.00 $110.00 $25,300.00 $112.00 $25,760.00 11 CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER SF 420 $60.00 $25,200.00 $81.00 $34,020.00 $54.00 $22,680.00 $78.80 $33,096.00 $95.00 $39,900.00 $58.00 $24,360.00 12 ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE GRIND SF 2,100 $3.50 $7,350.00 $4.45 $9,345.00 $2.25 $4,725.00 $3.37 $7,077.00 $4.00 $8,400.00 $4.00 $8,400.00 13 ASPHALT CONCRETE TON 375 $250.00 $93,750.00 $160.00 $60,000.00 $145.00 $54,375.00 $189.52 $71,070.00 $250.00 $93,750.00 $198.00 $74,250.00 14 ASPHALT CONCRETE DIKE LF 480 $20.00 $9,600.00 $52.00 $24,960.00 $15.00 $7,200.00 $20.35 $9,768.00 $28.00 $13,440.00 $33.00 $15,840.00 15 STRIPING AND PAVEMENT MARKERS LS 1 $12,950.00 $12,950.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $26,112.00 $26,112.00 $18,120.00 $18,120.00 $39,000.00 $39,000.00 16 UNSUITABLE MATERIAL CY 50 $50.00 $2,500.00 $112.00 $5,600.00 $155.00 $7,750.00 $311.50 $15,575.00 $75.00 $3,750.00 $190.00 $9,500.00 TOTALS $275,000.00 $226,627.00 $243,912.00 $296,766.00 $308,195.00 $309,644.00 ADDITIVE ALTERNATE #1:
$/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL 1 Paving Grid SY 2,250 $10.00 $22,500.00 $13.00 $29,250.00 $12.50 $28,125.00 $13.67 $30,757.50 $15.00 $33,750.00 $14.67 $33,000.00 ADDITIVE ALTERNATE #1 TOTALS: $22,500.00 $29,250.00 $28,125.00 *Note 1 $30,757.50 $33,750.00 *Note 2 $33,000.00 BASE BID AND ADDITIVE ALTERNATE #1 TOTALS: $297,500.00 $255,877.00 $272,037.00 $327,523.50 $341,945.00 $342,644.00 *Note 1: Total Price on Bid Summary Additive Alternate # 1 was submitted as $30,768.00 *Note 2: Unit Price on Bid Summary Additive Alternate #1 was submitted as a lump sum of $33,000.

ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE DIRT DYNASTY, INC. RNR PAVING, INC. GEORGE REED, INC.

CITY OF SUTTER CREEK

EUREKA ROAD OVERLAY PROJECT

BID SUMMARY
BID OPENING: MAY 8, 2024 at 10:00 A.M.

CAMPBELL CONSTRUCTION
GENERAL ENGINEERING, INC.

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE CONSOLIDATED ENGINEERING, INC. DIRT DYNASTY, INC. RNR PAVING, INC. GEORGE REED, INC.

CAMPBELL CONSTRUCTION
GENERAL ENGINEERING, INC.

CONSOLIDATED
ENGINEERING, INC.
23 Section 9, Item A.

Staff Report
To: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Meeting Date: June 3, 2024
From: Matt Ospital, City Engineer
Subject: Oro Madre Way Asphalt Concrete Overlay Project Recommendation: Award of Contract
Type: Street Rehabilitation
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the resolution awarding the construction contract for the Oro Madre Way Asphalt Concrete Overlay Project to the low bidder for the Base Bid and Additive Alternative #1.

BACKGROUND:

The city identified Oro Madre Way as a priority for street rehabilitation.

Due to escalating construction costs in recent years, the project was broken out into a base bid with an additive alternate. The base bid project consisted of drainage improvements, installing 3 sanitary sewer manholes, replacing 150 L.F. of sewer main and an asphalt concrete overlay. Additive Alternate #1 consisted of installing a paving grid underneath the asphalt concrete overlay to provide additional roadway strength and increase the life of the asphalt concrete.

DISCUSSION:

The City of Sutter Creek conducted the bid opening for the Oro Madre Way Asphalt Concrete Overlay Project at 10:00 a.m. on May 15, 2024. The City received three bids for the project as follows:

Base Bid Add. Alt. #1 Total

1. Dirt Dynasty, Inc. $299,266.00 $41,800.00 $341,066.00

2. Campbell Construction $304,960.00 $50,000.00 $354,960.00

3. George Reed, Inc. $408,780.00 $52,800.00 $461,580.00 Based upon the attached bid summary, I hereby recommend the City Council of the City of Sutter Creek award the contract for the Base Bid and Alternative #1 to the low bidder, Dirt Dynasty, Inc. in the amount of $341,066.00. Construction is anticipated to start on/around July 1st and end on/around Aug 2 nd
.
24 Section 9, Item B.

BUDGET IMPACT:

Construction management costs are estimated to be $30,000. Typically, construction contingencies are estimated at 10%. However, since the existing sewer main condition could not be verified on Oro Madre Way due to the long pipe run length between existing sanitary sewer manholes, it is recommended to increase the construction contingency to approximately 20% or ($60,000) in case additional portions of the existing sanitary sewer main require replacement.

Attachments:

Bid Summary
Draft Resolution
25 Section 9, Item B.

RESOLUTION 23-24-*

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUTTER CREEK

AWARDING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE

ORO MADRE WAY ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Sutter Creek conducted the bid opening for the Oro Madre Way Asphalt Concrete Overlay Project at 10:00 a.m. on May 15, 2024; and WHEREAS, The City received three bids for the project; and WHEREAS, no discrepancies were noted in the bid review; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Sutter Creek hereby awards the contract in the amount of $341,066.00 to Dirt Dynasty, Inc. in accordance with the contract documents.

The foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sutter Creek on the 3rd day of June 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

THE CITY OF SUTTER CREEK
______________________________
Claire Gunselman, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Karen Darrow, City Clerk
26 Section 9, Item B.

BASE BID:
$/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL
1 Mobilization LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $32,000.00 $32,000.00 $33,000.00 $33,000.00 $27,000.00 $27,000.00 2 Locate & Protect Existing Utilities LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $6,100.00 $6,100.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 3 Traffic Control LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $41,000.00 $41,000.00 $17,000.00 $17,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 4 Clearing & Grubbing LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $7,800.00 $7,800.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 5 12-Inch Diameter Storm Drain LF 108 $250.00 $27,000.00 $182.00 $19,656.00 $220.00 $23,760.00 $660.00 $71,280.00 6 Class 4 Backfill CY 40 $300.00 $12,000.00 $216.00 $8,640.00 $270.00 $10,800.00 $300.00 $12,000.00 7 Storm Drain Inlet EA 2 $7,500.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,100.00 $10,200.00 $6,100.00 $12,200.00 8 6 Inch Diameter Sewer Main (PVC) LF 150 $200.00 $30,000.00 $154.00 $23,100.00 $155.00 $23,250.00 $315.00 $47,250.00 9 Connect to Existing Sanitary Sewer Service EA 2 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $1,700.00 $3,400.00 $1,700.00 $3,400.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 10 Sanitary Sewer Manhole EA 3 $8,000.00 $24,000.00 $6,500.00 $19,500.00 $3,100.00 $9,300.00 $9,200.00 $27,600.00 11 Connect to Existing Sewer Manhole EA 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,130.00 $1,130.00 $2,300.00 $2,300.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 12 Aggregate Base TON 70 $125.00 $8,750.00 $290.00 $20,300.00 $121.00 $8,470.00 $200.00 $14,000.00 13 Asphalt Concrete Surface Grind SF 5,200 $1.50 $7,800.00 $1.45 $7,540.00 $2.90 $15,080.00 $3.50 $18,200.00 14 Asphalt Concrete Leveling Course TON 70 $300.00 $21,000.00 $135.00 $9,450.00 $180.00 $12,600.00 $350.00 $24,500.00 15 Asphalt Concrete TON 650 $200.00 $130,000.00 $135.00 $87,750.00 $188.00 $122,200.00 $165.00 $107,250.00 16 Unsuitable Material (CA) CY 20 $100.00 $2,000.00 $150.00 $3,000.00 $150.00 $3,000.00 $150.00 $3,000.00 TOTALS $337,550.00 $299,266.00 $304,960.00 $408,780.00
ADDITIVE ALTERNATE #1:
$/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL $/UNIT TOTAL
1 Paving Grid SY 4,400 $10.00 $44,000.00 $9.50 $41,800.00 $11.36 $50,000.00 $12.00 $52,800.00 ADDITIVE ALTERNATE #1 TOTALS: $44,000.00 $41,800.00 $50,000.00 $52,800.00 BASE BID AND ADDITIVE ALTERNATE #1 TOTALS: $381,550.00 $341,066.00 $354,960.00 $461,580.00

CITY OF SUTTER CREEK

ORO MADRE WAY ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY PROJECT

BID SUMMARY
BID OPENING: MAY 15, 2024 at 10:00 A.M.

ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE DIRT DYNASTY, INC. CAMPBELL CONSTRUCTION GENERAL ENGINEERING, INC. GEORGE REED, INC.

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY
DIRT DYNASTY, INC. CAMPBELL CONSTRUCTION
GENERAL ENGINEERING, INC. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE GEORGE REED, INC. 27 Section 9, Item B.
1 18 Main St., Sutter Creek, CA 95685 • Telephone: (209)267-5647 • Fax: (209)267-0639 • TTY: 711 The City of Sutter Creek is an equal opportunity service provider and employer

STAFF REPORT
TO: CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: JUNE 3, 2024
FROM: DEREK COLE, CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF REAL PROPERTY DONATION
AGREEMENT FOR 18.3 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY
(APNs 018-020-031 and 018-020-032)
Recommendation
Adopt Resolution 23-24-* Authorizing the City Manager to execute a Real Property Donation Agreement conveying 18.3 acres of real property to the City of Suter Creek (APN’s 018-020-031 and 018-020-032).

Background and Analysis
Creekwood Capital LLC (“Creekwood”) owns two parcels comprising 18.3 acres (“Property”) near the City’s wastewater treatment plant (“WWTP”). The property is bordered by Highway 49 on the west, Sutter Ione Road on the north, Oro Madre Way on the west, and the WWTP property on the south. Creekwood has proposed to donate the Property to the City.

The donation of this Property will provide great flexibility to the City given that it is adjacent to the WWTP property. Although the City does not have immediate needs for the Property, the donation will allow the City to have space to accommodate the future uses of the WWTP property, room for a potential public works maintenance yard, solar power generation for city use and to ensure adequate buffer property can surround the WWTP currently and in the future.

Importantly, the conveyance of the property would not include any restrictive covenant. The City would thus have the authority to apply the donated property for any public purpose.

The City has secured the attached appraisal from a qualified appraiser, who valued the Property at $1,265,000. The City has also had a “Phase I” environmental analysis performed, which did not indicate any environmental concerns requiring further analysis.

The City Attorney has drafted a Real Property Donation Agreement that both City Staff and Creekwood have accepted in principle and as to form. If the Council authorizes the receipt of the 28 Section 9, Item C.
2 18 Main St., Sutter Creek, CA 95685 • Telephone: (209)267-5647 • Fax: (209)267-0639 • TTY: 711 The City of Sutter Creek is an equal opportunity service provider and employer donation, the parties will open up a 60-day escrow. Upon the closing of escrow, the two parcels comprising the Subject Property would be conveyed to the City without charge (other than the small closing costs the City would incur).

Fiscal Impact
The City will only incur a small amount of closing costs associated with the escrow for the proposed transaction. Following closing, the City would incur the normal “carrying costs” associated with the ownership of public property. These costs would include the regular costs of property upkeep, maintenance, and security. If the property is used for future WWTP improvements, the value of the land can be considered an “in kind” contribution by the city to the costs of a plant, and used as matching funds for potential grants. 29 Section 9, Item C.

RESOLUTION 23-24-*

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF SUTTER CREEK AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A REAL PROPERTY DONATION AGREEMENT CONVEYING 18.3

ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF SUTTER CREEK
(APNs 018-020-031 and -032)
WHEREAS, Creekwood Capital LLC (“Creekwood”) is the owner in fee of two parcels near the City of Sutter Creek Wastewater Treatment Plan (“WWTP”), specifically Amador County Assessor Parcel Nos. 018-020-031 and 018-020-031 (“Subject Property”); WHEREAS, Creekwood has expressed interest in donating the Subject Property, which includes

18.3 acres of undeveloped land;
WHEREAS, California Government Code sections 37350, 37351.5, and 37544 authorize the City to receive donations of real property;
WHEREAS, Because Creekwood proposes to donate the Subject Property to the City without any restrictive covenant or limitation, the City may use the property for any public purpose (California Government Code section 37355);
WHEREAS, the City has obtained an appraisal of the Subject Property from a qualified appraiser who has determined a value of $1,265,000;
WHEREAS, the City and Creekwood agree that the sale of the Subject Property qualifies as a charitable donation for taxation purposes in accordance with Internal Revenue Code section 170 and other applicable federal and state laws and regulations; WHEREAS, before and as of the time of the donation, Creekwood was under no compulsion to convey, dedicate, or transfer any or all of the Subject Property to the City and Creekwood was not under any threat of condemnation;
WHEREAS, the City has conducted a “Phase I” environmental analysis of the Subject Property, which did not disclose any significant environmental condition requiring further environmental analysis; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the acquisition of the Subject Property is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the “Common Sense Exemption” (14 Cal. Code Regs., § 15061(b)(3)) because the acquisition of the property provides buffer property for the WWTP property, does not commit the City to pursue any project, and because any future project involving the Subject Property would require its own CEQA process.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the Sutter Creek authorizes the City Manager to execute the Real Property Donation Agreement between the City of Sutter Creek and Creekwood Capital LLC.
30 Section 9, Item C.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, to execute on the City’s behalf any attestation, certification, or instrument Creekwood requires for submission to the Internal Revenue Service or any federal or state taxing agency.

The foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sutter Creek on the 3rd day of June 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:
____________________________________
Claire Gunselman, Mayor
______________________________________
Karen Darrow, City Clerk
31 Section 9, Item C.

EXHIBIT A
Real Property Donation Agreement
32 Section 9, Item C.
1 REAL PROPERTY

DONATION AGREEMENT
This Real Property Donation Agreement (the “Agreement”) is entered into by and between the City of Sutter Creek, a California municipal agency (“City”), and Creekwood Capital LLC, a California limited liability company (“Donor”).

RECITALS
A. Donor is the owner of 18.3 acres of real property located in the City of Sutter Creek, in Amador County, California described as Amador County Assessor Parcel Nos. 018-020-031 and 018- 020-032, and more particularly described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated by reference.

The real property, including improvements thereon, if any, are collectively referred to within as the “Donation Property.”
B. In accordance with Internal Revenue Code section 170 and other applicable federal or California law, Donor desires to donate, and City desires to accept, the Donation Property.

C. As of the Effective Date of this Agreement and as of the Closing Date, Donor was under no threat of City condemnation related to the Donation Property and was under no obligation otherwise to transfer the Donation Property for any reason or consideration whatsoever.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements within and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

1. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be effective on June 4, 2024 (“Effective Date”).

2. Donation. In accordance with and subject to the terms and provisions of this Agreement, Donor is willing to donate the Donation Property to the City in its as-is condition. Other than as expressly set forth in this Agreement, (a) the City acknowledges and agrees that the City is acquiring the Property in its “AS IS” condition, with all faults. The City acknowledges that through this Agreement it has been afforded the opportunity to make such inspections (or have such inspections made by consultants) as it desires of the Donation Property and to obtain information regarding operative or proposed governmental laws and regulations (including, but not limited to, zoning, environmental and land use laws and regulations) to which the Donation Property is or may be subject to at the Close of Escrow. The City acknowledges that it has or will independently and with the assistance of the City’s professional advisors and consultants undertake whatever non-invasive studies, tests, and investigations the City desires to conduct relating to the Donation Property (including, without limitation, economic reviews, engineering analyses, environmental analyses, and analyses of the records of any governmental or quasi-governmental entity having jurisdiction over the Donation Property). The City is relying solely on its own investigation as to the Donation Property and its value and is assuming the risk that adverse physical, economic, or other conditions may not have been revealed by such investigation Except for those terms and provisions that expressly survive the Close of Escrow, from and after the Close of Escrow, the City hereby completely releases and forever discharges Donor, Donor’s 33 Section 9, Item C.
2 employees, agents, or any other person acting on behalf of Donor, and Donor’s partners and owners (collectively, the “Indemnitees”) from and against all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, rights, damages, costs, expenses, or compensation whatsoever, direct or indirect, known or unknown, foreseen or unforeseen (collectively, “Claims”), arising from or in any way growing out of or connected with the physical condition of the Donation Property or any law or regulation applicable thereto (collectively, the “Released Matters”). In connection with such waiver and relinquishment, the City acknowledges that it is aware that it hereafter may discover Claims or facts in addition to or different from those which it now knows or believes to exist with respect to the Released Matters, but that it is the City’s intention to fully, finally and forever to settle and release all of the Released Matters in accordance with the provisions of this section, and the release set forth herein shall be and remain in effect as a full and complete release notwithstanding the discovery or existence of any such additional or different Claims or facts. The foregoing release of Claims shall be binding on the City and all subsequent owners, lessees, and other transferees of the Donation Property.

In connection with this section, the City expressly waives the benefits of Section 1542 of the California Civil Code which provides as follows:
“A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.”
City signatory’s Initials

3. Conditions to City’s Performance. The City’s obligation to perform under this Agreement is subject to the following conditions:

3.1 The City has had an adequate opportunity to independently conduct the inspections of the Donation Property provided for within;

3.2 Donor’s representations and warranties in this Agreement being correct as of the Effective Date and as of Close of Escrow;

3.3 Donor’s performance of all obligations under this Agreement; and

3.4 The vesting of title to the Donation Property in City by grant deed in fee simple absolute, free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, assessments, leases (recorded and/or recorded), and taxes.

If the City determines that any of these conditions have not been met, the City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by delivering written notice to Donor, and, if applicable, to the Escrow agent.

4. Taxes and Assessments. Non-delinquent real property taxes and assessments and utility and other charges (to the extent such utility or other accounts cannot be transferred in the name of City as of the close of Escrow) shall be prorated between the Donor and City as of the Close of Escrow. All prorations shall be made on a per-diem basis using a thirty (30) day month and a three hundred sixty-five (365) day year. To the extent any apportionment cannot reasonably be completed by the Close of Escrow, the parties shall make such necessary proration in a commercially reasonable manner and pay such amounts to the party entitled hereto within a period of thirty (30) days after the Close of Escrow.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the provisions of this section shall survive the Close of 34 Section 9, Item C.
3 Escrow to the extent necessary to fully allocate such amounts. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Donor reserve the right to keep, collect and retain any refunds, rate or price reductions or other sums, including, without limitation, any property tax refund, reductions or rebate, which relate to the periods prior to the Close of Escrow whether or not such sums are collected after the Close of Escrow, and City shall promptly return to Donor any such sums received by City.

5. Escrow. By this Agreement, the City and Donor establish an escrow (“Escrow”) with Placer Title Company (“Title Company”). Donor hereby authorizes the City to prepare and file escrow instructions with this Title Company, on behalf of Donor, in accordance with this Agreement. This includes authorization of the Title Company to withhold pro rata taxes, liens, and assessments on the Donor Property conveyed.

5.1 Fees and Title Insurance. City shall pay the Closing Agent’s Escrow Fee, transfer tax and recording fees, if applicable, and the premium for title insurance if desired by City. Donor shall be responsible for any and all reconveyance or transfer fees for any deeds of trust, full release of mortgage, payment of liens, discharge of judgments, or any legal, administrative or other costs or expenses Donor may incur in delivering marketable title to City. All costs related to satisfying any “due diligence” requirements or requests that a party deems necessary to perform its obligations under this Agreement shall be the sole obligation of such party. All current property taxes on the Property shall be handled in accordance with Section 4986 of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California and updates thereof. Any other costs or expenses not otherwise provided for in this Agreement shall be paid by the requesting party.

5.2 Property Review. City shall keep the Property lien free and shall immediately discharge and remove any liens placed thereon based upon the actions of the City or any party acting under or on behalf of the City.

5.3 Donor’ Deposit into Escrow. On or before Close of Escrow, Donor will deliver into Escrow with the Title Company the following documents:

A. A grant deed, in recordable form and properly executed on behalf of the City, in a form approved by City (“Grant Deed”) conveying to City the Property in fee simple absolute, subject only to the Approved Exception(s).

B. Copies of any effective leases, rental agreements or any other agreements, if any, which City has agreed in writing, are to remain in effect after City takes title.

C. Donor’s affidavit of nonforeign status as contemplated by Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“FIRPTA Affidavit”); and D. Grantor’s affidavit as contemplated by the Revenue and Taxation Code Section 18662 (“Withholding Affidavit”).

5.4 Close of Escrow. Escrow shall close on or before August 30, 2024 (“Close of Escrow”). On the Close of Escrow date, the Title Company shall close Escrow as follows:

A. Record the Deed, marked for return to City in care of the City Manager (which shall be deemed delivery to City), and shall obtain at recording conformed copies of the Deed and deliver a copy thereof to Donor and City immediately after the Close of Escrow; 35 Section 9, Item C.
4 B. Issue the title policy;
C. Prorate taxes, assessments, rents, and other charges as provided by this Agreement; and
D. Prepare and deliver to the City and to Donor one signed copy of the Title Company’s closing statement showing all receipts and disbursements of the Escrow.

If the Title Company is unable to simultaneously perform all of the instructions set forth above, the Title Company shall notify Donor and the City and retain all funds and documents pending receipt of further instructions from Donor and the City. Either party may waive any and all objections to any condition precedent to its performance and proceed with this Agreement by giving written notice thereof to the other party and the Title Company.

6. Donor’s Representations. Donor represents and warrants to the City that as of the Effective Date and as of the Close of Escrow:

6.1 Hazardous Substances. To the best of Donor’s knowledge and except as set forth in any environmental reports delivered or made available to the City, the Donation Property is: (i) free from hazardous substances, as that term is defined in applicable federal and California law; (ii) contains no buried or partially buried storage tanks located on the Donation Property; (iii) has not been used for the generation, storage or disposal of any hazardous substance, as that term is defined under applicable federal or California law, and no hazardous substance has been spilled, disposed of, or stored on, under, or at the Donation Property; and (iv) has never been used as a dump or landfill;

6.2 Leases. To the best of Donor’s knowledge, except as otherwise disclosed or indicated in a preliminary title report, there are no leases, licenses, or other agreements allowing any thirdparty rights to use the Donation Property that are now or will be in force as of the Close of Escrow;

6.3 Litigation and Investigations. There is no pending or, to the best of Donor’s knowledge, threatened litigation, administrative proceeding, or other legal or governmental action with respect to the Donation Property, and Donor has received no notice, warning, administrative complaint, judicial complaint, or other formal or informal notice alleging that conditions on the Donation Property are or have been in violation of any laws, or informing Donor that the Donation Property is subject to investigation or inquiry regarding the violation of any laws;

6.4 No Insolvency Proceedings. Donor has not (i) made a general assignment for the benefit of creditors; (ii) filed any voluntary petition in bankruptcy or suffered the filing of any involuntary petition by its creditors; (iii) suffered the appointment of a receiver to take possession of all or substantially all of its assets; (iv) suffered the attachment or other judicial seizure of substantially all of its assets; or (v) admitted in writing its inability to pay its debts as they come due;

6.5 No Other Agreements, Undertakings or Tenancies. Donor will not enter into any agreements or undertake any new obligations prior to the Close of Escrow that will in any way burden, encumber or otherwise affect the Donation Property without the prior written consent of the City; and

6.6 Warranty as to Donation Property Ownership. Donor represents and warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement on behalf of Donor have the legal power, right, and authority to make this Agreement.
36 Section 9, Item C.
5 7. Other Agreements. City agrees to cooperate with Donor’s determination of the fair market value by an appraisal to be commissioned by and performed solely for Donor’s purposes. City is under no obligation to confirm or agree upon any value derived from an appraisal conducted by Donor. Donor will obtain independent tax counsel and is solely responsible for compliance with the gift substantiation requirements of the tax code. City’s obligation will be to acknowledge receipt of a donation of the Donation Property by executing IRS Form 8283 before Close of Escrow. City acknowledges that it has not provided Donor with anything of value in exchange for the Donation Property.

8. Termination of Agreement. Donor and City mutually agree that this Agreement shall be effective through August 30, 2024, unless further extended in writing by Donor and the City. The parties to this agreement mutually agree that if Close of Escrow does not occur on or before August 30, 2024, and if this Agreement is not extended by Donor and City, this Agreement shall terminate at midnight on August 30, 2024.

9. Survival. All of the terms, provisions, representations, warranties and covenants of the parties under this Agreement shall survive the assignment, expiration or termination of this Agreement and shall not merge in the deed or other documents following the delivery and recordation of said deed or other documents.

10. Possession of the Donation Property. Possession of the Donation Property shall be delivered to City at the Close of Escrow.

11. Attorney Fees. Should either party institute any action or proceeding to enforce any provision of this Agreement or for damages by reason of an alleged breach of any provision hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to receive all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney, consultant, and expert witness fees incurred by such prevailing party in connection with such action or proceeding, at trial and on any appeal.

12. Assignment and Successors. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the parties to this Agreement and their respective heirs, successors, and assigns.

13. Notices. All notices (including requests, demands, approvals or other communications) under this Agreement shall be in writing. The place for delivery of all notices given under this Agreement shall be as follows:

Donor: Mark Egide
Creekwood Capital, LLC
474 Fairway Drive
Novato, CA 94949
City: Tom Dubois
City Manager
City of Sutter Creek
18 Main Street
Sutter Creek, CA 95685
Or to such other addresses as Donor and City may respectively designate by notice to the other.

14. Entire Agreement. The parties have herein set forth the whole of their agreement. The 37 Section 9, Item C.
6 performance of this agreement constitutes the entire consideration for this document and shall relieve City of all further obligation or claims. Donor has no other right or claim to compensation arising out of or connected with the acquisition of the Donation Property by City.

15. Construction. The section headings and captions of this Agreement are, and the arrangement of this instrument is, for the sole convenience of the parties to this Agreement. The section headings, captions and arrangement of this instrument do not in any way affect, limit, amplify or modify the terms and provisions of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be construed as if it had been prepared by one of the parties, but rather as if both parties had prepared it. The parties to this Agreement and their counsel have read and reviewed this Agreement and agree that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply to the interpretation of this Agreement. The Recitals are and shall be enforceable as a part of this Agreement.

16. Further Assurances. Whenever requested to do so by the other party, each party shall execute, acknowledge and deliver all further conveyances, assignments, confirmations, satisfactions, releases, powers of attorney, instruments of further assurance, approvals, consents and all further instruments and documents as may be necessary, expedient, or proper in order to complete all conveyances, transfers, sales, and assignments under this Agreement, and do all other acts and to execute, acknowledge, and deliver all documents as requested in order to carry out the intent and purpose of this Agreement.

17. Donation Property Studies and Records. Donor shall deliver to City, within five (5) calendar days after execution of this Agreement by all Parties, complete, accurate and legible (hard and electronic) copies of all documents concerning the Donation Property that are in Donor’s possession or control or are readily available to Donor, including, but not limited to, title reports, specifications, maps, drawings, surveys, engineering, soils, environmental, and geotechnical studies and reports, leases, estoppels, topographic surveys, grading plans, feasibility, marketing or other studies, investigations or reports, permits, approvals, affordable housing agreements, right of way and easement agreements, zoning and master plans, bonds, specific plans, initial studies, mitigated negative declarations and/or environmental impact reports, Phase I and II environmental assessments, entitlement documents; property tax bills; estoppels from tenants; and notices of any violation of any federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, affordable housing or inclusionary housing agreements, rules or regulations.

18. Waiver. A waiver or breach of any covenant or provision in this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any other covenant or provision in this Agreement, and no waiver shall be valid unless in writing and executed by the waiving party.

19. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected.

20. Counterparts. This Agreement and any amendments hereto may be executed in any number of counterparts and by each party in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be deemed an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

21. Costs, Expenses and Fees. City and Donor each agree to pay their own costs and expenses, including fees of attorneys, accountants, and consultants, incurred in the preparation of and carrying out of this Agreement.
38 Section 9, Item C.
7 22. Right To Enter Donation Property.

22.1 Access to Donation Property. Commencing with execution of this Agreement, the City or City's representatives, after written request(s) and approval(s), shall be allowed access to the Donation Property prior to the Close of Escrow, at all reasonable times for the purpose of obtaining data and making surveys, tests, inspections and other studies at City's sole expense, necessary to carry out this Agreement or as required by local and California state regulatory agencies.

22.2 The City shall procure and maintain (and require any of its representatives entering the Donation Property to procure and maintain): (i) workers’ compensation insurance required by the laws of the State of California; (ii) commercial general liability insurance in the amount of at least Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) combined single limit, naming Donor as additional insureds and containing a cross liability endorsement or severability of interests clause; and (iii) with respect to any contractor or consultant conducting environmental, soils or geological tests, commercial general liability insurance, in the amount of at least One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit. The City shall, prior to any entry by City and/or its representatives, furnish certificates of such insurance coverage to Donor.

Such certificates shall contain a clause providing for thirty (30) days’ advance notice of cancellation or material change in coverage.

22.3 Restoration of Donation Property. The City shall, upon completion of data gathering, and making surveys, tests, inspections and other studies, restore the Donation Property to the extent reasonably possible to its condition prior to such data gathering, surveys, tests, inspections and other studies.

22.4 Indemnification Resulting From Access. The City shall indemnify and hold harmless Donor of and from any and all mechanic's liens, claims, actions, liabilities, costs, expenses, including attorneys' fees, and damages of any type or nature arising out of or in any way related to any such use of or entry onto the Donation Property by the City or by any other person or entity on behalf of, or at the request of, the City, excluding any losses or damages, including but not limited to a reduction in the value of the property, resulting from any finding or results of any surveys, tests, inspections or other studies, whether or not negligent.

SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE
39 Section 9, Item C.
8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have duly executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.

DONOR

CREEKWOOD CAPITAL, LLC
By:

Mark Egide
Owner
DONOR

CITY OF SUTTER CREEK
By:

Tom Dubois
City Manager
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Karen Darrow
City of Sutter Creek
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Derek P. Cole
City Attorney

40 Section 9, Item C.
9 EXHIBIT A
Property Description
[To be inserted]
41 Section 9, Item C.

Appraisal Report

18.3 Acres Residential Land
Corner Highway 49 and Sutter Ione Rd
Sutter Creek, California 95685
Date of Report: April 1, 2024
Prepared for:

Cole | Huber Attorneys LLP
2281 Lava Ridge Ct, Suite 300
Roseville, CA 95661
Prepared by:

John T. Ashworth, MAI, SRA
42 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

1 Ashworth Appraisal Services
705 E Bidwell St #2-412
Folsom, CA 95630
(530) 888-9803
www.realestatevalue.com
April 1, 2024
Derek P. Cole, Partner
Cole | Huber Attorneys LLP
2281 Lava Ridge Ct, Suite 300
Roseville, CA 95661
RE: 18.3 Acres Residential Land
SE Corner Highway 49 and Sutter Ione Rd
Sutter Creek, California 95685
Dear Mr. Cole:

Ashworth Appraisal Services has prepared an Appraisal Report pertaining to the market value of the fee simple interest in the above property. This report is written in conformance with the requirements set forth under the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP).

The subject represents two contiguous parcels of real property in the city of Sutter Creek, California which are currently unimproved land. More details regarding physical and financial characteristics of the property are contained within the attached report.

As a result of my analyses, it is my opinion the as-is market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property as of February 23, 2024, in accordance with the assumptions and limiting conditions set forth on pages 10 through 12 of this report, is:

ONE MILLION TWO HUNDRED SIXTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
$1,265,000
The estimate of market value assumes a transfer would reflect a cash transaction or terms considered to be equivalent to cash. The estimate is also premised on an assumed sale after reasonable exposure in a competitive market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, with both buyer and seller acting prudently, knowledgeably, for their own self-interest and assuming neither is under duress.

This letter must remain attached to the report, which contains 46 pages, in order for the value opinion(s) contained in the report to be considered valid.

I hereby certify the property has been inspected and I have impartially considered all data collected in the investigation. Further, I have no past, present or anticipated future interest in the property. 43 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

2 The appraiser certifies this appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, a direction in value, or the approval of a loan or other future event.

This appraisal has been performed in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) and the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute.

Sincerely,
John T. Ashworth, MAI, SRA
State Certification #AG001835
Expiration Date: August 18, 2024
44 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Transmittal Letter
Table of Contents
Introduction
Summary of Important Facts and Conclusions 4
Area Map Showing Location of Subject 5
Property Overview and History 5
Type and Definition of Value 6
Client, Intended User and Intended Use of the Appraisal 6 Property Rights Appraised 7
Appraisal Report Format 7
Dates of Inspection, Value and Report 7
Scope of Work 7
Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions 10 General Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 11
Certification Statement(s) 13
Market Area
Description of Local Market Area 14
Residential Market Overview 16
Commercial Market Overview 19
Subject Property
Property Identification and Legal Data 22
Descriptions of Subject Property 26
Photographs of Subject Property 28
Valuation Analysis
Highest and Best Use 31
Valuation Methodology 33
Sales Comparison Approach 35
Reconciliation and Conclusion of Market Value 43
Exposure Time 44
Addenda
Qualifications of the Appraiser 46
45 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

4 SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Appraised Property: Residentially zoned land (unimproved) Street Address: SE corner Highway 49 and Sutter Ione Rd Sutter Creek, California 95685
Census Tract Number: 3.03
Assessor’s Parcel Number: 018-020-031 and 018-020-032
Owner of Record: Creekwood Capital LLC
Zoning: R-L (Residential—Low Density)
Year Built: (no structural improvements)
Site Area: 18.3 acres
Highest and Best Use As-Is: Investigate Residential Development Highest and Best Use If Vacant: Investigate Residential Development Exposure Time: 3-12 months
Date of Last Inspection: February 23, 2024
Effective Date of Value: February 23, 2024
Date of Report: April 1, 2024
Property Rights Appraised: Fee simple estate
Conclusion of Market Value: $1,265,000
The conclusion of value is subject to the General and
Extraordinary Assumptions, Limiting Conditions and
Hypothetical Conditions referenced on pages 10
through 12 of this report.
46 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

5 AREA MAP SHOWING LOCATION OF SUBJECT
Property Overview and History
The subject property consists two parcels of unimproved land zoned for medium-density residential development. There is no development other than some fencing. Current ownership is vested under Creekwood Capital, LLC, an entity which appears to have acquired the property in a foreclosure action in 2009, having previously provided construction loan funding, recorded in 2006. It does not appear that any physical construction was ever started on the property. 47 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

6 The property had previously been approximately 23 acres in size, however, after the foreclosure approximately five acres was taken in a condemnation action for the expansion of the adjacent highway, which became a new section of State Highway 49. The property was reduced to its current size of 18.3 acres. Current zoning us RL (Residential Low-Density). According the current City Manager, the property retained the right to develop a maximum of 46 residential home sites on the property following completion of the Highway 49 project.

Location is within the city limits of Sutter Creek at the extreme northwesterly boundary. Sutter Creek is a small semi-rural city, though one of the larger ones in the region, and immediately adjacent to Jackson, the largest city in Amador County and its primary commercial hub. Sacramento, the state capitol, is approximately an hour and a half away.

Type and Definition of Value
The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the as-is market value of the subject property as of the effective date. Market value is defined as follows:
market value. The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
• Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
• Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their own best interest;
• A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; • Payment is made in terms of cash in U. S. Dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and
• The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.1
Client, Intended User, and Intended Use of the Appraisal The client in this appraisal assignment is the Cole | Huber Attorneys LLP, which is legal counsel for the city, functioning as the City Attorney. The intended use of the appraisal is to assist the client in matters of acquisition of the property via donation, including tax reporting for the donor. An additional potential intended user is the Internal Revenue Service. This report is intended for use by 1 Federal Register, vol. 55, no. 163, August 22, 1990, 34228 and 34229. 48 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

7 the client and intended user(s) only; it is not valid, or to be relied upon, for any other intended use, user, or purpose.

Property Rights Appraised
The value estimate in this appraisal reflects the fee simple estate rights. fee simple estate. Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat.2
The rights appraised are also subject to the Extraordinary Assumptions, Hypothetical Conditions, General Assumptions and Limiting Conditions contained in this report, as well as any exceptions, encroachments, easements and rights-of-way recorded.

Appraisal Report Format
This report is an Appraisal Report as defined by the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), and is intended to comply with the reporting requirements set forth by USPAP.

Dates of Inspection, Value and Report
An inspection of the subject property was completed on February 23, 2024, which is also the effective date (date of value) of the report. This appraisal report was completed on April 1, 2024.

Scope of Work
This appraisal report has been prepared in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). This analysis is intended to be an “appraisal assignment,” as defined by USPAP; the intention is that the appraisal service be performed in such a manner that the result of the analysis, opinions, or conclusion be that of a disinterested third party.

The only individual involved in the preparation of this appraisal was John T. Ashworth, MAI, SRA.

Legal and physical aspects of the property researched and documented. A physical inspection of the property was completed and serves as the basis for the site and improvement descriptions contained in this report. The client provided some additional property details. I gathered and documented additional property characteristics via the Amador County government services website. Property tax information for the current tax year was obtained from the Amador County Tax Collector’s Office. No preliminary title report was made available.

The appraiser analyzed and documented data relating to the subject’s neighborhood and surrounding 2 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015), 90. 49 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

8 market area and the City of Sutter Creek. This information was obtained through personal inspections of the market area and analyzing market data and trends; additional general market research may have included online articles and reports; business and real estate publications; real estate conferences; and interviews with various market participants, including some or all of the following: owners, sellers, property managers, brokers, developers and local government agencies.

The highest and best use of the subject property as though vacant and as improved, based on the four standard tests (legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility and maximum productivity) was determined. In addition, I estimated a reasonable exposure time associated with the market value estimate.

The valuation employed one of the three traditional approaches to values—the sales comparison approach—to estimate the market value of the subject property. Because the property is essentially unimproved, the cost approach was excluded from this appraisal. In addition, the income approach was not applicable, as unimproved residential land does not typically generate income. The sales comparison approach was the only applicable approach to value and was reliable. The approaches to value will be discussed in more detail in the Valuation Methodology section.

With respect to the physical inspection of the subject property, the scope of work was limited to a walking observation of portions of the site. The appraiser is not a property inspector, and does not guarantee any improvements at the property are free of defects. Inspections by appropriate professionals are recommended if there are further concerns, or if this level of analysis is desired.

The appraiser has not checked the land records for recorded easements, and has reported only readily apparent easements, encroachments and other apparent adverse conditions. The client should review a title report prepared by a title company for recorded easements and the most up to date items affecting title. The appraiser has not researched any public or private databases regarding registered sexual offenders reported to be living in the area. The appraiser has not performed any research regarding other criminal offenders or general crime statistics or reports in the area. The appraiser has not researched known or registered contaminated sites or hazardous waste facilities proximate to the subject. These specialized data are beyond the scope of this appraisal assignment, and the client is urged to obtain appropriate research and reports if there is concern in any of these areas, or if this level of market area analysis is desired.

Hazardous material, including mold, which may or may not be on the subject property, was not observed by the appraiser. However, the appraiser is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of these materials may have an effect on the marketability of the subject property that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover said hazardous materials. The client is urged to retain the 50 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

9 services of a qualified professional in the environmental field if there is any indication or concern of possible hazardous material, including mold, by any of the parties or professionals involved in this transaction.

The reader should be advised that appraisals are the result of an inexact science and that estimated market value is dependent upon conditions and perceptions of market value that are likely to change over time. This valuation represents an opinion estimate only and is not intended to be a guarantee or assurance of resale value.
51 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

10 EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS AND HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS It is noted the use of an extraordinary assumption or hypothetical condition can affect the results of an appraisal.

Extraordinary Assumptions3

1. All necessary public utilities are reported to be available at or near the site. It is assumed that they are sufficient for development of the property to its maximum density. Such information is not fully knowable without detailed investigation, likely to include an application process for a specific development project; as such, it is beyond the scope of this appraisal. If ultimate investigation of a proposed project results in different determinations which limits the extent of development, or feasibility of development, to the maximum allowed by zoning, the value estimate in this appraisal may not be accurate.

2. It is assumed that up to 46 residential lots could be developed at the subject, based on information provided by the City Planner and also reported in Costar commercial database.

Hypothetical Conditions4

1. According to the client, the City of Sutter Creek likely intends to acquire approximately four to five acres of the subject in the near future in order to accommodate the needed expansion of its wastewater treatment plant, which is adjacent to the southwest corner of the subject.

Although that probable project may not be widely known among the public, the subject is appraised as if the project did not exist, in order to exclude the need to consider how the project may impact the current value of the subject or the remainder of the property after the taking. This is appropriate (and required) methodology in a condemnation action, and is undertaken so the property owner is compensated fairly for the market value of the property without factoring in possible impacts on value due to anticipated changes and market perceptions. Although a condemnation action has not yet been needed, nor is this appraisal prepared for that purpose, it is appropriate to give full consideration of the subject property’s value and marketability unimpacted by consideration of an anticipated future partial acquisition.
3 An assumption, directly related to a specific assignment, which, if found to be false, could alter the appraiser’s opinions or conclusions. Extraordinary assumptions presume as fact otherwise uncertain [or unknowable] information about physical, legal or economic characteristics of the subject property; or about conditions external to the property such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis. Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), 2016-2017 ed.). 4 That which is contrary to what exists but is supposed for purposes of analysis. Hypothetical conditions assume conditions contrary to known facts about physical, legal or economic characteristics of the subject property; or about conditions external to the property, such as market conditions; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis. The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 5th ed. (Chicago:

Appraisal Institute, 2010), 97.
52 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

11 GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS

1. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description provided or for matters pertaining to legal or title considerations. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise stated.

2. No responsibility is assumed for matters of law or legal interpretation.

3. Although the property may be encumbered with typical trust deeds, it is appraised free and clear of any or all liens or encumbrances, in fee simple ownership.

4. The information and data furnished by others in preparation of this report is believed to be reliable, but no warranty is given for its accuracy.

5. It is assumed there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for obtaining the engineering studies that may be required to discover them.

6. It is assumed the property is in full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations and laws unless the lack of compliance is stated, described, and considered in the appraisal report.

7. It is assumed the property conforms to all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions unless nonconformity has been identified, described and considered in the appraisal report.

8. It is assumed all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, and other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is based.

9. It is assumed the use of the land and improvements is confined within the boundaries or property lines of the property described and there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in the report.

10. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous materials, which may or may not be present on the property, was not observed by the appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraiser, however, is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of substances such as asbestos, ureaformaldehyde foam insulation and other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. The value estimated is predicated on the assumption there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The intended user of this report is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired.

11. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. I have not made a specific survey or analysis of this property to determine whether the physical aspects of the improvements meet the ADA accessibility guidelines. Since compliance matches each owner’s financial ability with the cost-to cure the property’s potential physical characteristics, the real 53 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

12 estate appraiser cannot comment on compliance with ADA. A brief summary of the subject’s physical aspects is included in this report. It in no way suggests ADA compliance by the current owner. Given that compliance can change with each owner’s financial ability to cure nonaccessibility, the value of the subject does not consider possible non-compliance. Specific study of both the owner’s financial ability and the cost-to-cure any deficiencies would be needed for the Department of Justice to determine compliance.

12. The appraisal is to be considered in its entirety and use of only a portion thereof will render the appraisal invalid.

13. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not carry with it the right of publication nor may it be used for any purpose by anyone other than the client without the previous written consent of Ashworth Appraisal Services.

14. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraiser, or the firm with which the appraiser is connected) shall be disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or any other media without the prior written consent and approval of Ashworth Appraisal Services.

15. The liability of Ashworth Appraisal Services for errors and omissions, if any, in this work is limited to the amount of its compensation for the work performed in this assignment.

16. Acceptance and/or use of the appraisal report constitutes acceptance of all assumptions and limiting conditions stated in this report.

17. The exact locations of typical roadway and utility easements, or any additional easements, which would be referenced in a preliminary title report, were not provided to the appraiser. The appraiser is not a surveyor nor qualified to determine the exact location of easements. It is assumed typical easements do not have an impact on the opinion (s) of value as provided in this report. If, at some future date, these easements are determined to have a detrimental impact on value, the appraiser reserves the right to amend the opinion (s) of value.

18. This appraisal report is prepared for the exclusive use of the appraiser’s client and the identified intended users. No third parties are authorized to rely upon this report without the express consent of the appraiser.

19. The appraiser is not qualified to determine the existence of mold, the cause of mold, the type of mold or whether mold might pose any risk to the property or its inhabitants. Additional inspection by a qualified professional is recommended.
54 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

13 CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:
• The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct; • The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions;
• I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved;
• I have performed no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the subject property within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. • I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment;
• My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results;
• My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal;
• I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report; • The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice; • No one provided significant real property assistance to the person signing this certification; • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute;
• The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives;
• As of the date of this report, I have completed the continuing education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute;
• I certify that my State of California real estate appraiser license has never been revoked, suspended, canceled or restricted;
• I have the knowledge and experience to complete this appraisal assignment and have appraised similar properties in the past. Please see the Qualifications of Appraiser portion of the Addenda to this report for additional information.

JOHN T. ASHWORTH, MAI, SRA DATE: April 1, 2024
State Certification No.: AG001835 (Expires: August 18, 2024) 55 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

14 DESCRIPTION OF LOCAL MARKET AREA
The subject market area is in a generally rural location well outside of major metropolitan areas.

Located almost an hour and a half southeast of the greater Sacramento area, and almost one hour from the large Stockton industrial market area to the southwest, Amador County covers just over 600 square miles and had a total population of 38,091 in the 2010 census. It is a heavily wooded region in the foothills of the western Sierra Nevada mountain range, and consists of several small towns and communities, the largest of which are Jackson and Ione, both of which had a population of just over 5,000 in the 2020 census. All other cities and communities have fewer than 5,000 residents. Outside of the small towns, development is extremely sparse (mostly forest lands and some residences on large acreage.

Amador County is particularly known for its Gold Rush beginnings and mining history. Growth was very moderate in the 1900s following the decline of mining in the early part of the century, though the area has always remained a popular are for tourism. Additionally, it has emerged as a premium wine-growing region in recent years. The natural beauty and the availability of outdoor recreational activities, along with a low cost of living, attracts retirees to the area as well. The size and populations of the county’s incorporated cities and the unincorporated areas are as follows.

Population levels throughout Amador County (and in the adjacent and nearby rural counties as well) are projected to increase very moderately, or to decline slightly in some locales. Notably, many of the unincorporated areas have declined slightly between the 2010 and 2020 census. Countywide, population grew from 38,091 in the 2010 census to 40,474 in the 2020 census, a gain of 6.3% over the 10-year period. Sutter Creek grew by 5.6% during that time, from 2,501 to 2,646. Pine Grove grew by just over 30%, from 2,219 to 2,891. The population of Ione declined notably, and a slight decline has been experienced in some of the small communities and outlying areas. Low and negative growth rates are likely reflective of the broad socioeconomic trend toward urbanization and the preference for younger families especially in seeking lifestyles in the cities and suburbs.

Anecdotally, the effects of population decline and slow income growth are observed in much of the subject market area. In the small towns, and especially in the more isolated and outlying areas, it is not uncommon to see closed or “dark” commercial uses, while much of the existing commercial properties reflect older design and signage, and small, independent users. Outside of some primary commercial corridors and shopping centers in the larger towns, primarily Sutter Creek and nearby Jackson, much of the commercial property inventory reflects older properties and little demand for new construction.

Sutter Creek
Sutter Creek is adjacent to Jackson, the primary commercial center in the county. Other nearby 56 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

15 communities include Pioneer, Ione. Plymouth and Pine Grove. Demand for both tenants and customers of most commercial uses in Sutter Creek draws primarily from Sutter Creek and Jackson and also from some of the surrounding sparsely populated areas and more remote communities. With respect to investors or buyers of commercial property (including land suitable for subdivision) in Sutter Creek, and Amador County in general, most would be those with local interests.

Summary
The subject’s market is a rural county over an hour away from the greater Sacramento area and from the port city of Stockton. All the towns in the region are very small, most with a population under 3,000. Growth is expected to be minimal in most communities, with some submarkets projected to have no growth or negative growth. The more built-up town centers along the Highway 49 corridor (Sutter Creek and Jackson) reflect some newer commercial uses, however, the rural areas have only small pockets of commercial uses, and most of these are older. Demand for users (customers) of commercial space in Sutter Creek would be primarily from Sutter Creek and Jackson, and secondarily from surrounding smaller communities and outlying areas. The mostly likely buyer for commercial properties or development project would be one with local interests, though a regional builder may consider the subject if it could achieve close to maximum allowable density. 57 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

16 RESIDENTIAL MARKET OVERVIEW
The primary focus of market analysis will be on the residential market, as that is the driver of land suitable for subdivision. Values and trends in the market for single-family residences (SFRs) influence the demand for properties such as the subject. The following graphs and analyses reflect the market for all SFRs in Amador County up to 3,000 SF in size. This broader look at the market was necessary because Sutter Creek alone is such a small market that data sets would insufficient for meaningful analyes, particularly for trend analysis.

The square footage cap was 3,000 because this covers over 90% of SFR sales, and is most useful for discerning meaningful trends. Notably, Sutter Creek has averaged 5 to 15 SFR sales per quarter (about 2 to 5 per month) every quarter except one over the last 10 years. Amador County has averaged 30 to 50 sales per month, which allows for reliable trends analysis, and which should be reliable for application to Sutter Creek.

RESIDENTIAL SALE PRICES IN AMADOR COUNTY
The graph above shows average and median value trends over the last 10 years. Values rose steadily until early 2020, began increasing more sharply following the onset of the COVID pandemic, then dropped slightly and leveled off in late 2022. Since 2023 values have been increasingly slightly overall.
58 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

17 RESIDENTIAL SALE PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT ($/SF) IN AMADOR COUNTY The graph above shows the average price per square foot ($/SF) for sales of SFRs over the same period. It shows that sales prices have reflected a generally flat, or stable, price per square foot over the 10-year period.

Lastly, the graph on the following page show inventory levels for SFRs in the market. Inventory reflects the number of houses listed and available for sale. It is measure in terms of how many months of demand can be satisfied, based on how have been selling in recent month. For example, if 30 homes sold in the last quarter, the average is 10 home sales per month. If there are currently 40 homes listed for sale and available, that reflects in inventory level of four months (4 months times 10 sales per month).

Inventory levels of less than three months are considered to reflect a possible shortage, especially when down to two months or less. This is also known as a seller’s market because sellers have more leverage, and will eventually lead to upward pressure on prices. Levels of three to six months, or 59 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

18 possibly nine months, are typically considered to reflect balance, adequate for the volume of anticipated sales. Supplies greater than six to nine months move the market into an oversupply condition. There are more than enough properties to satisfy demand, and this ultimately results downward pressure on prices.

Inventory of SFRs in the county were lightly increasing in the years leading up to the pandemic, then dropped sharply when the pandemic began. There was a shortage of supply for mid-2020 until around mid-2022. However, they began increasing again notably in mid-2022 and have continue to rise steadily since late 2023. The inventory level is currently around four months, suggesting balance, not so little as to continue driving prices up, but not too much that properties languish due to too few buyers. Current inventory levels are reflective of a fairly healthy market and stable values.

RESIDENTIAL INVENTORY LEVELS IN AMADOR COUNTY
Summarizing, price levels for SFRs in Amador County generally stable since mid-2022. Average and median pricing may reflect some slightly upward pressure, though price per square foot remains very stable. This is supported by the fact that inventory levels continue to grow. The market is healthy, without notable downward or upward pressure.
60 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

19 COMMERCIAL MARKET OVERVIEW
As a large and very rural area, there are no market studies that specifically cover Amador County or the region in general. It is a distinct and separate market, isolated relative to the urban and suburban markets in an around Sacramento. Generally, commercial uses in the county and in Sutter Creek reflect average construction quality, and development and design from the early- to mid-1900s (and some from the 1800s in the historic downtown area). Users tend to be a mix of independent, smaller businesses. Most commercial properties in the market are smaller and serve primarily local customers and some tourist traffic and visitors. The mix of uses appears to be average in terms of compatibility.

Most income property investors in the region would only selectively consider Sutter Creek and similar communities due to their outlying locations and small size, which creates inefficiencies in management. As such, most local commercial properties tend to be owned and occupied by those with local interests, often full or partial owner-users.

Data sets for commercial property at the local level are so small, even when gathered countywide, and consist of transactions of such varied small-town properties, that they are typically insufficient for detailed trend analysis. However, a study of annual commercial activity exhibits that nonresidential property values have been generally increasing over time, though activity has been a fairly steady half a dozen to a dozen sales per year for properties up to a $1M sale price.

YEAR SALES HIGH AVG MEDIAN DAYS ON MKT
2013 8 $900,000 $244,250 $147,500 315
2014 11 $875,000 $340,263 $250,000 92
2015 12 $800,000 $395,208 $370,000 243
2016 12 $715,000 $298,850 $272,500 146
2017 3 $550,000 $224,833 $75,000 674
2018 5 $840,000 $380,000 $320,000 517
2019 9 $999,000 $389,667 $281,000 146
2020 6 $880,000 $550,000 $527,500 186
2021 12 $835,000 $416,417 $355,000 65
2022 5 $980,000 $476,000 $400,000 58
2023 5 $910,000 $502,560 $562,800 128
(Active Listings) 12 $975,000 $548,992 $472,000 114

COMMERCIAL SALE TRANSACTIONS IN AMADOR COUNTY IN LOCAL MLS The above data represent all non-residential properties in Amador County that sold or are currently listed in the local MLS database, including industrial and special purpose uses, but with a cap of 61 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

20 $1M asking or sale prices. The price cap eliminates large and dissimilar properties, sales of which are infrequent (0 to 2 per year), resulting in more meaningful statistics. Although the data naturally represent diverse properties, it is sufficient to conclude that values are stable to slightly increasing.

Of note is that a major wildfire burned over 70,000 acres, and hundreds of homes and businesses, in adjacent Calaveras County in September of 2017, canceling most sales in progress and eliminating most sales activity in late 2017 and early 2018 in Calaveras and Amador counties.

Some very general indicators regarding commercial property was available in surrounding outlying areas. These also tend to indicate a stable to slightly positive metrics, reflecting a healthy market.

Retail: Outer Sacramento County
Average $/SF sale price $257
Sale price trend increasing
Vacancy 2.4%
Vacancy trend increasing
Retail: Outer San Joaquin County
Average $/SF sale price $203
Sale price trend increasing
Vacancy 1.8%
Vacancy trend decreasing
Industrial: Outer Sacramento County
Average $/SF sale price $131
Sale price trend decreasing
Vacancy 3.5%
Vacancy trend increasing
Industrial: Outer San Joaquin County
Average $/SF sale price $104
Sale price trend increasing
Vacancy 2.9%
Vacancy trend increasing
62 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

21 Summary
Although regional and even local commercial real estate markets appear fairly healthy (if not strong in some sectors), Amador County in general is a very tertiary market. Except for a few franchise and large operations, most commercial real estate has appeal only to local interests or those motivated more by price point than location. Sutter Creek, and most Amador County communities, reflect isolated markets with very small populations and demand base, and will tend to reflect rents, vacancy levels, and (if applicable) capitalization rates similar or inferior to broader secondary markets. The subject market area (Amador County) has few commercial property transactions, usually no more than a dozen a year. Most are in the larger towns, primarily Jackson. With the exception of some newer shopping centers in the larger towns, income property owners in the region tend to be owner-users as opposed to investors.
63 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

22 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AND LEGAL DATA
Location
The subject property is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Highway 49 and Sutter Ione Rd near the northwesterly boundary of Sutter Creek; it consists of both parcels identified below.

Street Address
(no address assigned as the property has no structures) Sutter Creek, California 95685
Census Tract Number

3.03 64
Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

23 Assessor’s Parcel Number
018-020-031 and 018-020-032
Owner(s) of Record
Creekwood Capital LLC
Legal Description
40M46 ADJ PAR 1 SEC6 T6N R11E
40M46 ADJ PAR 2 SEC6 T6N R11E
Please consult a title report for a complete and verified legal description.

Property Taxes
The property tax system in California was amended in 1978 by Article XIII to the State Constitution, commonly referred to as Proposition 13. It provides for a limitation on property taxes and for a procedure to establish the current taxable value of real property by reference to a base year value, which is then modified an\nually to reflect inflation (if any). Annual increases cannot exceed 2% per year. Taxes totaled $10,428 for tax year 2023-2024, however, for appraisal purposes they will be appropriately calculated based on the estimated market value.

The subject is located in tax rate area 4005. The assessed value of the property in 2023 was $1,023,377 (total of both parcels), which is not necessarily reflective of market value due to the property tax system in California, as discussed above. The tax rate applicable to properties in tax rate area 4005 is 1.019% of assessed value.

With respect to valuing real estate, property is re-assessed upon a sale based on the sale price (with the assumption that the sale is reflective of market value). Therefore, the tax burden used in this appraisal is calculated based on the appraised market value, which would become the new assessed value for the property if sold at market value as of the effective date (a premise of an appraisal). The formula to be applied to calculate the tax amount for appraisal purposes is as follows.

Appraised (market) value x 1.0190%
The resulting figure would be the tax burden to a new owner at market value. This would also be the appropriate figure to include as an expense item when analyzing the subject’s performance if using an income approach to value.
65 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

24 Zoning
The subject is zoned R-L in the City of Sutter Creek. Denoted Residential—Low Density according to the city’s zoning ordinance, this zone “is designated for detached one-family dwellings on lots characterized by a suburban setting.” The zone requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 SF, common in Sutter Creek city limits but relatively small relative to the broader semi-rural and rural Amador County market. Notably, the city manager reported that the subject property was recognized as having 46 potential allowable lots following the city’s acquiring the four to five acres via condemnation for building the new section of Highway. However, the 20,000 SF-minimum lot size requirement would allow only 39, based on the subject’s 18.3 acres. Further, a property profile provided by Costar’s commercial property database also indicates the property as having a maximum number of potential units via subdivision as 46. This figure will be used going forward in the report (see Extraordinary Assumptions on page 10).

ZONING MAP
66 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

25 The P-D (Planned Development) combining zone is intended for flexibility in development to approve or even encourage additional uses beyond those permitted by the underlying zoning “to promote and encourage development…where appropriate in location and character.” The City Manager noted that a commercial component could be considered at the subject as part of a proposed residential development project.

Conditions of Title
No preliminary title report was made available for the subject property for this appraisal report. The appraiser assumes no negative title restrictions impact the subject property. The appraiser accepts no responsibility for matters pertaining to title or vesting. If information becomes available at some future point regarding item(s) of title that may specifically impact the value or marketability of the subject, the appraiser reserves the right to update the report and amend the opinion(s) of value if necessary.

Easements
It appears the subject contains easements for roadways and public utilities; however, these easements are typical for the area and are not considered to adversely affect the value or marketability of the subject property.

The appraiser is not a surveyor nor qualified to determine the exact location of any easements. It is assumed any easements do not have an impact on the opinion(s) of value set forth in this report. If, at some future date, any easements are determined to have a detrimental impact on value, the appraiser reserves the right to amend the opinion(s) of value contained herein.

Flood Zone
The property is located in a non-flood zone, Zone X, on FEMA Map Panel 06005C0340F dated May 20, 2010.
67 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

26 DESCRIPTIONS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
The property consists of two parcels of land zoned for potential residential subdivision; they are being valued as if combined into one assembled property. Location in the city’s P-D: Planned Development overlay zone could also allow for approval of other uses such as commercial/retail. The property is essentially undeveloped except for some fencing. Attributes and features noted include the following.
• Irregular site shape
• Total site size is 18.3 acres
• Vast majority of site is lightly sloping to gently rolling • There are many trees scattered throughout the site but not densely • There are a few areas of some relatively large boulders • Site has been used for horse grazing in the recent past • Some overhead power or telephone lines near easterly boundary behind houses • Roughly 1,500’ of frontage along Highway 49
• Only about 300’ of usable frontage due to highway guardrail along the majority • The 300’ of accessible frontage is below the intersection at Sutter Ione Rd • This corner has steeply mounded dirt and fill over one story high (see photos) • Most of the frontage along Sutter Ione Rd steeply upsloped • Access to the property is via a manual gate at the northeast corner of the site • The easterly boundary mostly backs approximately 14 homes on Oro Madre Way • The southerly boundary is along Mahoney Rd, which is mostly gravel and private • Mahoney Rd terminates at the city’s wastewater treatment plant • The subject is mostly moderately to steeply sloped along Mahoney Rd • Currently there is no access from Mahoney Rd
• No sidewalks, curbs, gutters or street lights
• Much wire fencing at boundaries along the two secondary streets • Public utilities assumed to be available at the street nor near the site but not connected, based on the fact that they serve the nearby houses and a large parcel suitable for subdivision across Sutter Ione Rd is being marketed as having all utilities available • Some average local, pastoral views
• Sutter High School is on the opposite of Oro Madre Way less than 100 yards from subject • The long frontage on Highway 49 presents some traffic noise • The wastewater treatment plant is across from the southwest corner of the subject 68 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

27 Overall location is considered to be average at best within the Sutter Creek market. Its location near the high school and the wastewater treatment plants would be a moderate negative factor for many potential buyers, especially new home buyers, and the traffic noise from Highway 49 would also be perceived as a negative locational factor by many. Support for this is that the housing on adjacent Oro Madre Way is generally smaller, older and modest. The sites that could be developed at the property would likely have average to slightly below average locational appeal within the broader Sutter Creek market.

PLAT MAP
subject consists of two contiguous parcels
69 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

28 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS
Frontage of Subject along Highway 49 Frontage from Highway 49 Near SW corner Frontage Near Corner of Hwy 49 and Sutter Ione Rd Corner of Highway 49 and Sutter Ione Rd Sutter Ione Rd (Subject on Left) Frontage Along Mahoney Hill Rd 70 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

29 Entry to Subject from Sutter Ione Rd Subject Site
Subject Site Subject Site
Hwy 49 Guardrail at Westerly Boundary of Site Subject Site Backing Homes on Oro Madre Rd 71 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

30 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF SUBJECT
clockwise from top, arrows indicate approximate boundaries of subject: Sutter Ione Rd; houses on the southwest side of Oro Madre Rd (with Amador High School directly across that street); private Mahoney Hill Rd (which terminates at the city’s wastewater treatment plant across from the southwest corner of the subject); the wastewater treatment plant itself; and Highway 49 to the west

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF REGION
Subject near extreme northwesterly boundary of Sutter Creek 72 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

31 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS
The term “highest and best use,” as used in this report, is defined as follows:

The reasonably probable use of property that results in the highest value. The four criteria that the highest and best use must meet legal permissibility, physically possibility, financial feasibility and maximum productivity.5
Two analyses are typically required for highest and best use, highest and best use of the subject property as though vacant and highest and best use of the property as currently improved. In this case, the subject is essentially vacant, and the two conclusions would be identical.

Possible Legal Uses
The property is zoned R-L, which allows for medium density SFR development. Location in the P-D combining zone indicates that other, non-residential uses could be considered as part of a residential development project if it was concluded by the city to be appropriate for the project and location, and in keeping with the character of the city and its goals.

Physically Possible Uses
There are some limitations to development at the perimeters of the property. A highway guardrail along roughly 80% of the Highway 49 precludes access. Very sharp slope and large embankments at the corner of Highway 49 and Sutter Ione Rd preclude or substantially impact the possibility or feasibility of development; this is also true on much of the frontage along Sutter Ione Rd. The southerly boundary is a road which is mostly gravel and private, also with a moderate to steep slope at the subject, though not as much as at Highway 49 and Sutter Ione Rd.

The interior of the site is mostly rolling to gently sloping and appears suitable for development.

Current access is somewhat limited, as it is only from one point on Sutter Ione Rd though it is almost level at that point. Creating any additional access point would be relatively expensive and may not be feasible or even possible and the Highway 49 intersection. There are no apparent or known soil or drainage issues. There a few trees and boulders which may have to be dealt with, or worked around, but this is not uncommon in the region.

Feasible Uses and Maximally Productive Use

1. As if vacant, residential development would need to be the primary (if not only) component of any proposed development project. A commercial / non-residential component could be 5 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015), 109. 73 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

32 allowed at the discretion of the city. Research of commercial sale data in Sutter Creek and the broader market (including some communities in adjacent Calaveras County) indicate that top-tier commercial locations—those in core developed downtown area, and adjacent to or near prominent or newer building or prime locations with current trade traffic—tend to sell for roughly $100,000/acre up to more than $200,000/acre. Properties in second-tier commercial locations sell for well under $100,000/acre, with outlying locations going for as low as $15,000/acre. The subject, though located on Highway 49, is a decidedly second-tier location for commercial development, and has additional impairments of limited access on the highway and its large and steeply sloped embankments on the frontages. There would be the need to move dozens of truckloads of material to prepare a commercial site. Even if permissible, this would certainly negatively impact the price point of the land necessary for feasibility. A commercial project could be included at the interior of the site but it would lose much visibility and beneficial access, again rendering the value of such underlying land lower, in addition to the land lost to development because of the steep slope and large embankments. Because there is uncertainty if even a second-tier commercial component could be allowed or feasible , it is concluded that residential development is the only potentially allowable and feasible development at the subject and should be investigated.

2. As currently improved, the subject has only some perimeter fencing to consider. Some or all of this may only be useful in the interim and would have to be removed or replaced in a future development. As such, the property is effectively unimproved and considered simply to be vacant and available for development. Therefore, the highest and best use of the property as currently improved is identical to the conclusion of its highest and best use as if vacant, above.

Concluding, the highest and best use of the subject property both as if vacant and available for development, and as currently improved, is to investigate residential subdivision. Notably, there is little support that there is strong market demand for a project the size of the subject. Much investigation would be necessary to determine feasibility, which could alter the price point at which the land is feasible for development. It may turn out that holding it for future development potential is the highest and best use, or that the exploration of other subdivision scenarios may be more expedient (e.g., subdivision into a fewer number of larger “estate” sized lots. Holding the property for a future increase in underlying land values increase (residential and/or commercial) may be the most optimal—the “path or progress” motivation. For valuation purposes, it is most appropriate and straightforward to consider development to maximum density to be the highest and best use of the subject. The following sections in the report develop an estimate of market value for the property. 74 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

33 VALUATION METHODOLOGY
The valuation process is a systematic procedure employed to provide the answer to a client’s question about the value of real property. This process involves the investigation, organization and analysis of pertinent market data and other related factors that affect the market value of real estate.

The market data is analyzed in terms of any one or all of the three traditional approaches to estimating real estate value. These are the cost, sales comparison, and income approaches. Each approach to value is briefly discussed and defined as follows:

Cost Approach
The cost approach is based on the premise that no prudent buyer would pay more for a particular property than the cost to acquire a similar site and construct improvements of equivalent desirability and utility. Thus, this approach to value relates directly to the economic principle of substitution, as well as supply and demand. The cost approach is most applicable when valuing properties where the improvements are new or suffer only a minor amount of accrued depreciation and is especially persuasive when the site value is well supported. The cost approach is also highly relevant when valuing special-purpose or specialty properties and other properties that are not frequently exchanged in the market.
cost approach. A set of procedures through which a value indication is derived for the fee simple estate by estimating the current cost to construct a reproduction of (or replacement for) the existing structure, including an entrepreneurial incentive or profit; deducting depreciation from the total cost; and adding the estimated land value. Adjustments may then be made to the indicated value of the fee simple estate in the subject property to reflect the value of the property interest being appraised.6 Sales Comparison Approach
The sales comparison approach is based on the premise that the value of a property is directly related to the prices being generated for comparable, competitive properties in the marketplace. Similar to the cost approach, the economic principles of substitution, as well as supply and demand are basic to the sales comparison approach. This approach has broad applicability and is particularly persuasive when there has been an adequate volume of recent, reliable transactions of similar properties that indicate value patterns or trends in the market. When sufficient data are available, this approach is the most direct and systematic approach to value estimation. Typically, the sales comparison approach is most pertinent when valuing land, single-family homes and small, and some owneroccupied commercial properties. sales comparison approach. The process of deriving a value indication for the subject property by comparing sales of similar properties to the property being 6 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015), 54. 75 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

34 appraised, identifying appropriate units of comparison, and making adjustments to the sales prices (or unit prices, as appropriate) of the comparable properties based relevant, market-derived elements of comparison. The sales comparison approach may be used to value improved properties, vacant land, or land being considered as though vacant when an adequate supply of comparable sales is available.7 Income Approach
The income approach is based on the premise that income-producing real estate is typically purchased as an investment. From an investor's point of view, the potential earning power of a property is the critical element affecting value. The concepts of anticipation and change, as they relate to supply and demand issues and substitution, are fundamental to this valuation approach.

These concepts are important because the value of income-producing real estate is created by the expectation of benefits (income) to be derived in the future, which is subject to changes in market conditions. Value may be defined as the present worth of the rights to these future benefits. The validity of the income approach hinges upon the accuracy of which the income expectancy of a property can be measured. This approach is only used in the valuation of income producing properties.

Conclusion: Subject Valuation
The valuation will employ one of the three traditional approaches to values—the sales comparison approach—to estimate the market value of the subject property. Because the property is only minimally improved, the cost approach was excluded from this appraisal; it was not necessary for credible appraisal results. The income approach is also not applicable.

The sales comparison approach was the only approach which was reliable and necessary. It is the approach relied on for almost all buyers and sellers of commercial land including land suitable for subdivision or holding for future subdivision.8 The subject will be valued as land suitable for investigation of its subdivision potential based on its underlying zoning; subdivision may or may not be currently feasible, but that does not eliminate or preclude a speculative component of value due to possible future subdivision potential.
7 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015), 207. 8 An income approach can be performed for a largely approved subdivision but is not appropriate for transitional land, or land not yet investigated for subdivision or feasibility, such as the subject. Some level of entitlements or tentative approval are needed, along with a specific proposed project, in order to begin the complex methodology of subdivision appraisal based on projected revenue and expenses (i.e., an income approach)
76 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

35 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
In the sales comparison approach, the market value of the subject property is estimated by a comparison to similar properties that have recently sold, are listed for sale, or are under contract. The underlying premise of the sales comparison approach is the market value of a property is directly related to the price of comparable, competitive properties in the marketplace.

This approach is based on the economic principle of substitution. According to The Appraisal of Real Estate, 14
th Edition (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2013), “The principle of substitution states that when several similar or commensurate commodities, goods, or services are available, the one with the lowest price attracts the greatest demand and widest distribution…[and that] a buyer will not pay more for one property than for another that is equally desirable.” In order to arrive at indications of value of the subject, which is land zoned for residential subdivision, several sets of sale data of residential land will be analyzed. These analyses will help form value indications for both individual lots—land already subdivided into homesite-ready parcels—and for land not yet subdivided but with some subdivision potential. The four land data sets are as follows.
▪ Sale data of individual lot sales in the local market ▪ Sale data of land with subdivision potential but without approvals in the local market ▪ Sale data of land with subdivision potential but without approvals in Greater Sacramento ▪ Sale data of land with some level of approvals, entitlements, or advancements of subdivision The first analysis, individual home sites, informs generally the value of the end-product of subdivision, a created lot ready for development of a single-family residence. Sale data for existing ready-to-build homesites are useful to understand the maximum potential value of the subject should subdivision be completed. The second and third analyses involved land marketed for its potential as subdividable land but with no substantial steps taken in a development process. These analyses would reflect properties most similar to the subject. The latter analysis would reflect sale data of properties which include some advancement in the subdivision process; these advancements could range from some preliminary investigations or reports, to some substantial investigations and possibly tentative approval of a project, to a fully approved subdivision map. Sale prices will reflect the value of such land to potential buyers, including the premium for the future value which could be created from the land. This premium could be zero or negligible if the market perceived demand was insufficient for a volume of new homes sites or homes, if development or approval was believed to be unlikely, or if the time horizon was too long to motivate waiting or speculation. The premium could be significant if an area prime for redevelopment or when value has been newly created due to a recent or anticipated zone change; these scenarios are more often seen in suburban and urban areas. 77 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

36 Each analysis will result arrive at a conclusion regarding value, followed by a reconciliation of the four into a conclusion of value for the subject.

Individual Lot Sales in Sutter Creek
The following are sales of individual, ready-to-develop home sites in Sutter Creek. Utilities at each are readily available except as noted.
255 Spanish St 0.37 acres $69,000 02/03/24 (pending sale) near subject neighborhood; light slope; backs cemetery
Bryson Dr 0.19 acres $45,000 02/16/23
Average neighborhood with mobile home park nearby; very light slope Lot 27 Herrington Ct 0.71 acres $78,400 08/23/22
Established neighborhood outside of town; level, prepared site; some views 237 Manor Ct 0.55 acres $155,000 08/05/22
Established neighborhood out of town; very light slope; some views 135 Patricia Ln 0.31 acres $105,000 05/18/22
Above average neighborhood; allows SFR or up to 4 units; light slope 267 California Dr 0.32 acres $120,000 04/26/22
Near subject but in a neighborhood of above-average newer homes; light slope; views 90 Dennis St 0.24 acres $150,000 Active Listing
Above average neighborhood; near downtown; light to moderate slope SUBJECT 0.40 acre; average location; rolling to light slopes; some views Conclusion: The first sale on Spanish St is proximate to the subject and is very recent but backs directly to a cemetery, a decidedly substantial negative factor to the majority of potential buyers. The Byson Drive lot was much smaller, roughly half the estimated average size of the subject’s potential lots. Most lots were fairly similar in size, though Herrington Ct was notably larger. The subject’s overall location is average, due to its proximity to Highway 49 traffic noise, the High School, and the wastewater treatment plant. Conversely, most of the subject’s sites would have views and the location would ultimately be in a neighborhood of newer homes, premium to many neighborhoods, as Sutter Creek does not have a large inventory of newer homes. It is estimated that finished lots at 78 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

37 the subject, largely ready to build and connect to existing utilities, would have a value on the order of $100,000.

Land with Subdivision Potential and No Approvals in Amador County There have been almost no closed sales of land marketed for subdivision potential in Amador County in the last few years of land anywhere close to the size of the subject in terms of the number of allowable lots. A few have been marketed and some are currently listed for sale and available, but only two have closed and were not very similar to the subject and may not have even been purchased with the intention of subdivision. The value conclusions for these properties are based on the sale price per lot or the sale price per acre.

Valley Vista Ct, Pine Grove 26.1 acres $139,750 05/03/22 $34,938/lot Rural; not overly comparable; marketed as potential for 4-lots and with a tentative map available; not a useful value indicator
21484 Homestead, Pine Grove 33.1 acres $230,000 07/08/21 $38,333/lot Rural; zone 5-acre minimum, allowing 6 potential lots; uncertain if subdivision has been pursued Following are some of the listings in the area marketed as land zoned for subdivision potential. 11285 Sutter Ione Rd, Sutter Creek 20.4 acres $1,800,000 Listing $36,000/lot This is likely the most useful of all data considered in the report. It is almost directly across the street from the subject, its access being across from the subject’s access gate. It is virtually the same size and marketed as zoned for development of up to 50 lots. It also includes an older existing SFR and large shop on a separate 0.76-acre lot. The listing agent, John Kaufman at Cushman & Wakefield, could not be reached for additional information. Some sources state the listing was recently taken off the market, though prominent signage was on site as of the inspection date. The property was also previously listed four years ago by a local Keller Williams office but the price was unavailable.

Bell Rd, Plymouth 38.8 acres $500,000 Listing $12,887/acre This is in a rural area over three miles outside of the small community of Plymouth. Its R1 zoning suggests potential for many lots, but has been on the market for approximately 10 months at the same asking price; price of only $500,000 indicates lack of interest for subdivision; may be more suitable as an individual rural homesite. Further, there are two more nearly identical and adjacent listings of almost the same size, at $450,000 and $475,000 (same agent and seller).

Carson Dr, Pioneer 8.9 acres $150,000 Listing $16,949/acre This is also in a very rural area with R1 zoning, and is marketed as having lot-split potential, and 79 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

38 with an additional 25 acres available “for a larger build out.” SUBJECT 46-lot potential; rolling to light slopes; some views, some negative externals Conclusion: Of all the above data, the only one with much usefulness is the very similar property across the street from the subject marketed at $1,800,000 but not sold. Other data to not reflect similar properties or development potential. This listing at 11285 Sutter Ione Rd, which may have just been taken off the market, had a listing price of $36,000 per potential lot at maximum allowable density. The subject is inferior to this property in terms of general locational appeal because the subject is adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant and has slightly greater traffic noise from Highway 49. The competing property has slightly superior terrain and better access. It also includes the old house with large shop, though it is uncertain if that would contribute to value, as it may well be razed in some development plans (it is located almost in the center or the site, would not conform to the rest of the future new homes, and would probably create two additional new home sites if the structures were removed and the land incorporated into the subdivision project). Conversely, the subject has slightly superior zoning, in that the P-D combining zone allows flexibility in development in that other uses could be considered secondary to a primary residential component. It could prove useful, particularly in the future, if commercial land becomes more valuable on Highway 49 in this area. It must be remembered that this data represents a listing that did not sell with good market exposure (and good signage on site). It had been listed four years before as well, though the price is not known. It is concluded that the indicated value for the subject is less than $36,000 per lot, probably significantly less.

Land with Subdivision Potential and No Approvals in Greater Sacramento The search for these land sale data encompassed the entire Greater Sacramento region. It will necessarily include suburban markets which will tend to sell at higher price levels because price point for SFRs in general are higher in most of these markets relative to Amador County. Suburban areas tend to have strong pricing power for new home products. Many of these transactions reflect superior properties, but are still useful for informing appropriate conclusions regarding the value of the subject.
820 Brown Gables Rd, Auburn 21.6 acres $1,100,000 01/30/24 pend $100,000/lot * This property had 4 acres of industrially zoned land, with the balance being zoned for residential development with a 2.3acre minimum site size requirement. The value of the industrial land component was roughly estimated at $100,000/acre, for a total of $400,000, leaving $700,000 for the residential component, which could be subdivided into 7 lots. * The estimate of the industrial land value is generally supportable because the same seller has adjacent residential land listed for sale at $1,275,000 for 11 potential lots. This equals $115,909/lot. This is only a listing, not yet sold or 80 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

39 contracted. The $100,000/lot conclusion for 820 Brown Gables Rd is a reasonable conclusion based on the other listing. This land reflects larger lots in a neighborhood close to a larger town and is overall superior to the subject.
7901 Stevenson Ave, Sacramento 6.5 acres $2,500,000 11/15/21 pend $78,125/lot This lot is zoned RD-5, which allows development up to a maximum of 5 units/acre. 6.5 acres could accommodate 32 lots. This sale has been pending for almost two and a half years, possibly as a result of the process of obtaining complete approvals (it is not uncommon to create an arrangement with the seller to effectively partner with the buyer through the final approval state; this reduces risk for the buyer, though they would be responsible for the time and expenses of the process, and usually is part of negotiation in which the seller has been sufficiently incentivized to wait for the sale to close).

This property reflects level, buildable land adjacent to the city of Elk Grove, a primary center of suburban development and growth.
7767 Florencia Ln, Sacramento 18.2 acres $1,981,450 05/25/23 $21,774/lot The acreage is in a zone with potential to have been rezoned to RD5 in Sacramento County. This would allow 5 units/acre for a total potential development of 91 lots. The property is in the South Sacramento area immediately adjacent to established SFR development. Price points in this area are lower than the more premium suburban areas. In addition, these resulting lot sizes would be roughly half the size of the subject’s lots if subdivided. The lower price is also reflective of the fact that the lot’s potential required achieving a rezoning. It appears to have been achieve because the prior zoning did not allow for any subdivision.

Country Hill Dr, Elk Grove 40.0 acres $2,000,000 08/31/21 $100,000/lot Semi-rural land near Elk Grove zoned AR-2, allowing 2-acre estate homesites. Much residential development had been occurring (and still is) in that area. The price per lot reflects strong growth and demand in this area, and large lot sizes in this case. 2440 Bean Rd, Auburn 25.1 acres $600,000 04/20/21 $26,087/lot The previous approval of a subdivision with 23 homes was used to arrive at the price per lot. This property is in a suburban location near services and shopping in the city of Auburn. Notably, it is uncertain if the subdivision was the motivation for the purchase because that price level could simply be reflective of a parcel that size suitable for an estate homesite. A less intensive subdivision could also be feasible at that price point, as a level, in-town lot of this size could command a figure such as this.

Conclusion: These indicators ranged greatly. All but the one on Florencia Ln in Sacramento are in a generally superior market area. The higher indicators are for larger lots and worth more, except that the property on Stevenson likely reflects a seller waiting to achieve final approval and being 81 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

40 compensated accordingly. The Florencia Ln property is likely the best indicator from this group of data. The subject should be worth more than this comparable sale because, all else being equal, including price points potentially, the subject should be worth more on a price per lot basis. It is therefore concluded that the subject should have a value on the order of $25,000 per lot.

Land with Some Level of Approvals, Entitlements or Steps Advancing Development Additional research in the Greater Sacramento region resulted in some sale data similar to properties above except that some level of approval had been completed, including tentative maps or, in one case, an approved final map. These sales ranged greatly, from approximately $30,000/lot to over $100,000/lot. Some were higher and a few were even lower. Of course, when a tentative map is issued, the requirements of the proposed subdivision have become fully know. Risk has been eliminated but in many cases the costs are prohibitive, even precluding development on occasion, or, if still feasible, land price can become negatively impacted because the project is more expensive than anticipated.

Despite the wide range of indicators, the useful conclusion is that the subject’s value would at best be toward the low end of the range of indicated values. Therefore, following analyses of the final land sale data, it is concluded that the value of the subject should be no greater than $30,000/lot. 82 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

41 LOCATION MAP SHOWING SUBJECT AND COMPARABLE INDIVIDUAL LOT SALES 83 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

42 Conclusion of Value by Sales Comparison Approach
The analyses of the four sets of land sale data resulted in the following conclusions regarding value regarding the subject.
▪ Completed new lots ready for building could command on the order of $100,000 ▪ Based largely on the adjacent listing, subject currently worth substantially <$36,000/lot ▪ Based on greater Sacramento data, subject value currently on the order of $25,000/lot ▪ Based on sale data of some projects with partial approvals, subject value is <$30,000/lot Of note is that there is little support that there is strong demand for a residential subdivision project the size of the subject. Local data tend to have particularly long marketing times for land marketed for its subdivision potential. See the detailed discussion in the Highest and Best Use section.

Considering the preceding data and analyses, a value conclusion of $27,500 per potential lot is reasonable and supportable. With its maximum 46-lot potential subdivision, the value of the subject is calculated below.
$ 27,500/lot x 46 lots = $1,265,000
Therefore, the conclusion of value of the subject using the sales comparison approach is $1,265,000.
84 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

43 RECONCILIATION AND CONCLUSION OF MARKET VALUE
The purpose of this appraisal has been to estimate the market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property, which represents land which would allow up to 46 potential residential lots via subdivision. There was sufficient market data available to complete the sales comparison approach in a credible manner, and the conclusion of the fee simple market value is believed to be accurate and reliable. The income approach and the cost approach were not applicable and were not needed for credible results. Few if any potential buyers would rely on an income approach. The value conclusions derived from the various analyses in the approaches to value are summarized as follows:

Cost Approach $ N/A
Income Approach $ N/A
Sales Comparison Approach $ 1,265,000
Indicated Value $ 1,265,000
The sales comparison approach was reliable, as there was sufficient sale data to arrive at a reliable and supportable conclusion of value. The indicated value was $1,265,000 for the subject. Therefore, as a result of my analyses, and in accordance with the assumptions and limiting conditions contained on pages 10 through 12 of this report, it is my opinion the market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property, as of February 23, 2024, is:

ONE MILLION TWO HUNDRED SIXTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
$1,265,000.
.
85 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

44 EXPOSURE TIME
Exposure time is the period a property interest would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal (i.e., a sale at the estimated value on the effective date of the report). Of the data accumulated in research during the appraisal process the following marketing times were reported among the comparable sale data. 11285 Sutter Ione Rd, Sutter Creek Listed/Active 4 years on and off mkt 21484 Homestead Dr, Pine Grove sold Jul 2021 547 days on market Brown Gables Rd, Auburn Pending 132 days on market
7767 Florencia Ln, Sacramento sold May 2023 336 days on market Country Hill Dr, Elk Grove sold Aug 2021 74 days on market 2440 Bean Rd, Auburn sold Apr 2021 152 days on market
5110 Filbert Ave, Orangevale Pending 119 days on market Marketing times ranged broadly from about less than three months to almost two years, and with the largest local indicator remaining unsold after approximately four years on and off the market. The subject is a potentially very large and ambitious project for the area. It may take an extended period to locate a buyer positive development in demand and market conditions. Considering the preceding data, and assuming effective marketing efforts and appropriate pricing, an exposure time of 6 to 24 months is considered reasonable for the subject property. 86 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

45 ADDENDA
87 Section 9, Item C.

Ashworth Appraisal Services

46 John T. Ashworth, MAI, SRA
LICENSING CA Certified General Appraiser #AG001835
EXPERIENCE Owner Ashworth Appraisal Services
Auburn, CA 95603
530-888-9803
[email protected]
Commercial Appraisal: Multifamily, Industrial, Land, Retail, Office, Agricultural Residential appraisal and appraisal review.

Greater Sacramento; North Shore Tahoe/Truckee; other areas.

Qualified as an Expert Witness.
1991 to present.

Appraiser Ashworth and Associates, Inc.

St. Thomas, United States Virgin Islands 00802
Residential appraisals; some commercial exposure
Construction draw inspections.
1990 - 1991
EDUCATION Appraisal Institute Courses (partial list of most recent courses) Standards of Professional Practice, Parts A and B
Real Estate Finance, Statistics and Valuation Modeling
Residential Highest and Best Use
General [Commercial] Highest and Best Use
General [Commercial] Sales Comparison Approach
General [Commercial] Cost Approach and Site Valuation
Income Capitalization Part I
Income Capitalization Part II
Appraisal Seminars Completed (partial list of most recent) Rates and Ratios
The Appraiser as an Expert Witness
Appraising Green Residential Buildings (Certification)
Review Appraising
Appraising from Plans and Specifications
Residential Construction Basics
Technology and the Future of the Appraisal Industry
Appraising the Top Dollar SFR Market
Appraising After the Earthquake
Residential Appraisal Forum
Appraising Small Residential Income Properties
Environmental Screening in Real Estate Transactions
College Degree
B. A. in Economics, 1981, Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Indiana PROFESSIONAL Appraisal Institute, MAI and SRA Designations MEMBERSHIPS Appraisal Institute, President, Sacramento-Sierra Chapter, 2015 Appraisal Institute, Vice-President, Sacramento-Sierra Chapter, 2014 Appraisal Institute, Sect.-Treasurer, Sacramento-Sierra Chapter, 2013 Appraisal Institute, Board of Directors, Sacramento-Sierra Chapter, 2008-2010 Appraisal Institute, Board of Directors, Central Coast Chapter, 2001 Appraisal Institute, Board of Directors, Ventura Chapter, 1998 WEB SITE See www.realestatevalue.com for more information 88 Section 9, Item C.
4876-2300-9725.1 1
18 Main St., Sutter Creek, CA 95685 • Telephone: (209)267-5647 • Fax: (209)267-0639 • TTY: 711 The City of Sutter Creek is an equal opportunity service provider and employer

STAFF REPORT
TO: CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: JUNE 3, 2024
FROM: TOM DUBOIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: AMADOR CITY FUEL BREAK PROJECT
Staff was requested to bring this to council along with Amador City. We are presenting the information to you for council discussion and determination.

Staff does not have a lot of information about the background of the project and is not recommending one course of action.

RECOMMENDATION:

Discuss the issue and either authorize staff to submit a letter on behalf of the City Council to the Foothill Resource Management in support of their Amador City Fuel break project proposal to the Amador Fire Safe Council or decide not to support the item at this point in time. 89 Section 9, Item D.

Proposed Letter of Support
The City Council of the City of Sutter Creek has voted to support the concept of a shaded fuel break on the property owned by CJ and Lisa Rendic, northeast of the City of Sutter Creek.

This fuelbreak is located strategically on ridgelines where fire crews could potentially hold a wildfire originating to the northeast of our town. Fire suppression activities such as back firing and direct suppression would be more feasible than if no fuel break were constructed.

The Rendic’s have indicated that they intend to expand the thinning and fuel hazard reduction on a larger portion of their property and have planned to maintain the fuel break and thinned oak woodland by using targeted grazing with livestock. This is a very important additional activity that will assist firefighters in the event of a wildfire.

The importance of this fuel break is demonstrated by the historic event of the 1961 Rancheria Fire, which burned over the entire area northeast of Sutter Creek and Amador City and even reached our town, destroying the gymnasium at Sutter Creek High School (now Amador High School).

We, of the city council of the City of Sutter Creek strongly encourage the Amador Fire Safe Council to seek the funding necessary to cause this fuel break to be established. 90 Section 9, Item D.
4874-3534-2501.1 1
18 Main St., Sutter Creek, CA 95685 • Telephone: (209)267-5647 • Fax: (209)267-0639 • TTY: 711 The City of Sutter Creek is an equal opportunity service provider and employer

STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JUNE 3, 2024
FROM: DAN LAFONTAINE, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: SUBMISSION OF A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION FOR THE LAKE OR

STREAMBED ALTERATION PERMIT FOR THE CREEK CLEARING

PROJECT
Recommendation
Consider the proposed exemption class and adopt the NOE. After the NOE has been adopted and signed it will be posted with the Amador County Clerk. The NOE can then be referenced as the completed CEQA documentation for the Lake or Streambed alteration permit application to the Department of Fish and Game.

Background and Analysis
The City has recently submitted a Lake or Streambed Alteration permit notification to the Department of Fish and Game on May 16, 2024. As part of the permit application the City of Sutter Creek as the Lead agency is required to make a determination on the environmental impact of the permit through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Alternatively, the City could deem the Department of Fish and Game the lead agency, which would need approval from Fish and Game. Estimates, based on conversations with Fish and Game, are that costs could be up to 6-months in delays and 30 to 40K based on other similar projects. The Creek cleaning project entails creek/tributary cleaning around the City including Bryson Park Culverts, Old Rte. 40 Culvert, Sutter Creek, and The Grizzly culvert per the map attached to this staff report (which was included in the permit application).

Staff has prepared the following Notice of Exemption (NOE). Under Exempt Status, Categorical Exemption Section 15301 (existing Facilities) allows operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. The Sutter Creek Maintenance project is consistent with 15301.h as it proposes maintenance of existing landscaping, native growth, and water supply reservoirs without the use of pesticides.

Therefore, the project qualifies for this exemption.
91 Section 9, Item E.
4874-3534-2501.1 2
18 Main St., Sutter Creek, CA 95685 • Telephone: (209)267-5647 • Fax: (209)267-0639 • TTY: 711 The City of Sutter Creek is an equal opportunity service provider and employer Fiscal Impact
If the council does not believe that the NOE is appropriate, Staff will need to prepare an Initial Study with a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report at considerable expense to the City.
92 Section 9, Item E.

Notice of Exemption
To: Office of Planning and Research From: City of Sutter Creek 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 18 Main Street
Sacramento, CA 95814 Sutter Creek, CA 95685
County Clerk
County of Amador
810 Court Street
Jackson, CA 95642
Project Title: Sutter Creek Channel Maintenance
Project Location – Specific: Sutter Creek and various culverts within the City limits Project Location – City: Sutter Creek Project Location – County: Amador Description of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Project:

Obtain a permit from CDFW (Routine maintenance permit for 5 years - standard timeframe) to maintain the creek flows throughout town. Work is being authorized around Sutter Creek from the flushing damn to the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) for approximately 6,500 feet, in the creek along gopher flat road for approximately 2,000 feet and on the culvert on the East side of Old Rt 49 for approximately 800 feet. Work includes removing brush from the creek banks and chopping up fallen trees that are impeding creek flow. All work would either be performed on the bank of the creek or in the creek channel only when water is not present. Work would also include removal of small saplings that are beginning to grow in the creek channel (again only without water present).

Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Sutter Creek Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: Dan Lafontaine, Public Works Director Exempt Status: (check one)
Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1);15268);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3);15269(a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4);15269(b)(c));
Categorical Exemption. Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) Statutory Exemptions. State code number:

Reasons why project is exempt: Section 15301 allows operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. The Sutter Creek Channel Maintenance project is consistent with example 15301.h as it proposes maintenance of existing landscaping, native growth, and water supply reservoirs without the use of pesticides. Therefore, the project qualifies for this exemption.

Lead Agency Contact Person: Daniel Lafontaine Phone: (209) 215-4895 If filed by applicant:

1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.

2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: _____________ Title: Public Works Director City of Sutter Creek Signed by Lead Agency Date received for filing at OPR:

Signed by Applicant POSTED:_____________________
93 Section 9, Item E.

Sutter Creek Cleaning Area
Creek and Culvert Cleaning around town
Legend
Feature 1
Sutter Creek Cleaning
2000 ft
N
➤
Image © 2024 Airbus
Image © 2024 Airbus
Image © 2024 Airbus
94 Section 9, Item E.