Cities Index.
Agenda

Temecula City Council
May 27, 2025

Document
Agenda
Meeting
May 27, 2025
Body
Temecula City Council
Pages
13
Original file
1.3 MB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on laserfiche.temeculaca.gov. That file is the official record.

Contract No. XXXXXXX
Yto
Description
Estimated Labor
Hours
Hours
Raw Labor
Amount
U .^
^ LL
o a)
L a
U- a
o
a'
C
N
c Uo
c� a
m
c�
co% LOof
Y cn w
O
EO_>
� w U)
a)
c
1E
O L
O
o_
-0 C
— cn w a-
aOU �
U> a)i
o w cn

1.0 Project Management

1.1 Project Administration and Meetings (assume 14 months / 28 meetings) 28 14
42 $3,944

1.2 QA/QC Plan
4 8
12 $938
0 $0
TASK SUBTOTAL:
0 32
22 0
0 0
0 0
54 $4,883

2.0 Landscape PS&E

2.1 60% Landscape PS&E package
0 $0
Title sheet (1 Sheet)
0 $0
Landscape Plan (18 Sheets)
0 $0
Planting Plan
0 $0
Planting List
0 $0
Planting Details
0 $0
Planting Quantities
0 $0
Irrigation Plan (18 Sheets)
0 $0
Irrigation Plan
0 $0
Irrigation Quantities
0 $0
Specifications
0 $0
Cost Estimate
0 $0
QA/QC
2 20
22 $1,469
Respond to 60% PS&E Comments
0 $0

2.2 95% Landscape PS&E package
0 $0
QA/QC
2 16
18 $1, 219
Respond to 95% PS&E Comments
0 $0

2.3 100% Landscape PS&E package
0 $0
QA/QC
2 12
14 $969
Respond to 100% PS&E Comments
0 $0

2.4 RTL Ready Landscape PS&E package
0 $0
QA/QC
2 10
12 $844
0 $0
TASK SUBTOTAL:
0 8
58 0
0 0
0 0
66 $4,502

3.0 Environmental Revalidation
Task Management/Meeting attendance
40 8
8 56
$4,337
Environmental Study Request (ESR)
6 10
15 31
$1,851
Environmental Re-evaluation
25 31
40 96
$6,020
Environmental Commitment Record (ECR)
6 10
15 31
$1,851
QA/QC
24 24
$2,631
TASK SUBTOTAL:
0 24
0 77
59 78
07�777
01 238
$16,690
1-15 FVP Phase 11 Landscape PSE—overall fee—SB.xls Printed: 05/09/2025

Date:

Prime Consultant:

Project Title:

Client Reference:
05/01 /2025
TYLin
I-15/French Valley Parkway Interchange Phase II - Landscape City of Temecula
T.Y. LIN INTERNATIONAL

PROJECT TITLE

BUDGET WORKSHEET

Page 2 of 4 ends

Contract No. XXXXXXX
Estimated Labor
Hours
o
o
ca
c
c
cc
N
cc
c�
U a
N
O
Q S= cn
O E
Q S= cn
Yto
0 oL ma
o
00 N
o
L
O
o_
OU �
Raw Labor
Description
Li a
c� a
Y cn w
EO_>
w U)
-0 C
— cn w a-
U i Ni
o w cn
Hours
Amount
Total Hours:
0 64
80 77
59 78
0 0
358
$26,076
Raw Labor Rate:
$109.62
$62.50
$85.82
$71.63
$41.35
358
$26,075
Raw Labor Subtotal:
$0.00
$7,015.68
$5,000.00
$6,608.14
$4,226.17
$3,225.30
$0.00
$0.00
Annual Escalation Rate:

Price Amount Contract Duration (Years): 1.17
$0.67 $0 RAW LABOR: $26,076
OTHER DIRECT COSTS Quantity
Unit
Mileage
EA
$0
$0 152.49% OVERHEAD: $39,762
COSTS: $0 RAW LABOR + OVERHEAD: $65,838

OTHER DIRECT

SUBCONSULTANT/VENDOR SERVICES
Amount
%
DBE?
Parsons Landscape Architects
Subtotal - SUBCONSULTANT SERVICES:
$95,691

56.9%
$95,691

56.9%
DBE Participation: $0 $0.0

10.0%

FIXED FEE

SUBCONSULTANT/VENDOR SERVICES
$6, 584
$95,691
OTHER DIRECT COSTS: $0
BASE BUDGET: $168,113
1-15 FVP Phase 11 Landscape PSE—overall fee—SB.xls Printed: 05/09/2025

Date:

Subconsultant:

Project Title:

Client Reference
05/01 /2025
Parsons
1-15/French Valley Parkway Interchange Phase II - Landscape City of Temecula
T.Y. LIN INTERNATIONAL

PROJECT TITLE

BUDGET WORKSHEET

Page 3 of 4 ends

Contract No. XXXXXXX
Y
f
fA
N
Description
p
Estimated
Labor Hours
Hours
Raw Labor
Amount
L
CU
CJ (a
c6 V
.�?
(6 Q
O Q N�
�
`
a-
N L
M
O
V C
°�' .a) .2)
a) a °'
ina_0
� L
O
CL
a) co
U Q L
C
°'
M m
�0
O Q
cn
p
E Q
OU
$0

1.0 Project Management

1.1 Project Administration and Meetings (assume 14 months / 28 meetings) 0 1.2
QA/QC Plan
0 $0
0 $0
TASK SUBTOTAL:
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
$0

2.0 Landscape PS&E

2.1 60% Landscape PS&E package
0 $0
Title sheet (1 Sheet)
0 0
1 0
4 5
$205
Landscape Plan (18 Sheets)
0 2
4 8
2 16
$768
Planting Plan
0 2
8 15
4 29
$1,305
Planting List
0 2
0 4
1 7
$378
Planting Details
0 2
0 4
1 7
$378
Planting Quantities
0 2
4 4
1 11
$584
Irrigation Plan (18 Sheets)
0 2
8 4
2 16
$828
Irrigation Plan
0 2
20 4
4 30
$1,524
Irrigation Quantities
0 2
8 0
1 11
$645
Specifications
0 4
2 0
0 6
$491
Cost Estimate
0 4
2 0
0 6
$491
QA/QC
4 6
10 10
2 32
$1,934
Respond to 60% PS&E Comments
8 16
4 4
0 32
$2,697

2.2 95% Landscape PS&E package
0 18
20 75
18 131
$6,192
QA/QC
4 4
8 8
0 24
$1,487
Respond to 95% PS&E Comments
10 16
4 4
0 34
$2,895

2.3 100% Landscape PS&E package
0 18
28 18
18 82
$4,535
QA/QC
4 4
8 8
0 24
$1,487
Respond to 100% PS&E Comments
8 16
4 4
0 32
$2,697

2.4 RTL Ready Landscape PS&E package
0 18
28 18
18 82
$4,535
QA/QC
4 4
8 10
0 26
$1,560
Respond to Final PS&E Comments
8 16
4 4
0 32
$2,697
TASK SUBTOTAL:
50 160
183
206
76 0
0 675
$40,312

3.0 Environmental Revalidation
Task Management/Meeting attendance
0 $0
Environmental Study Request
0 $0
Environmental Re-evaluation
0 $0
Environmental Commitment Record
0 $0
QA/QC
0 $0
0 $0
1-15 FVP Phase 11 Landscape PSE_overall fee_SBAs Printed: 05/09/2025

Date:

Subconsultant:

Project Title:

Client Reference
05/01 /2025
Parsons
1-15/French Valley Parkway Interchange Phase II - Landscape City of Temecula
T.Y. LIN INTERNATIONAL

PROJECT TITLE

BUDGET WORKSHEET

Page 4 of 4 ends

Contract No. XXXXXXX
Estimated
Labor Hours
L
� L
O
Q
_
Y
f0
f
C
CL
'' ^3
a) co
O
co
EO
Q
C
C
fA
Y
c6 V
m a)
p
CJ
°�' .�? °'
°'
(
p
Raw Labor
Description
O
a
.L C i
°' a
N O N
in a 0
E N
p
S= Q
O U
I
I
I Hours
I Amount
TASK SUBTOTAL:
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
$0
Total Hours:
50 160
183
206
76 0
0 675
$40,312
Raw Labor Rate:
$99.14
$97.00
$51.54
$36.31
$38.46
675
$40,312
Raw Labor Subtotal:
$4,957.00
$15,520.00
$9,431.82
$7,479.86
$2,922.96
$0.00
$0.00
Annual Escalation Rate:

Unit Price Amount Contract Duration (Years): 1.17
EA $0.67 $0 RAW LABOR: $40,312

OTHER DIRECT COSTS
Quantity
Mileage
$0
$0 115.80% OVERHEAD: $46,681
OTHER DIRECT COSTS: $01 RAW LABOR + OVERHEAD: $86,992

SUBCONSULTANT/VENDOR SERVICES
I Amount
%
DBE?
Subtotal - SUBCONSULTANT SERVICES:
$0

0.0%
DBE Participation: 1 $0 $0.0

10.0%
FIXED FEE:

SUBCONSULTANTIVENDOR SERVICES
$8,699
$0
OTHER DIRECT COSTS: $0
BASE BUDGET: $95,691
1-15 FVP Phase 11 Landscape PSE_overall fee_SB.xls Printed: 05/09/2025

City of Temecula
Fiscal Years 2025-29
Capital Improvement Program
1-15 / FRENCH VALLEY PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS - PHASE II
Circulation Project
Project Description: This project includes the design and construction of the two lane northbound collector/distributer road system beginning north of the Winchester Road Interchange on -ramps and ending just north of the 1-15/1-215 junction with connectors to 1-15 and 1-215.

Benefit: This project will address and improve traffic circulation in the City's northern area by providing the northbound collector/distributer road system.

Core Value: Transportation Mobility and Connectivity
Project Status: Construction May 2023 through February 2025.

Department: Public Works - Account No. 210.265.999.5800.PW16-01 / 726 Level: I
Project Cost:

Prior Years
Actuals
2024-25
2023-24 Adopted 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29
Adjusted Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Total Project
Cost
5801-Administration
3,303,969
426,365 170,000
3,900,334
5804-Construction
4,941,062
85,013,938
89,955,000
5805-Construction Engineering
1,032,749
9,868,251
10,901,000
5802-Design & Environmental
19,440,322
29,446
19,469,768
5700-Land Acquisition
13,782,603
740,648
14,523,251
5240-Utilities
1,993
1,993
Total Expenditures
1 42,502,699
96,078,647 170,000
138,751,346
Source of Funds:
4271-CFD 01-02 (Harveston)
1,005,840
1,005,840
4242-DIF-Street Improvements
75,360
75,360
4001-General Fund
4,236,174
4,236,174
4668-1NFRA Grant
11537,255
48,462,745
50,000,000
4170-Measure A
1,627,914
1,627,914
4002-Measure S
5,561,573
300,012 170,000
6,031,585
4438-Reimbursements
6,023,000
6,023,000
4465-SAFETEA-LU
1,602,360
1,602,360
4426-STIP-Surface Transportation
47,600,000
47,600,000
Improvement Program
4473-TUMF (CETAP/RCTC)
472,841
999,668
11472,509
4474-TUMF (RCTC)
2,343,000
21343,000
4472-TUMF (WRCOG)
113,406,3901
3,327,214
16,733,604
Total Funding
36,289,346
102,292,000 170,000
138,751,346
Future Operating & Maintenance Costs:
78 City of Temecula
Fiscal Years 2025-29
Capital Improvement Program
1-15 / FRENCH VALLEY PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS - PHASE II
Circulation Project
2024-25
Prior Years
2023-24 Adopted 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29
Total Project
Project Cost:

Actuals
Adjusted Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Cost
Total Operating Costs
Notes :

1. General Fund Includes Required Contribution match for TUMF (CETAP/RCTC) funds.

2. State Transportation Improvement Program-2014 RCTC Call for projects as approved by the Commission on November 13, 2013 ($10,000,000).

3. TUMF (RCTC)- Regional funding is pursuant to RCTC Agreement No. 06-72-048-00 for a total of $7,517,000 ($5,517,000-ROW; $2,000,000-PS&E). $200,000 City Match, Phase I expended $3,174,000-ROW; $2,000,000 PS&E; $200,000 City Match. Phase II expended $2,343,000 ROW.

4. TUMF (WRCOG) - TUMF Zone funding is pursuant to WRCOG Agreement No. 06-SW-TEM-1079 for a total of $11,575,000 reduced to $11,451,875 ($975,752-PA&ED; $8,801,875-PS&E; $1,674,248-ROW) for Phase I and Phase II.

5. TUMF (WRCOG) - TUMF Zone funding is pursuant to WRCOG Agreement No. 05-SW-TEM-1064 for $4,078,000 reduced to $4,043,000 ($108,724 PA&ED;3,934,296 PS&E) for Phase I and Phase II.

6. TUMF (WRCOG) - TUMF Zone Funding is pursuant to WRCOG Agreement No. 05-SW-TEM-1064 for $1,925,000-ROW. No expenditures for Phase I.

7. TUMF (CETAP/RCTC) - Funding is pursuant to the RCTC Agreement No. 17-73-007-00 in the amount of $1,472,509 ($673,562 ROW; $798,947 DESIGN; $106,603 City Match).
79 Item No. 9

CITY OF TEMECULA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Ron Moreno, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: May 27, 2025
SUBJECT: Accept Improvements and File the Notice of Completion for the Pickleball Courts, PW21-03
PREPARED BY: Nino Abad, Senior Civil Engineer
Samantha Preciado, Assistant Engineer II
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Accept the construction of the Pickleball Courts, PW21-03, as complete; and

2. Direct the City Clerk to file and record the Notice of Completion, release the performance bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 100% of the final contract amount; and

3. Release the Labor and Materials Bond seven months after filing the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed.

BACKGROUND: On May 14, 2024, the City Council awarded a construction contract to ACT 1 Construction, Inc. in the amount of $2,408,434.95 and authorized the City Manager to approve contract change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $240,843.50.

The Pickleball Courts project provided the design and construction of seventeen (17) dedicated concrete pickleball courts surrounded by a 10-ft-high chain link fence with windscreen. The facility also included a 3.5-ft-high interior chain link fence, outdoor amenities, a designated area for portable restrooms with a hand -washing station and two (2) asphalt concrete parking lots with solar -powered security lights.

ACT 1 Construction, Inc. has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. All work is warranted for a period of one year from February 11, 2025, the date the City obtained "beneficial use" of the project improvements. The retention for this project will be released pursuant to the provisions of Public Contract Code 7107.

The amount of the contract was $2,408,434.95. There were six (6) construction change orders totaling $182,762.31. The final contract amount totaled $2,591,197.26.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with accepting the project and filing and recording the Notice of Completion.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion

2. Contractor's Affidavit and Final Release

3. Maintenance Bond

4. Project Description

5. Project Location

RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND RETURN TO:

CITY CLERK

CITY OF TEMECULA
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590

EXEMPT FROM RECORDER'S FEES
Pursuant to Government Code
Sections 6103 and 27383

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:

The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described.

2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590.

3. The Nature of Interest is a Contract which was awarded by the City of Temecula to Act 1 Construction, Inc., 444 Sixth St. Norco, CA 92860 to perform the following work of improvement:

PICKLEBALL COURTS
Project No. PW21-03

4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on May 27, 2025. That upon said contract the Developers Surety and Indemnity Company was surety for the bond given by the said company as required by law.

5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows:

PICKLEBALL COURTS
Project No. PW21-03

6. The location of said property is: 30875 Rancho Vista Rd, Temecula, California.

Dated at Temecula, California, this 27' day of May, 2025.

City of Temecula
Randi Johl, City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council.

Dated at Temecula, California, this 27th day of May, 2025.

City of Temecula
Randi Johl, City Clerk

CITY OF TEMECULA, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE
for

PICKLEBALL COURTS
PROJECT NO. PW21-03
This is to certify that Act 1 Construction, Inc.
(hereinafter the "Contractor") declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the Contractor or by any of the Contractor's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of its Contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as PICKLEBALL COURTS, PROJECT NO. PW21-03, situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows:

Pickleball Courts, 30875 Rancho Vista Rd., Temecula, CA 92592

ADDRESS OR DESCRIBE LOCATION OF WORK
The Contractor declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the Contractor.

Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the Contractor hereby disputes the following amounts:

Description I Dollar Amount to Dispute
none
Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 7100, the Contractor does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the Contractor by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the Contractor has not disputed above.

CONTRACTOR:

Dated: April 21, 2025 i3y:zl,�VkX—
Signature
Don Trenholm, President
Print Name and Title
RELEASE R-1

CITY OF TEMECULA, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BOND NO. 0102677

MAINTENANCE BOND
for

PICKLEBALL COURTS
PROJECT NO. PW21-03

KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT
Act 1 Construction, Inc at 444 6th St, Norco, CA 92860

NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR
a corporation (hereinafter called "Principal"), and
(fill in whether a Corporation, Partnership, or Individual) Developers Surety and Indemnity Company at 800 SUPERIOR AVENUE E., 21ST FLOOR, CLEVELAND, OH 44114

NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY
(hereinafter called "Surety"), are held and firmly b? ondllun fioetiund ed0 9hTEMECULA (hereinafter called "Owner") in the penal sum of thousand one hundred ninety seven DOLLARS AND twenty six CENTS ($ 2,581,197.26) in lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than ten percent of the Contract value payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a certain Contract with the Owner, dated the 14th day of May , 2024 a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PICKLEBALL COURTS, PROJECT NO. PW21-03.

WHEREAS, said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee for the period of one year after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the Owner, against all defects in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period; and WHEREAS, the said Contract has been completed, and was the final estimate approved on this the 11 th day of February 20 25
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if within one year from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work, and the carrying out of the terms of said Contract, or it shall appear that defective materials were furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this instrument shall be void.

As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred MAINTENANCE BOND MB-1

by the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered.

The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications.

Signed and sealed this 22nd day of April 12025
(Seal)
Developers Surety and Indemnity Company Act 1 Construction, Inc SURETY- PR CIPAL:
01 `1
Allison cam o
(Name) ( me)
Attorney -In -Fact ce�;6(4 yyf _ ^
(Title) (T(� � ...

By:
r--
APPROVED AS TO FORM: r )ho In'1
(Name
5e&l
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney (Title)
NOTE: Signatures of two corporate officers required for corporations. A Notarial Acknowledgement or Jurat must be attached for each of the Surety and Principal Signatures.

MAINTENANCE BOND MB-2

POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR

COREPOINTE INSURANCE COMPANY

DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY
59 Maiden Lane, 43rd Floor, New York, NY 10038
(212)220-7120
KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS that, except as expressly limited herein, COREPOINTE INSURANCE. COMPANY and DEVELOPERS SURE fY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, do hereby make, constitute and appoint:

Michael R. Strahan, E.B. Strahan and Allison Ocampo
of San Diego, CA
as its true and lawful Attorney -in -Fact, to make, execute, deliver and acknowledge, for and on behalfof said companies, as sureties, bonds, undertakings and contracts of suretyship giving and granting unto said Attorney- in -Fact full power and authority to do and to perform every act necessary, requisite or proper to be done in connection therewith as each of said company could do, but reserving to each of said company full power of substitution and revocation, and all of the acts of said Attomey-in-Fact, pursuant to these presents, are hereby ratified and confirmed. This Power of Attorney is effective February 2, 2023 and shall expire on December 31, 2025.

This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed trader and by authority of the following resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors ofCOREPOIN"rE INSURANCE COMPANY and DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY (collectively, "Company') on February 10, 2023.

RESOLVED, that Sam 7.aza President Surety Underwriting, James Bell, Vice President, Surety UnderNritin;, and Craig Dawson. Executive Underwriter, Surety. each an employee of AmTrust North America, Inc., an affiliate of the Company (the "Authorized Signors'), are hereby authorized to execute a Power of Attorney_ qualifying attomey(s)-in-fact named in the Power of Attorney to execute, on behalf of the Company, bonds, undertakings and contracts of suretyship, or other suretyship obligations, and that the Secretary or any Assistant Secretary of the Company be, and each of them hereby is. authorized to attest the execution of any such Power of Attorney.

RESOLVED, that the signature of any one of the Authorized Signors and the Secretary or any Assistant Secretary of the Company, and the seal of the Company must he affixed to any such Power of Attorney, and any such signature or seal may he affixed by facsimile, and such Power of Attorney shall be valid and binding upon the Company when so affixed and in the future with respect to any bond, undertaking or contract of suretyship to which it is attached.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, COREPOINTE INSURANCE COMPANY and DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY have caused these presents to he signed by the Authorized Signor and attested by their Secretary or Assistant Secretary this March 27, 2023 ,��•`� NNSURA •, �•`` AND / '•,,
By: •
Printed Na Sam Zaza O : •GO ��`'• t� , cq : �1G <c; �2
Title: President, Surety Underwriting
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:

SEAL: D
'•FCAWP� Y�
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

STATE OF California COUNTY OF Orange
19Pq
36 'a
On this 27 day of March , 2023 , before me, Hoang-Queen Phu Pham , personally appeared Sam Laza who proved to me on the basis ofsatisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to within the instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacity, and that by the signature of the instrument the entities upon behalf which the person acted, executed this instrument.

I certify, under penalty of perjup•, under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.
i0m
HOAN&QUYEN P. ►HAJA
Notary Public - California
Signature Orange County
Commission # 2432970
y Comm. ExQires Dec 31, 202i

CORPORATE CERTIFICATION
"Ihe undersigned, the Secretary or Assistant Secretary of CORE-POINTE-LtiSURANCE COMPANY and DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, does hereby certify that the provisions of the resolutions of the respective Boardfi ofjDirectors of said corporations set forth in this Power of Attorney are in force as of the date of this Certification.

This Certification is executed in the City of Cleveland, Ohio, this March 19, 2023. noeuSignod by-
By: b
4 W M Q5t S Barry W. Moses. Assistant Secrctarg POA No. N/A 68UISIVADESOC_.

DocuSignEnvelopeiD:3352BFD6-5E9D-479&837E-C1 E455E653OF Ed. 0323 Signed and sealed this 22nd day of April, 2025

U-I9:/►`71R4 : Z�3 j Z iii
A notary public or other officer completing this
certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is
attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or
validity of that document.

State of California
County of San Diego
On 4/22/2025
before me, E.B. Strahan, Notary Public
personally appeared Allison Ocampo
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/thay< executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(iws), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

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

WITNESS my hand and official seal.
%yf E. B. STRAHAN
W Notary Public • California
San Diego County
Commission 4 2406282
Signature (Seal)
r `'` °0""w`My Comm, Expires Jun 25, 2026 r

ALL-PURPOSECALIFORNIA •.

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

State of California
County of Riverside
On April 23, 2025
Date
personally appeared
before me, Cheri L. Bower, Notary Public
Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer
Don Trenholm & Tiffany Trenholm
Name(s) of Signer(s)
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) glare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that)bethey executed the same in /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by*AWU6 Vtheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

CHERI L, BOWER
o COMM, #2458069 z
z Notary Public • California
Riverside County
M4 Comm. Expires Au . 8, 2027
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws
of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

SignatureC _&�
Signature of Notary Public
Place Notary Seal Above

OPTIONAL
Though this section is optional, completing this information can deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this foram to an unintended document.

Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document:

Document Date:

Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:

Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer's Name:
❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s):
❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General
❑ Individual ❑ Attorney in Fact
❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator
❑ Other:

Signer Is Representing:

Number of Pages:

Signer's Name:
❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): _
❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General
❑ Individual ❑ Attorney in Fact
❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator
rl Other:

Signer Is Representing:
02015 National Notary Association • www.NationalNotary.org • 1-800-US NOTARY (1-800-876-6827) Item #5907

aft
_l
The I fear[ OF Sru[hern C Iifr..rnia
W ir,e Country

PICKLEBALL COURTS
Parks/Recreation Project
Project Description: Design and construct new dedicated pickleball courts at Ronald Reagan Sports Park.

Benefit: This project will provide City residents with an additional popular amenity for enhanced recreational opportunities.

Core Value: Healthy and Livable City
Project Status: Project development, design, and environmental through Fiscal Year 2023-24. Construction in Fiscal Year 2024-25.

Department: Public Works - Account No. 210.265.999.5800.PW21-03 / 787 Level: I
City of Temecula
Fiscal Years 2025-29
Capital Improvement Program
Project Cost:

Prior Years
Actuals
2024-25
2023-24 Adopted 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29
Adjusted Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Total Project
Cost
5801-Administration
118,013
248,418
366,431
5804-Construction
2,663,460
2,663,460
5805-Construction Engineering
50,000
50,000
5802-Design & Environmental
138,705
143,282
281,987
5809-Information Technology
200,000 175,000
375,000
Total Expenditures
1 256,7181
3,305,160 175,000
3,736,878
Source of Funds:
4244-DIF-Park & Rec Improvements
256,718
1,193,282
1,450,000
4240-DIF-Quimby
261,000
261,000
4002-Measure S
1,850,878 175,000
2,025,878
Total Funding
256,718
3,305,160 175,000
3,736,878
Future Operating & Maintenance Costs:

Total Operating Costs
184

Item No. 10

ACTION MINUTES

TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET

TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
MAY 13, 2025
CALL TO ORDER at 6:17 PM: President Zak Schwank
ROLL CALL: Alexander, Kalfus, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart
PUBLIC COMMENTS — None

CSD CONSENT CALENDAR
Unless otherwise indicated below, the following pertains to all items on the Consent Calendar.

Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Alexander, Second by Kalfus. The vote reflected unanimous approval.

13. Approve Action Minutes of April 22, 2025
Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the action minutes of April 22, 2025.

CSD BUSINESS

14. Receive Presentation Regarding Options for Limited Reserved Parking at Fourth of July Extravaganza and Provide General Direction Regarding _ the Same (At the Request of Subcommittee Members Schwank and Stewart)
Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive a presentation regarding options for limited reserved parking at Fourth of July Extravaganza and provide general direction regarding the same.

Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion Stewart, Second by Kalfus. The vote reflected unanimous approval.

CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT

CSD GENERAL MANAGER REPORT

CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS

CSD ADJOURNMENT
At 7:57 PM, the Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, May 27, 2025 at 5:00 PM for a Closed Session, with a regular session commencing at 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.

Zak Schwank, President
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, Secretary
[SEAL]

Item No. 11

TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT

AGENDA REPORT
TO: General Manager/Board of Directors
FROM: Jennifer Hennessy, Director of Finance
DATE: May 27, 2025
SUBJECT: Set Public Hearing to Approve Temecula Community Service District Proposed Rates and Charges for Fiscal Year 2025-26
PREPARED BY: Paula Majors, Fiscal Services Manager
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors adopt a resolution entitled:

RESOLUTION NO. CSD

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE

TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE

CITY OF TEMECULA ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A

REPORT WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED RATES AND
CHARGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 AND SETTING A

TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN

CONNECTION THEREWITH
BACKGROUND: The Temecula Community Service District (TCSD) operates under the authority of Community Services District Law and provides residential street lighting; perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance; recycling and refuse collection and unpaved road maintenance services in the City of Temecula. The boundaries of the TCSD are coterminous with the City and the City Council serves as the Board of Directors of the TCSD.

The TCSD is required to complete an annual levy process which includes adopting a resolution to accept the filing of a report on the proposed rates and charges necessary to provide the following services; noticing each affected property owner in the City; and conducting a public hearing to consider approving the proposed rates and charges.

The four current service levels of the TCSD include:

1. Service Level B — Residential Street Lighting.

2. Service Level C — Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance.

3. Service Level D — Residential Recycling and Refuse Collection.

4. Service Level R — Unpaved Road Maintenance.

1. Service Level B — Residential Street Lighting
The TCSD Rates and Charges for Service Level B are not proposed to increase from last year's rates. The rate is capped at $25.68 per single family residential.

2. Service Level C — Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance As a result of various property owner elections, there are two zones subject to an annual rate increase. The rate increase is the lesser of:
(1) the percentage increase in the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index ("CPI") of All Urban Consumers for the Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, for the previous calendar year
(2) 5%
The Annual CPI change for 2025 was 2.61 %. As a result, the following zones will see a 2.61 % increase in the rates for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Zone No. and Name
24-25 Rate
25-26 Rate
Increase
6 - Woodcrest County
$137.36
$140.94
$3.58
29 - Gallery Portraits
$490.26
$503.08
$12.82

3. Service Level D — Residential Recycling and Refuse Service Per the Franchise Agreement with CR&R, the change in CPI and land -fill tipping fees determine the increase/decrease in the annual Service Level D rate and charge. An increase of $5.84 is proposed to the annual rate and charge for Service Level D from $357.84 to $363.68 per residential unit beginning Fiscal Year 2025-26. The increase is due to a CPI increase of 2.01 %, and an overall reduction to the annual rate adjustment to maintain the fund balance in Fund 194. In addition, the County of Riverside's Waste Management Department has indicated that they will be increasing their disposal fees by 2.88% for fiscal year 2025-2026.

4. Service Level R — Unpaved Street and Road Maintenance The TCSD rates and charges for Service Level R are not proposed to increase from their approved per parcel rate. The rate is capped at $115.26 per single-family residential and $57.62 per vacant residential property.

Staff recommends that the Board of Directors adopt the resolution to accept the filing of the report on the proposed rates and charges for Fiscal Year 2025-26 and schedule a public hearing concerning these issues for July 22, 2025. Staff will proceed with noticing each affected property owner in the City regarding the proposed rates and charges within a minimum of forty-five (45) days prior to the public hearing.

FISCAL IMPACT: The revenue generated for the TCSD Fiscal Year 2025-26 rates and charges will fund residential street lighting; perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance; recycling and refuse collection and unpaved road maintenance services in the City of Temecula.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution

2. FY 2025-26 Preliminary Engineer's Report

RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF

THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF

THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACKNOWLEDGING THE

FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO THE

PROPOSED RATES AND CHARGES FOR FISCAL YEAR
2025-26 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A

PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Upon incorporation of the City of Temecula, effective December 1, 1989, voters approved the formation of the Temecula Community Services District ("TCSD"), to provide specified services to properties within its jurisdiction.

Section 2. Pursuant to Government Code Section 61115, the TCSD has prescribed, revised and collected rates and charges for the services furnished by it, and has elected to have these rates and charges collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, property taxes collected within the TCSD in the same manner prescribed by Government Code Section 61115. The TCSD proposes to continue such rates and charges for the operation, maintenance, servicing and administration of street lights, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance, refuse collection, and unpaved street maintenance for the 2025-26 Fiscal Year. All laws applicable to the levy, collection, and enforcement of property taxes, including, but not limited to, those pertaining to the matters of delinquency, correction, cancellation, refund and redemption, shall be applicable to these rates and charges, except for the California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 4831.

Section 3. Pursuant to Government Code Section 61115, the TCSD has caused a written report ("Report") to be prepared and filed with the Secretary of the TCSD. This Report contains a description of each parcel of real property and the proposed amount of the rates and charges for Fiscal Year 2025-26. The Report is based upon a budget adopted by the Board of Directors for the proposed services for specific areas where such services are provided, including necessary staff and administrative expenses. A summary of the Report containing the proposed rates and charges is attached hereto as Exhibit A, entitled "Project Summary", and incorporated herein by this reference. A copy of the Report is on file in the office of the Secretary of the TCSD and is available for public inspection.

Section 4. The Board of Directors hereby acknowledges the filing of the Report, and appoints the 22"d day of July 2025, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as feasible, in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590, as the time and place for the public hearing on the Report and the proposed rates and charges. At the public hearing, the Board of Directors will hear and consider all objections or protests, if any, to the Report. The Board may continue the hearing from time to time.

Section 5. The District Secretary is hereby directed to give notice of the filing of the Report and of the time and place of the hearing on the Report pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 61115. The District Secretary is further directed to give notice, pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIID of the California Constitution, regarding any increases proposed in the Report with respect to any of the rates and charges.

Section 6. The District Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula this 271h day of May, 2025.

ATTEST:

Randi Johl, Secretary
[SEAL]
Zak Schwank, President
N

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 2025- was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 27th day of May 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: BOARD MEMBERS:

NOES: BOARD MEMBERS:

FA:0.yll/_\I0�:T97_11 to] 07L1aL10.1a
ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, Secretary

Webb
MUNIC-IIIAL t-Ii
Preliminary Engineer's Annual Levy Report
Fiscal Year 2025-2026
Temecula Community Services District
Service Levels B, C, R and Refuse & Recycling Collection Prepared For
is
a
The Heart of Southern California
Wine Country
May 2025

Table of Contents
Sections
Tables
Section i. Engineer's Statement
Section 1.

Description of Services
1 Section 2.

Budgets and Levy Summary
2 Section 3.

District Services and Charges
10 Section 4.

Changes to the District
16 Section 5.

Method of Apportionment
18 Section 6.

Tax Roll
21 Table 2-1.

Operating Budget Summary for Service Levels B, D and R
3 Table 2-2.

Operating Budget for Service Level C
4 Table 2-3.

Year over Year Budget Comparison
9 Table 3-1.

Service Level B
10 Table 3-2.

Service Level C
11 Table 5-1.

Parcel Charge Calculation Service Level B
18 Table 5-2.

Parcel Charge Calculation Service Level C
19 Table 5-3.

Parcel Charge Calculation Service Level R
20 Table 5-4.

Parcel Charge Calculation Refuse/Recycling Collection
20 Appendices
Appendix A. Tax Roll A-1

i. Engineer's Statement
AGENCY: CITY OF TEMECULA
PROJECT: TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS

CITY OF TEMECULA

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
REPORT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 61115
Pursuant to Government Code Section 61115, this Report is prepared and presented to the Board to prescribe Service Level B, Service Level C, Service Level R and Refuse/Recycling Collection rates and charges for the parcels and territories within the District. A Public Hearing is held each year before the Board to allow the public an opportunity to hear and be heard regarding the District. Following consideration of all public comments and written protests at the noticed Public Hearing, and review of the Report, the Board may order amendments to the Report or confirm the Report as submitted. Following final approval of the Report, and confirmation of the Charges, the Board shall order the levy and collection of Charges for Fiscal Year 202S-2026. In such case, the levy information will be submitted to the Riverside County Auditor/Controller and included as Charges on the property tax roll for the various services provided in Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES of the areas covered and the services provided for the Fiscal Year. The description of services shows and describes the existing improvements and is sufficient in showing and describing the general nature, location, and extent of the improvements.

SECTION 2 A BUDGETS AND LEVY SUMMARY by Service Level of the improvements to be maintained and/or improved for the mentioned Fiscal Year.

SECTION 3 A description of the DISTRICT SERVICES AND CHARGES by Service Level, describing the method used to apportion the District charges.

SECTION 4 CHANGES TO THE DISTRICT contains details of changes that have occurred within the District since its inception that could affect the levy.

SECTION 5 The METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT used to calculate the levy for each of the Service Levels.

SECTION 6 The TAx ROLL information.

Temecula Community Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

i. Engineer's Statement
WHEREAS, upon incorporation of the City of Temecula (the "City"), effective December 1, 1989, voters approved the formation of the Temecula Community Services District (the "District") to provide specified services previously provided by the County of Riverside (the "County") to properties within its jurisdiction. The boundary of the District is coterminous with the City boundary and includes all parcels within the City with the City Council acting as the Board of Directors (the "Board") for the District. The District collects property -related fees and charges ("Charges") in order to provide services and maintain the improvements within the District.

The District was formed, and Charges were set and established, pursuant to the Community Services District Law, Title 6, Division 3 of the California Government Code ("CSD Law").

WHEREAS, each fiscal year, an Engineer's Annual Levy Report (the "Report") is prepared, filed, and approved by the Board. This Report describes the District, any changes to the District, and the proposed Charges for the fiscal year. The word "parcel," for the purposes of this Report, refers to an individual property assigned its own Parcel Number or Property Identification Number by the Riverside County Assessor's Office. The Riverside County Auditor/Controller uses Property Identification Numbers and specific Fund Numbers to identify, on the tax roll, properties charged for District services. The Charges contained in the Report are based on the historical and estimated costs to service properties within the District. The services provided by the District and the corresponding costs are budgeted and charged as separate Service Levels and include all expenditures, deficits, surpluses, and revenues. Each parcel is charged for the services provided to the parcel. The District provides residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope protection, and refuse collection in numerous residential developments as well as unpaved road improvement and maintenance within specified areas of the District.

WHEREAS, Pursuant to Government Code Section 61115 the District has prescribed, revised, and collected rates and charges for residential street lighting ("Service Level B"), perimeter landscaping ("Service Level C"), unpaved road maintenance ("Service Level R"), and Refuse/Recycling Collection services furnished by the District, and has elected to have these rates and charges collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, its general taxes in the manner prescribed by Government Code Section 61115.

Temecula Community Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) II Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

i. Engineer's Statement
Now, THEREFORE, I Matthew E. Webb, a Professional Civil Engineer (employed at Albert A. Webb Associates and retained through an agreement between Webb Municipal Finance, LLC and my employer), acting on behalf of the Temecula Community Services District, pursuant to the "CSD Law", do hereby submit the following:

The District requested Webb Municipal Finance, LLC, to prepare and file an Engineer's Levy Report for Temecula Community Services District (Levels B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) pursuant to the Government Code Section 61115, presenting plans and specifications describing the general nature, location and extent of the improvements to be maintained, an estimate of the costs of the maintenance, operations, and servicing of the improvements for Service Levels B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection, for the referenced Fiscal Year, an assessment of the estimated costs of the maintenance, operations, and servicing the improvements, assessing the net amount upon all assessable lots and/or parcels within each Service Level and Refuse/Recycling Collection in proportion to the special benefit received;
This Report and the information contained herein reflect the proposed budget for each of the various services provided by the District and the rates and charges applicable to those services as they existed at the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention. Reference is hereby made to the Riverside County Assessor's maps for a detailed description of the lines and dimensions of parcels within the District. The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed Report as directed by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District.

Please note that Albert A. Webb Associates provides engineering advice and related consulting services. Albert A. Webb Associates is not a registered municipal advisor and does not participate in municipal advisory activities, and nothing in this Engineer's Report is, or should be interpreted to be, municipal advisory services or advice.

Executed this day of 2025.

ALBERTA. WEBB ASSOCIATES
Q�n�EssroN
L z
w N0. 37385 M MATTHEW E. WEBB
a
PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER NO. 37385
kl� CIyI1. ENGINEER OF WORK
Z
qrF Or CALII o ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND

THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Temecula Community Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

i. Engineer's Statement
Final approval, confirmation and levy of the annual assessments and all matters in the Engineer's Report were made on the day of 2025, by adoption of Resolution No. by the Board of Directors.

CITY CLERK

CITY OF TEMECULA

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A copy of the Tax Roll and Engineer's Annual Levy Report were filed in the office of the City Clerk on the day of 2025.

CITY CLERK

CITY OF TEMECULA

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Temecula Community Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) iv Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

1. Description of Services
The boundary of the District is coterminous with the City boundary and includes all parcels within the City. The District provides certain property related services and improvements consisting of four (4) separate and distinct services referred to as "Service Levels". Each parcel within the District is charged proportionately for only those services attributable to the parcel. Each Service Level has differing costs depending upon the services provided.

All parcels identified within a Service Level share in the cost of the service. The costs associated with the service are spread among all properties within that Service Level to which the service is provided in accordance with the Method of Apportionment of the specific service level. Services and improvements provided throughout the District include residential street lighting, perimeter landscape maintenance and slope protection, unpaved road improvement construction and maintenance, and a refuse and recycling collection program. The Service Levels are identified as follows:

Service Level B - Residential Street Lighting
Services include the operation, maintenance, utility costs, and administration of residential streetlights.

Service Level C- Perimeter Landscaping
Services include the operation, maintenance, utility costs, improvements, and administration of all perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance areas maintained by the District.

Service Level R - Unpaved Road Maintenance
Services include the operation and administration of certain unpaved streets and roads maintained by the District.

Refuse/Recycling Collection
Services include the operation and administration of the refuse and recycling program for single-family dwellings.

Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

2. Budgets and Levy Summary
The budgets for each Service Level are shown below. Each Service Level provides different and specific services and improvements to various parcels within the District. Only the parcels that the services and improvements are levied for are included in each of the Service Levels. The "Total Levy Units" and the resulting "Charge per Levy Unit" (shown in Table 2-2), reflect a method of apportionment that most fairly spreads the costs of the services to the parcels in that Service Level. The "Total Levy Units" for Service Levels B, C, and Refuse/Recycling Collection is based on a per parcel count. For Service Level R, levy units are based on a Parcel Development Unit ("PDU"), which is similar to a per parcel count but makes a distinction between developed and undeveloped parcels. For a more complete description of the methods used for calculating the "Total Levy Units" used for each Service Level, please refer to Section 5, Method of Apportionment.

Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 2 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

2. Budgets and Levy Summary
Table 2-1
Service Levels B, R and Refuse/Recycling Operating Budget Summary for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025

PERSONNEL
Services
$0
$0
$74,789
$74,789
Subtotal Personnel Services
$0
$0
$74,789
$74,789

OPERATIONS MAINTENANCE
5200-S
Repair & Maintenance Facilities
5212
$0
$0
$0
$0
Office Supplies
5220
$0
$0
$0
$0
Printing
5222
$0
$0
$0
$0
Election Costs (Offset by Developer Deposits)
5225
$0
$0
$0
$0
Dues and Memberships
5226
$0
$0
$6,500
$6,500
Postage and Packaging
5230
$0
$0
$0
$0
Property Tax Administrative Fees
5231
$17,000
$200
$14,000
$31,200
Utilities
5240
$0
$0
$0
$0
Small Tools and Equipment
5242
$0
$0
$0
$0
Uniforms
5243
$0
$0
$350
$350
Consulting Services
5248
$11,688
$234
$0
$11,922
Other Outside Services
5250
$0
$0
$25,501
$25,501
Public Notices
5256
$0
$0
$23,000
$23,000
Staff Training/Education
5261
$0
$0
$0
$0
Mileage
5262 1
$0
$0
$0
$0
Recognition Program
5265
$0
$0
$0
$0
Subtotal5200's
$28,688
$434
$69,351
$98,473
Waste Hauling
5315
$0
$0
$10,973,877
$10,973,877
Street Lighting
5319
$455,000
$0
$0
$455,000
Subtotal5300's
$455,000
$0
$10,973,877
$11,428,877
Emergency Road Maintenance
5402
$0
$10,000
$0
$10,000
Landscape Maintenance
5415
$0
$0
$0
$0
Landscape Rehabilitation
5416
$0
$0
$0
$0
Subtotal5400's
$0
$10,000
$0
$10,000
Recycling Programs
$0
$0
$31,516
$0
Subtotal
$0
$0
$31,516
$0
Capital Outlay
$0
$0
$0
$0
Subtotal
$0
$0
$0
$0

TOTAL DIRECT DISTRICT COSTS
$483,688
$10,434
$11,149,533
$11,612,139

EXPENDITURES/REVENUES
Contingency Reserve
$0
$0
$0
$0

TOTAL EXPENDITURES / REVENUES
$483,688
$10,434
$11,149,533
$11,612,139

CONTRIBUTIONS
Contributions from Grants
4025
$0
$0
$250,789
$250,789
Operation Income
$0
$0
$0
$0
Other Contributions
($174,465)
$0
$8,710
($165,755)
Fund Balance Collection/Contribution
$0
$4,902
$0
$4,902

TOTAL COLLECTION/CONTRIBUTIONS
($174,465)
$4,902
$259,499
$89,936
Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 3 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

2. Budgets and Levy Summary
Table 2-2
Service Levels C Operating Budget for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025 Budget FY 2025-2026

DIRECT COSTS
Saddlewood
7$9,000
Ranchos
Highland
The
V, neyards
• 1'
Signet
[ Series
. •
Woodcrest
Country
. �.

Repair & Maintenance / Facility
,500
$1,500
$2,000
$1,000
$2,500
$1,200
Utilities
$10,200
$13,200
$1,800
$12,000
$11,400
Landscape Contract
$27,511
$19,542
$22,248
$3,816
$20,215
$10,114
Rehabilitation
$5,000
$30,000
$15,000
$1,000
$4,300
$9,000

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$43,011
$61,242
$52,448
$7,616
$39,015
$31,714

INDIRECT COSTS
City Admin
$5
$5
$5
$5
$5
$5
County Fees
$206
$258
$234
$140
$169
$171
Special Tax Consultant
$250
$300
$250
$175
$175
$200

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$461
$563
$489
$320
$349
$376
TOTAL•
:0
($5,609)
••-

ADJUSTMENTS
Fund Balance
Collection/Contribution
TOTAL•.

EDUs
($19,263)
($5,540)
327
($1,542)
($339)
$185
229
478
408
139
$39,025
223
FY 2025-2026 Proposed Rate
$116.00
$89.00
$116.00
$46.00
$175.00
$140.94
FY 2024-2025 Maximum Rate
$116.00
$89.00
$116.00
$46.00
$175.00
$137.36
FY 2025-2026 Maximum Rate
$116.00
$89.00
$116.00
$46.00
$175.00
$140.94
Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

2. Budgets and Levy Summary
Budget FY 2025-2026

DIRECT COSTS
Ridgeview
Zone 07
Grove
Zone 08
RanchoVillage
Solana..

Zone 0•
Repair & Maintenance / Facility
$1,100
$4,500
$500
$1,000
$350
$3,300
Utilities
$6,200
$36,000
$1,500
$4,050
$1,200
$27,000
Landscape Contract
$6,700
$74,000
$1,017
$3,272
$815
$47,000
Rehabilitation
$1,200
$22,000
$2,000
$1,500
$0
$20,000

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$15,200
$136,500
$5,017
$9,822
$2,365
$97,300

INDIRECT COSTS
City Admin
$5
$5
$5
$5
$5
$5
County Fees
$151
$365
$130
$121
$96
$382
Special Tax Consultant
$175
$400
$150
$150
$125
$450

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$331
$770
$285
$276
• 0•
$226
$837
TOTAL•

ADJUSTMENTS
Fund Balance Collection/Contribution
($223)
($245)
($196)
($354)
($141)

TOTALASSESSMENT
EDUs
$15,308
172
$137,025
783
$5,106
111
84 14
831
FY 2025-2026 Proposed Rate
$89.00
$175.00
$46.00
$116.00
$175.00
$116.00
FY 2024-2025 Maximum Rate
$89.00
$175.00
$46.00
$116.00
$175.00
$116.00
FY 2025-2026 Maximum Rate
$89.00
$175.00
$46.00
$116.00
$175.00
$116.00
Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

2. Budgets and Levy Summary
BudgetPresley

DIRECT COSTS
Develop.

I [Zone 13
Morrison
1 Zone 14 1
Barclay
Zone J15
Zone 16
Monte I
Zone 17
Temeku
Zone 18
Repair & Maintenance / Facility
$1,200
$1,000
$800
$2,000
$105
$3,000
Utilities
$12,200
$6,000
$2,300
$4,500
$2,600
$18,000
Landscape Contract
$15,500
$6,060
$5,387
$12,807
$953
$49,775
Rehabilitation
$5,000
$1,000
$1,500
$25,000
$500
$21,500

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$33,900
$14,060
$9,987
$44,307
$4,158
$92,275

INDIRECT COSTS
City Admin
$5
$5
$5
$5
$5
$5
County Fees
$352
$149
$111
$167
$107
$561
Special Tax Consultant
$425
$175
$130
$200
$125
$625

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$782
$329
$246
$372
$237
$1,191
,.

ADJUSTMENTS
Fund Balance Collection/Contribution
($458)
$385
($433)
($6,879)
($2,279)
$544
EDUs
744
166
:00
56 $37,800
216
46 1,343
FY 2025-2026 Proposed Rate
$46.00
$89.00
$175.00
$175.00
$46.00
$70.00
FY 2024-2025 Maximum Rate
$46.00
$89.00
$175.00
$175.00
$46.00
$70.00
FY 2025-2026 Maximum Rate
$46.00
$89.00
$175.00
$175.00
$46.00
$70.00
Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

2. Budgets and Levy Summary
BudgetCrowne

DIRECT COSTS
•
Vail
Sutton
Pheasant
.

Repair & Maintenance / Facility
$2,500
$5,500
$15,000
$425
$400
$8,000
Utilities
$13,300
$40,000
$45,000
$1,600
$1,900
$42,000
Landscape Contract
$33,696
$74,140
$127,430
$2,150
$3,036
$73,000
Rehabilitation
$10,000
$60,000
$47,000
$3,000
$3,000
$38,000

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$59,496
$179,640
$234,430
$7,175
$8,336
$161,000

INDIRECT COSTS
City Admin
$5
$5
$5
$5
$5
$5
County Fees
$176
$447
$710
$104
$238
$659
Special Tax Consultant
$200
$500
$850
$125
$250
$750

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$381
$952
$1,565
$234
$493
$1,414
TOTAL•STS
$59,877
$180,592
$235,995
$7,409
$8,829
$162,414

ADJUSTMENTS
Fund Balance Collection/Contribution
($5,427)
($2,617)
($7,794)
($3,001)
($429)
($314)
EDUs
242
1,017
1,769
38 420
1,621
FY 2025-2026 Proposed Rate
$225.00
$175.00
$129.00
$116.00
$20.00
$100.00
FY 2024-2025 Maximum Rate
$225.00
$175.00
$129.00
$116.00
$20.00
$100.00
FY 2025-2026 Maximum Rate
$225.00
$175.00
$129.00
$116.00
$20.00
$100.00
Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

2. Budgets and Levy Summary
BudgetSerena

DIRECT COSTS
Gallery
..

Wolf
Gallery
Portraits
Repair & Maintenance / Facility
$2,000
$250
$500
$9,000
$500
Utilities
$10,000
$1,000
$5,285
$82,000
$1,050
Landscape Contract
$23,595
$815
$3,272
$114,500
$1,340
Rehabilitation
$20,000
$0
$1,000
$33,000
$1,000

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$55,595
$2,065
$10,057
$238,500
$3,890

INDIRECT COSTS
City Admin
$5
$5
$5
$5
$5
County Fees
$168
$94
$137
$723
$95
Special Tax Consultant
$200
$100
$150
$800
$110

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
$373
$199
$292
$1,528
$210
TOTAL•
00 ADJUSTMENTS
Fund Balance Collection/Contribution
($11,968)
($104)
($1,249)
($7,054)
$931
E DUs
220
8 130
1,806
10 FY 2025-2026 Proposed Rate
$200.00
$270.00
$70.00
$129.00
$503.08
FY 2024-2025 Maximum Rate
$200.00
$270.00
$70.00
$129.00
$490.26
FY 2025-2026 Maximum Rate
$200.00
$270.00
$70.00
$129.00
$503.08
Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

2. Budgets and Levy Summary
The following Table provides levy information for the various Service Levels within the District, comparing the Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 to the previous fiscal year.

Table 2-3
Year -over -Year Budget Comparison
FISCAL
YEAR 2024-2025

ENROLLMENTS
To tal

FISCAL YEAR
2025-2026
% Change

PROJECTIONS
Total
�01
Service Level B - Residential Street Lighting
Levy
per Levy
Unit
Levy
Single -Family Residential
25,289
25,289
$25.68
$649,421.52
25,289
25,289

0.00%
$25.68
$649,421.52
Condominium
680
340
$25.68
$8,731.20
680
340

0.00%
$25.68
$8,731.20
68-2914
25,969
25,629
$658,152.72
25,969
25,629
$658,152.72
Service Level
C - Perimeter Landscaping
111Ri
Zone 1
68-2930
327
327
$116.00
$37,932.00
327
327

0.00%
$116.00
$37,932.00
Zone 2
68-2931
478
478
$89.00
$42,542.00
478
478

0.00%
$89.00
$42,542.00
Zone 3
68-2932
408
408
$116.00
$47,328.00
408
408

0.00%
$116.00
$47,328.00
Zone 4
68-2933
139
139
$46.00
$6,394.00
139
139

0.00%
$46.00
$6,394.00
Zone 5
68-2934
223
223
$175.00
$39,025.00
223
223

0.00%
$175.00
$39,025.00
Zone 6
68-2935
229
229
$137.36
$31,455.44
229
229

2.61%
$140.94
$32,275.26
Zone 7
68-2936
172
172
$89.00
$15,308.00
172
172

0.00%
$89.00
$15,308.00
Zone 8
68-2937
783
783
$175.00
$137,025.00
783
783

0.00%
$175.00
$137,025.00
Zone 9
68-2938
111
111
$46.00
$5,106.00
111
111

0.00%
$46.00
$5,106.00
Zone 10
68-2939
84 84
$116.00
$9,744.00
84 84

0.00%
$116.00
$9,744.00
Zone 11
68-2940
14 14
$175.00
$2,450.00
14 14

0.00%
$175.00
$2,450.00
Zone 12
68-2941
831
831
$116.00
$96,396.00
831
831

0.00%
$116.00
$96,396.00
Zone 13
68-2942
744
744
$46.00
$34,224.00
744
744

0.00%
$46.00
$34,224.00
Zone 14
68-2943
166
166
$89.00
$14,774.00
166
166

0.00%
$89.00
$14,774.00
Zone 15
68-2944
56 56
$175.00
$9,800.00
56 56

0.00%
$175.00
$9,800.00
Zone 16
68-2945
216
216
$175.00
$37,800.00
216
216

0.00%
$175.00
$37,800.00
Zone 17
68-2946
46 46
$46.00
$2,116.00
46 46

0.00%
$46.00
$2,116.00
Zone 18
68-2947
1,343
1,343
$70.00
$94,010.00
1,343
1,343

0.00%
$70.00
$94,010.00
Zone 19
68-2948
242
242
$225.00
$54,450.00
242
242

0.00%
$225.00
$54,450.00
Zone 20
68-2949
1,017
1,017
$175.00
$177,975.00
1,017
1,017

0.00%
$175.00
$177,975.00
Zone 21
68-2950
1,769
1,769
$129.00
$228,201.00
1,769
1,769

0.00%
$129.00
$228,201.00
Zone 22
68-2951
38 38
$116.00
$4,408.00
38 38

0.00%
$116.00
$4,408.00
Zone 23
68-2952
420
420
$20.00
$8,400.00
420
420

0.00%
$20.00
$8,400.00
Zone 24
68-2953
1,621
1,621
$100.00
$162,100.00
1,621
1,621

0.00%
$100.00
$162,100.00
Zone 25
68-2954
220
220
$200.00
$44,000.00
220
220

0.00%
$200.00
$44,000.00
Zone 26
68-2955
8 8
$270.00
$2,160.00
8 8

0.00%
$270.00
$2,160.00
Zone 27
68-2956
130
130
$70.00
$9,100.00
130
130

0.00%
$70.00
$9,100.00
Zone 28
68-2957
1,806
1,806
$129.00
$232,974.00
1,806
1,806

0.00%
$129.00
$232,974.00
Zone 29
68-2958
10 10
$490.26
$4,902.60
10 10

2.61%
$503.08
$5,030.80
Zone 30
N/A
0 N/A
N/A
N/A
0 N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Zone 31
N/A
0 N/A
N/A
N/A
0 N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Zone 32
N/A
0 N/A
N/A
N/A
0 N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Total
13,651
13,651
$1,592,100.04
13,651
13,651
$1,593,048.06
Service Level
R - Road Maintenance
Rate Level 1
68-2917
1 55
48 $115.26
$5,532.48
55 48
$115.26
$5,532.48
Citywide Refuse/Recycling
Collection
68-2916
1 29,585
29,585
$357.84
$10,586,696.40
29,944
29,944
$363.68
$10,890,033.92
Ill The maximum rate per Levy Unit, for Zones 6, 29, 31 and 32 will escalate by the lesser of 5% or the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI"), which is 2.61%.

For Fiscal Year 2025-2026 the increase will be 2.61%, the percentage increase in the Annual CPI.

Ill Zones 30, 31, & 32 will not be levied for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 as the project areas will be maintained by an HOA.

Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 9 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

3. District Services and Charges
Service Level B, Residential Street Lighting
Service Level B includes all developed single-family residential parcels, condominiums, and residential vacant lots for which the District provides ongoing servicing, operation, and maintenance of local street lighting improvements. The current rate and charges for Service Level B is $25.68 per residential lot ($12.84 per condominium unit within Specific Plans) and shall be applied to developed and undeveloped residential parcels within the following Tracts and subdivisions for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Table 3-1
Service Level B
E.
04153-00 19872-05 20882-01 21675-04 23063-03 23101-05 23267-02 24135-03 27827-01 29928-00 31053-03 04188-00 19939-00 20882-02 21675-05 23063-04 23101-06 23267-03 24136-00 27827-02 29928-01 31276-00 04457-00 19939-01 20882-03 21675-06 23063-05 23125-00 23267-04 24136-01 27827-03 29928-02 31344-00 06559-00 19939-02 20987-00 21760-00 23063-06 23125-01 23371-00 24136-02 28309-00 29928-03 31898-00 07401-00 20079-00 21067-00 21765-00 23063-07 23125-02 23371-01 24136-03 28480-00 29929-00 32104-00 07402-00 20079-01 21082-00 22148-00 23063-08 23125-03 23371-02 24182-01 28482-00 29929-01 32169-00 08369-00 20079-02 21082-01 22203-00 23064-00 23126-00 23371-03 24182-02 28482-01 30088-00 32170-00 08369-01 20079-03 21082-02 22204-00 23064-01 23128-00 23371-04 24182-03 28482-02 30264-00 32319-00 08369-02 20130-00 21082-03 22208-00 23064-02 23142-00 23371-05 24182-04 28482-03 30264-01 32436-00 11087-01 20130-01 21082-04 22593-00 23064-03 23143-00 23371-06 24183-00 28503-00 30264-02 32436-01 11087-02 20130-02 21340-00 22593-01 23065-00 23143-01 23371-07 24183-01 28510-00 30264-03 32437-00 12189-01 20130-03 21340-01 22593-02 23065-01 23143-02 23371-08 24184-00 28510-01 30264-04 32437-01 12189-02 20130-04 21340-02 22627-00 23065-03 23143-03 23371-09 24184-01 28510-02 30264-05 32437-02 12189-03 20130-05 21340-03 22627-01 23065-04 23143-04 23371-10 24185-00 28510-03 30264-06 32437-03 12189-04 20130-06 21340-04 22715-00 23065-05 23143-06 23371-11 24185-01 28526-00 30264-07 33124-00 12189-05 20153-00 21340-05 22715-01 23066-01 23143-07 23371-14 24185-02 28553-00 30264-08 33125-00 12189-06 20154-00 21340-06 22715-02 23066-02 23143-08 23483-00 24186-00 28553-01 30264-09 34698-00 12189-07 20319-00 21340-07 22716-00 23066-03 23143-09 24131-00 24186-01 28810-00 30264-10 Old Town 13060-01 20643-00 21430-01 22716-01 23066-04 23143-10 24131-01 24186-02 28980-00 30264-11 PM 24387 13060-02 20644-00 21561-00 22716-02 23066-05 23143-11 24131-02 24186-03 29033-00 30264-12 PM 26488 13060-03 20703-01 21672-01 22716-03 23067-02 23173-00 24131-03 24187-00 29036-00 30264-13 PM 27493 13060-04 20703-02 21672-02 22716-04 23067-03 23173-01 24132-00 24187-01 29133-00 30264-14 PM 28122 13060-05 20703-03 21672-03 22761-00 23067-04 23173-02 24132-01 24187-02 29203-00 30264-15 37341-01 13060-06 20735-01 21672-04 22762-00 23067-05 23173-03 24133-00 24188-00 29286-00 30667-00 37341-03 13060-07 20735-02 21673-00 22786-00 23100-01 23173-04 24133-01 24188-01 29734-00 30667-01 37341-04 13060-08 20735-03 21673-01 22915-00 23100-02 23174-01 24133-02 24188-02 29798-00 30667-02 37341-05 18518-00 20735-04 21673-02 22915-01 23100-03 23174-02 24133-03 24188-03 29798-01 30667-03 37341-06 18518-01 20735-05 21673-03 22915-02 23100-04 23174-03 24133-04 24232-00 29798-02 30668-00 37341-07 18518-02 20735-06 21674-00 22915-03 23100-05 23174-04 24133-05 25004-00 29798-03 30668-01 37341-08 18518-03 20735-07 21674-01 22916-00 23100-06 23174-05 24134-00 25004-01 29798-04 30668-02 37341-09 18583-00 20735-08 21674-02 22916-01 23100-07 23174-06 24134-01 25892-00 29798-05 30669-00 37341-10 19872-00 20735-09 21674-03 22916-02 23100-08 23177-00 24134-02 26488-00 29798-06 30669-01 19872-01 20848-00 21675-00 22916-03 23101-01 23209-00 24134-03 26828-00 29798-07 30669-02 19872-02 20879-00 21675-01 22962-00 23101-02 23220-00 24135-00 26828-01 29798-08 31053-00 19872-03 20879-01 21675-02 23063-01 23101-03 23267-00 24135-01 26828-02 29798-09 31053-01 19872-04 20882-00 21675-03 23063-02 23101-04 23267-01 24135-02 27827-00 29798-10 31053-02 Temecula Services District (Service Level $ C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 10 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

3. District Services and Charges
Service Level C, Perimeter Landscaping
Service level C includes all developed single-family and condominium residential parcels and residential vacant lots for which the District provides on -going servicing, operation, and maintenance of perimeter landscaped areas and slopes within the public rights -of -way and dedicated easements adjacent to and associated with certain tracts and subdivisions. The level of maintenance required in these tracts and subdivisions varies depending on operating costs. Thirty-two (32) Zones with corresponding rates have been established within Service Level C.

In recent fiscal years, the cost of maintaining the perimeter landscaping for most zones in Service Level C, far accede the maximum assessment that can be levied against the parcels in these zones. As a result, it has been necessary for City staff to reduce services and activities and/or reduce or eliminate the collection of funding for long term repairs, replacements and rehabilitation.

The current rates and charges for Service Level C is per residential lot and shall be applied to developed and undeveloped residential parcels within the following Tracts and subdivisions for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Table 3-2
Service Level C
Zone No. 1 Maximum Rate: $116.00 Proposed Rate: $116.00 Tract Name: Tract Numbers:

Tract Name:
7 maximum 11 Proposed 11
Tract Numbers:

Winchester Creek
20130-00 20130-01 20130-02 20130-03 20130-04 20130-05 20130-06 21340-00 21340-01 21340-02 21340-03 21340-04 21340-05 21340-06 Zone No. 3
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $116.00 Proposed Rate: $116.00
Tract Numbers:

Rancho Highlands
20643-00 20644-00 21760-00 22203-00 22204-00 22761-00 22762-00 Zone No. 4
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $46.00 I Proposed Rate: $46.00
Tract Numbers:

The Vineyards
0800 08
Tract Name:

Tract Numbers:

Signet Series
20882-00 20882-01 20882-02 20882-03
Zone No. 6 (3)
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $137.37 I Proposed Rate: $140.94
Tract Numbers:
(3) Beginning Fiscal Year 2009-2010, the base rate for Zone 6 was $95.00. Each year thereafter, beginning Fiscal Year 2010-2011 the maximum rate as approved by the property owners is annually adjustable by the lesser of the percentage increase in the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index ("CPI") of All Urban Consumers for the Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario Area (formerly Los Angeles -Riverside -Orange County Area), for the previous calendar year or 5.00%. For Fiscal Year 2025-2026 the adjustment is 2.61%, the annual increase in the CPI.

Tract Name: Tract Numbers:

Ridgeview 1 20735-07 20735-08 20735-09 20881-00 21764-00 Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

3. District Services and Charges
Zone No. 8
Maximum Rate:
00 Proposed Rate: $175.00
Tract Name:

Tract Numbers:

Village Grove
21672-01 21672-02
21672-03
21672-04 21673-00 21637-01 21637-02
21673-03 21674-00
21674-01
21674-02 21674-03 21675-00 21675-01
21675-02 21675-03
21675-04
21675-05 21675-06
Tract Name:
laximum Rate: $46.00 Proposed Rate: $46.00
Tract Numbers:

Rancho Solana
22593-00 22593-01 22593-02
Zone No. 10
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $116.00 Proposed Rate: $116.00
Tract Numbers:

V Own . -
: 11
Zone No. 11
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $175.00 Proposed Rate: $175.00
Tract Numbers:
-... -BTURITIM
Zone No. 12
Maximum Rate: ii 1 Proposed00
Tract Name:

Tract Numbers:

Vintage Hills
22715-00 22715-01 22715-02 22716-00 22716-01 22716-02 22716-03 22716-04 22915-00 22915-01 22915-02 22915-03 22916-00 22916-01 22916-02 22916-03
Zone No. 13
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $46.00 Proposed Rate: $46.00
Tract Numbers:

Presley Development
23267-00 23267-01 23267-02 23267-03 23267-04 26861-00 26861-01 26861-02 26861-03
Zone No. 14
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $89.00 I Proposed Rate: $89.00
Tract Numbers:

Morrison Homes
W,: reI
Zone No. 15
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $175.00 Proposed Rate: $175.00
Tract Numbers:

Barclay Estates
�I
Zone No. 16
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: 00 Proposed Rate: $175.00
Tract Numbers:

Tradewinds
1 23125-00 23125-01 23125-02 23125-03
Zone No. 17
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $46.00 Proposed Rate: $46.00
Tract Numbers:

Monte Vista
1• Brim
No. 18
Maximum Rate: $70.00
ProposedZone
Tract Name:

Tract Numbers:

Temeku Hills
23371-00 23371-01 23371-02 23371-03 23771-04 23771-05 23371-06 23371-07 23371-08 23371-09 23371-10 23371-11 23371-14 28482-00 28482-01 28482-02 28482-03 28526-00 29033-00
Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 12 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

3. District Services and Charges
Zone No. 19
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: 00 Proposed Rate: $225.00
Tract Numbers:

Chantemar
28510-00 28510-01 28510-02 28510-03
Zone No. 20
Maximum Rate: 00 Proposed Rate: $175.00
Tract Name:

Tract Numbers:

Crowne Hill
23143-00 23143-02 23413-03 23413-04 23413-01 23413-03 23413-04 23413-06 23413-07 23413-08 23413-09 23413-10 23413-11
Zone No. 21
Tract Name:
maximum Rate: 00 ... 00
Tract Numbers:

Vail Ranch Gated Community
28832-00
Vail Ranch Residential
23173-00 23173-01 23173-02 23173-03 23173-04 23174-01 23174-02 23174-03 23174-04 23174-05 23174-06 28480-00
Zone No. 22
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $116.00 Proposed Rate: $116.00
Tract Numbers:

Sutton Place
II
No. 23
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $20.00
ProposedZone
Tract Numbers:

Pheasant Run
19872 19872-01 19872-02 19872-03 19872-04 19872-05
Zone No.
24 Maximum
Rate: $100.00
Proposed Rate:
$100.00
Tract Name:

Tract Numbers:

Harveston
29928
29928-01
29928-02
29928-03
29929
29929-01
30088
30667
30667-01
30667-02
30667-03
30668
30668-01
30668-02
30669
30669-01
30669-02
31053
31053-01
31053-02
31053-03
32436
32436-01
32437
32437-01
32437-02
32437-03
34698
Harveston
Ashville 1
31276
Harveston
Ashville II
32104
Harveston
Condos
32169
32170
Zone No. 25
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $200.00 Proposed Rate: $200.00
Tract Numbers:

ROOM�•
Zone No. 26
Tract Name:

Zone No. 26
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $270.00 Proposed Rate: $270.00
Tract Numbers:

Traditions/Gallery Homes
1 29133
Tract Name:

Tract Numbers:

Avondale
26828 26828-01 26828-02
Zone No. 28
Maximum
Rate:
00 Proposed
Rate:
$129.00
Tract Name:

Tract Numbers:

Wolf Creek
29798
29798-01
29798-02
29798-03
29798-04
29798-05
29798-06
29798-07
29798-08
29798-09
30264
30264-01
30264-02
30264-03
30264-04
30264-05
30264-06
30264-07
30264-08
30264-09
30264-10
30264-11
30264-12
30264-13
30264-14
30264-15
31898
33125
32319
33124
Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 13 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

3. District Services and Charges
Zone No. 29 (4)
Name:

Maximum Rate: $490.27 I Proposed Rate: $503.08
Tract Numbers:

GalleryTract
••
�� @�
(4) Beginning Fiscal Year 2006-2007, the base rate for Zone 29 was $315.00. Each year thereafter, beginning Fiscal Year 2007-2008 for Zone 29 the maximum rate as approved by the property owners is annually adjustable by the lesser of the percentage increase in the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index ("CPI") of All Urban Consumers for the Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario Area (formerly Los Angeles -Riverside -Orange County Area), for the previous calendar year, or 5.00%. For Fiscal Year 2025-2026 the adjustment is 2.61%, the annual increase in the CPI.

Zone No. 30 (5)(6)
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $129.00 I Proposed Rate: $0.00
Tract Numbers:
.. •
(6) The maximum rate for Zone 30 is $129.00.
(6) Beginning Fiscal Year 2010-2011, Zone 30 elected to maintain its own perimeter landscaping under the existing Homeowner's Association ("HOA"). As a result, the Zone will not be levied under Service Level C for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Zone No. 31(7)(8)
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $41.52 I Proposed Rate: $0.00
Tract Numbers:

Roripaugh Ranch
TBD
(71 Beginning Fiscal Year 2006-2007, the base rate for Zone 31 was $26.00. Each year thereafter, beginning Fiscal Year 2007-2008 for Zone 31, the maximum rate as approved by the property owners is annually adjustable by the lesser of the percentage increase in the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index ("CPI") of All Urban Consumers for the Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario Area (formerly Los Angeles -Riverside -Orange County Area), for the previous calendar year, or 5.00%. For Fiscal Year 2025-2026 the adjustment is 2.61%, the annual increase in the CPI. (8) Zone 31 elected to have its perimeter landscaping maintained by a Homeowner's Association ("HOA"). As a result, the Zone will not be levied under Service Level C for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Zone No. 32 (9)(10)
Tract Name:

Maximum Rate: $949.61 Proposed Rate: $0.00
Tract Numbers:

Vineyard View
(91 Beginning Fiscal Year 2008-2009, the base rate for Zone 32 was $640.00. Each year thereafter, beginning Fiscal Year 2009-2010 for Zone 32, the maximum rates as approved by the property owners are annually adjustable by the lesser of the percentage increase in the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index ("CPI") of All Urban Consumers for the Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario Area (formerly Los Angeles -Riverside -Orange County Area), for the previous calendar year, or 5.00%. For Fiscal Year 2025-2026 the adjustment is 2.61%, the annual increase in the CPI. (10) Zone 32 elected to have its perimeter landscaping maintained by a Homeowner's Association ("HOA"). As a result, the Zone will not be levied under Service Level C for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Service Level R, Road Maintenance
Service Level R provides funding for construction, improvement, service, and maintenance of unpaved public streets and roads within specific areas of the District. The services provided may include, but are not limited to, renovation or restoration due to damage, flood and drainage control, repairs and re -grading, and upgrades of the existing areas as required for unpaved roads. All parcels identified within Service Level R share in the cost of the services provided. The costs associated with the services are spread among all parcels within various areas ("rate levels") of Service Level R in accordance with the Rate and Method of Apportionment for the service level.

Service Level R currently has one (1) active rate level, Rate Level R-1. The area for Rate Level R-2 has been fully paved and therefore an assessment is currently not required. Only the parcels within Rate Level R-1 boundary area will be charged for the costs associated with servicing and maintaining the roads and streets in the area. • RATE LEVEL R-1—This rate level consists of fifty-five (55) assessable parcels that have direct access to roads or streets that are serviced and maintained through the District. This rate level provides funding for the servicing and maintenance of Kimberly Lane, Greenwood Lane, Liefer Road, Gatlin Road, and Pala Vista. A total of 1.546 miles of roads are serviced and maintained in this area. The current maximum rates and charges in R-1 are $115.26 per single-family residential lot and $57.62 per vacant residential lot. • RATE LEVEL R-2 — This rate level consists of forty (40) assessable parcels that have direct access to Santiago Road. This area has been fully paved and no longer requires service under this District.

Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 14 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

3. District Services and Charges
Refuse/Recycling Collection
The Refuse/Recycling Collection Service Level provides for the operation and administration of the refuse collection program, including recycling services for all developed residential homes (or "Households") within the District. The rate and charge for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Refuse/Recycling Collection is $363.68 per Household and will be applied to all parcels that have been identified as developed residential homes.

Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 15 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

4. Changes to the District
Changes or modifications to the District structure, if any, could include but are not limited to, changes or expansion in the existing improvements or in the types of services provided, addition of new services or Service Levels, restructuring of the current Service Levels, inclusion of parcels into the District or Service Levels, or revisions to the method of apportionment. Changes or modifications within the District that may affect the levy are outlined in the following.

Notable Previous Modifications to the District
Two Service Levels Replaced with a Special Tax
On March 4, 1997, the voters of Temecula approved a Special Tax to fund citywide community services. This Special Tax replaced two existing Service Levels, previously charged through the Community Services District.

Beginning in Fiscal Year 1997-1998 the below two Service Levels were replaced by the Special Tax and are no longer charged through the District.
• COMMUNITY SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION — This service level provided for the maintenance, service, and operation of all public parks and recreation services within the City. • SERVICE LEVEL A, ARTERIAL STREET LIGHTING AND MEDIANS — This service level provided servicing, operation, and maintenance of traffic signals, street lighting, and landscaped medians along arterial streets.

Service Level R
As of Fiscal Year 2008-2009, the streets have been fully paved and there is no longer a need to assess for unpaved road maintenance (Rate level R-2).

Proposed Modifications to the District for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 The most notable modification to the District for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 is related to the addition of improvements and expansion of existing services as a result of new development. When a new residential tract is developed, the District may accept additional improvements for maintenance and servicing. Along with acceptance of the improvements, the parcels within those tracts would be included in the appropriate Service Levels. The improvements and services for Service Levels B and C are typically tract or development specific and therefore, all parcels within a tract or development would be included in these two Service Levels when the District accepts the improvements. Additionally, individual residential parcels are included in the Refuse/Recycling Collection when a new single-family residential unit is identified, and service is ordered.

Service Level B
In Fiscal Year 2022-2023 the District conducted a successful Proposition 218 ballot proceeding and annexed 545 parcels into Service Level B. Another successful Proposition 218 ballot proceeding was conducted in Fiscal Year 2023-2024 and an additional 138 parcels were annexed into Service Level B.

Service Level C
The annual revenue collected for the majority of the Zones in Service Level C is not sufficient to cover the costs to maintain these zones. Due to the rising costs, the District has had to reduce services to the maintenance of the perimeter landscaping for these zones. In Fiscal Year 2019-2020 the District conducted a Proposition 218 ballot proceeding to increase the assessment rates for Zones 1, 4, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, 22 and 27. The majority of the ballots received were in opposition to the increased assessments in all zones, and the increase was therefore not applied. The assessment rates, for 27 of the 29 zones currently assessed in Service Level C, have not increased since the zones were established. Because the costs continue to increase and the assessments have stayed the same, the service will remain limited and may have to be reduced further due to limited annual funds.

In Fiscal Year 2020-2021 the District terminated the flood channel easements in Zone 7 therefore eliminating the need for maintenance of said areas. This action resulted in the termination of the assessment for only the sixteen (16) parcels affected, effective Fiscal Year 2020-2021.

Temecula Services District (Service Level $ C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 16 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

4. Changes to the District
In December of 2020, the District initiated a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the maintenance services of the landscape areas in Service Level C. The new maintenance contract that was awarded and approved by the Board resulted in a reduction in the budgeted maintenance cost for Fiscal Year 2021-2022. The new contract was effective July 1, 2021.

There are no new inclusions to Service Level C (Perimeter Landscaping) proposed for the Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Service Level R
There are no new inclusions to Service Level R (Road Maintenance) proposed for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Refuse/Recycling Collection
A total of 359 newly developed residential parcels have been identified and added to Refuse/Recycling Collection for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. New residential parcels are identified each year and included in Refuse/Recycling Collection based upon the waste hauler's updated service records.

The rate for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 for Refuse/Recycling Collection is $363.68 per residential parcel. For Fiscal Year 2024-2025, the rate for this service was $357.84.

For more information, please refer to Section 2, Budgets and Levy Summary. The costs for the District represent actual service costs, as provided in the City's Franchise Agreement with CR&R Waste Services.

Temecula Services District (Service Level $ C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 17 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

5. Method of Apportionment
Method of Apportionment
The cost to provide services within the District will be fairly distributed among each eligible property.

Service Level B (Residential Street Lighting):

The following formula is used to calculate each property's Service Level B charges by the per parcel/unit (residential "lot/unit") method.

Total Balance to Levy (Budgeted) _ (Total Residential Lots + Assigned Condominium Units) = Parcel Charge
Service Level C (Perimeter Landscaping and Slopes); and Refuse/Recycling Collection:

The following formula is used to calculate each property's charges by the per parcel (residential "lot") method.

Total Balance to Levy (Budgeted) / Total Residential Lots (in Service Level) = Parcel Charge Service Level R (Roads):

The charge per Levy Unit for Service Level R is based on a Parcel Development Unit (PDU), which is similar to a per parcel charge, but makes a distinction between developed and undeveloped parcels.

Parcel Development Units =1.0 for Developed Parcels
Parcel Development Units = 0.5 for Undeveloped Parcels
Total Balance to Levy / Total Parcel PDU (in Rate Level) = Parcel Charge The following tables reflect the levy calculations for each Service Level.

Table 5-1
Parcel Charge Calculation Service Level B
(11) Defined as Assigned Condominium Units in Service Level B for which the interior streetlights are privately maintained however, the Assigned Condominium Units benefit from perimeter or collector street lighting funded by Service Level B.

Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 18 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

5. Method of Apportionment
Table 5-2
Parcel Charge Calculation Service Level C
p.

Property
Residential Lot Zone No. 1

1.00 $116.00
$116.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 2

1.00 $89.00
$89.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 3

1.00 $116.00
$116.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 4

1.00 $46.00
$46.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 5

1.00 $175.00
$175.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 6 (12)

1.00 $140.94
$140.94
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 7

1.00 $89.00
$89.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 8

1.00 $175.00
$175.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 9

1.00 $46.00
$46.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 10

1.00 $116.00
$116.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 11

1.00 $175.00
$175.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 12

1.00 $116.00
$116.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 13

1.00 $46.00
$46.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 14

1.00 $89.00
$89.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 15

1.00 $175.00
$175.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 16

1.00 $175.00
$175.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 17

1.00 $46.00
$46.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 18

1.00 $70.00
$70.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 19

1.00 $225.00
$225.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 20

1.00 $175.00
$175.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 21

1.00 $129.00
$129.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 22

1.00 $116.00
$116.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 23

1.00 $20.00
$20.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 24

1.00 $100.00
$100.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 25

1.00 $200.00
$200.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 26

1.00 $270.00
$270.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 27

1.00 $70.00
$70.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 28

1.00 $129.00
$129.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 29 (12)

1.00 $503.08
$503.08
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 30 (13)

1.00 $129.00
$129.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 31 (12)(14)

1.00 $41.52
$0.00
Per Parcel
Residential Lot Zone No. 32 (12)(14)

1.00 $949.61
$0.00
Per Parcel
(12) Beginning Fiscal Year 2007-2008 for Zones 29 and 31 and beginning Fiscal Year 2009-10 for Zones 6 and 32, the maximum rates as approved by the property owners are annually adjustable by the lesser of the percentage increase in the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index ("CPI") of All Urban Consumers for the Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario Area (formerly Los Angeles -Riverside -Orange County Area), for the previous calendar year, or

5.00%.
(13) Beginning Fiscal Year 2010-2011, Zone 30 has elected to maintain its own perimeter landscaping under the existing Homeowner's Association ("HOA"). As a result, the Zone will not be levied under Service Level C for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. (14) Zones 31 and 32 Zone 31 elected to have the perimeter landscaping maintained by a Homeowner's Association ("HOA"). As a result, the Zones will not be levied under Service Level C for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 19 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

5. Method of Apportionment
Table 5-3
Parcel Charge Calculation Service Level K
Property Type and Zone x Parcel Parcel Charge Multiplier Single Family Residential Lot R-1 1.00 $115.26 $115.26 Per Parcel Vacant Residential Lot R-1 0.50 $115.26 $57.62 Per Parcel Table 5-4
Parcel Charge Calculation Refuse/Recycling Collection
(15) Developed residential parcels identified by CRU for which refuse collections are available.

Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 20 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

6. Tax Roll
Parcel identification for each lot or parcel within the District shall be the parcel as shown on the County Assessor's map for the year in which this Report is prepared.

Temecula Services District (Service Level B, C, R and Refuse/Recycling Collection) 21 Engineer's Annual Levy Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026

APPENDIX A
Tax Roll
(On file with the City Clerk)
Webb

MVNICIPAL FINANCE

Item No. 12

CITY OF TEMECULA/TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT/SARDA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/Board of Directors
FROM: Aaron Adams, City Manager/General Manager/Executive Director DATE: May 27, 2025
SUBJECT: Approve Fiscal Years 2026-30 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Adopt Fiscal Year 2025-26 CIP and Annual Operating Budgets for the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) and the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency (SARDA)
PREPARED BY: Jennifer Hennessy, Finance Director/Treasurer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council/Board of Directors adopt the following resolutions entitled:

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2026-30 AND ADOPTING

THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE

TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-
26 PRELIMINARY ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AND

ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN

APPROPRIATIONS
RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2026-30,

ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26, ADOPTING THE

FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AND

ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN

APPROPRIATIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING

CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS,

ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF CITY

MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT

AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED

POSITIONS AND SALARY SCHEDULE
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26
DISCUSSION: At its May 22, 2025 Budget Workshop, the City Council was presented the Proposed Fiscal Years 2026-30 Capital Improvement Program and 2025-26 CIP and Annual Operating Budgets for the City, Temecula Community Services District (TCSD), and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency (SARDA).

The attached Transmittal Letter summarizes the highlights of the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Proposed Annual Operating Budget and Fiscal Years 2026-30 Capital Improvement Program documents.

The list of adjustments noted below were discussed at the Council Workshop, and will be incorporated into the Final Annual Budget and CIP:
- Care Solace Contract: $45,000 added to the TCSD Operations budget for a 6-month contract, with an option to extend the contract if desired. - Fire Mitigation Management: $250,000 added to the Fire Department budget, via a transfer from Measure S, for vegetation mitigation.
- Acceleration of Pension Liability Paydown: $10,000,000 in additional discretionary payments to Ca1PERS from the following sources:
o $5,000,000 via a transfer of funds from Fund 006-Fire Facility Acquisition Fund, to

be paid back to Fund 006 with the savings generated from the acceleration of the debt paydown within 5-years
o $2,000,000 in available General Fund Balance
o $2,000,000 from the City's PARS Pension Trust
o $1,000,000 via a tranfer of uncommitted funds from Fund 110-Community Reinvestment Program Fund
- La Paz Road Roundabout Reconstruction CIP (New Project): $3,000,000 added to the Capital Improvement Program, from Measure S Funding
o Including the reallocation of $1,000,000 from the Pavement Rehabilitation Program Citywide project
Additionally, the following list of administrative corrections will also be reflected in the Final Budget:
- Emergency Management: $6,000 appropriation for Narcan training for staff and the community
Information Technology/Support Services: Reallocate $100,055 in Project Salaries from Fund 320 — Information Technology to Fund 330 — Support Services due to a reassignment of duties.

Various Revenue reductions across several Funds - ($193,109) due to a programming error in the City's budget software system that mistakenly duplicated several line items, plus any resulting impacts to the Internal Service Fund Allocations. - Various Expenditure reductions across several Fund/Departments - ($96,596) due to a programming error in the City's budget software system that mistakenly duplicated several line items, plus any resulting impacts to the Internal Service Fund Allocations.

FISCAL IMPACT: The specific fiscal impacts are noted in the Fiscal Years 2026-30 Capital Improvement Program and Fiscal Year 2025-26 Annual Operating Budget documents.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Transmittal Letter

2. Resolution - Approving the CIP for Fiscal Years 2026-30 and Adopting the CIP Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26

3. Resolution - Adopting the Fiscal Year 2025-26 TCSD Preliminary Annual Operating Budget

4. Resolution — Approving the SARDA CIP Fiscal Years 2026-30 and Adopting the CIP Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26, and Adopting the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Annual Operating Budget

5. Resolution - Adopting the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Annual Operating Budget

6. Resolution - Schedule of Authorized Positions with attachments

7. Resolution - Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2025-26 with attachment

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
May 27, 2025
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:

I am pleased to submit the Annual Operating Budget for the Fiscal Year 2025-26. This budget document was developed to serve as the financial plan for the City's programs and policies. It reflects the resources necessary to meet the goals, programs, and service priorities that the City Council is committed to providing its citizens.

The Fiscal Year 2025-26 Annual Operating Budget has been developed after a considerable review process. Departmental budget submittals were prepared and reviewed by line item in connection with projected revenues. Detailed performance objectives and accountability measures were developed consistent with the City's Quality of Life Master Plan. Five-year revenue and expenditure projections were developed to identify the future impacts of proposed staffing and program changes, as well as the impact of proposed capital improvement projects. The resulting budget is realistic and balanced and continues to provide quality services to the community while effectively utilizing available resources.

As you will read below, the City's General Fund is not only balanced for the ensuing fiscal year, but also projected to be balanced for the next five fiscal years. Additionally, the City's reserve funds are fully funded across all five years of the long-range financial forecast.

CITY OF TEMECULA PROFILE
The City of Temecula is a dynamic community comprised of approximately 112,220 citizens. The City maintains 42 parks on 337 developed acres throughout the community, which provide recreation opportunities for both the citizens of Temecula, as well as surrounding communities. Law Enforcement and Fire
Protection services are provided through contracts with the County of Riverside.

Known as Southern California's Wine Country, the City of Temecula is a nationally and internationally known tourist destination welcoming over 3 million visitors a year. Temecula is also an innovative, dynamic economic powerhouse and job center for the region, all the while retaining its small-town charm and character that residents cherish. Offering the finest quality of life, Temecula is listed among the safest cities in the State and Nation per FBI statistics. With a diverse population, citizens enjoy picturesque neighborhoods, a vast array of beautifully manicured parks and trails, multi -cultural dining options, retail stores that include the region's premier shopping
destination Promenade Temecula, the highest rated
School District in Riverside County for its outstanding academic scores, higher education opportunities
including Mount San Jacinto College's Temecula
Campus and Cal State San Marcos at Temecula. As a
visitor destination, Temecula also offers a vibrant Old Town with boutique shops, outdoor markets, and a
distinct foodie district, Pechanga Resort Casino,
Southern California's Wine Country speckled each
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

IV
The i",L-Ar�o€sa� .c 1
morning with hot air balloons hovering over grapevines and equestrian trails, championship golf courses, Vail Ranch Historic Headquarters comprised of turn -of -the -century old west structures restored into specialty restaurants and retail, and City of Temecula signature events, parades, museums and a theater. Temecula's scenic landscape of
rolling hills, vineyards and wineries are swept clean each afternoon with fresh ocean breezes that funnel through the Santa Margarita gap of the coastal mountains providing an ambience that magnifies the beauty of the City and
Temecula Valley.

ECONOMIC INDICATORS
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
The City of Temecula monitors several economic and demographic indicators, which play a role in the development of revenue projections.
0 t 0 0 ift *�
Population Median Age Households Average Median # of Jobs Unemployment 112,220 37.5 years 36,914 Income Home Price Rate 4.6%
$771 $145,129 54400 a,000 (Mar'25) (Mar'25)
(Apr'25)
• Estimated Population: up 1.2%from 2024 (Source: State Department of Finance) • Median Age: down from 37.7 in 2024 (source: Pop -Facts Report, 2-13-25) • Number of Households: down 0.7% from 2024 (source: Pop -Facts Report, 2-13-25) • Average Household Income: up 2.3% from 2024 (Source: Pop -Facts Report, 2-13-25) • April Median Home Price: up 6.2%from 2024 (source: Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors)
• Number of Jobs: up 0.2% from April 2024 (source: EDD) • March Unemployment Rate: up from 4.1% in April 2024 (Riverside County: 5.1%, CA: 5.3%, Nation: 4.2% (Source: EDD & BLS)
Temecula has experienced slight increases in the majority of the above economic indicators. Population has increased 1.2% after two consecutive years of declines. Housing prices continue to climb due to the low inventory, with a 6.2% increase in the median home price. Temecula's average household income has increased by 2.3%, while the number of jobs has remained relatively flat over the prior year.

Unemployment has increased slightly, but remains lower than both Riverside County and the State. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget

LOCAL ECONOMY AND LEGISLATIVE IMPACTS
Local Economy
As the economic indicators noted above have improved over 2024, the impact to the local economy is evident in the retail activity and sales tax trends. Despite a flattening of Sales Tax revenue in the current year, it is projected to grow at a modest 2.5% next fiscal year, as both national retailers and local entrepreneurs continue to invest in Temecula by opening businesses, undergoing expansion projects and starting new construction. Currently, there are seventeen new businesses slated to open soon, including a hotel, multiple retailers, restaurants and breweries. In addition, several auto dealers are undergoing expansions within the Temecula Auto Mall.

R�inNrn�€
l �
:r ��
88 QQ`p L 1,P1
Este �rYv� 201
rw��t
With Temecula's regional shopping mall, Old Town district, and auto mall, shoppers from the entire Temecula Valley region contribute to the City's sales tax base. Temecula residents generated $37,209 in sales tax per capita in 2024, which far outpaced neighboring cities and statewide averages.

Per Capita Sales
Temecula
Riverside County
Southern California
California
4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q
21 22 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 24 24 24
Source: HdL Companies
Legislative Impacts
$14,000
$12,000
$10,000
$8,000
$6,000
$4,000
The City of Temecula actively follows state and federal legislative proposals each year and works closely with the League of California Cities and the National League of Cities to stay informed and engaged to ensure the City supports legislation that aligns with the City's local legislative platform guiding principles:
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
I. Preservation of Local Control - Support measures that preserve and protect the City's general law powers and duties to enact legislation and policy direction concerning local affairs. Oppose measures that preempt local authority.

II. Promotion of Fiscal Stability - Support measures that promote fiscal stability, predictability, and financial independence. Support measures that preserve and promote the City's revenue base. Oppose measures that mandate costs with no guarantee of local reimbursement or offsetting benefit. Oppose measures that shift local funds to the county, state, or federal government, without offsetting benefit.

III. Support Funding Opportunities -Support measures that allow the City to compete for its fair share of regional, state and federal funding including competitive grants and other funding programs.

Support measures that promote dedicated funding streams at the regional, state and federal levels allowing the City to maximize local revenues, offset and leverage capital expenditures, and maintain City goals and standards.

Recent legislation that potentially impacts the City's operations include the following:

Senate Bill 937 Impact Fee Deferral - SB 937 was signed into law on September 19, 2024 and became effective January 1, 2025. This new law prohibits the local agencies from collecting the fees or charges from a Designated Residential Development Project for the construction of public improvements or facilities until the first occupancy certificate or first temporary certificate of occupancy is issued. The local agency may collect utility service fees at the time of application for service. It may charge the fees prior to the certificate of occupancy if construction does not begin within five years of the date the building permit is issued. The local agency may require the payment of these fees or charges at an earlier time if the conditions specified in the code are met.

Assembly Bill 1868 Property Taxation on Affordable Housing — AB 1868 was enacted in 2024 and became effective on January 1, 2025. The bill primarily deals with property taxation and affordable housing, specifically focusing on how county assessors value property for tax purposes when its subject to restrictions for affordable housing. It establishes a rebuttable presumption that the value of property subject to certain affordable housing contracts is no more than the sum of the first mortgage and down payment

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The City Council recently adopted the Temecula 2040 Quality of Life Master Plan (QLMP) in November 2022. The Temecula 2040 Plan is a living document that reflects the vision and long-term goals of the City. As Temecula continues S C UL to grow and mature, the Temecula 2040 Plan will be a crucial part of not only4 maintaining the City's quality of life, but to take a proactive approach and identify specificL MPfic community needs, goals, and possible improvements. The 0 City of Temecula utilizes the QLMP to formulate and budget Citywide projects.

In addition, the QLMP is used to guide planning, investment decisions, to provide vision and continuity for the next phase of the City's journey, and for -- continuous process improvement in partnership with Temecula's residents. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
To incorporate the QLMP into the City's budget process, the QLMP includes specific goals based on the Core Values of the QLMP. These goals are used by each department to develop short-term objectives and performance measures for completion in the upcoming fiscal year and are reflected in the Department Information and Performance Measures sections of the budget document.

The QLMP outlines 7 Core Values:

Sustainable &Resilient City
© Healthy & Livable City
Transportation Mobility &Connectivity
Economic Prosperity Accountable & Responsive City
rill
Government
Safe & Prepared Community
Equity

BUDGET OVERVIEW
The Fiscal Year 2025-26 Annual Budget reflects a structurally balanced, healthy fiscal outlook across all major funds for the City of Temecula. General Fund, Special Revenue Funds and TCSD Fund revenues are growing, albeit at a modest pace, and expenditures include all contractually obligated increases offset by various budget reductions necessary to partially absorb rising costs in Public Safety departments.

Major changes from the prior Operating Budget are summarized below.

Revenue &
Expenditures &
Change in
Fund Category
Transfers In
Transfers Out
Fund Balance Variance Analysis
Change from
Change from
from Prior
Prior Year
Prior Year
Year
Revenue growth attributable to Sales Tax, Measure S Tax and Interest

GENERAL FUNDS
9,119,015
(22,028,106)
(4,082,295) Earnings. Expenditure reduction due to reduced Capital Project funding, offset by 5.2% increase in Operating Expenditures.

Revenue growth attributable to Development Impact Fees. Expenditure

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
3,437,195
(13,157,830)
1,745,437 reduction due to reduced Capital Project funding from Development Impact Fees, Measure A, Affordable Housing and Road Maintenance Funds.

TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Revenue growth attributable to the TCSD Operations and Library Funds. (TCSD)
636,008
573,888
(627,045) Expenditure growth due to higher salaries, benefits and internal service fund allocations.

Revenue decline due to reduced Redevelopment Property Tax Trust SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT (595660) 429Fund distributions due to the wind down of the former Redevelopment AGENCY ,,997 55,382 Agency. Expenditure increase due partly to Depreciation which had not been budgeted in the prior year.

Revenue decline due to one-time transfers in the prior year from the Information Technology Fund to the Technology Replacement Fund, and INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS (4,210,438) (3,351,405) 212,877 a reduced Transfer in from the Measure S Fund to the Facilities Replacement Fund. Expenditure decline due to reduced Capital Project funding and one-time transfers.

BUDGETEDr
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
Assumptions, combined with known contractual obligations are used in forecasting revenue sources, expenditure trends, as well as the long-term financial forecasts.

Current year revenue assumptions are based on multiple factors, including input from the City's Sales Tax and Property Tax consultants, input from the State of California, local economic trends and development activity. Assumptions beyond the current year include general inflationary growth projections plus any known development projects, new hotels, expanding businesses and any other specific data that may impact revenue growth. The table below summarizes the growth assumptions for the General Fund Five - Year Revenue Forecast:

Summary of Revenue Assumptions
FY25-26
FY26-27
FY27-28
FY28-29
FY29-30
Property Tax

4.4%

4.0%

4.0%

4.0%

4.0%
Sales and Use Tax

2.5%

3.0%

3.0%

3.5%

3.5%
Less: Sales Tax Sharing Agreement

3.0%

3.0%

3.0%

3.0%

3.0%
Franchise Fees
-7.4%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%
Transient Occupancy Tax

1.6%

3.0%

3.0%

5.0%
-1.9%
Special Tax (Measure Q

9.0%

0.5%

0.5%

0.5%

0.5%
Licenses, Permits and Service Charges

13.0%

2.0%

2.0%

2.0%

2.0%
Fines and Forfeitures

13.7%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%
Use of Money and Property

29.2%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%
Intergovernmental Revenues

4.2%

4.0%

4.0%

4.0%

4.0%
Reimbursements

5.1%

4.6%

4.9%

4.4%

3.9%
Miscellaneous
-17.9%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%

1.0%
Assumptions used in forecasting Operating expenditures include the following:
■ Contractual obligations:
o Negotiated cost of living adjustment of 2.3% for City employees o Public Safety labor contracts (9.5% for Sheriff positions, 17.5% for Fire positions) o Reclassification of 23 full-time authorized positions o CalPERS Pension cost sharing of 3% for eligible employees ■ Council policies:
o Continuation of the Debt/Liability Paydown Strategy ($8,267,833 in FY25-26 for additional discretionary payments towards the City's CalPERS unfunded pension liability)
o Annual Replacement allocations for Fleet, Technology, Facilities, Support Services, Street Maintenance and Street Light assets.
■ Expected savings achieved from the Debt/Liability Paydown Strategy ($18.5 million over the ensuing five fiscal years)
■ Actuarially determined contributions to the City's pension and retiree health programs ■ Estimated inflation for non -personnel related expenditures 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
The HL-Ar�o€sau�.c 1

GENERAL FUND ANALYSIS
The General Fund forecast over the coming five years is balanced, with its Reserve for Economic Uncertainty and its FY25-26 General Fund Balance
$35,523,239
Secondary Reserve fully funded in all five years.
40,0DQ0W

35.00Q000
Available
{unau�gnedj
Ending fund balance for Fiscal Year 2025-26 is projected to ��
Nod galanee
Assignedl
be $35,523,239, of which $26,680,709 is committed to
"ow,
"' '0
Committed
fulfilling the Fund's policy -level reserves of 25% of Operating go"
seUry
Reserve
(5%)
Expenditures. A total of $465,524 of fund balance is
1,.,M
Reserve for
Economic
committed to cover the costs of a Sheriffs Deputy
;Z.;"
position
funded by the Pechanga Tribe.

A total of $8,377,005 in fund balance is unassigned and available for one-time appropriations.

General Fund Revenue Highlights
General Fund revenue is projected to increase by 7.6% over the prior year with a total of $113,978,529.

Tax revenues, excluding the transfer from Measure S Fund, are projected to increase by 3%. The transfer of Measure S increases significantly to fund contractual increases in Public Safety expenditures.

The General Fund major revenue sources are summarized below:
• Sales Tax ($47,340,358) is
projected
to increase by 2.5%
over the
prior fiscal year as
taxable
retail sales are
projected
to increase slightly,
although
there are still
concerns
about the overall
trajectory
of the economy.
• Property Tax ($12,164,898) is
projected to increase by 4.4%,
due to a stable housing market.

Pro art Tax revenue for Fiscal
Fiscal Year 2025-26 General Fund Revenue - $113,978,529 Franchise Fees TOT
Prop. Tax in Lieu of
4% Measure 0
VLF
2%
10%
Licenses/Permits
6%
Property Tax
11%
—Measure 5
12%
Transfers In
5%
Sales Tax
Reimbursements
40%
Other 4%
2%
P Y
Year 2025-26 is based on assessed valuation from the year prior, which have shown steady growth, as inventory is still low and home prices continue to rise slightly. • Franchise Fees ($4,229,094) are projected to decrease by 7.4% due to lower natural gas rates and continuing declines in cable subscribers.
• Transient Occupancy Tax ($4,500,000) is projected to increase by 1.6% over the prior year. Both occupancy rates and the average daily hotel rates have leveled off recently due to concerns over the economy. With the opening of a new hotel in Fiscal Year 2025-26, Transient Occupancy Tax is expected to grow.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
• Licenses, Permits & Service Charges ($6,623,241) are projected to increase by 13% due to the continuation of development activity within the City.
• Intergovernmental Revenues ($11,713,171) are projected to increase by 4.2% due to the increases expected in Property Tax In Lieu of Vehicle License Fees which is driven by property value assessments within the City.
• Operating Transfers In ($5,428,738) are projected to decrease by 35.5% due to a $3 million reduction in the transfer from the City's Pension Trust, in accordance with the City's Debt/Liability Paydown Strategy to fully fund the accrued pension liability by Fiscal Year 2028-29. • Operating Transfers In - Measure S ($13,548,319) will continue to fund 11 Sheriff Deputies, staffing for Fire Station No. 95, funding for the future replacement of the newly acquired fire ladder truck and inspection vehicles, and enhanced park maintenance services.

General Fund Expenditure Hiahlights
The largest expenditure of the General Fund is Public
Safety, making up 55% of total General Fund
expenditures. In accordance with the Measure S
ballot language and City Council appropriation
guidelines, the City has invested heavily in Public
Safety over the past several years and continues to
hold Public Safety as its highest priority.

In addition to the ongoing Measure S-funded Public
Safety expenditures, the Sheriff Department will
continue to exceed the staffing goal of one officer per 1,000 residents and the Fire Department will continue
to provide four firefighter personnel per engine at all five fire stations.

General Fund expenditures total $106,722,837, which represents an 8% increase over the prior fiscal year. • Sheriff Department ($48,474,402) is increasing by 11.1% over the prior year due to inflationary adjustments in the contract with Riverside County, including a new multi -year labor agreement which includes successive pay adjustments. The budget reflects 117 Sworn Deputies, which includes continued patrol coverage of 210 hours per day, and full staffing for the Metro and CORE Teams. The budget also includes the replacement of four motorcycles. • Fire Department ($13,923,013) is increasing by 25.6% due to inflationary adjustments in the contract with Riverside County combined with the reversal of a one-time CalPERS Retirement offset administered by the State in FY2024-25. The total Fire budget of $26.4 million is offset by the Structural Fire Tax Credit of $12.4 million. The department employs 79 positions and provides four firefighters per engine/truck staffing model.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
Non -Safety Departments ($47,128,746) represents a 3.1% increase over the prior year, due primarily to the reclassification of several positions and the calculated 2.3% cost of living adjustment in accordance with the City's labor agreements.

Non -Departmental (-$2,803,324) includes the projected savings in the CaIPERS unfunded liability offset by the Retiree Medical Contribution and Property Tax Administrative fees.

Operating Transfers Out & One -Time Payments
This category of expenditures reflects funds that are transferred to meet the Debt/Liability Paydown Strategy, to the Capital Improvement Program and the Fire Facility Acquisition Fund. • CAPERS Unfunded Pension Liability ($8,267,833) to further reduce the City's annual pension costs by an estimated $3.5 million per year.
• Capital Improvement Fund ($500,000) to support the General Plan Update project.

Overall, the General Fund remains structurally balanced, with revenues exceeding expenditures, and reserves are fully -funded each year of the ensuing five-year financial forecast. The City continues to budget in a conservative, yet realistic, manner while keeping close watch on several economic indicators. As conditions change throughout the fiscal year, adjustments to revenue or expenditure budgets will be recommended to the City Council for their approval.

MEASURE S FUND
With the approval of a one -cent transactions and use tax measure in November 2016, the Measure S Fund was established to account for this new revenue source. Fiscal Year 2025-26 Measure S revenue is projected to be $40,028,469.

Measure S appropriations of $42,771,911 reflect the
priorities established in Budget Policy IV —
Transactions and Use Tax Funding.

Public Safety (32°0) The budget includes $13,754,539
of Measure S funding to support the contracts for the
Sheriff and Fire Departments. Measure S provides
for 11 Sheriff's Deputies, staffing for Fire Station No. 95, and funding for the future replacement of the
newly acquired fire ladder truck and inspection
vehicles.

Asset Management/Investment (5%)
As noted in Council's appropriation guidelines for Measure S, ensuring adequate reserves are set aside for the future replacement of City -owned assets is critical to the long-term viability of the City's operations.

For Fiscal Year 2025-26, Measure S is contributing $1,250,000 to the Facilities Replacement Fund, and $1,000,000 to the Streets Maintenance Fund.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
Capital Improvement Program (21%)
The budget includes an additional $8,809,109 appropriation in Fiscal Year 2025-26 to complement the current year budget of $34,283,385 to fund multiple CIP projects. The influx on Measure S funding has allowed the City to leverage other funding sources, such as Development Impact Fees and various grant funds, to complete projects in a timelier manner.

Major Projects funded by Measure S include:
• Fire Station 73 Gym/Garage - to construct a gym, storage room and a second garage at the station to house the squad and additional vehicles.
• Fire Station 84 Renovation — to completely renovate the existing station including the addition of a gym, upgraded electrical, windows, paint and renovated living quarters. • Ronald Reagan Sports Park Hockey Rink - to renovate the existing outdoor hockey rink by installing new flooring, dasher boards, scoreboard and a roof structure. • Ronald Reagan Sports Park Skate Park — to remove and replace the existing skate park and install state-of-the-art street skate plaza elements.

General/Community Services (42%)
The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has historically been funded with voter -approved Measure C funding and program -related revenue. Measure S funding is used to augment Measure C, in order to maintain the award -winning programs, activities and events TCSD provides to the citizenry. • TCSD Operations contribution - $16,480,467
• Library contribution - $1,384,016
• Enhanced Custodial Services - $93,780
The ending fund balance within the Measure S Fund is projected to be $24,605,093, which will carry - forward to the ensuing fiscal year. Over the forecasted five-year period, Measure S is projected to have adequate resources to fund public safety, asset management, capital projects and general services.

OTHER GENERAL FUNDS
Fund 006 — Fire Facility Acquisition Fund: This fund was established in Fiscal Year 2021-22 to accumulate resources to acquire and/or construct property for a future Fire Station. The ending fund balance is projected to be $5,031,293 for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Fund 110 — COVID-19 Pandemic Community Reinvestment Program Fund: This fund was established in Fiscal Year 2021-22 to provide grant funding to support the local economy to rebound from the global pandemic. A total of $14,080,000 was transferred into this fund from available General Fund balance.

The Council approved six funding categories, including: (1) Business Support ($3,080,000); (2) Non -Profit Support ($1,000,000); (3) Homeless Services ($1,000,000); (4) Housing Assistance ($5,500,000); (5) Behavioral Health Services ($1,500,000) and (6) Higher Education/Workforce Development ($1,000,000), leaving $1,000,000 subject to further Council appropriation. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget

MAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Special Revenue Funds are used to account for activities paid for by taxes or other designated revenue sources that have specific limitations on use according to law. The City has several Special Revenue Funds.

The major Special Revenue funds are highlighted below.

Fund 100 - Gas Tax: Gas Tax revenue is projected to be $3,143,671, which reflects an increase of 0.4% as volume of gasoline sales is projected to remain steady. These funds are transferred to the General Fund to support street and road maintenance.

Fund 102 — Road Maintenance Rehabilitation Account (RMRA): Per the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB1-Beall), increased gas tax and vehicle registration fees were imposed to fund street and road projects and other transportation uses Statewide. RMRA revenue is projected to be $3,037,266, which is an increase of 4.4%. These funds are allocated to the Pavement Rehabilitation Capital Improvement Project.

Fund 103—Street Maintenance: This fund was established in Fiscal Year 2018-19 to accumulate resources for the future replacement of streets and roads throughout the City. Measure S contributes annually to this fund, which has a projected Fiscal Year 2025-26 ending balance of $4,763,355. FY2025-26 appropriations of $1,927,477 is to partially fund the Overland Drive Widening capital project.

Fund 105 — NPDES In Lieu Fees: This fund was established in Fiscal Year 2019-20 to account for the collection of In Lieu fees associated with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).

Revenue is received as private development subject to NPDES requirements occur. Fiscal Year 2025-26 expenditures of $114,150 is programmed to install storm drain inlet filters throughout the City.

Fund 106 — Uptown Temecula New Streets In -Lieu Fees: This fund was established in Fiscal Year 2019- 20 in conjunction with the adoption of the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan New Streets In -Lieu Fee.

Developers within the Specific Plan who cannot build new streets will be charged the In Lieu Fee. No activity is anticipated in this fund for 2025-26, and the ending fund balance totals $983,842.

Fund 120— Development Impact Fees (DIF): DIF revenue is projected to be $8,073,996, which reflects an increase of 194.6% due to the higher level of activity in the prior year occurring in the Altair, Elderberry Park and Sommer's Bend developments. DIF revenue varies from year-to-year as it is based on anticipated development projects. DIF Revenues are transferred to the CIP to fund capital projects. Fiscal Year 2025- 26 ending fund balance is projected to be $20,237,550.

Fund 125 — Public, Education & Government (PEG): PEG Fund revenues are received from local cable operators for the sole purpose of supporting the access facilities within the City. PEG Revenues are projected to be $215,436, which will be spent on various technology equipment used to support the broadcast of City Council meetings and events. Fiscal Year 2025-26 ending fund balance is projected to be $1,261,637.

Fund 140 — Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): CDBG grant revenues are received from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Fiscal Year 2025-26 revenue is projected to be $612,781 and will support operations, community grants and capital projects. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
Fund 145 —Temecula Energy Efficiency Asset (TEAM) Fund: This fund was established to capture energy efficiency rebates to be used to fund future energy efficiency projects. In Fiscal Year 2020-21, the City received a rebate of $640,754 for the acquisition of street lights and conversion to LED bulbs. There is no activity programmed for Fiscal Year 2025-26, and the ending fund balance is projected to be $126,157.

Fund 150—AB2766 Motor Vehicle Subvention Fund: This fund was established to account for subvention funds used to implement programs/projects to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles. Fiscal Year 2025- 26 revenue is projected to be $166,694. The majority of these funds are programmed for capital projects, including the Citywide Bike Lane and Trail Program, and to support the Clean Cities Coalition.

Fund 160—Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund: This fund was established to account for state grant funds to assist cities in delivering front-line law enforcement services. Fiscal Year 2025-26 revenue is projected to be $283,502 and will be transferred to the General Fund to support law enforcement.

Fund 165—Affordable Housing Fund: The Affordable Housing Fund reflects the housing -related activities of the former Temecula Redevelopment Agency. Total Revenue for Fiscal Year 2025-26 of $488,091 includes the State Department of Finance allocation of $250,000 designated for the administration of the wind down of redevelopment obligations, plus $238,091 in investment interest. Expenditures reflect the ongoing administration of the City's Affordable Housing program.

Fund 170 — Measure A: Measure A revenue is projected to be $4,242,301which reflects a 7.1% decrease over the prior year, due to a slower economy. This revenue is restricted for use on local streets and roads and is programmed to support street and road maintenance. Fiscal Year 2025-26 ending fund balance is projected to be $976,020.

INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Internal Service Funds are used to account for the funding of goods and services provided by one department to other benefitting departments on a cost -reimbursement basis. Additionally, the City maintains several Replacement Funds designed to accumulate resources for the future replacement of City equipment, technology, and facilities.

Fund 300 — Insurance: Projected expenses total $3,800,317, which covers the cost of administering the City's liability and property insurance programs. The projected fund balance is $2,077,725 exceeds the desired reserve level of $1.5 million, which is three times the City's self -insured retention of $500,000 per incident.

Fund 305 — Workers' Compensation: Projected expenses total $657,169, which covers the cost of administering the City's self -insured Workers' Compensation program. The projected fund balance is $1,478,521 and nearly meets the desired balance of $1.5 million, which represents three times the City's self -insured retention of $500,000 per incident.

Fund 310 — Vehicles and Equipment: Projected expenses total $799,527 to replace several fleet vehicles and heavy equipment that have reached the end of their useful lives. The projected fund balance is $5,575,061. Replacements planned for 2025-26 include a Boom Truck, Construction Dump Truck and a 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
Ford F-150 Lightning. Additionally, depreciation expense has been budgeted this year, adding $429,527 in expenditures for this Fund.

Fund 320 — Information Technology: Projected expenses total $7,227,781, which provides for the management of the City's computers, audio-visual equipment, cyber security, and telephone systems.

The projected fund balance is $850,797.

Fund 325 — Technology Replacement: Projected expenses total $516,158 to replace the City's phone system, network switch, audio equipment at the Community Recreation Center Amphitheater and to fund the annual computer replacement program. The projected fund balance is $4,030,642.

Fund 330 — Support Services: Projected expenses total $387,827, which provides for the management of the City's central reception, printing and mail activities. The projected fund balance is $22,976.

Fund 335 — Support Services Replacement: Projected expenses total $72,200 to replace the Central Services copy machines and includes $42,200 in depreciation expenses. The projected fund balance is $383,895.

Fund 340 — Facilities: Projected expenses total $1,645,947, which provide for the operations and maintenance of the City's buildings and parking structure. The projected fund balance is $92,364.

Fund 350 — Facility Replacement: Projected expenses total $1,087,338 for Capital Outlay to support the City Facilities Rehabilitation capital project and includes $87,338 in depreciation expenses. The projected fund balance is $3,548,715.

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (SARDA)
Fund 380 — SARDA: Projected expenses total $7,090,641 primarily to pay debt service expenditures on the outstanding 2017A and 2017B Redevelopment Agency Tax Allocation Bonds, plus the addition of $1,179,997 budgeted for expected depreciation expense, not included in the prior year.

TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT (TCSD)
The Temecula Community Services District was established as an assessment district to provide a comprehensive neighborhood and community park system, as well as a complement of recreational and cultural programs and events. TCSD also provides street lighting, median and slope maintenance, refuse hauling and a recycling program, and library services (known as Service Level Funds).

Combined revenue for TCSD totals $36,143,057, which reflects an increase of 1.8% over the prior year.

The majority of the increase is from TCSD Operations and the Temecula Public Library. Combined expenditures for TCSD total $36,770,101 and reflect an increase of 1.6% due primarily to the addition of one new Signal Technician I position to support Service Level B (Street Lights), and higher waste hauling costs reflected in the Service Level D (Refuse/Recycling) Fund.

Ending fund balance for TCSD is projected to be $4,849,853 for Fiscal Year 2025-26. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
TCSD Operations, excluding the Service Levels and Library Funds, is projected over a five-year period, as summarized below.
2023-24
2024-25
2025-26
2026-27
2027-28
2028-29
2029-30
Actuals
Revised
Proposed
Projection
Projection
Projection
Projection
Measure C Revenue
1,908,085
1,926,088
1,935,718
1,955,076
1,974,626
1,994,373
2,014,316
Measure S Revenue
13,254,402
15,864,726
16,480,467
17,388,215
18,151,038
18,945,152
19,771,855
Program Revenue
2,779,695
2,836,576
2,860,431
2,889,036
2,917,926
2,947,105
2,976,576
Total Revenue
17,942,182
20,627,390
21,276,617
22,232,326
23,043,590
23,886,630
24,762,748
Operations Expenditures
16,459,137
19,166,127
19,303,385
20,164,533
20,914,238
21,693,679
22,504,086
Maintenance Expenditures
1,775,748
1,950,588
2,008,203
2,067,793
2,129,353
2,192,951
2,258,662
Total Expenditures
18,234,885
21,116,715
21,311,588
22,232,326
23,043,591
23,886,630
24,762,748
Beginning Balance
916,999
624,296
134,971
100,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
Ending Balance
624,296
134,971
100,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
100?001
Revenue from Measure S
74%
77%
77%
78%
79%
79%
80%
The Five -Year Forecast shows the various revenue sources and projected operating expenditures, which are increasing between 2.0 — 4.3% per year. The contribution from Measure S increases from 74% in 2023-24 to 80% by 2029-30. A long-term fiscal strategic plan is recommended to address the increased reliance on Measure S to balance this Fund into the future.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP)
The City's five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is presented to the City Council under separate cover. This program provides a five-year plan for capital improvements that is updated annually to ensure compliance with the program. The impact of capital projects on maintenance and operating costs were taken into consideration in the development of the operating budget.

The CIP includes a total of $894,070,582 in
identified capital projects, with a total of
$624,379,144 in project funding, representing
70% of all Project Costs. There is $269,691,438
in "Unspecified" project funding, indicating that
a revenue source has not yet been secured for
these projects, which have been identified as
necessary infrastructure for the City, and will
require that funding be secured before the
project construction can commence. Capital
projects are categorized into five Project Types,
as noted in the adjacent table.

Project
Type
Number of
Projects
Total Project
Cost
Circulation
24 632,429,570
Housing
4 20,401,000
1 nfrastru ctu re
49 117,740,242
Parks/ Re c
18 59,908,080
CFD-Funded
Total"
2 63,591,689
1 1 ,582
Various sources contribute to the funding of the Capital Improvement Program, including many City Funds, State and Federal Grants, Community Facility District Funds, Successor Agency Funds, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Funds. The City seeks all available funding sources for 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

IV
The HL-Art o€ 4autlw l= ,Gat1
projects, including federal, state, and local grants,
outside contributions and City funds. Total
funding for the Fiscal Years 2026-30 CIP program
reflects 61% from outside funding sources, with
the remaining 39% provided by various City funds,
including Measure S, Measure A, Development
Impact Fee Funds, General Fund, Capital
Financing, and several other sources.

Only one new project has been added to the CIP,
the Local Roadway Safety Plan Update ($155,000)
which is designed to bring the Plan in line with
federal safety requirements.

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
Capital Prolect Funding Sources
TUMF,
54,161,598, 9%
City Funds,
State/Local Grants, 244,469,320,
79,448,743, 13% 39%
Successor
Agency,
750,000,0% _.

Reimbursements, -
40,952,252,6%
Federal Grants,
96,030,114, IS%
Development Community
Impact Fees, Facility Districts,
` 53,591,561,9% 54,975,557,9%
As part of the development of the Capital Improvement Program budget, each project is evaluated to identify any ongoing impacts to the Operating Budget. The amounts identified in the table below are incorporated into the Annual Operating Budget and the Five -Year Financial Projections.

Summary of Operating & Maintenance Impacts
Maintenance and Operations of
PW17-01/711 - CITY SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM
Security Camera System
300,000
300,000
300,000
300,000
300,000
FN19-01/724 - CITYWIDE FINANCIAL SYSTEM

UPGRADE
Annual Software Maintenance
86,000
86,000
86,000
86,000
86,000

ACQUISITION & LIGHT EMITTING DIODE (LED)

RETROFIT
Electricity Savings
(695,286)
(709,475)
(723,665)
(738,138)
(752,901)
PW21-09/683 - ELECTRIC VEHICLES CHARGING

STATION
Electric Charging Vehicles Fees
(3,100)
(3,100)
(3,100)
(3,100)
(3,100)
PW 17-19/690 - 1-15/STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH

INTERCHANGE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING
Required by Caltrans

60.805

62.046
63,289

65.188

67.144
PW17-21/692 - MARGARITA RECREATION CENTER
Staffing for MRC (4 positions)
526,609
548,551
570,493
591,600
614,370
Project Staffing for MRC
(45 positions - 13.07 FTEs)
705,946
735,361
764,775
795,366
825,978
Additional Utility Costs
71,371
72,828
74,285
77,034
79,999
Janitorial/Security
129,251
131,888
134,526
139,504
144,873
1,433,177
1,488,628
1,544,079
1,603,504
1,665,220
IT20-01/780 - OLD TOWN SECURITY CAMERA &
Maintenance fee for Old Town

SOUND SYSTEM
Sound System
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
PWPE07-03/PW23-18 - LONG CANYON CREEK PARK

RESTROOMS
Janitorial Services
29,866
30,475
31,085
31,706
32,340
PWPE-07/155 - PARK RESTROOMS RENOVATIONS,

EXPANSION AND ADA IMPROVEMENTS
Janitorial Services
27,591
28,154
28,717
29,292
29,878
r rRESTROOMS r, 0 r. 32,31A
Total Incremental Operating & Maintenance
Impacts 1,343,919 1,388,203 1,432,490 1,481,158 1,531,921 2025-26 AUTHORIZED STAFFIN
Total authorized Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions total 202.2 authorized positions, including five Council Members. The increase reflects 1 new position (Signal Technician 1) compared to the prior year. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget
Public Safety personnel is provided through contracts with Riverside County and CalFire. A total of 117 sworn Sheriff's Deputies and 18 Community Service Officers are included in the Sheriff's budget, and a total of 79 personnel are reflected in the Fire Department budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

City of Temecula
History of Authorized Positions
25000
210.75
aoz.za
200.oa
150.00
100.00

50.00 m o ti N m y Ln cg R co rn o rl r.l rn Ln %D m o eel N m d 'n 'D 6} O G O O O O G O O 1'i 1i 1- 1i e-I •i -V rl N N N N CV Nl 1V 1= N M V 1= In Q� a N N M C N ri 00 61 O N N n9 C uS
04 a, O O O O O O O O O O eel rl rl o eel c[ �„� i..� rl rl N N N N N N a, c+ rynry ynyyy o c rynry bo(yy fin�..(( n rya ic�yy yny.�� c ryory rya ryory n o n rycry any ryory ryn n n rynry Y 7 Y Y Y � Y Y Y Y } `r `r Y

LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL In addition to the Authorized Positions, the City employs three Limited -Term -Assignment positions related to the implementation of anew Human Resources/Payroll software system. A significant number of part- time, non-benefitted Project employees are also employed to assist with the multitude of programs offered by the Temecula Community Services District. For Fiscal Year 2025-26, an estimated 90 full-time equivalents will be hired as seasonal and part-time support.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the City of Temecula is in a solid fiscal position with the General Fund balanced and all reserves fully funded not only in Fiscal Year 2025-26 but throughout the ensuing five-year period. The Capital Improvement Program is robust, with 70% of all Project Costs funded, and will deliver a wide array of improvements to infrastructure, facilities, affordable housing, enhanced parks, new trails and many other amenities the citizens of Temecula enjoy.

I would like to express my appreciation to the City Council for providing the direction and support crucial to achieving the City's goals. I would also like to recognize the contributions of City staff for not only creating a responsive operating budget, but also for their commitment to providing top quality services to all who live, work, and play in Temecula. I would like to give special thanks to the City's Budget Team:

Jennifer Hennessy, Director of Finance; Ward Komers, Assistant Director of Finance; Paula Majors, Finance Manager; and Catlin Dorset, Budget Manager for their long hours and dedication to the City and this budget process.

Sincerely,
a, 01CL_
Aaron Adams
City Manager
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479

RESOLUTION NO.2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2026-30

AND ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Adoption of this Program is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions, which actions the City Council has not approved, adopted, or funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require consideration of environmental factors. In reviewing this Program and conducting public hearings on it, the City Council has considered relevant environmental factors. This City Council, as the lead agency for environmental review, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and the Guidelines promulgated there under (collectively "CEQA), has reviewed the scope and nature of this Capital Improvement Program and has concluded that the planning and prioritization process comprising this activity is not a project pursuant to CEQA because it does not order or authorize the commencement of any physical or other activity that would directly or indirectly have a significant effect upon the environment. The Capital Improvement Program merely establishes a listing of priority and allocates funds for the City to commence the necessary planning studies, including review pursuant to CEQA, at a future unspecified date. The future planning studies will be conducted at the earliest possible time so as to ensure thorough review pursuant to CEQA. Recognizing that the protection of the environment is a key factor in the quality of life within the City of Temecula and to further the City's strict adherence to both the spirit and letter of the law as regards to CEQA, this City Council has also considered this Capital Improvement Program as if it were a Project pursuant to CEQA. Reviewing this Program as a Project, this City Council concludes the Project would be exempt from review under CEQA, both pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) and to the categorical exemption set forth in Section 15262 of CEQA. Section 15061(b)(3) would apply because it can be seen with certainty that this prioritizing and fund allocation program cannot and does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. No physical activity will occur until all required CEQA review is conducted at the time the physical improvements prioritized in the Program are undertaken. Section 15262 provides a categorical exemption to actions that are feasibility or planning studies related to possible future actions. This Council is aware of and has considered the current and relevant environmental factors as an integral component of the review of this Program. This Council, as lead agency, hereby determines and decides that the exemption provided in both Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15262 apply in the event this is deemed a Project pursuant to CEQA.

Section 2. On May 21, 2025, the Planning Commission found the Capital Improvement Program consistent with the General Plan in accordance with Government Code Section 65401 of State Planning and Zoning Law.

Section 3. The City Council hereby finds and declares that the requirements of Government Code Section 65402(a) shall not apply to: (1) the disposition of the remainder of a larger parcel which was acquired and used in part for street purposes; (2) acquisitions, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening; or (3) alignment projects, provided such dispositions for street purposes, acquisition, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening, or alignment projects are of a minor nature.

Section 4. The City Council hereby finds that the acquisition of land necessary for the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-30 is consistent with the General Plan.

Section 5. That a certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Temecula, entitled "City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026- 30" includes herein appropriations for Fiscal Year 2025-26, and are hereby adopted. The CIP appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2024-25 which have not been completed, encumbered, nor included in the Fiscal Years 2026-30 CIP, are hereby carried over for each applicable project to the Fiscal Year 2025-26. Certain Development Impact Fees from future revenue may be used to replace the expenditure of current capital reserve funds in the CIP.

Section 6. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations:

A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered appropriation available to cover the expenditure.

B. The City Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). Any expenditure of funds in excess of $100,000 requires City Council action.

C. The City Manager may approve change orders on Public Works contracts in amounts up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), if sufficient appropriated funds are available.

D. The City Manager may authorize transfers up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) between approved Capital Improvement Program projects.

E. Notwithstanding Section 6.13. above, pursuant to Section 3.32.050 of the Municipal Code, the City Manager may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to one -hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). Any expenditures of Public Works funds in excess of one -hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) require City Council action, except that the City Manager may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved by the Council in amounts up to project contingency established by Council.

Section 7. Certification: The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 27th day of May, 2025.

Brenden Kalfus, Mayor
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2025- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 27th day of May, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, City Clerk

RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE

TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE

CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR
2025-26 PRELIMINARY ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET

AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN

APPROPRIATIONS

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. That the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) Preliminary Operating Budget is hereby adopted.

Section 2. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations:

A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered appropriation available to cover the expenditure.

B. The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the General Manager.

C. The Board of Directors must authorize transfers (appropriations) of funds from the Unreserved Fund Balance and transfers between departmental budget accounts.

D. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the General Manager shall administer the City personnel system. This General Manager is authorized to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the Board of Directors.

E. The General Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). Any expenditure of funds in excess of $100,000 requires Board of Directors action.

F. The General Manager may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to one - hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). Any expenditures of Public Works funds in excess of $100,000 require Board of Directors action, except that the General Manager may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved by the Board in amounts up to the project contingency established by the Board.

G. Pursuant to Section 3.28.130 of the Municipal Code, the General Manager may authorize purchases of supplies and equipment in amounts up to one -hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). Any purchases of supplies and equipment in excess of $100,000 shall be awarded to

the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to formal bid procedures and require City Council action, except that the General Manager may approve change orders on purchases of supplies and equipment approved by the Board in amounts up to the contingency established by Board.

H. Pursuant to Section 3.28.250 of the Municipal Code, purchases of supplies and equipment of an estimated value of one -hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) or less, may be made by the purchasing agent in the open market pursuant to the procedure prescribed in Sections

3.28.260 through 3.28.280 and without observing the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.130 through 3.28.240; provided, however, that all bidding may be dispensed with for purchases of supplies and equipment having a total estimated value of $5,000 or less.

I. Appropriations and Revenue Estimates for grant funded programs for Fiscal Year 2024-25 which have not been expended or encumbered, are hereby carried over for the applicable grant program to the Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Section 3. The Finance Director is authorized to make temporary short term interfund loans between appropriate funds in order to cover short term cash needs caused by cash flow timing differences. These interfund loans must have an identified repayment source.

Section 4. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the District books at June 30, 2025, are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Section 5. There are numerous occasions when small dollar valued purchases must be made for or on behalf of the District; and it is appropriate that a petty cash fund be used to provide for the purchase of these smaller dollar valued items; now, therefore, the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve, determine, and order as follows:

A. There is hereby established a renewable petty cash fund to be maintained in the Finance Department.

B. The imprest balance amount of the petty cash fund shall be three thousand dollars ($3,000).

C. Vouchers, receipts, or other evidence of payment shall be required before reimbursement shall be made from said petty cash fund, in such form as shall be required by Finance Director.

Section 6. The Board Secretary shall certify adoption of the resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula this 27th day of May, 2025.

Zak Schwank, President
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, Secretary
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 2025- was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 271h day of May, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: BOARD MEMBERS:

NOES: BOARD MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: BOARD MEMBERS:

ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, Secretary
4 RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2026-30,

ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26, ADOPTING THE
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET

AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN

APPROPRIATIONS

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Adoption of this Program is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions, which actions the City Council has not approved, adopted, or funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require consideration of environmental factors. In reviewing this Program and conducting public hearings on it, the City Council has considered relevant environmental factors. This City Council, as the lead agency for environmental review, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and the Guidelines promulgated there under (collectively "CEQA), has reviewed the scope and nature of this Capital Improvement Program and has concluded that the planning and prioritization process comprising this activity is not a project pursuant to CEQA because it does not order or authorize the commencement of any physical or other activity that would directly or indirectly have a significant effect upon the environment. The Capital Improvement Program merely establishes a listing of priority and allocates funds for the City to commence the necessary planning studies, including review pursuant to CEQA, at a future unspecified date. The future planning studies will be conducted at the earliest possible time so as to ensure thorough review pursuant to CEQA. Recognizing that the protection of the environment is a key factor in the quality of life within the City of Temecula and to further the City's strict adherence to both the spirit and letter of the law as regards to CEQA, this City Council has also considered this Capital Improvement Program as if it were a Project pursuant to CEQA. Reviewing this Program as an Project, this City Council concludes the Project would be exempt from review under CEQA, both pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) and to the categorical exemption set forth in Section 15262 of CEQA. Section 15061(b)(3) would apply because it can be seen with certainty that this prioritizing and fund allocation program cannot and does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. No physical activity will occur until all required CEQA review is conducted at the time the physical improvements prioritized in the Program are undertaken. Section 15262 provides a categorical exemption to actions that are feasibility or planning studies related to possible future actions. This Council is aware of and has considered the current and relevant environmental factors as an integral component of the review of this Program. This Council, as lead agency, hereby determines and decides that the exemption provided in both Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15262 apply in the event this is deemed a Project pursuant to CEQA.

Section 2. On May 21, 2025, the Planning Commission found the Capital Improvement Program consistent with the General Plan in accordance with Government Code Section 65401 of State Planning and Zoning Law.

Section 3. The Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency hereby finds and declares that the requirements of Government Code Section 65402(a) shall not apply to: (1) the disposition of the remainder of a larger parcel which was acquired and used in part for street purposes; (2) acquisitions, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening; or (3) alignment projects, provided such dispositions for street purposes, acquisition, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening, or alignment projects are of a minor nature.

Section 4. The Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency hereby finds that the acquisition of land necessary for the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program FY 2026-30 is consistent with the General Plan.

Section 5. That a certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Temecula, entitled "City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026- 30" include herein appropriations for Fiscal Year 2025-26, is hereby adopted. The CIP appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2024-25 which have not been completed, encumbered, nor included in the Fiscal Years 2026-30 CIP, are hereby carried over for each applicable project to the Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Section 6. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations:

A. No expenditures of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered appropriation available to cover the expenditure.

B. The Executive Director may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to $100,000. Any expenditure of funds in excess of $100,000 requires Board of Directors action.

C. The Executive Director may approve change orders on Public Works contracts in amounts up to $100,000, if sufficient appropriated funds are available.

D. The Executive Director may authorize transfers up to $100,000 between approved Capital Improvement Program projects.

E. Notwithstanding Section 7.13. above, pursuant to Section 3.32.050 of the Municipal Code, the Executive Director may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to $100,000.

Any expenditures of Public Works funds in excess of $100,000 require City Council action, except that the Executive Director may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved by the Council in amounts up to project contingency established by Council.

Section 7. That the Fiscal Year 2025-26 SARDA Operating Budget is hereby adopted.

Section 8. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations:

A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless the Oversight Board of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency has adopted a resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2025-26 SARDA Operating Budget and the State Department of Finance has approved the expenditure on the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS), pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34177.

B. The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the Executive Director.

C. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the Executive Director shall administer the City personnel system. The Executive Director is authorized to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the Agency Board.

D. The Executive Director may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to $100,000. Any expenditure of funds in excess of $100,000 requires Agency Board action.

E. The Executive Director may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to $100,000. Any expenditure of Public Works funds in excess of $100,000 require Agency Member action, except that the Executive Director may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved by the Agency Board in amounts up to the project contingency established by the Agency Board.

F. Pursuant to Section 3.28.130 of the Municipal Code, the Executive Director may authorize purchases of supplies and equipment in amounts up to $100,000. Any purchases of supplies and equipment in excess of $100,000 shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to formal bid procedures and require Agency Board action, except that the Executive Director may approve change orders on purchases of supplies and equipment approved by the Agency Board in amounts up to the contingency established by Agency Board.

G. Pursuant to Section 3.28.250 of the Municipal Code, purchases of supplies and equipment of an estimated value of $100,000 or less, may be made by the purchasing agent in the open market pursuant to the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.260 through 3.28.280 and without observing the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.130 through 3.28.240; provided, however, that all bidding may be dispensed with for purchases of supplies and equipment having a total estimated value of $5,000 or less.

Section 9. The Director of Finance is authorized to make temporary short term interfund loans between appropriate funds in order to cover short term cash needs caused by cash flow timing differences. These interfund loans must have an identified repayment source. 3 Section 10. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the Agency books at June 30, 2025, are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Section 11. There are numerous occasions when small dollar valued purchases must be made for or on behalf of the Agency; and it is appropriate that a petty cash fund be used to provide for the purchase of these smaller dollar valued items; now, therefore, the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve, determine, and order as follows:

A. There is hereby established a renewable petty cash fund to be maintained in the Accounting and Purchasing Department.

B. The imprest balance amount of the petty cash fund shall be $3,000.

C. Vouchers, receipts, or other evidence of payment shall be required before reimbursement shall be made from said petty cash fund, in such form as shall be required by Finance Director.

Section 12. The Agency Secretary shall certify adoption of the resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency this 27th day of May, 2025.

Brenden Kalfus, Chair
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, Secretary
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, Secretary of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. SARDA 2025- was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency at a meeting thereof held on the 27th day of May, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: BOARD MEMBERS:
\• :17.1►0 U U: ►_
ABSTAIN: BOARD MEMBERS:

ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, Secretary

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING

CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS,

ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF CITY

MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT

AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. That certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Temecula entitled "City of Temecula Annual Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2025-26" is hereby adopted.

Section 2. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations:

A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered appropriation available to cover the expenditure.

B. The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the City Manager.

C. The City Council must authorize transfers (appropriations) of funds from the Unreserved Fund Balance and transfers between departmental budget accounts.

D. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the City Manager shall administer the City personnel system. The City Manager is authorized to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the City Council.

E. The City Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to one - hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). Any expenditure of funds in excess of $100,000 requires City Council action.

F. The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into the following types of agreements on behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services District, and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency where the amount of the agreement is one - hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) or less, there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account against which the cost of the agreement is to be charged, and all applicable procedures for approval of the agreement have been fulfilled: public works construction agreements; agreements for purchase of supplies or equipment; personal, professional, consultant

and maintenance services agreements; theater, entertainment and talent agreements; reimbursement agreements related to public improvements; and real property leases, licenses and facility use agreements in which the term is three (3) year or less. Sponsorship agreements and fee waiver agreements shall be approved by the City Council. The City Manager is also authorized to enter into agreements for cultural resources treatment and tribal monitoring with a federally recognized Indian tribe.

G. The City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, is hereby authorized to settle personal injury and property damage lawsuits and enter into settlement agreements on behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services District, and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency where the amount of the settlement does not exceed one - hundred thousand dollars ($100,000).

H. Pursuant to Section 3.28.250 of the Municipal Code, purchases of supplies and equipment of an estimated value of one -hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) or less, may be made by the purchasing agent in the open market pursuant to the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.260 through 3.28.280 and without observing the procedure prescribed in Sections

3.28.130 through 3.28.240; provided, however, that all bidding may be dispensed with for purchases of supplies and equipment having a total estimated value of five thousand dollars ($5,000) or less.

I. Appropriations and Revenue estimates for grant funded programs for Fiscal Year 2024-25 which have not been expended, encumbered or received, are hereby carried over for the applicable grant program to the subsequent fiscal year.

J. Appropriations for the transfer of funds to the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2024-25 which have not been expended are hereby carried over to the subsequent fiscal year.

Section 3. The Director of Finance, in consultation with the City Manager, is delegated the authority to determine and define the amounts of those components of fund balance that are classified as "Assigned Fund Balance".

Section 4. The Director of Finance is authorized to make temporary short term interfund loans between appropriate funds in order to cover short term cash needs caused by cash flow timing differences. These interfund loans must have an identified repayment source.

Section 5. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the City books at June 30, 2025, are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Section 6. There are numerous occasions when small dollar valued purchases must be made for or on behalf of the City; and it is appropriate that a petty cash fund be used to provide for the purchase of these smaller dollar valued items; now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve, determine, and order as follows:

N

A. There is hereby established a renewable petty cash fund to be maintained in the Finance Department.

B. The imprest balance amount of the petty cash fund shall be three thousand dollars ($3,000).

C. Vouchers, receipts, or other evidence of payment shall be required before reimbursement shall be made from said petty cash fund, in such form as shall be required by Director of Finance.

Section 7. The City Clerk shall certify adoption of the resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 27t" day of May, 2025.

ATTEST:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
Brenden Kalfus, Mayor
3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2025- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 27th day of May, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, City Clerk

RESOLUTION NO.2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF

AUTHORIZED POSITIONS AND SALARY SCHEDULE

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Schedule of Authorized Positions and Salary Schedule, attached hereto, is hereby adopted pursuant to Section 45001 of the California Government Code. Such list is attached to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 2. The Schedule of Authorized Positions shall become effective July 1, 2025 and the Salary Schedule shall become effective June 28, 2025, and may be, thereafter, amended.

Section 3. The City Manager shall implement the attached Schedule of Authorized Positions and Salary Schedule and has the authority to select and appoint employees and approve Executive Staff employment agreements in accordance with the City of Temecula's Municipal Code and personnel policies.

Section 4. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the City Manager shall administer the City personnel system. This resolution specifically authorizes the City Manager to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the City Council.

Section 5. All prior resolutions and parts of this resolution in conflict with this Resolution are hereby rescinded.

Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 27th day of May, 2025.

Brenden Kalfus, Mayor
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2025- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 27th day of May, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, City Clerk

SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
As of July 1, 2025

CITY COUNCIL
Councilmember
FY2025-26
Number of
Positions

5.0 Salary Schedule
Monthly Salary
Minimum Maximum
1,900 2,100
Bargaining
Unit***
N/A
Exempt/Non-
Exempt
E
City Council Subtotal:

5.0 CITY MANAGER
Assistant City Manager

1.0 19,138 27,043
Exec
E
Assistant to the City Manager

1.0 11,762 16,621
MCP
E
City Manager
Deputy City Manager
Executive Assistant
Senior Office Specialist
City Manager Subtotal:

1.0 N/A 29,747
Contract
E

1.0 17,401 24,586
Exec
E

1.0 6,190 8,745
MCP
E

1.0 4,956 6,344
Rep
NE

OFFICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Administrative Assistant
Economic Development Manager
Multimedia Coordinator
Senior Management Analyst

1.0 5,337 6,833
Rep
NE

1.0 10,655 15,056
MCP
E

1.0 7,003 8,965
Rep
NE

2.0 8,121 11,475
MCP
E
Office of Public Information & Economic Development Subtotal:

CITY CLERK
Deputy City Clerk
Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
Management Assistant
Records Manager

1.0 7,923 11,194
MCP
E

1.0 15,432 21,805
Exec
E

1.0 5,748 7,356
Rep
NE

1.0 7,178 10,143
MCP
E
Records Technician
City Clerk Subtotal:

1.0 4,169 5,337
Rep
NE

HUMAN RESOURCES
Assistant Director of HR/Risk Management
Director of HR/Risk Management
Human Resources Supervisor (Confidential)

1.0 12,055 17,033
MCP
E

1.0 15,432 21,805
Exec
E

1.0 7,003 9,894
MCP
NE
Management Assistant(Confidential)

2.0 5,748 8,121
MCP
NE
Senior Management Analyst

1.0 8,121 11,475
MCP
E
Senior Management Analyst (underfill as Management Analyst)

1.0 8,121 11,475
MCP
E
Human Resources Subtotal:

FINANCE
Accountant 1/11

2.0 7,178 9,653
Rep
NE
Accounting Assistant (Cashier & AP)

3.0 5,079 6,502
Rep
NE
Accounting Technician 1/11

1.0 5,607 7,542
Rep
NE
Assistant Director of Finance

1.0 12,983 18,344
MCP
E
Director of Finance

1.0 15,818 22,351
Exec
E
Finance Manager

1.0 9,188 12,983
MCP
E
Fiscal Services Manager

2.0 10,655 15,056
MCP
E
Management Analyst

2.0 7,003 9,894
MCP
E
Senior Accountant (Confidential)

1.0 8,325 11,762
MCP
NE
Senior Accounting Technician

1.0 6,502 8,325
Rep
NE
Senior Accounting Technician - Payroll (Confidential)
1 1.0
6,502 9,188
Finance Subtotal:
iik�

SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
As of July 1, 2025

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Assistant Director Information Technology/Support Svcs
FY2025-26
Number of
Positions

1.0 Salary Schedule
Monthly Salary
Minimum Maximum
12,665 17,897
Bargaining
Unit***
MCP
Exempt/Non-
Exempt
E
Director of Information Technology/Support Svcs

1.0 15,432 21,805
Exec
E
Information Technology Manager

1.0 11,475 16,212
MCP
E
Information Technology Specialist 1/11 (Confidential)

2.0 6,190 9,188
MCP
NE
Information Technology Supervisor (Confidential)

4.0 7,923 11,194
MCP
NE
Information Technology Supervisor (Multimedia Services) (Confidential)

1.0 7,923 11,194
MCP
NE
Information Technology Technician 1/11

0.5 5,337 7,923
MCP
NE
Management Analyst

1.0 7,003 9,894
MCP
E
Senior Administrative Assistant

1.0 5,892 7,542
Rep
NE
Senior Information Technology Specialist (Confidential)

2.0 7,178 10,143
MCP
NE
Support Services
Information Technology Technician 1/11

0.5 5,337 7,923
MCP
NE
Office Specialist 1/11 - AM

0.6 4,273 5,748
Rep
NE
Office Specialist 1/11 - PM

0.6 4,273 5,748
Rep
NE
Support Services Supervisor
Information Technology Subtotal:

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Assistant Director of Community Development

1.0 1.0
4,956 6,344
12,983 18,344
Rep
MCP
NE
E
Director of Community Development

1.0 15,818 22,351
Exec
E
Principal Management Analyst

1.0 8,965 12,665
MCP
E
Senior Administrative Assistant

1.0 5,892 7,542
Rep
NE
Planning
Assistant Planner

1.0 6,502 8,325
Rep
NE
Associate Planner I (underfill as Planning Technician)

1.0 7,542 9,653
Rep
NE
Associate Planner 1/11

2.0 7,542 10,655
Rep
NE
Community Development Technician 1

1.0 5,748 7,356
Rep
NE
Community Development Technician 11 (underfill as Comm Dev Tech 1)

2.0 6,344 8,121
Rep
NE
Planning Manager

1.0 11,194 15,818
MCP
E
Principal Management Analyst

1.0 8,965 12,665
MCP
E
Principal Planner

1.0 10,143 14,329
MCP
E
Senior Community Development Technician

2.0 7,003 8,965
Rep
NE
Senior Management Analyst

0.1 8,121 11,475
MCP
E
Senior Office Specialist

1.0 4,956 6,344
Rep
NE
Senior Planner

1.0 9,188 12,983
MCP
E
Building and Safety/Code Enforcement
Building Inspector 1

1.0 6,665 8,533
Rep
NE
Building Inspector 11

2.0 7,356 9,417
Rep
NE
Building Official

1.0 11,762 16,621
MCP
E
Code Enforcement Manager

1.0 8,325 11,762
MCP
E
Code Enforcement Officer 1

1.0 5,607 7,178
Rep
NE
Code Enforcement Officer 11

1.0 6,190 7,923
Rep
NE
Field Supervisor- Code Enforcement

1.0 7,542 9,653
Rep
NE
Plan Checker

1.0 8,965 11,475
Rep
NE
Senior Administrative Assistant

2.0 5,892 7,542
Rep
NE
Senior Building Inspector

2.0 8,121 10,397
Rep
NE
Senior Code Enforcement Officer (underfill as Code Enforcement Officer 11)

1.0 6,833 8,745
Rep
NE
Senior Management Analyst
ffCommunity Development Subtotal:

0.9 8,121 11,475
MCP
E

SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
As of July 1, 2025

PUBLIC WORKS
Assistant Director of Public Works
FY2025-26
Number of
Positions

1.0 Salary Schedule
Monthly Salary
Minimum Maximum
13,981 19,755
Bargaining
Unit***
MCP
Exempt/Non-
Exempt
E
Director of Public Works

1.0 15,818 22,351
Exec
E
Program Manager

1.0 8,965 12,665
MCP
E
Senior Administrative Assistant

1.0 5,892 7,542
Rep
NE
CIP Administration
Assistant Engineer 1/11

1.0 7,178 9,653
Rep
NE
Associate Civil Engineer

1.0 9,653 12,357
Rep
E
Associate Civil Engineer (underfill as Assistant Engineer 11)

1.0 9,653 12,357
Rep
E
Associate Engineer 1

1.0 8,325 10,655
Rep
E
Associate Engineer 11

2.0 9,188 11,762
Rep
E
Principal Civil Engineer

2.0 12,055 17,033
MCP
E
Senior Civil Engineer

1.0 10,923 15,432
MCP
E
Senior Public Works Inspector

2.0 7,923 10,143
Rep
NE
Senior Public Works Inspector (underfill as Public Works Inspector 11)

1.0 7,923 10,143
Rep
NE
Supervising Public Works Inspector

1.0 8,745 11,194
Rep
NE
Land Development/NPDES
Associate Civil Engineer

1.0 9,653 12,357
Rep
E
Associate Civil Engineer (underfill as Associate Engineer 1)

1.0 9,653 12,357
Rep
E
Associate Engineer 11

2.0 9,188 11,762
Rep
E
Engineering Tech 1/11

1.0 6,190 8,325
Rep
NE
Management Assistant (underfill as Senior Office Specialist)

1.0 5,748 7,356
Rep
NE
Senior Management Analyst (underfill as Management Analyst)

1.0 8,121 11,475
MCP
E
Senior Public Works Inspector

1.0 7,923 10,143
Rep
NE
Traffic
Associate Civil Engineer

1.0 9,653 12,357
Rep
E
Principal Civil Engineer

1.0 12,055 17,033
MCP
E
Senior Signal Technician

2.0 7,923 10,143
Rep
NE
Signal Technician 1

1.0 6,833 8,745
Rep
NE
Maintenance (Streets, Facilities, Parks)
Custodian 11 - Facilities

2.0 3,871 4,956
Rep
NE
Field Supervisor -Trades

1.0 7,729 9,894
Rep
NE
Landscape Inspector II

1.0 6,502 8,325
Rep
NE
Lead Maintenance Worker - Electrician

1.0 7,003 8,965
Rep
NE
Lead Maintenance Worker - HVAC

1.0 7,003 8,965
Rep
NE
Lead Maintenance Worker - Streets (underfill as Maintenance Worker 11)

3.0 5,607 7,178
Rep
NE
Lead Maintenance Worker - Parks

2.0 5,607 7,178
Rep
NE
Maintenance Manager

1.0 11,762 16,621
MCP
E
Maintenance Superintendent

3.0 10,655 15,056
MCP
E
Maintenance Worker I - Facilities

1.0 5,472 7,003
Rep
NE
Maintenance Worker I - Parks

1.0 4,602 5,892
Rep
NE
Maintenance Worker I - Streets

5.0 4,602 5,892
Rep
NE
Maintenance Worker 11- Facilities

3.0 6,039 7,729
Rep
NE
Maintenance Worker II - Parks

1.0 5,079 6,502
Rep
NE
Maintenance Worker II - Streets

2.0 5,079 6,502
Rep
NE
Management Analyst

1.0 7,003 9,894
MCP
E
Park Attendant 11

3.0 6,190 7,923
Rep
NE
Senior Landscape Inspector

1.0 7,178 9,188
Rep
NE
Senior Office Specialist (underfill as Office Specialist 11) Public Works Subtotal:

1.0 4,956 6,344
Rep
NE
1i

SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
As of July 1, 2025
FIRE
FY2025-26
Number of
Positions
Salary Schedule
Monthly Salary
Minimum Maximum
Bargaining
Unit***
Exempt/Non-
Exempt
Community Development Technician II

1.0 6,344 8,121
Rep
NE
Fire Inspector II

1.0 8,533 10,923
Rep
NE
Management Analyst

1.0 7,003 9,894
MCP
E
Office Specialist 1/11

1.0 4,273 5,748
Rep
NE
Senior Community Development Technician (underfill as ComDevTech I)

1.0 7,003 8,965
Rep
NE
Emergency Management
Emergency Manager
Fire Subtotal:

COMMUNITY SERVICES
Assistant Director of Community Services

1.0 1.0
8,533 12,055
12,665 17,897
MCP
MCP
E
E
Community Services Coordinator 1/11

6.0 5,748 7,729
Rep
NE
Community Services Manager

8.0 10,397 14,688
MCP
E
Community Services Specialist 1/11

1.0 4,956 6,665
Rep
NE
Community Services Superintendent

1.0 11,475 16,212
MCP
E
Community Services Supervisor 1/11

13.0 6,665 8,965
Rep
NE
Director of Community Services

1.0 15,432 21,805
Exec
E
Management Assistant

1.0 5,748 7,356
Rep
NE
Multimedia Coordinator

2.0 7,003 8,965
Rep
NE
Principal Management Analyst

1.0 8,965 12,665
MCP
E
Theater Technical Coordinator 1/11

1.0 5,748 7,729
Rep
NE
Theater Technical Coordinator I/11 (underfill as Theater Technical Specialist 11) Community Services Subtotal:
1 1.0
1 37.0
5,748 7,729
Rep
NE
75 ** Bargaining Units:

Rep = Represented
MCP = Management/Confidential
Exec = Executive
Authorized/Unfunded positions:

Community Development - Plannins
Principal Planner I 1.0 10,143 14,329 MCP E

SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
As of July 1, 2025

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Technician 1 1.0 1 5,892 7,542 1 Rep NE

COMMUNITY SERVICES
Management Assistant

FINANCE
Senior Accounting Technician (Confidential)

HUMAN RESOURCES
Administrative Assistant (Confidential)
Human Resources Technician 1/11
Senior Management Analyst

1.0 1 5,748 7,356 1 Rep I NE

1.0 1 6,502 9,188 1 MCP I NE

1.0 5,337 7,542
MCP
NE

1.0 5,472 8,121
MCP
NE

1.0 8,121 11,475
MCP
E
Office Specialist 1/II - PM 1 1.0 1 4,273 5,748 1 Rep NE

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

ADMINISTRATIVE
Executive Assistant 4 951-004 Hourly

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 Monthly
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
Annually
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
Senior Administrative Assistant 4 952-004 Hourly

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 Monthly
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
Annually
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
Administrative Assistant 3 953-003 Hourly

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 Monthly
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
Annually
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
Senior Office Specialist 2 954-002 Hourly

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 Monthly
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
Annually
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
Office Specialist II 1 955-001 Hourly

25.90 26.55

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 Monthly
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
Annually
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
Office Specialist 1 1 956-001 Hourly

24.65 25.28

25.90 26.55

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 Monthly
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
Annually
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
Office Aide 1 959-001 Hourly

19.26 19.74

20.23 20.75

21.26 21.79

22.33 22.89

23.46 24.05

24.65 25.28

25.90 26.55

27.21 Monthly
3,338.40
3,421.60
3,506.53
3,596.67
3,685.07
3,776.93
3,870.53
3,967.60
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
Annually
40,060.80
41,059.20
42,078.40
43,160.00
44,220.80
45,323.20
46,446.40
47,611.20
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80

ANALYST
Principal Management Analyst 7 901-007 Hourly

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 71.29

73.07 Monthly
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
Annually
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
Senior Management Analyst 6 902-006 Hourly

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 Monthly
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
Annually
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
Management Analyst 5 903-005 Hourly

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 Monthly
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
Annually
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
Management Assistant 4 904-004 Hourly

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 Monthly
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
Annually
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
Management Aide III 3 905-003 Hourly

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 Monthly
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
Annually
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
Management Aide 11 2 906-002 Hourly

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 Monthly
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
Annually
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
Management Aide 1 1 907-001 Hourly

24.65 25.28

25.90 26.55

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 Monthly
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
Annually
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
Intern 1 908-001 Hourly

18.33 18.79

19.26 19.74

20.23 20.75

21.26 21.79

22.33 22.89

23.46 Monthly
3,177.20
3,256.93
3,338.40
3,421.60
3,506.53
3,596.67
3,685.07
3,776.93
3,870.53
3,967.60
4,066.40
Annually
38,126.40
39,083.20
40,060.80
41,059.20
42,078.40
43,160.00
44,220.80
45,323.20
46,446.40
47,611.20
48,796.80
PAGE 1 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
I Salary Steps _ MCP Only
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Director of Community Development 8 300-008 Hourly

91.26 93.53

95.89 98.27
100.73
103.25
105.83
108.48
111.18
113.97
116.82
119.74
122.73
125.80
128.95
Monthly
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
18,803.20
19,271.20
19,754.80
20,248.80
20,754.93
21,273.20
21,805.33
22,351.33
Annually
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40
225,638.40
231,254.40
237,057.60
242,985.60
249,059.20
255,278.40
261,664.00
268,216.00
Asst Dir. of Community Development 7 330-007 Hourly

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 84.74

86.86 89.03

91.26 93.53

95.89 98.27
100.73
103.25
105.83
Monthly
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
Annually
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT- BUILDING & SAFETY
Building Official 7 331-007 Hourly

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 84.74

86.86 89.03

91.26 93.53

95.89 Monthly
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
Annually
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
Field Supervisor - Building 4 330-004 Hourly

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 Monthly
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
Annually
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
Plan Checker 4 308-004 Hourly

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 Monthly
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
Annually
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
Senior Building Inspector 3 332-003 Hourly

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 Monthly
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
Annually
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
Building Inspector II 2 333-002 Hourly

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 Monthly
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
Annually
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
Building Inspector 1 1 334-001 Hourly

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 Monthly
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
Annually
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - CODE ENFORCEMENT
Code Enforcement Manager 5 339-005 Hourly

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 Monthly
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
Annually
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
Field Supervisor - Code Enforcement 4 343-004 Hourly

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 Monthly
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
Annually
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
Senior Code Enforcement Officer 3 340-003 Hourly

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 Monthly
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
Annually
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
Code Enforcement Officer II 2 341-002 Hourly

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 Monthly
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
Annually
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
Code Enforcement Officer 1 1 342-001 Hourly

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 Monthly
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
Annually
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
PAGE 2 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
MCP Only
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT- PLANNING
Planning Manager 7 301-007 Hourly

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 84.74

86.86 89.03

91.26 Monthly
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
Annually
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
Principal Planner 6 302-006 Hourly

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 Monthly
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
Annually
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
Senior Planner 5 303-005 Hourly

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 Monthly
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
Annually
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
Associate Planner II 4 304-004 Hourly

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 Monthly
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
Annually
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
Associate Planner 1 3 305-003 Hourly

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 Monthly
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
Annually
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
Assistant Planner 2 306-002 Hourly

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 Monthly
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
Annually
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
Planning Technician 1 307-001 Hourly

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 Monthly
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
Annually
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT -SERVICES
CommDev Processing Supervisor 4 320-004 Hourly

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 Monthly
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
Annually
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
Senior CommDev Technician 3 321-003 Hourly

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 Monthly
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
Annually
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
CommDev Technician 11 2 322-002 Hourly

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 Monthly
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
Annually
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
CommDev Technician 1 1 323-001 Hourly

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 Monthly
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
Annually
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20

CITY CLERK
Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk 8 500-009 Hourly

89.03 91.26

93.53 95.89

98.27 100.73
103.25
105.83
108.48
111.18
113.97
116.82
119.74
122.73
125.80
Monthly
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
18,803.20
19,271.20
19,754.80
20,248.80
20,754.93
21,273.20
21,805.33
Annually
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40
225,638.40
231,254.40
237,057.60
242,985.60
249,059.20
255,278.40
261,664.00
Deputy City Clerk 7 501-007 Hourly

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 Monthly
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
Annually
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
Records Manager 6 510-006 Hourly

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 Monthly
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
Annually
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
Records Supervisor 4 511-004 Hourly

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 Monthly
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
Annually
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
Senior Records Coordinator 3 512-003 Hourly

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 Monthly
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
Annually
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
PAGE 3 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

26.55 27.21

27.90 28.59

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 Records Coordinator 2 513-002 Hourly
Monthly
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
Annually
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
Records Technician 1 514-001 Hourly

24.05 24.65

25.28 25.90

26.55 27.21

27.90 28.59

29.30 30.05

30.79 Monthly
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
Annually
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20

CITY MANAGER
City Manager (per Employment Contract) 9 100-009 Hourly 171.62
Monthly
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
29,747.47
Annually
356,969.60
Assistant City Manager 8 101-008 Hourly
110.41
113.17
116.01
118.91
121.89
124.93
128.05
131.25
134.54
137.89
141.35
144.89
148.51
152.22
156.02
Monthly
19,137.73
19,616.13
20,108.40
20,611.07
21,127.60
21,654.53
22,195.33
22,750.00
23,320.27
23,900.93
24,500.67
25,114.27
25,741.73
26,384.80
27,043.47
Annually
229,652.80
235,393.60
241,300.80
247,332.80
253,531.20
259,854.40
266,344.00
273,000.00
279,843.20
286,811.20
294,008.00
301,371.20
308,900.80
316,617.60
324,521.60
Deputy City Manager 8 102-008 Hourly
100.39
102.89
105.46
108.11
110.80
113.57
116.42
119.32
122.30
125.37
128.50
131.71
135.01
138.38
141.84
Monthly
17,400.93
17,834.27
18,279.73
18,739.07
19,205.33
19,685.47
20,179.47
20,682.13
21,198.67
21,730.80
22,273.33
22,829.73
23,401.73
23,985.87
24,585.60
Annually
208,811.20
214,011.20
219,356.80
224,868.80
230,464.00
236,225.60
242,153.60
248,185.60
254,384.00
260,769.60
267,280.00
273,956.80
280,820.80
287,830.40
295,027.20
Assistant to the City Manager 8 103-008 Hourly

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 84.74

86.86 89.03

91.26 93.53

95.89 Monthly
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
Annually
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
Economic Development Manager 6 120-006 Hourly

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 84.74

86.86 Monthly
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
Annually
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80

COMMUNITY SERVICES
Director of Community Services 8 600-008 Hourly

89.03 91.26

93.53 95.89

98.27 100.73
103.25
105.83
108.48
111.18
113.97
116.82
119.74
122.73
125.80
Monthly
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
18,803.20
19,271.20
19,754.80
20,248.80
20,754.93
21,273.20
21,805.33
Annually
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40
225,638.40
231,254.40
237,057.60
242,985.60
249,059.20
255,278.40
261,664.00
Asst Director of Community Services 7 601-007 Hourly

73.07 74.90

76.78 78.69

80.66 82.67

84.74 86.86

89.03 91.26

93.53 95.89

98.27 100.73
103.25
Monthly
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
Annually
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
Community Services Superintendent 6 602-006 Hourly

66.20 67.86

69.55 71.29

73.07 74.90

76.78 78.69

80.66 82.67

84.74 86.86

89.03 91.26

93.53 Monthly
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
Annually
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
Community Services Manager 5 603-005 Hourly

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 71.29

73.07 74.90

76.78 78.69

80.66 82.67

84.74 Monthly
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
Annually
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
Community Services Supervisor II 4 610-004 Hourly

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 Monthly
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
Annually
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
Community Services Supervisor 1 4 611-004 Hourly

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 Monthly
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
Annually
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
Community Services Coordinator II 3 612-003 Hourly

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 Monthly
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
Annually
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
Community Services Coordinator 1 3 613-003 Hourly

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 Monthly
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
Annually
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
PAGE 4 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 Community Services Specialist II 2 614-002 Hourly Monthly
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
Annually
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
Community Services Specialist 1 2 615-002 Hourly

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 Monthly
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
Annually
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
Community Services Assistant 1 616-001 Hourly

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 Monthly
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
Annually
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
Senior Recreation Leader 1 617-001 Hourly

25.28 25.90

26.55 27.21

27.90 28.59

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 Monthly
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
Annually
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
Recreation Leader 1 618-001 Hourly

23.46 24.05

24.65 25.28

25.90 26.55

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 Monthly
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
Annually
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
Recreation Assistant 1 619-001 Hourly

21.79 22.33

22.89 23.46

24.05 24.65

25.28 25.90

26.55 27.21

27.90 Monthly
3,776.93
3,870.53
3,967.60
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
Annually
45,323.20
46,446.40
47,611.20
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00

COMMUNITY SERVICES - AQUATICS
Aquatics Supervisor II 4 620-004 Hourly

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 Monthly
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
Annually
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
Aquatics Supervisor 1 4 621-004 Hourly

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 Monthly
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
Annually
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
Aquatics Coordinator 3 622-003 Hourly

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 Monthly
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
Annually
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
Lead Lifeguard 2 623-002 Hourly

25.28 25.90

26.55 27.21

27.90 28.59

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 Monthly
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
Annually
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
Senior Lifeguard 1 624-001 Hourly

23.46 24.05

24.65 25.28

25.90 26.55

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 Monthly
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
Annually
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
Lifeguard 1 625-001 Hourly

21.79 22.33

22.89 23.46

24.05 24.65

25.28 25.90

26.55 27.21

27.90 Monthly
3,776.93
3,870.53
3,967.60
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
Annually
45,323.20
46,446.40
47,611.20
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
Water Safety Instructor 1 626-001 Hourly

21.79 22.33

22.89 23.46

24.05 24.65

25.28 25.90

26.55 27.21

27.90 Monthly
3,776.93
3,870.53
3,967.60
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
Annually
45,323.20
46,446.40
47,611.20
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00

COMMUNITY SERVICES - DAY CAMP
Day Camp Director 1 654-001 Hourly

26.55 27.21

27.90 28.59

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 Monthly
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
Annually
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
Assistant Day Camp Director 1 655-001 Hourly

24.05 24.65

25.28 25.90

26.55 27.21

27.90 28.59

29.30 30.05

30.79 Monthly
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
Annually
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
Day Camp Counselor 1 656-001 Hourly

21.79 22.33

22.89 23.46

24.05 24.65

25.28 25.90

26.55 27.21

27.90 Monthly
3,776.93
3,870.53
3,967.60
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
Annually
45,323.20
46,446.40
47,611.20
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
PAGE 5 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

COMMUNITY SERVICES - THEATER
Theater Technical Coordinator II 3 640-003 Hourly

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 Monthly
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
Annually
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
Theater Technical Coordinator 1 3 641-003 Hourly

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 Monthly
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
Annually
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
Theater Technical Specialist II 2 642-002 Hourly

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 Monthly
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
Annually
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
Theater Technical Specialist 1 2 643-002 Hourly

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 Monthly
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
Annually
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
Theater Technical Assistant 1 644-001 Hourly

25.90 26.55

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 Monthly
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
Annually
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80

FINANCE
Director of Finance 8 200-008 Hourly

91.26 93.53

95.89 98.27
100.73
103.25
105.83
108.48
111.18
113.97
116.82
119.74
122.73
125.80
128.95
Monthly
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
18,803.20
19,271.20
19,754.80
20,248.80
20,754.93
21,273.20
21,805.33
22,351.33
Annually
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40
225,638.40
231,254.40
237,057.60
242,985.60
249,059.20
255,278.40
261,664.00
268,216.00
Assistant Director of Finance 7 201-007 Hourly

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 84.74

86.86 89.03

91.26 93.53

95.89 98.27
100.73
103.25
105.83
Monthly
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
Annually
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40
Fiscal Services Manager 6 202-006 Hourly

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 84.74

86.86 Monthly
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
Annually
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
Finance Manager 5 204-005 Hourly

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 Monthly
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
Annually
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00

FINANCE - ACCOUNTING
Senior Accountant 4 240-004 Hourly

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 Monthly
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
Annually
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
Accountant II 3 241-003 Hourly

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 Monthly
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
Annually
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
Accountant I 3 242-003 Hourly

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 Monthly
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
Annually
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
PAGE 6 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
Salary Step, MCP Only
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

FINANCE - ACCOUNTING SUPPORT
Accounting Support Supervisor 4 250-004 Hourly

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 Monthly
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
Annually
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
Senior Accounting Technician 3 251-003 Hourly

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 Monthly
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
Annually
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
Accounting Technician II 2 252-002 Hourly

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 Monthly
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
Annually
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
Accounting Technician 1 2 253-002 Hourly

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 Monthly
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
Annually
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
Accounting Assistant 1 254-001 Hourly

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 Monthly
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
Annually
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
Cashier 1 230-001 Hourly

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 Monthly
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
Annually
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80

FINANCE - BUSINESS LICENSE
Business License Supervisor 4 260-004 Hourly

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 Monthly
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
Annually
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
Senior Business License Technician 3 261-003 Hourly

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 Monthly
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
Annually
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
Business License Technician 2 262-002 Hourly

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 Monthly
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
Annually
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
Business License Assistant 1 263-001 Hourly

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 Monthly
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
Annually
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80

FINANCE - PAYROLL
Payroll Manager 5 220-005 Hourly

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 Monthly
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
Annually
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
Payroll Administrator 4 222-004 Hourly

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 Monthly
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
Annually
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
Payroll Supervisor 4 221-004 Hourly

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 Monthly
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
Annually
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
Senior Payroll Coordinator 3 223-003 Hourly

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 Monthly
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
Annually
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
Payroll Coordinator 2 224-002 Hourly

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 Monthly
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
Annually
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
Payroll Technician 1 225-001 Hourly

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 Monthly
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
Annually
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
PAGE 7 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

FINANCE - PURCHASING
Purchasing Manager 5 203-005 Hourly

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 Monthly
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
Annually
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
Purchasing Supervisor 4 204-004 Hourly

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 Monthly
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
Annually
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
Senior Buyer 3 205-003 Hourly

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 Monthly
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
Annually
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
Buyer II 2 206-002 Hourly

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 Monthly
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
Annually
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
Buyer 1 2 207-002 Hourly

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 Monthly
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
Annually
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
Purchasing Assistant 1 208-001 Hourly

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 Monthly
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
Annually
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80

FIRE - EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Emergency Manager 7 360-007 Hourly

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 Monthly
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
Annually
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00

FIRE - PREVENTION
Field Supervisor - Fire 4 353-004 Hourly

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 71.29

73.07 74.90

76.78 Monthly
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
Annually
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
Senior Fire Inspector 4 350-003 Hourly

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 Monthly
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
Annually
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
Fire Inspector II 2 351-002 Hourly

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 Monthly
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
Annually
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
Fire Inspector 1 1 352-001 Hourly

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 Monthly
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
Annually
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
PAGE 8 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

HUMAN RESOURCES
Director of HR/Risk Management 8 800-008 Hourly

89.03 91.26

93.53 95.89

98.27 100.73
103.25
105.83
108.48
111.18
113.97
116.82
119.74
122.73
125.80
Monthly
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
18,803.20
19,271.20
19,754.80
20,248.80
20,754.93
21,273.20
21,805.33
Annually
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40
225,638.40
231,254.40
237,057.60
242,985.60
249,059.20
255,278.40
261,664.00
Asst Director of HR/Risk Management 7 801-007 Hourly

69.55 71.29

73.07 74.90

76.78 78.69

80.66 82.67

84.74 86.86

89.03 91.26

93.53 95.89

98.27 Monthly
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
Annually
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
HR Supervisor 4 804-004 Hourly

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 Monthly
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
Annually
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
Senior HR Technician 3 805-003 Hourly

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 Monthly
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
Annually
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
HR Technician 11 2 806-002 Hourly

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 Monthly
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
Annually
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
HR Technician 1 2 807-002 Hourly

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 Monthly
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
Annually
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
HR Assistant 1 808-001 Hourly

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 Monthly
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
Annually
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Director of IT/Support Services 8 700-008 Hourly

89.03 91.26

93.53 95.89

98.27 100.73
103.25
105.83
108.48
111.18
113.97
116.82
119.74
122.73
125.80
Monthly
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
18,803.20
19,271.20
19,754.80
20,248.80
20,754.93
21,273.20
21,805.33
Annually
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40
225,638.40
231,254.40
237,057.60
242,985.60
249,059.20
255,278.40
261,664.00
Asst Director of IT/Support Services 7 701-007 Hourly

73.07 74.90

76.78 78.69

80.66 82.67

84.74 86.86

89.03 91.26

93.53 95.89

98.27 100.73
103.25
Monthly
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
Annually
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
IT Manager 6 702-006 Hourly

66.20 67.86

69.55 71.29

73.07 74.90

76.78 78.69

80.66 82.67

84.74 86.86

89.03 91.26

93.53 Monthly
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
Annually
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
IT Administrator 5 703-005 Hourly

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 71.29

73.07 74.90

76.78 78.69

80.66 82.67

84.74 Monthly
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
Annually
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
PAGE 9 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 IT Supervisor 4 704-004 Hourly
Monthly
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
Annually
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
Senior IT Specialist 3 705-003 Hourly

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 Monthly
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
Annually
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
IT Specialist II 2 706-002 Hourly

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 Monthly
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
Annually
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
IT Specialist 1 2 707-002 Hourly

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 Monthly
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
Annually
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
ITTechnician II 1 708-001 Hourly

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 Monthly
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
Annually
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
IT Technician 1 1 709-001 Hourly

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 Monthly
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
Annually
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80

MEDIA/MARKETING
Multimedia Coordinator 3 921-004 Hourly

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 Monthly
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
Annually
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
Multimedia Specialist 11 2 922-003 Hourly

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 Monthly
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
Annually
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
Multimedia Specialist 1 2 923-002 Hourly

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 Monthly
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
Annually
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
Multimedia Assistant 1 924-001 Hourly

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 Monthly
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
Annually
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20

PUBLIC WORKS
Director of PW/City Engineer 8 400-008 Hourly

91.26 93.53

95.89 98.27
100.73
103.25
105.83
108.48
111.18
113.97
116.82
119.74
122.73
125.80
128.95
Monthly
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
18,803.20
19,271.20
19,754.80
20,248.80
20,754.93
21,273.20
21,805.33
22,351.33
Annually
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40
225,638.40
231,254.40
237,057.60
242,985.60
249,059.20
255,278.40
261,664.00
268,216.00
Assistant Director of Public Works 7 400-007 Hourly

80.66 82.67

84.74 86.86

89.03 91.26

93.53 95.89

98.27 100.73
103.25
105.83
108.48
111.18
113.97
Monthly
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
17,459.87
17,896.67
18,343.87
18,803.20
19,271.20
19,754.80
Annually
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
209,518.40
214,760.00
220,126.40
225,638.40
231,254.40
237,057.60
Program Manager 7 402-007 Hourly

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 71.29

73.07 Monthly
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
Annually
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60

PUBLIC WORKS - CUSTODIAL
Custodian II 2 460-002 Hourly

22.33 22.89

23.46 24.05

24.65 25.28

25.90 26.55

27.21 27.90

28.59 Monthly
3,870.53
3,967.60
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
Annually
46,446.40
47,611.20
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
Custodian 1 1 461-001 Hourly

20.23 20.75

21.26 21.79

22.33 22.89

23.46 24.05

24.65 25.28

25.90 Monthly
3,506.53
3,596.67
3,685.07
3,776.93
3,870.53
3,967.60
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
Annually
42,078.40
43,160.00
44,220.80
45,323.20
46,446.40
47,611.20
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
PAGE 10 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

PUBLIC WORKS- ENGINEERING
Principal Civil Engineer 6 402-006 Hourly

69.55 71.29

73.07 74.90

76.78 78.69

80.66 82.67

84.74 86.86

89.03 91.26

93.53 95.89

98.27 Monthly
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
17,033.47
Annually
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
204,401.60
Senior Civil Engineer 5 403-005 Hourly

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 71.29

73.07 74.90

76.78 78.69

80.66 82.67

84.74 86.86

89.03 Monthly
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
Annually
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
Associate Civil Engineer 4 404-004 Hourly

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 Monthly
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
Annually
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
Associate Engineer II 4 405-004 Hourly

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 Monthly
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
Annually
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
Associate Engineer 1 3 406-003 Hourly

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 Monthly
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
Annually
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
Assistant Engineer II 2 407-002 Hourly

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 Monthly
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
Annually
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
Assistant Engineer 1 2 408-002 Hourly

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 Monthly
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
Annually
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
Engineering Technician 11 1 409-001 Hourly

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 Monthly
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
Annually
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
Engineering Technician 1 1 410-001 Hourly

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 Monthly
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
Annually
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80

PUBLIC WORKS - INSPECTIONS
Supervising PW Inspector 4 420-004 Hourly

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 Monthly
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
Annually
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
Senior PW Inspector 3 421-003 Hourly

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 Monthly
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
Annually
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
PW Inspector II 2 422-002 Hourly

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 Monthly
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
Annually
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
PW Inspector 1 1 423-001 Hourly

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 Monthly
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
Annually
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40

PUBLIC WORKS - MAINTENANCE
Maintenance Manager 7 430-007 Hourly

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 84.74

86.86 89.03

91.26 93.53

95.89 Monthly
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
15,431.87
15,818.40
16,211.87
16,620.93
Annually
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
185,182.40
189,820.80
194,542.40
199,451.20
Maintenance Superintendent 6 431-006 Hourly

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 76.78

78.69 80.66

82.67 84.74

86.86 Monthly
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
13,981.07
14,329.47
14,688.27
15,055.73
Annually
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
167,772.80
171,953.60
176,259.20
180,668.80
PAGE 11 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
- M Salary Steps -1�� MCP Only
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

PUBLIC WORKS - LANDSCAPE
Maintenance Supervisor - Landscape 5 443-005 Hourly

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 Monthly
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
Annually
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
Field Supervisor - Landscape 4 444-004 Hourly

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 Monthly
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
Annually
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
Senior Landscape Inspector 3 440-003 Hourly

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 Monthly
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
Annually
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
Landscape Inspector II 2 441-002 Hourly

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 Monthly
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
Annually
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
Landscape Inspector 1 1 442-001 Hourly

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 Monthly
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
Annually
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80

PUBLIC WORKS - PARK ATTENDANT
Supervising Park Attendant 4 490-004 Hourly

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 Monthly
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
Annually
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
Park Attendant 111 3 491-003 Hourly

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 Monthly
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
Annually
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
Park Attendant II 2 492-002 Hourly

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 Monthly
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
Annually
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
Park Attendant 1 1 493-001 Hourly

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 Monthly
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
Annually
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80

PUBLIC WORKS - STREETS/PARKS
Maintenance Supervisor - Streets/Parks 5 432-005 Hourly

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 Monthly
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
Annually
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
Field Supervisor - Streets/Parks 4 433-004 Hourly

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 Monthly
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
Annually
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
Lead Maintenance Worker - Streets/Parks 3 434-003 Hourly

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 38.45

39.42 40.40

41.41 Monthly
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
Annually
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
Maintenance Worker II - Streets/Parks 2 435-002 Hourly

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 34.84

35.71 36.60

37.51 Monthly
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
Annually
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
Maintenance Worker I - Streets/Parks 1 436-001 Hourly

26.55 27.21

27.90 28.59

29.30 30.05

30.79 31.57

32.35 33.16

33.99 Monthly
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
Annually
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
PAGE 12 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
�� Salary Steps Mhow- MCP Only
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

PUBLIC WORKS - FACILITIES
Maintenance Supervisor- Facilities 5 432-005 Hourly

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 Monthly
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
Annually
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
Field Supervisor - Facilities 4 472-004 Hourly

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 Monthly
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
Annually
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
Lead Maintenance Worker- Facilities 3 473-003 Hourly

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 Monthly
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
Annually
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
Maintenance Worker II - Facilities 2 474-002 Hourly

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 Monthly
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
Annually
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
Maintenance Worker I - Facilities 1 475-001 Hourly

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 Monthly
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
Annually
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00

PUBLIC WORKS - TRADES
Maintenance Supervisor -Trades 5 482-005 Hourly

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 58.52

59.98 61.47

63.02 64.58

66.20 67.86

69.55 Monthly
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
Annually
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
Field Supervisor -Trades 4 483-004 Hourly

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 53.01

54.33 55.69

57.08 Monthly
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
Annually
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
Lead Maintenance Worker - Trades 3 484-003 Hourly

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 48.03

49.23 50.45

51.72 Monthly
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
Annually
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
Maintenance Worker 11 - Trades 2 485-002 Hourly

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 43.51

44.59 45.71

46.85 Monthly
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
Annually
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
Maintenance Worker I - Trades 1 486-001 Hourly

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 37.51

38.45 39.42

40.40 41.41

42.44 Monthly
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
6,501.73
6,664.67
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
Annually
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
78,020.80
79,976.00
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20

PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC SIGNALS
Maintenance Supervisor - Signals 5 453-005 Hourly

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 66.20

67.86 69.55

71.29 73.07

74.90 76.78

78.69 Monthly
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
11,474.67
11,762.40
12,055.33
12,356.93
12,665.47
12,982.67
13,308.53
13,639.60
Annually
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
137,696.00
141,148.80
144,664.00
148,283.20
151,985.60
155,792.00
159,702.40
163,675.20
Field Supervisor - Signals 4 454-004 Hourly

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 59.98

61.47 63.02

64.58 Monthly
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
10,396.53
10,654.80
10,923.47
11,193.87
Annually
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
124,758.40
127,857.60
131,081.60
134,326.40
Senior Signal Technician 3 450-003 Hourly

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 54.33

55.69 57.08

58.52 Monthly
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
9,417.20
9,652.93
9,893.87
10,143.47
Annually
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
113,006.40
115,835.20
118,726.40
121,721.60
Signal Technician II 2 451-002 Hourly

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 51.72

53.01 Monthly
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
8,964.80
9,188.40
Annually
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
107,577.60
110,260.80
Signal Technician 1 2 452-002 Hourly

39.42 40.40

41.41 42.44

43.51 44.59

45.71 46.85

48.03 49.23

50.45 Monthly
6,832.80
7,002.67
7,177.73
7,356.27
7,541.73
7,728.93
7,923.07
8,120.67
8,325.20
8,533.20
8,744.67
Annually
81,993.60
84,032.00
86,132.80
88,275.20
90,500.80
92,747.20
95,076.80
97,448.00
99,902.40
102,398.40
104,936.00
PAGE 13 OF 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

SALARY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE June 28, 2025
Adopted by City Council on May 27, 2025
I I Salary Steps
Class Family / Title Level Class Code Time Base

SUPPORT SERVICES
Support Services Supervisor 4 720-004 Hourly

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 33.99

34.84 35.71

36.60 Monthly
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
5,891.60
6,038.93
6,189.73
6,344.00
Annually
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
70,699.20
72,467.20
74,276.80
76,128.00
Senior Support Services Technician 3 721-003 Hourly

25.90 26.55

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 30.79

31.57 32.35

33.16 Monthly
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
5,336.93
5,472.13
5,607.33
5,747.73
Annually
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
64,043.20
65,665.60
67,288.00
68,972.80
Support Services Technician 2 722-002 Hourly

23.46 24.05

24.65 25.28

25.90 26.55

27.21 27.90

28.59 29.30

30.05 Monthly
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
4,836.00
4,955.60
5,078.67
5,208.67
Annually
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
58,032.00
59,467.20
60,944.00
62,504.00
Support Services Assistant 1 723-001 Hourly

21.26 21.79

22.33 22.89

23.46 24.05

24.65 25.28

25.90 26.55

27.21 Monthly
3,685.07
3,776.93
3,870.53
3,967.60
4,066.40
4,168.67
4,272.67
4,381.87
4,489.33
4,602.00
4,716.40
Annually
44,220.80
45,323.20
46,446.40
47,611.20
48,796.80
50,024.00
51,272.00
52,582.40
53,872.00
55,224.00
56,596.80
PAGE 14 OF 14

RESOLUTION NO.2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS
LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Appropriations Limit will be calculated based on the changes in City population and California per capita personal income.

Section 2. The Appropriations Limit for the City of Temecula for Fiscal Year 2025- 26, attached hereto, is hereby adopted.

Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the office of the City Clerk.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 27th day of May 2025.

Brenden Kalfus, Mayor
ATTEST:

Randi Johi, City Clerk
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johi, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2025- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 27th day of May, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, City Clerk

City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Annual Operating Budget

GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
Article XIIIB of the California State Constitution, more commonly referred to as the Gann Initiative or Gann Limit, was approved by California voters in November 1979, and placed limits on the amount of proceeds of taxes that state and local government agencies can receive and spend each year. For cities that incorporated after 1978- 79 (such as the City of Temecula), the voters set the initial appropriations limit at the time of incorporation.

Proposition 111 was approved by California voters in June 1990, which provided new adjustment formulas which make the appropriations limit more responsive to local growth issues. Each year the City Council must adopt by resolution the appropriations limit for the following year. Following is the calculation of the City's Gann Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2025-26:

Fiscal Year 2024-25 Appropriations Limits................................................................... $362,489,557 CityPopulation Growth............................................................................................................1.19% Per Capita Personal Income Change.........................................................................................6.44% Fiscal Year 2025-26 Appropriations Limit.......................................................................$390,425,308 Appropriations subject to the limit in the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget total $107,737,717 which is $282,687,591 less than the computed limit. Additional appropriations to the budget funded by non -tax sources such as service charges, restricted revenues from other agencies, grants or beginning fund balances would be unaffected by the appropriations limit. However, any supplemental appropriations funded through increased tax sources would be subject to the appropriations limit and could not exceed the $282,687,591 variance indicated. Further, any overall actual receipts from tax sources greater than $282,687,591 from budget estimates will result in proceeds from taxes in excess of the City's appropriations limit, requiring refunds of the excess within the next two fiscal years or voter approval of an increase in the City's appropriations limit. Voter approval for an increase in the City's appropriations limit is not anticipated in the future due to the margin between the limit and tax revenue.

GANN Appropriations Limit
500,000,000
400,000,000
300,000,000
200,000,000
100,000,000 ■ ■ � � � —
0 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26
■ Appropriations Subject to Limit Legal Limit
Annual Operating Budget

Item No. 13

CITY OF TEMECULA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Matt Peters, Director of Community Development
DATE: May 27, 2025
SUBJECT: Adopt Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps for the City Prepared by the State Fire Marshal
RECOMMENDATION:

That prior to consideration of the proposed Ordinance, the City Clerk randomly select Mayor Kalfus, Council Member Stewart or Council Member Rahn pursuant to Section 18705 of the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission to achieve a quorum for this Agenda Item since these three Council Members own residential property in the proposed Fire Hazard Severity Zones and three affirmative votes of the Council are required by State law to adopt the Ordinance.

2. That the City Council introduce an ordinance entitled:

ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,

CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE MAP AND ADDING CHAPTER 15.14 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, FIRE

HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE MAP AND FINDING THE ORDINANCE

EXEMPT FROM CEQA

BACKGROUND
Government Code Section 51178 requires the State Fire Marshal to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. Moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones shall be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors including areas where winds have been identified by the Office of the State Fire Marshal as a major cause of wildfire spread.

On March 24, 2025, pursuant to Government Code section 51178, the State Fire Marshal published a map indicating the Local Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones for the City of Temecula that designates various areas in the City of Temecula as moderate, high and very high Fire Hazard Severity Zones ("FHSZ").

Within 30 days after receiving the Fire Hazard Severity Zones map, the City made the maps and information available for public review and comment and placed the information and maps on its website in an understandable and accessible form. Information is available on the City's Fire Hazard Severity Zone website at: www.TemeculaCA.gov/Firemap .

The recent updates to Fire Hazard Severity Zones in California provide a more precise assessment of wildfire risks using modern climate data and advanced fire modeling. These updates impact Local Responsibility Areas (LRA), influencing fire prevention measures. Including defensible space, building codes, and real estate disclosure requirements.

ANALYSIS
Factors Used in the Designation of the Fire Hazard Severity Zones Properties are designated as Moderate, High, or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones based on:
• Terrain and topography
• Vegetation and fuel conditions
• Fire history and frequency
• Climate and weather patterns
The FHSZ maps identify the hazard potential, not the immediate risk. They do not factor in mitigation efforts such as defensible space, fire-resistant construction, or local firefighting capabilities.

According to Cal Fire, the fire hazard severity model for wildland fire has two key elements:
probability of an area burning and expected fire behavior under extreme fuel and weather conditions. The zones reflect areas that have similar burn probabilities and fire behavior characteristics. The factors considered in determining fire hazard within wildland areas are fire history, flame length, terrain, local weather, and potential fuel over a 50-year period. Outside of wildlands, the model considers factors that might lead to buildings being threatened, including terrain, weather, urban vegetation cover, blowing embers, proximity to wildland, fire history, and fire hazard in nearby wildlands. FHSZs are not a structure loss model, as key information regarding structure ignition (such as roof type, etc.) is not included.

Impact of Zone Designation on Homeowners within a Zone
Generally, homeowners in Very High FHSZ must:
• Maintain 100 feet of defensible space around structures. • Comply with home hardening requirements to reduce ignition risks. • Ensure new construction and renovations adhere to Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) building codes which are found in the California Building Code Chapter 7A. • Disclose FHSZ designation when selling property.

Generally, homeowners in High FHSZ must:

Comply with home hardening requirements to reduce ignition risks.

Ensure new construction and renovations adhere to Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) building codes.

Disclose FHSZ designation when selling property.

Specifically, Government Code Section 51182 requires homeowners in the Very High FHSZ to:
• Maintain defensible space of 100 feet from each side and from the front and rear of the structure. The amount of fuel modification necessary shall consider the flammability of the structure as affected by building material, building standards, location, and type of vegetation. Fuels shall be maintained and spaced in a condition so that a wildfire would be unlikely to ignite the structure. This does not apply to single specimens of trees or other vegetation that are well -pruned and maintained so as to effectively manage fuels and not form a means of rapidly transmitting fire from other nearby vegetation to a structure or from a structure to other nearby vegetation or to interrupt the advance of embers toward a structure. The intensity of fuels management may vary within the 100-foot perimeter of the structure, with more intense fuel reductions being used between 5 and 30 feet around the structure, and an ember -resistant zone being required within 5 feet of the structure, to consider the elimination of materials in the ember -resistant zone that would likely be ignited by embers.
• Remove that portion of a tree that extends within 10 feet of the outlet of a chimney or stovepipe.
• Maintain a tree, shrub, or other plant adjacent to or overhanging a building free of dead or dying wood.
• Maintain the roof of a structure free of leaves, needles, or other vegetative materials.

These provisions would be enforced through Chapter 8.16 of the Temecula Municipal Code, Hazardous Vegetation, both on an annual basis and any time violations are or reported.

Additionally, the City may not decrease the FHSZ level recommended by State Fire Marshall. The City may add to or increase the recommended FHSZ level, but Riverside County Fire Department (Cal Fire) is not proposing any additions or increases during this adoption process.

Fire Insurance Related Questions
According to Cal Fire, insurance companies use risk models, which differ from hazard models, because they consider the susceptibility of a structure to damage from fire and other short-term factors that are not included in hazard modeling. It is unlikely that insurance risk models specifically call out Cal Fire's Fire Hazard Severity Zones as a factor, but much of the same data that is used in the fire hazard severity zone model are likely included in the insurance companies' risk models. However, insurance risk models incorporate many additional factors and factors that

change more frequently than those that Cal Fire includes in its hazard mapping, which is built to remain steady for the next 10+ years.

Procedure for Random Selection Pursuant to Section 18705 of the Fair Political Practices Commission Regulations
Government Code Section 51178 requires the State Fire Marshal to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas.

Government Code Section 51179 requires that "A local agency shall designate, by ordinance, moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones in its jurisdiction within 120 days of receiving recommendations from the State Fire Marshal pursuant to Section 51178." Government Code Section 36936 provides that "ordinances require a recorded majority vote of the total membership of the city council." Since the Temecula City Council has five members, three affirmative votes are required to adopt an ordinance and fulfill the requirement of Government Code Section 51779.

The personal residences of Mayor Kalfus, Council Member Stewart and Council Member Rahn are located on parcels within the Fire Hazard Severity Zones for the City of Temecula identified by the State Fire Marshal. In the opinion of the City Attorney, these three members may not participate in the Council's decision to approve the Fire Hazard Severity Zones pursuant to Section 18702.2(a)(1) of the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission because the Council action to adopt the Fire Hazard Severity Zones "involves the adoption or amendment of a development plan or criteria applying the parcel."
In the event potential conflict of interest will prevent a legislative body from achieving a quorum for the transaction of business, Section 18705 of the Fair Political Practices Commission Regulations specifically authorizes the random selection of one or more members of a legislative body that would have a financial interest in a decision to participate in that decision if necessary to achieve a quorum of the legislative body. Therefore, in order to achieve a quorum of three Members of the City Council pursuant to and to enact an ordinance approving the Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps as required by Government Code Sections 36936 and 51779, it is necessary to randomly select either Mayor Kalfus, Council Member Stewart or Council Member Rahn to achieve the required quorum.

The following procedures have been found by decisions of the Fair Political Practices to meet the requirements of Section 18705 of the Fair Political Practices Commission Regulations for the random selection of a City Council Member to achieve the required quorum for approval of the Fire Hazard Severity Zones pursuant to Government Code Sections 36936 and 51779:

1. The random selection process will occur just prior to consideration of the Fire Hazard Severity Zone by the Council at the public session at the May 27, 2025 regular meeting of the City Council.

2. This Agenda Report includes a description of the nature of the economic interest of the

members involved, the real property interests of the members involved, and a description of the circumstances in which the conflict might arise, and the legal necessity of achieving a quorum to act on this matter, as required by Section 18705.

3. The City Clerk will stand in front of the public audience, with the Deputy City Clerk as a witness, and place the names of Mayor Kalfus, Council Member Stewart and Council Member Rahn on individual pieces of paper into a clear bowl and folded so that their names are not visible or otherwise identifiable.

4. The City Clerk will announce that she will draw the name of one of these Council Members from the bowl and that the Council Member whose name is drawn will be deemed randomly selected to participate in all matters of the City Council to act on the Fire Hazard Severity Zones as required by Government Code Sections 36936 and 51779.

5. The City Clerk will draw a piece of paper from the bowl and announce the name of the member selected to participate in all actions related to the Fire Hazard Severity Zones.

6. The City Clerk will specifically record in the official minutes of City Council a description of the process employed and the name of the Council Member randomly selected to participate.

7. The Council Member randomly selected will then be entitled to participate in all actions of the City Council related to the Fire Hazard Severity Zones as required by Government Code Sections 36936 and 51779.

FINANCIAL IMPACTS
There are no financial impacts to the City from the recommended action.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit A - Ordinance No. 2025-XX

2. Exhibit B - Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map for the City of Temecula

3. Notice of Public Hearing

4. Notice of Exemption

5. Cal Fire's Frequently Asked Questions and Answers Fire Hazard Severity Zones

ORDINANCE NO. 2025-

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE FIRE

HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE MAP AND ADDING CHAPTER

15.14 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, FIRE

HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE MAP AND FINDING THE

ORDINANCE EXEMPT FROM CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare as follows:
(a) Government Code Section 51178 requires the State Fire Marshal to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas.

Moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones shall be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors including areas where winds have been identified by the Office of the State Fire Marshal as a major cause of wildfire spread. (b) On March 24, 2025, pursuant to Government Code Section 51178, the State Fire Marshal published a map indicating the Local Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones designating various areas in the City of Temecula as moderate, high and very high Fire Hazard Severity Zones ("FHSZ's").
(c) Within 30 days after receiving a transmittal from the State Fire Marshall that identifies fire hazard severity zones, the City made the maps and information available for public review and comment and placed the information and maps on its website in an understandable and accessible form.
(d) The City has fulfilled all requirements for the adoption of the FHSZ maps.

Section 2. Addition of Chapter 15.14, Fire Hazzard Severity Zone Maps. Chapter

15.14, Fire Hazzard Severity Zone Maps, is hereby added to the Temecula Municipal Code to read as follows:

CHAPTER 15.14 FIRE HAZZARD SEVERITY ZONE MAPS

15.14.010 Adoption of Fire Severity Zone Map. Pursuant to Government Code section 51179(a), the City Council hereby adopts the fire hazard severity zones for the City of Temecula as recommended by the State Fire Marshal on March 24, 2025 and the map entitled "City of Temecula Fire Hazard Severity Zones" depicting fire hazard severity

zones within the City. The City of Temecula Fire Hazard Severity Zones map shall be on file in the Office of the City Clerk and shall be available upon request. The official map is also located electronically on the following City website:
https://temeculaca.gov/1651/Fire-Hazard-Severity-Map or such other website as designated on the City's official website.

15.14.020 Designation may not be decreased.

Pursuant to Government Code section 51179(b)(3) no fire hazard severity zone identified by the State Fire Marshal for an area within the city may be decreased to a lesser fire hazard severity zone.

Section 3. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). City staff have evaluated the proposed Ordinance and determined that it is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3), 15303, and 15308 on the grounds that it can be seen with certainty that the Ordinance will not have a significant effect on the environment. To the extent this is a project under CEQA, it is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land), 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), 15307 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources), and 15308 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment).

Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the final decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, phrases or portions might be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 8. Certification. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published and posted in the manner required by law.

Section 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall on the date provided in Government Code Section 36937.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this day of ,
Brenden Kalfus, Mayor
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2025- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 27th day of May, 2025, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of , by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, City Clerk

CITY OF TEMECULA - RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Local Responsibility Area
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
UfVINCORP'KATED
RIVERSIDE O.

Temecula
As Identified by the
State Fire Marshal
March 24, 2025

UNINCORPORATED
RIVERSIDE CO.

The State of California and the Department of Forestry and Fire Gavin Newsom, Governor, State of California
Protection make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy of data or maps. Neither the State nor the Department shall Wade Crowfoot, Secretary for Natural Resources, CA Natural Resources Agency be liable under any circumstances for any direct, special, incidental, Joe Tyler, Director/Fire Chief, CA Department of Forestry and Fire Protection or consequential damages with respect to any claim by any user or third party on account of, or arising from, the use of data or maps.

Daniel Berlant, State Fire Marshal, CA Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Data Sources:

CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZSRA23_3, FHSZLRA_25_1) CAL FIRE State Responsibility Areas (SRA25_1)
City and County boundaries as of 10/22/24 (CA Board of Equalization)

Notice of Public Hearing

THE CITY OF TEMECULA
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the CITY COUNCIL to consider the matter(s) described below.

Case No.: Long Range Project No. LR25-0097 (Local Fire Hazard Map) Applicant: City of Temecula
Location: Citywide
Proposal: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula to adopt Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps for the City prepared by the State Fire Marshall Environmental Action: City staff have evaluated the proposed Ordinance and determined that it is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3), 15303, and 15308 on the grounds that it can be seen with certainty that the Ordinance will not have a significant effect on the environment. To the extent this is a project under CEQA, it is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land), 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), 15307 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources), and 15308 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment).

PLACE OF HEARING: 41000 Main St., Temecula, CA 92590
City of Temecula, Council Chambers
DATE OF HEARING: May 27, 2025
TIME OF HEARING: 6:00 PM
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before the hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the approval of the project at the time of hearing.

Any petition for judicial review of a decision of the City Council shall be filed within the time required by, and controlled by, Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. In any such action or proceeding seeking judicial review of, which attacks or seeks to set aside, or void any decision of the City Council, shall be limited to those issues raised at the hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing described in this notice.

The proposed draft ordinance may be viewed at the public information counter, Temecula Civic Center, Community Services Department, 41000 Main Street, Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Questions concerning the project(s) may be addressed to Mark Collins, City of Temecula Community Development Department, (951) 506-5172.

City of Temecula
Community Development
41000 Main Street • Temecula, CA 92590
Phone (951 ) 694-6400 • TemeculaCA.gov

VIA -ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL
CEQAProces sina(& asrclkrec. com
May 28, 2025
Supervising Legal Certification Clerk
County of Riverside
P.O. Box 751
Riverside, CA 92501-0751
SUBJECT: Filing of a Notice of Exemption for Long Range Project Number LR25-0097, an Ordinance designating fire hazard severity zones
Dear Sir/Madam:

Enclosed is the Notice of Exemption for the above referenced project. In addition, pursuant to Assembly Bill 3158 (Chapter 1706) the City will pay for the County Administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 California Code Regulations 1507. The payment of the $50.00 filing fee is under protest. It is the opinion of the City that the administrative fee has been increased in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of State Law. Under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 California Code Regulations 1507, the County is entitled to receive a $25.00 filing fee.

Also, please email a stamped copy of the Notice of Exemption within five working days after the 30-day posting to the email listed below.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mark Collins at email:

Mark. Co1hns(c-r�,TemeculaCA. gov.

Sincerely,
Matt Peters
Director of Community Development
Enclosures: Notice of Exemption Form
Electronic Payment - Filing Fee Receipt

City of Temecula
Community Development
Planning Division
Notice of Exemption
TO: County Clerk and Recorders Office FROM: Planning Division County of Riverside City of Temecula
P.O. Box 751 41000 Main Street
Riverside, CA 92501-0751 Temecula, CA 92590
Project Title: Long Range Project No. LR25-0097 - Ordinance designating Ere hazard severity zones Description of Project: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula adopting the Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map and adding Chapter 15.14 (Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map) to the Temecula Municipal Code
Project Location: Citywide
Applicant/Proponent: City of Temecula
The City Council approved the above -described project on May 27', 2025, and found that the project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended.

Exempt Status: (check one)
❑Ministerial (Section 21080(b)(1); Section 15268);
❑Declared Emergency (Section 21080(b)(3); Section
15269(a));
❑Emergency Project (Section 21080(b)(4); Section
15269(b)(c));
❑ Statutory Exemptions (Section Number: )
❑ Categorical Exemption:
®Other: Section 15061 (b)(3), 15303, 15304, 15305,
15307 and 15308.

Statement of Reasons Supporting the Finding that the Project is Exempt:

The proposed Ordinance and determined that it is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3), 15303, and 15308 on the grounds that it can be seen with certainty that the Ordinance will not have a significant effect on the environment. To the extent this is a project under CEQA, it is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land), 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), 15307 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources), and 15308 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment). The proposed ordinance designates local fire hazard severity zones as mandated by state law and does not propose or authorize any construction nor physical changes to the environment.

Contact Person/Title: Mark Collins, Associate Planner Telephone Number (951) 506-5172 Signature:

Matt Peters, Director of Community Development
Date received for filing at the County Clerk and Recorders Office:

Date:

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT:
2024 Fire Hazard Severity Zones _
Fire Hazard Severity Zones Explained
• What is a "Fire Hazard Severity Zone," or FHSZ?
o Answer: Public Resource Code 4202; The State Fire Marshal shall classify lands within state responsibility areas into fire hazard severity zones. Each zone shall embrace relatively homogeneous lands and shall be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors present, including areas where winds have been identified by the department as a major cause of wildfire spread. Government Code 51178; The State Fire Marshal shall identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. Moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones shall be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors including areas where winds have been identified by the Office of the State Fire Marshal as a major cause of wildfire spread.
• Why are fire hazard severity maps being updated?
o Answer: The hazard maps are being updated to more accurately reflect the zones in California that are susceptible to wildfire. The hazard mapping process will incorporate new science in local climate data and improved fire assessment modeling in determining hazard ratings.
• What do Fire Hazard Severity Zones measure?
o Answer: The Fire Hazard Severity Zone map evaluates "hazard," not "risk". The map is like flood zone maps, where lands are described in terms of the probability level of a particular area being inundated by floodwaters, and not specifically prescriptive of impacts. "Hazard" is based on the physical conditions that create a likelihood and expected fire behavior over a 30 to 50-year period without considering mitigation measures such as home hardening, recent wildfire, or fuel reduction efforts. "Risk" is the potential damage a fire can do to the area under existing conditions, accounting for any modifications such as fuel reduction projects, defensible space, and ignition resistant building construction.
• Where do Fire Hazard Severity Zones apply?
o Answer: Fire Hazard Severity Zones are found in areas where the state has financial responsibility for wildfire protection and prevention, called the State Responsibility Area.

More than 31 million acres are in this area. Under Senate Bill 63 (Stern, 2021) Government Code 51178 was amended to add the Moderate and High Fire Hazard Severity Zones with the Very High in local jurisdictions.
• What are the uses of Fire Hazard Severity Zones?
o Answer: The zones are used for several purposes including to designate areas where California's defensible space standards and wildland urban interface building codes are CAL FIRE —December 18, 2024
2024 FAQ Page 1

required. They can be a factor in real estate disclosure, and local governments may consider them in their general plan.
• Is there an easy way to determine the Fire Hazard Severity Zone of my property? o Answer: You can search by address to find your current designation on the web at:
osfm.fire.ca.ov/FHSZ
• What are the key elements of the Fire Hazard Severity Zone model? o Answer: The fire hazard severity model for wildland fire has two key elements: probability of an area burning and expected fire behavior under extreme fuel and weather conditions.

The zones reflect areas that have similar burn probabilities and fire behavior characteristics. The factors considered in determining fire hazard within wildland areas are fire history, flame length, terrain, local weather, and potential fuel over a 50-year period.

Outside of wildlands, the model considers factors that might lead to buildings being threatened, including terrain, weather, urban vegetation cover, blowing embers, proximity to wildland, fire history, and fire hazard in nearby wildlands. FHSZs are not a structure loss model, as key information regarding structure ignition (such as roof type, etc.) is not included.
• How do the Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps differ from California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) High Fire Threat District Maps?
o Answer: The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) sponsored map, known as "CPUC High Fire Threat District Map" (HFTD), includes similar factors as those in the FHSZ maps, however the CPUC HFTD Map is designed specifically for identifying areas where there is an increased risk for utility associated wildfires. As such, the CPUC map includes fire hazards associated with historical powerline-caused wildfires, current fuel conditions, and scores areas based on where fires start, as opposed to where potential fires may cause impacts.
• Why is my property in a different zone than the adjacent area, which looks similar? o Answer: In non-wildland areas, zone edges occur based on distance to the wildland edge.

Because hazard in these areas is largely determined by incoming embers from adjacent wildland, urban areas that are similar in vegetation type and housing density may have a change in FHSZ class as the distance to the wildland edge increases. Areas immediately adjacent to wildland receive the same FHSZ score as that wildland where fire originates, and the model then produces lower scores as the distance to wildland edge increases.

In wildland areas, zone edges are a result of the way zones are delineated. Specifically, zones represent areas of similar slope and fuel potential. Zone boundaries divide zones based on geographic and vegetation features that align with fire hazard potential; although, at a local scale, it may appear that the immediate area is similar on both sides of the edge. The class value within a zone is based on the average hazard score across the whole zone, so areas that are in the same zone but not immediately adjacent to a local area can have an influence on the final zone classification.

Data Related Questions
• How are Fire Hazard Severity Zones determined?
o Answer: CAL FIRE used the best available science and data to develop, and field test a model that served as the basis of zone assignments. The model evaluated the probability of CAL FIRE —December 18, 2024
2024 FAQ Page 2

the area burning and potential fire behavior in the area. Many factors were included such as fire history, vegetation, flame length, blowing embers, proximity to wildland, terrain, and weather.
• What new data will be included in the new model, and how does this differ from the previous model?
o Answer: A 2 km grid of climate data covering the years 2003-2018 is being used in the update. The previous model used stock weather inputs across the state to calculate wildland fire intensity scores. The updated model will adjust fire intensity scores based on the most extreme fire weather at a given location, considering temperature, humidity, and wind speed. In addition, ember transport is being modeled based on local distributions of observed wind speed and direction values instead of using a generic buffer distance for urban areas adjacent to wildlands.

What is the difference between the various Fire Hazard Severity Zones? o Answer: Classification of a wildland zone as Moderate, High or Very High fire hazard is based on the average hazard across the area included in the zone, which have a minimum size of 200 acres. In wildlands, hazard is a function of modeled flame length under the worst conditions and annual burn probability. Both these factors generally increase with increasing hazard level, but there may be instances where one value is Very High and the other is low, pushing the overall hazard into a more intermediate ranking. On average, both modeled flame length and burn probability increase by roughly 40-60% between hazard classes. Classification outside of wildland areas is based on the fire hazard of the adjacent wildland and the probability of flames and embers threatening buildings. • Why does the model place an emphasis on the spread of embers? o Answer: Embers spread wildfire because they can travel long distances in the wind and ignite vegetation, roofs, attics (by getting into vents), and decks.

State Regulated Area Questions
When were the maps last updated?
o Answer: The Office of the State Fire Marshal began the regulatory process for the State Responsibility Area (SRA) in December 2022, the final maps were adopted on January 31, 2024, and became effective April 1, 2024.

What is "State Responsibility Area," or SRA?
o Answer: SRA is a legal term defining the area where the state has financial responsibility for wildland fire protection and prevention. Incorporated cities and federal ownership are not included. Within the SRA, CAL FIRE is responsible for fire prevention and suppression.

There are more than 31 million acres in SRA, with an estimated 1.7 million people and 800,000 existing homes.

How is state responsibility area determined?
o Answer: The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection (Board) classifies land as State Responsibility Area. The legal definition of SRA is found in the Public Resources Code Section 4125. The Board has developed detailed procedures to classify lands as State Responsibility Area. Lands are removed from SRA when they become incorporated by a city, change in ownership to the federal government, become more densely populated, or are converted to intensive agriculture that minimizes the risk of wildfire. While some lands are removed from SRA automatically, the Board typically reviews changes every five years.

CAL FIRE —December 18, 2024
2024 FAQ Page 3

• What Fire Hazard Severity Zones are in State Responsibility Area? o Answer: All of the State Responsibility Area is in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Lands are either ranked as Moderate, High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones.

What are the wildland urban interface (WUI) building codes in State Responsibility Area? o Answer: The WUI building codes (California Building Code (CBC) Chapter 7A) reduce the risk of embers fanned by wind-blown wildfires from igniting buildings. The codes for roofing, siding, decking, windows, and vents apply throughout all state responsibility area regardless of the fire hazard severity ranking. Ember -resistant building materials can be found at: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/fire-engineering-and investigations/buildingmaterials-listing/
Is the GIS data for Fire Hazard Severity Zones available for download? o Answer: The data inputs used to develop the Fire Hazard Severity Zones are identified in the Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR) Title 19 Development (ca.gov). CAL FIRE has developed an additional data package which consists of sequential modeling steps, including any data inputs that were not already publicly available and referenced in the ISOR. The data package encompasses 34 spatial datasets and 8 tables, provided in raster, polygon, and table format. These datasets are formatted for Esri ArcGIS software, except for four tables provided in Excel. Ten of the datasets are updated versions used to produce an edited SRA FHSZ map following the public comment period that ended April 4, 2023.

Upon formal adoption of the FHSZ map, the final SRA FHSZ geospatial data file will become available. The data package is available on the FHSZ website Fire Hazard Severity Zones ca. ov under the science and methods banner.

Why do waterbodies have a Fire Hazard Severity Zone Classification? o Answer: All areas in State Responsibility Area, including water bodies, require a fire hazard severity zone designation. The 2007 FHSZ maps zoned all water as moderate by default. In the 2023 FHSZ model we added a buffer of FHSZ from the surrounding wildland into water bodies to account for potential threat of embers to buildings on docks and house boats, as well as variation in reservoir height that occurs with drought.

Local Regulated Area Questions
• What is "Local Responsibility Area", or LRA?
o Answer: Local Responsibility Areas (LRA) are incorporated cities, urban regions, agriculture lands, and portions of the desert where the local government is responsible for wildfire protection. This is typically provided by city fire departments, fire protection districts, counties, and by CAL FIRE under contract.

When did Fire Hazard Severity Zones start in Local Responsibility Area? o Answer: The "Bates Bill" (AB 337), Government Code Section 51175, was prompted by the devastating Oakland Hills Fire of 1991. This mid-1990s legislation calls for CAL FIRE to evaluate fire hazard severity in local responsibility area and to make a recommendation to the local jurisdiction where very high FHSZs exist. The Government Code then provides direction for the local jurisdiction to take appropriate action.

How are Fire Hazard Severity Zones determined in local responsibility areas? o Answer: CAL FIRE uses an extension of the state responsibility area Fire Hazard Severity CAL FIRE —December 18, 2024
2024 FAQ Page 4

Zone model as the basis for evaluating fire hazard in Local Responsibility Area. The Local Responsibility Area hazard rating reflects flame and ember intrusion from adjacent wildlands and from flammable vegetation in the urban area.

What are the requirements for landowners in FHSZs in local responsibility areas? o Answer: California's WUI building codes (CBC Chapter 7A) apply to the design and construction of new buildings located in High and Very High FHSZs in Local Responsibility Areas. Local ordinances may require ignition resistant construction for remodel projects.

Check with your local building department to determine which ignition resistant building codes apply to your project. In addition, Government Code Section 51182 calls for defensible space clearance and other wildland fire safety practices for buildings. Owners are also required to make a natural hazard disclosure as part of a real estate transfer. For information regarding "home hardening" and defensible space clearance, visit www. ReadyForWi ldfi re. org.

Does the designation of Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the Local Responsibility Area trigger the 100-foot clearance requirement?
o Answer: Yes, per Government Code 51182 unless a local government has passed a more stringent requirement, the 100-foot defensible space clearance applies. For information regarding "home hardening" and defensible space clearance, visit www. ReadyForWi ldfi re. org.
• How does CAL FIRE assist Local Governments in Fire Hazard Severity Zones? o Answer: CAL FIRE's Land Use Planning Program is a specialized unit that provides support to local governments by providing fire safety expertise on the State's wildland urban interface building codes, wildfire safety codes, as well as helping in the development of the safety elements in general plans.

What is the process for developing Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the Local Responsibility Area? o Answer: CAL FIRE uses the same modeling data that is used to map the State Responsibility Area. The map, along with a model ordinance, are then sent to the governing body for adoption.

How are the new Fire Hazard Severity Zones impacting development? o Answer: Many of the changes expanding fire hazard severity zones in local responsibility areas (LRA) have been supported by the building industry. CAL FIRE works closely with the building industry when setting various building codes and defensible space requirements, so we are working together to not affect development itself but to make sure development matches the hazards of that area.

When will the Local Responsibility Area Map be released? o Answer: The Local Responsibility Area Map Process will happen after the State Responsibility Area process has been completed, which is estimated to occur in the winter of 2025.

Why haven't Moderate and High Fire Hazard Severity Zone classes been classified before in the Local Responsibility Area?
o Answer: New legislation, Senate Bill 63 (Stern, 2021), now requires the adoption of all three Fire Hazard Severity Zone classes in the Local Responsibility Area. Previously only Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones were required for adoption in Local Responsibility Areas.

CAL FIRE —December 18, 2024
2024 FAQ Page 5

Insurance Related Questions
Will the new Fire Hazard Severity Zones affect my ability to get or maintain insurance? o Answer: Insurance companies use risk models, which differ from hazard models, because they consider the susceptibility of a structure to damage from fire and other short-term factors that are not included in hazard modeling. It is unlikely that insurance risk models specifically call out CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zones as a factor, but much of the same data that is used in the fire hazard severity zone model are likely included in the insurance companies' risk models. However, insurance risk models incorporate many additional factors and factors that change more frequently than those that CAL FIRE includes in its hazard mapping, which is built to remain steady for the next 10+ years.

Resources, Additional Information, and Contact Information • To find the current FHSZ designation for a property, visit FHSZ Map Viewer (ca.gov). • Helpful links:
o FHSZ Website:
0 osfm.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ
o FHSZ Map Viewer:
0 FHSZ Map Viewer (ca.gov)
Contacts for FHSZ for Public Questions:
o (916)633-7655
o [email protected]
CAL FIRE —December 18, 2024
2024 FAQ Page 6

Item No. 14

CITY OF TEMECULA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Matt Peters, Director of Community Development
DATE: May 27, 2025
SUBJECT: Award Consultant Contract to De Novo Planning Group for Comprehensive General Plan Update
PREPARED BY: Laurel Reimer, AICP, Planning Consultant
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Approve an agreement for consultant services with De Novo Planning Group in the amount of $1,756,847, for the preparation of a Comprehensive General Plan Update, Climate Action Plan, and Program Environmental Impact Report; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to approve extra work authorizations not to exceed the contingency amount of $175,684.70, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount.

BACKGROUND: California State Law requires every jurisdiction to adopt a comprehensive General Plan as the fundamental policy document for future development. A general plan includes community -wide priorities, goals, and specific implementation measures to guide the City's physical, economic, social, and environmental changes. The City's General Plan was last comprehensively updated in 2005.

The City planned a four -phase process to set the stage for a comprehensive General Plan Update, including adopting the 2021-2029 Housing Element, updating the Quality of Life Master Plan, and preparing a land use economic opportunity study. The comprehensive General Plan Update is the fourth phase of the process (see Attachment 2).

On, March 14, 2025, the City of Temecula released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for consultant services to prepare a comprehensive update to the City's General Plan, including a Climate Action Plan (in compliance with AB32) and Program Environmental Impact Report. The RFP was placed on the City's online bidding system (PlanetBids), proposals were received on April 14, 2025, and interviews were conducted on April 30 and May 1, 2025.

Based on their submitted proposal and subsequent interview, staff determined that De Novo Planning Group was the most qualified consultant. De Novo Planning Group has successfully

performed similar projects for jurisdictions throughout California and has the necessary experience and expertise to provide the City with a high -quality and user-friendly general plan. Additionally, the firm previously completed the City's 2021-2029 Housing Element and demonstrated a deep understanding of the challenges and opportunities facing the City in the decades to come.

The term of the agreement would run through June 30, 2027, with the option for a one-year extension.

FISCAL IMPACT: The Comprehensive General Plan Update project is included in the Fiscal Years 2025-2029 Capital Improvement Program (Attachment 3). Funds are available and budgeted for in Account No. 210.265.999.5800 PW21-02 / 777. Additional funding will be allocated in future years, as needed.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Agreement

2. General Plan Update Process & Timeline

3. CIP Budget Sheet

AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES BETWEEN

CITY OF TEMECULA AND DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP
Comprehensive General Plan Update
THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of May 27, 2025, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and De Novo Planning Group a California S-Corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

1. TERM
This Agreement shall commence on May 27, 2025, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2027, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.

The City may, upon mutual agreement, extend the contract for one (1) additional one (1) year term. In no event shall the contract be extended beyond June 30, 2028.

2. SERVICES
Consultant shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A.

3. PERFORMANCE
Consultant shall faithfully and competently exercise the ordinary skill and competence of members of their profession. Consultant shall employ all generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement.

4. PAYMENT
a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B, other than the payment rates and schedule of payment, are null and void. This amount shall not exceed one million seven hundred fifty-six thousand eight hundred forty-seven dollars and zero cents ($1,756,847.00), plus 10% Contingency of one hundred seventy-five thousand eight hundred forty-seven dollars and seventy cents ($175,684.70), for the total term of this agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager .

Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by the City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services.
01 /01 /2025

The City Manager may approve additional work up to ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement as approved by City Council. Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the City Council.

C. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed.

Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non -disputed fees. If the City disputes any of Consultant's fees, it shall give written notice to Consultant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. For all reimbursements authorized by this Agreement, Consultant shall provide receipts on all reimbursable expenses in excess of Fifty Dollars ($50) in such form as approved by the Director of Finance.

5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement.
b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City, pursuant to Section entitled "PAYMENT" herein.

6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT
a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement.

7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be 01 /01 /2025

maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts there from as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files.

8. INDEMNIFICATION
The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City of Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the City of Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non- performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City of Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency.

9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons and/or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of work by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors.
a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1) Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an "occurrence" basis, including products and completed operation, property damage, bodily injury, and personal & advertising with limits no less than One Million ($1,000,000) per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 05 09 or 25 04 05 09) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2) Automobile Liability: ISO Form Number CA 00 01 covering any auto (Code 1), or if Consultant has no owned autos, covering hired, (Code8) and non -owned autos (Code 9), with limits no less than One Million ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury, including death, of one or more persons, property damage and personal injury. 01 /01 /2025

3) Workers' Compensation: as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer's Liability Insurance with limit of no less than One million ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. In accordance with the provisions of Labor Code Section 3700, every Consultant will be required to secure the payment of compensation to it's employees. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, Vendor must submit to City the following certification before beginning any work on the Improvements:

I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract.

By executing this Agreement, Consultant is submitting the certification required above.

The policy must contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
4) Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions): One million ($1,000,000) per occurrence and in aggregate. Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. b. Deductibles and Self -Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions must be declared and approved by the Risk Manager. c. Other Insurance Provisions. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1) The City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant's products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant Insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 if a later edition is used). The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees, or volunteers. 2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant insurance coverage shall be primary and non-contributory and at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. This also applies to any Excess or Umbrella liability policies. 3) The Consultant may use Umbrella or Excess Policies to provide the limits as required in this agreement. The Umbrella or Excess policies shall be provided on a true "following form" or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying Commercial General Liability Insurance.
4) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect the indemnification provided to the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, and/or the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees, or volunteers. 01 /01 /2025

5) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
6) If the Consultant's maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or higher limits maintained by the consultant.
7) If insurance coverage is canceled or, reduced in coverage or in limits the Consultant shall within two (2) business days of notice from insurer phone, fax, and/or notify the City via certified mail, return receipt requested of the changes to or cancellation of the policy.
8) Unless otherwise approved by City, if any part of the Services and Tasks is subcontracted, the Minimum Insurance Requirements must be provided by, or on behalf of, all subcontractors even if city has approved lesser insurance requirements for Consultant, and all subcontractors must agree in writing to be bound by the provisions of this section. d. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance required above, except for workers' compensation insurance, must be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of A-:VII or better, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self-insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements.
e. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements, or copies of the applicable policy language affecting coverage required by this clause. All certificates and endorsements and copies of the Declarations & Endorsements pages are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.

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

10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City.

Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner.
b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 01 /01 /2025

11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section.

12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION
a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed there under or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response.

13. NOTICES
Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above.

Mailing Address: City of Temecula
Attn: City Manager
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
To Consultant: De Novo Planning Group
Attn: Amanda Tropiano
180 E. Main Street, Suite 108
Tustin, CA 92780
01 /01 /2025

14. ASSIGNMENT
The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant.

15. LICENSES
At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement.

16. GOVERNING LAW
The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted.

17. PROHIBITED INTEREST
No officer, or employee of the City of Temecula that has participated in the development of this agreement or its approval shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Consultant, or Consultant's sub -contractors for this project, during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Consultant hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula that has participated in the development of this agreement or its approval has any interest, whether contractual, non - contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, the proceeds thereof, or in the business of the Consultant or Consultant's sub -contractors on this project. Consultant further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement.

18. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material.

19. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT
The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. The City Manager is authorized to enter into an amendment on behalf of the City to make the following 01 /01 /2025

non -substantive modifications to the agreement: (a) name changes; (b) extension of time; (c) non - monetary changes in scope of work; (d) agreement termination. 01 /01 /2025

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.

CITY OF TEMECULA
By:

Brenden Kalfus, Mayor
ATTEST:

By:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney

DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP
By:

Ben Ritchie, President
By:

Steven McMurty, Chief Financial Officer

CONSULTANT
De Novo Planning Group
Amanda Tro iano
180 E. Main Street, Suite 108
Tustin, CA 92780
714-453-7711
[email protected] _
s
01 /01 /2025

EXHIBIT A
Tasks to be Performed
All tasks to be performed are per the proposal provided by the Consultant attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. 10 01/01/2025

I
1 CITY OF TEMECULA
Professional Services To Prepare a
Comprehensive General Plan Update
.�f
� •TEMECULA•
r
a.

PREPARED FOR:

City of Temecula
41000 Main St
Temecula, CA 92590
Submitted April 14, 2025
De Novo Planning Group
A Land Use Planning, Design, and Environmental Firm
PREPARED BY:

De Novo Planning Group
180 E Main Street, Suite 108
Tustin, CA 92780
In Association With:

Economic and Planning Systems Fehr
& Peers I Fuscoe I JZMK Partners
Kearns & West I Michael Baker I South
Environmental

De Novo Planning Group
A Land Use Planning, Design, and Environmental Firm
April 14, 2025
Laurel Reimer
City of Temecula Project Manager
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
Subject: Proposal to Prepare a Comprehensive General Plan Update A City seeped in rich history and tradition, the process to update Temecula's General Plan serves as an op- portunity to celebrate the community's past, embrace its present, and plan for its future. As one of the fast- est growing communities in the state, Temecula has experienced first-hand how changes in transportation, technology, market factors, and environmental conditions require cities to think carefully about how best to address long-term opportunities and challenges, all while maintaining an outstanding quality of life. Building off of recent City plans, programs, engagement, and research this General Plan Update will set the stage for continued prosperity over the next 20 years.

OUR TEAM
De Novo Planning Group would serve as the prime consultant for this contract with the City. Our team is led by De Novo Principal Amanda Tropiano (who will serve as Project Manager and Principal -in -Charge and who managed the City's recent successful Housing Element Update), Starla Barker, AICP (who will serve as the CEQA lead and who currently manages multiple CEQA projects for the City through our on - call contract), and Erik Anderson, who will serve as Assistant Project Manager. We are excited to carry our local experience forward to the General Plan. We will remain personally involved in every aspect of the project from start to finish.

General Plan updates and preparation of associated documents, including climate action plans and environ- mental documents, are De Novo's bread and butter. Our practice was built on our team's ability to successfully complete this type of work. We are deliberate about the projects we pursue to ensure that our team is able to deliver the highest quality of work to all of our clients; this process includes an analysis of our internal capac- ity and our ability to exceed expectations on all aspects of the project. Our southern California team recently completed two General Plan assignments in early 2025 (La Verne and Indian Wells) and we are on -track to complete another before the end of 2025 (Laguna Niguel). This leaves us with only two active focused GPUs in southern California (Brea and Glendale, both in the EIR stages) and we have true capacity and enthusiasm to take on a new assignment. We would be honored have Temecula as that opportunity.

This is a big project and it deserves a big team. De Novo is joined by the following subject area experts:

Economic & Planning Systems (economic/fiscal), Fehr & Peers (circulation/mobility), Fuscoe (infrastructure), Kearns & West (outreach), JZMK Partners (urban design), Michael Baker (climate planning), and South En- vironmental (cultural resources). This project team has worked together on numerous recent General Plan Updates and EIRs; we truly enjoy working together and we bring that shared respect and collaboration to all of our clients. All of our team members are ready to start work immediately upon the City's notice to proceed and are committed to delivering the products on time and on budget.

DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP
180 E MAIN STREET, SUITE 108 1 TUSTIN CA 92780 2
[email protected] 1 (714) 453-7711

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

WHY DE NOVO
De Novo is a relatively small planning firm in terms of staff size. We know this, and we embrace it. We consider our size to be a tremendous asset to our clients since it allows us to provide superior levels of customer service at very competitive billing rates. Larger firms tend to carry cumbersome overhead costs, which results in the need for higher hourly billing rates, frequent contract modifications, and higher staff turnover. As an owner of the company, your Project Manager Amanda Tropiano is able to make quick decisions to keep the project moving forward. Having worked with us on prior projects, we hope we've demonstrated to you our outstanding commitment to the City of Temecula.

We take tremendous pride in our ability to not only craft exceptional general plans, but to also prepare a use- ful and legally defensible EIR, which will serve the City well for years to come. We propose to craft the General Plan to be a self -mitigating document, wherein the policies and actions contained in the General Plan will also serve as implementing mitigation measures to be applied at the project level during the processing of subsequent applications and City programs. This proven approach has been very successful in reducing the burdens placed on staff and the development community following general plan adoption.

All of De Novo's principal -level planners prefer to roll up our sleeves and work on our projects ourselves.

As managers of the company, we take great pride in our work products, and we strive to build a strong connection with each of our clients. The greatest compliment that our clients pay us is to invite us back to provide additional services.

OUR STATEMENT OF COMMITMENT
We have structured this scope of work to best meet the City's needs, as we understand them. However, I would like to emphasize that we are more than happy to work collaboratively with the City to refine this scope of work and approach to best meet the City's needs and expectations for this very important project.

We are confident that De Novo's expertise in preparing General Plan Updates across California coupled with our subconsultant team's proven collaborative approach presents the City with a unique opportunity to hire a team of consultants with the best possible combination of skills needed for this project.

We look forward to the opportunity to further discuss our proposal and our approach to the preparation of your General Plan. The offer contained in this proposal is valid for a minimum of 120 days. If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please do not hesitate to contact me at (714) 453-7711 or at atropiano@ denovoplanning.com.

Sincerely,
1 Amanda Tropiano
Principal, General Plan Project Manager
De Novo Planning Group 3

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
Table of Contents
Qualifications and Experience...................5
Technical Approach and Timeline ............. 39
Price......................................... 62
Appendix A: Resumes ........................ 66
De Novo Planning Group 4

QUALIFI
AND EX

DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP
De Novo Planning Group is a land use and environmental planning firm specializing in community planning, environmental studies, design, and de- velopment services. Founded in 2008 in the greater Sacramento area, De Novo opened an office in Orange County in 2017—led by Principal Aman- da Tropiano—to serve southern California clients. The firm's principal -level staff have successfully completed over 400 projects consisting of compre- hensive general plans, visioning plans, specific plans, housing elements, en- vironmental impact reports, negative declarations, initial studies, NEPA anal- yses, climate action plans, biological assessments, wetland delineations, and development projects throughout California. As part of essentially all of our long-range planning projects, De Novo designs and implements communi- ty engagement programs.

OUR MISSION
Our mission is to provide municipal and private sector clients with world -class professional services, through principal -level attention to every project. We pride ourselves on our ability to work with clients to balance their economic, social, environmental, legal, and political goals. Our services result in an inte- grated planning and environmental solution for every project that is technical- ly sound, cost effective and delivered within the client's schedule.

OUR PHILOSOPHY
Our philosophy is to proactively plan and design projects in such a way that public and environmental concerns are addressed and accommodated early in the process. We strongly believe in the use of local knowledge for devel- oping sensible and cost-effective solutions to local concerns. Our solutions integrate local knowledge with the best available resources to achieve recog- nized national and international standards for planning and environmental management, to achieve a balance in local economic, social, and environ- mental goals. De Novo Planning Group is dedicated to fostering a partner- ship with each agency we serve, through listening to the community and stakeholders and reflecting the ideas and concerns we hear in the approach developed for each project.

OUR TEAM
The work program will be led out of our southern California office located in the City of Tustin. De Novo is a California S-Corporation and has 25 full-time staff, including five Principals, three Principal Planners, five Senior Planners, and a team of technical associates. We provide personal service to all of our clients and are committed to exceeding your expectations on all components of the work plan.

DIR#: PW-LR-1000363920
Years in Business: 17
Date of Incorporation: 2008
Type: S-Corp
Website: https://www.denovoplanningcom/

DE NOVO SERVICE AREAS
Community Planning
• General Plans
• Visioning Plans
• Housing Elements
• Specific Plans
• Zoning Codes
• Public Facilitation
• Grant Writing
• Project Management
• Application Processing
• Project Review/Peer Review
Environmental Studies
• CEQA Compliance
• NEPA Compliance
• Noise Studies
• Biological Studies
• Agricultural Studies
• Air Quality Studies
• Climate Action Plans
• Sustainability Planning
• Mitigation Monitoring
• Permitting
Design
• Land Use Plans
• Subdivision Layouts
• Site Planning
• Design Guidelines
Development
• Feasibility Studies
• Due Diligence Packages
• Competition Analyses
• Cost Estimate
De Novo Planning Group 6

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

SUB -CONSULTANTS
(00
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) is a land eco-
nomics consulting firm experienced in the full spectrum of services related to real estate development, the financ- ing of public infrastructure and government services,
land use planning, and government organization. EPS
was founded on the principle that real estate develop-
ment and land use -related public policy should be built on realistic assessment of market forces and economic
trends, feasible implementation measures, and recogni-
tion of public policy objectives, including provisions for required public facilities and services.

Since 1983 EPS has provided consulting services to hun- dreds of public- and private -sector clients in California and throughout the United States. Clients include cities, counties, special districts, multi -jurisdictional authorities, property owners, developers, financial institutions, and land use attorneys. The firm excels in preparing concise analyses that disclose risks and impacts, support deci- sion making, and provide solutions to real estate devel- opment and land use -related problems.

EPS, in association with allied planning, civil engineering, transportation, and environmental firms, has been in-
volved with the development of numerous General Plans.

The firm's integrated approach to land use, transporta- tion, market, fiscal, and financial issues results in plans that effectively and efficiently guide future development.

EPS evaluates market support for various land uses to de- termine key product characteristics, the prices/rents that can be obtained, and market absorption rates. This infor- mation is used for programming the mix of land uses in
the plan and for providing the inputs required for financial feasibility analyses and development of a financing plan for the public facilities needed to serve the plan. EPS's fiscal impact models estimate the costs of government
services required by new development and the offsetting revenues that the development will generate.

DIP#: 1000046979
Principal/Manager: Julie Cooper, Principal
Years in Business: 42
Date of Incorporation: 1983
Type: Corporation
Website: https://www.epsys.com/
FEHR� PEERS
Fehr & Peers is passionate about transforming transpor- tation consulting through innovation and creativity. The firm derives inspiration by partnering with communities to understand and shape local transportation futures
objectively tailored to diverse needs. Clients trust Fehr & Peers to help them overcome barriers and uncertainty
by combining advanced expertise with curiosity, humil-
ity, and initiative to deliver implementable, data -driven solutions that reinforce community values. From the
most straightforward to the most complex, team mem-
bers actively listen to client and community needs and
handle every project with diligence and focus.

Fehr & Peers is a specialized consulting firm focused on developing transportation planning and engineering
solutions. Their transportation planners are known for
their expertise in helping clients understand the land
use, transportation, economic, and environmental out-
comes of their decisions. This skill set is particularly im- portant in the development of a general plan that will
serve as the constitution for a local agency. In addition, the specific Fehr & Peers staffing for this project includes seasoned professionals with local experience: Jason
Pack, who has led hundreds of planning projects in the
local area over his 20+ year career, and Katy Cole and An- drew Scher who have extensive experience serving the
City of Temecula and preparing planning projects in the surrounding area.

Fehr & Peers has worked with the City of Temecula for
over a decade on several projects such as: Old Town Park- ing Management, Cherry Street Extension EIR, French
Valley 1-15 Transportation Analysis, VMT guidelines devel- opment, Complete Streets Ordinance, and grant writing
for Safe Streets and Roads for All.

DIP#: 1000011330
Principal/Manager: Jason Pack, Principal -in -Charge
Years in Business: 40
Date of Incorporation: 1985
Type: Corporation
Website: https://www.fehrandpeers.com/
De Novo Planning Group 7

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
F U S C 0 E
i ■ 6 11 E N N 1 N 6
Fuscoe Engineering Inc. provides civil engineering for
land development and public infrastructure using an
eco-adaptive® approach. Specialty practices include
survey & mapping services; water quality assurance; sus- tainable engineering; and geospatial technology. Fuscoe has delivered a broad range of services for numerous cit- ies and agencies for General Plan & Specific Plan EIRs.

Project assignments have included these services:
• Identifying opportunities and feasibility of
proposed land uses and revitalization projects in
urban, suburban and rural settings
» Evaluating zoning and land use changes
» Identifying measures to reduce potential impacts
of proposed developments for construction and
post -construction conditions
• Providing infrastructure analysis, identifying
infrastructure system deficiencies and offering
recommendations
• Preparing hydrology, flood control, sewer
and water quality technical studies related to
proposed land use changes
• Prepare Water Supply Assessments and
coordinate findings with local and regional
wholesale water providers.
» Evaluate implications of mandatory RHNA
housing units on local and regional water supply
providers and assess impacts on local and
regional wastewater treatment providers
• Drainage, sewer and water master planning
» Crafting innovative designs for preserving and
stabilizing water courses while enabling mixed-
use,TOD and infrastructure uses
» Developing storm water runoff management,
grading and infrastructure plans
» Devising low impact development (LID) strategies
for land and water quality protection
» > Providing impact assessments for CEQA
compliance
DIP#: 1000015538
Principal/Manager: Ian Adam, Vice President
Years in Business: 33
Date of Incorporation: 1992
Type: Limited Liability Company
Website: https://www.fuscoe.com

J Z M K
P A R T N E R$
JZMK Partners is a dynamic and award -winning interna-
tional architectural and urban planning firm that has built a reputation based on the premise that design solutions should be creative, inspirational, and provide long term value. The firm has distinguished itself as an innovative problem solver in the design of single and multi -family housing, including affordable and senior communities,
as well as in luxury and resort projects.

The JZMK Team is passionate about design excellence
and innovation. This enthusiasm for our work creates
positive creative energy within the office and filters
through to create a collaborative spirit among our team members. Our group of highly skilled and multi -disci-
plinary specialists embrace this collaborative spirit and work together to balance environmental ethos with de-
velopment objectives when developing solutions for cli- ents. With their fingers on the pulse of emerging indus- try trends, our highly skilled professionals are sought -out speakers across the country.

EXPERTISE
• Architects
• Urban Designers
» Landscape Architects
» Construction Experts
• Graphic Artists
• Entitlement Experts

MISSION
With a fusion of inspired people and dynamic processes, JZMK Partners addresses client and community needs
with planning and design solutions that are contextual, innovative and sustainable for the long term.

DIP#:In Process
Principal/Manager: Andrew Watkins, Partner
Years in Business: 65
Date of Incorporation: 1960
Type: Corporation
Website: https://jzmkpartners.com
De Novo Planning Group 8

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
Kearns & West, in business since 1984, specializes in
community engagement, stakeholder facilitation, and
communications services. We partner with municipal
leaders and stakeholders to formulate strategies for both citywide community engagement and specific projects.

Cities rely on us to help them establish more effective communication channels, create proactive processes for
identifying and resolving issues and concerns, and en-
sure public involvement has a place in shaping the fu-
ture. In fact, we focus exclusively on this type of work, al- most entirely for government agencies from the federal
to local level. Our team's diverse lived and learned expe- riences inform a variety of in -person, hybrid, and virtual opportunities for public involvement.

Kearns & West's approach to community engagement
begins with an assessment of local community charac-
teristics, communication opportunities and challenges,
and potential for community growth and change. The
development of the Community Engagement and Out-
reach Strategy creates a roadmap for working with the
community throughout the duration of the process. Ke-
arns & West staff have the technical depth to understand and bring non -technical people into conversations on
general plans and planning. With years of subject matter expertise, the Kearns & West team identifies opportuni- ties to make technical planning processes more accessi- ble and engaging. No strangers to the region, Kearns &
West team members have worked on a variety of proj-
ects in the Central Valley. Staff brings their experience engaging residents, employees, and organizations serv-
ing rural areas, farm communities, and small but vibrant cities.

Importantly for community engagement for the City of
Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update, the Ke-
arns & West team has specialized expertise conducting
community engagement for general plan updates and
other types of citywide planning projects.

DIP#: 1001108063
Principal/Manager: Jenna Tourje-Maldonado
Years in Business: 41
Date of Incorporation: 1984
Type:

Website: https://kearnswest.com/
I N T E R N A T I a N A L
Michael Baker is a leading global provider of engineer- ing and consulting services with over 80 years of firm
experience, which includes planning, architectural, en- vironmental, construction, program management, and
full life -cycle support services, as well as information technology and communications services and solu-
tions. A privately held company with more than $1 billion in annual revenue, Michael Baker has more than 6,000
employees in over 90 offices located across the U.S. and internationally. The Michael Baker Team in California is comprised primarily of experts from the legacy compa-
nies of RBF Consulting and PMC. With roots in southern
California since 1944, the firm has gained recognition in the profession of consulting planning, environmental,
and engineering services throughout the State of Cali-
fornia.

More than 75 professionals are dedicated to Environmen- tal, Planning, Urban Design, and Landscape Architecture services company -wide. As a leader in the environmen-
tal consulting field, Michael Baker offers an extensive ar- ray of services associated with environmental planning
and documentation. The Michael Baker Environmental
staff have prepared climate action plans, sustainability plans, hazard mitigation plans, and adaptation and re-
siliency plans for a diverse range of municipalities and agencies. Michael Baker produces environmental docu-
ments that are sensitive to both the public's concern for resource protection and community impacts, as well as
real -world issues associated with cost and feasibility of implementing sustainability measures. Michael Baker's
environmental managers have a broad resume of proj-
ect experience in coastal, urban, and rural communities and have worked on numerous complex projects requir-
ing technical expertise, creative solutions, and develop- ment of effective and workable mitigation. Our team has a thorough understanding of local, State, and Federal
regulations on climate change.

DIP#: 1000631983
Principal/Manager: Eddie Torres
Years in Business: 85 go
Date of Incorporation: 1940
Type:

Website: https://mbakerintl.com/
De Novo Planning Group 9

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
SOUTH

ENVIRONMENTAL
South Environmental is a certified Woman -Owned Busi-
ness Enterprise (WBE), Disadvantaged Business Enter-
prise (DBE), and Small Business Enterprise (SBE). We
use the latest technologies and best science available to further the conservation and preservation of natural and cultural resources in Southern California while helping our clients obtain their project goals and objectives. Our firm builds close relationships with agencies and orga- nizations whose missions align with ours, and we assist with the planning and implementation of projects dedi-
cated to the preservation and conservation of California's natural areas, rare species, and historic resources.

Our team of technical experts includes a Certified Wild- life Biologist, Urban Forester, Certified Arborists, Regis- tered Professional Archaeologists, Architectural Histo- rians, GIS Analysts, and Data Scientists that ensure the quality and strength of our science. We understand how
to efficiently move projects through complicated per-
mitting processes, saving our clients time and money by producing polished and professional work products that
balance project goals with federal, state, and local agen- cy requirements.

Specific services we offer fall into four general categories:

Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Urban Forestry, and GIS & Data Science. South Environmental specializes in completion of environmental compliance documen-
tation to support the required permitting processes of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Na- tional Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and all applicable local regulations. Our primary work products include biologi- cal and cultural resources assessments, historic resource evaluation reports, biological resource management
planning (habitat conservation plans, avian and nesting bird protection plans, mitigation and monitoring plans, urban forest management plans, and other supporting
environmental work.

DIP#: 1000837116
Principal/Manager: Samantha Murray
Years in Business: 7
Date of Incorporation: 2018
Type: Partnership
Website: https://southenvironmental.com/
De Novo Planning Group 10

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

FIRM QUALIFICATIONS

AN EXPERIENCED PROJECT TEAM
The De Novo Planning Group team represents a full -service team of city planning and subject -matter experts capable of providing all services requested by the City. We recognize and appreciate the tremendous commitment you are mak- ing to this program; the impacts to your time and financial resources are real and significant and it is our goal to work with you on an innovative program that results in an implementation -oriented plan. We will closely coordinate with City Staff and will provide principal -level attention to every step of the process while adhering to the project schedule and budget. De Novo recently worked with Temecula to successfully update your Housing and Safety Elements and we have prepared several CEQA documents as part of our on -call CEQA contract. Our subconsultant team, including Fehr & Peers and Kearns and West, also bring to the table recent local experience to allow us to hit the ground running.

Temecula is a unique community with special opportunities and challenges best addressed by a team with experience working in communities facing similar issues. Below is a list of De Novo Planning Group's General Plan Update experi- ence over just the past five years (2020-2025) with identification of our relevant team members.

As planning practitioners, we truly see ourselves as your community's "scribes". Every General Plan Update that we un- dertake is specifically tailored to the community we are working in, from developing an appropriate project approach, assembling the best team of subconsultants, listening to and learning from the community, implementing the work plan, and delivering the products. It is our job to guide you and the community through this complicated process while being mindful of local issues, opportunities, and preferences.

Sample Relevant Project Experience
Brea General Plan and EIR
Size (sq mi)

12.1 PopulationJurisdiction
47,325
..
23,900
..Members

0.47 DN
Campbell General Plan, CAP, and EIR

5.9 40,000
25,000

0.63 DN, F&P
Clovis General Plan Update and EIR

25.9 125,000
56,000

0.45 DN, EPS, K&W, JZMK
County of Orange General Plan and EIR
792.8
136,000
27,900

0.21 DN, EPS
Glendale General Plan and EIR

30.5 203,000
84,000

0.41 DN, EPS
Indian Wells General Plan and EIR

14.5 5.400
3,390

0.62 DN, EPS, K&W
La Verne General Plan and EIR

8.5 33,000
10,000

0.30 DN, EPS
Laguna Niguel General Plan and EIR

14.7 64,000
11,400

0.18 DN, EPS. F&P, K&W,
JZMK
Lake Forest General Plan and EIR

16.7 77,000
35,000

0.45 DN, EPS, JZMK
Lathrop General Plan and EIR

23.0 18,000
6,800

0.37 DN
Lawndale General Plan, Hawthorne
Specific Plan, and EIR

2.0 33,000
4,300

0.13 DN, EPS
Lomita General Plan, EIR, and Rezoning
Program
20 20,000
2,750

0.13 DN, EPS, JZMK
Manteca General Plan and EIR

20.6 75,000
15,000

0.20 DN, F&P
Milpitas General Plan and EIR

13.6 67,000
44,000

0.66 DN
Pittsburg General Plan and EIR

19.5 70,000
13,000

0.19 DN
Rancho Santa Margarita General Plan,
LHMP, EIR and Housing and Safety

12.94 48,000
14,250

0.29 DN*
Elements
San Jacinto General Plan, Zoning Update,
and EIR

26.0 48,000
6,300

0.13 DN, EPS, K&W
San Marcos General Plan, Zoning Update,
and EIR

24.4 96,000
28,600

0.30 DN, EPS, K&W
* General Plan Updated prepared while De Novo Principal Planner Starla Barker was employed at another planning firm.

De Novo Planning Group 11

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

OUR COMMITMENT TO IMPLEMENTATION
When preparing General Plans, our entire team carefully considers how the Vision, Goals, and Policies therein can be implemented by the local agency post -adoption. Our team brings to the table experience working as City staff which gives us special insight into how General Plans are implemented on a day-to-day basis. Additionally, our team has prepared specific plans, financing strategies, and environmental documents for private projects allowing us to see first-hand how the development industry interprets and responds to General Plan direction. To highlight the success of our approach, three General Plans projects and an example of their implementation are provided below.

General Plan Considerations
Stakeholder engagement
Community support
Identification of infill opportunities
Analysis of market trends
Role of technology in planning
Target areas for focused City attention
and funding
Future project streamlining
General Plan Considerations
Mobile home owner concerns
New mixed -use designations
Density and intensity
PIacemaking/identity
Trilingual outreach
Unincorporated county islands
Traffic mitigation measures
Implementation plan
General Plan Considerations
Open space preservation
Agricultural uses
Regional transportation
General Plan implementation
Transit planning
Job creation
Jobs/housing balance
Economic development
Implementation
The 2040 Lake Forest General
Plan has launched several im-
plementation actions, including
a Neighborhood Improvement
Study with funding allocated
to implementing local neigh-
borhood improvement actions
in southwest Lake Forest, new
mixed -use zoning, and updated
capital improvement plans.

Implementation
Approved in June 2018, the
Bolsa Row project will bring a
dynamic, mixed use complex
to Little Saigon, implementing
the City's new MU -Little Saigon
General Plan land use designa-
tion. The project includes: 200
apartments, a hotel, a banquet
facility, and about 45,000 square
feet of retail.

Implementation
De Novo prepared the City's Pri-
ority Area 1 Specific Plan, crafted
to facilitate the development
of a high -quality jobs center
complimented by high density
residential development and a
transit village, centered around
an emerging multi -modal transit
station. The foundation for the
SP was established in the GPU.
--_ Lake
ou,Visi n.�OurPl-. Forest
2040
Community Vision
January 2019
c www.lakeforesLgen Apia -M
c-
De Novo Planning Group 12

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

PROJECT TEAM
De Novo will be the prime and manage a team with deep experience planning and implementing General Plan Up- dates. Below is a chart outlining key management personnel. For ease of reference, the following pages include brief biographies for key staff, and resumes for all team members are included in Appendix A.

AmandaTropiano Starla Barker,AICP
Principal I Project Manager Principal Planner I CEQA Project Manager Erik Anderson Megan Thorne Abdul Jama
Associate Planner I Assistant PM Senior Urban Designer + Planner Assistant Planner Jason Moody Katy Cole, PE Ian Adam, MESM, CPSWQ, QSD Andrew Watkins Managing Principal Principal, Project Manager Vice President Partner Julie Cooper Jason Pack, TE Sue Williams, PE, MS, QSD/P Katja Martinez Principal Principal -in -Charge Technical Manager Principal/Senior Designer Andrew Williams Jason Scher, EST Cameron Castillo, MURP Tim Haagen Associate Lead Planner, Modeler Stormwater Specialist II Senior Planner Jana Sobhi
Planner
JennaTourje-Maldonado Jas King Eddie Torres Samantha Murray, MA, RPA Principal & Senior Facilitator Senior Associate Department Manager Cultural Resources Director Danielle Berger Eunice Lee Zhe Chen, MBA Sarah Corder, MFA Director Senior Associate Project Manager Principal Architectural Historian
Taylor Funderburk
Senior Associate
De Novo Planning Group 13

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

PROJECT LEADERSHIP
Amanda Tropiano Starla Barker, AICP
Principal -in -Charge, De Novo Principal Planner, De Novo With deep professional planning ex-
perience in the region, Amanda has
successfully managed a wide variety
of land use planning projects, all of
which have included a robust com-
munity engagement program. These
projects include General Plan Up-
dates for Lake Forest, San Jacinto, San
Marcos, Indian Wells, Lawndale, and
La Verne and community projects
in Irvine, Yorba Linda, Westminster,
Rancho Santa Margarita, and Tustin.

Amanda is certified by the Interna-
tional Association of Public Participa-
tion (IAP2).

Jason Moody
Managing Principal, EPS
Jason has extensive experience in the
areas of real estate market and finan-
cial analysis, socio-economic forecast-
ing, regional economics, and corridor
revitalization. He regularly works for
both public and private sector cli-
ents, focusing on the feasibility and
economic implications of individual
projects as well as larger areas, in-
cluding mixed -use districts, corridors,
and entire cities. Jason has applied
this expertise in numerous land use
planning and policy efforts, includ-
ing General Plans, Specific Plans, and
Master Plans..

Starla Barker, AICP, is a principal plan-
ner with De Novo Planning Group
whose primary responsibilities are
the management and preparation
of environmental documents (Initial
Studies, Negative Declaration, Envi-
ronmental Impact Reports, and En-
vironmental Assessments), as well as
other planning documents includ-
ing General Plans and Specific Plans.

With over 17 years of professional
planning experience Starla has suc-
cessfully managed a wide range of
Erik Anderson
Assistant PM, Associate Planner
Erik has worked on a diverse range
of projects for public and private sec-
tor clients, with a focus on land -use
planning, policy development, and
environmental and sustainability
planning. Erik provides project sup-
port in the preparation of CEQA doc-
umentation and long-range planning
documents, including General Plans,
Housing Elements, Zoning updates,
and Local Hazard Mitigation Plans.

Erik is passionate about serving com-
munities and creating innovative
projects with particular emphasis in work through place -based develop - General Plans. ment strategies.

Julie Cooper Andrew Williams
Principal, EPS Associate, EPS
Julie Cooper joined EPS's Los Angeles
office in 2018, bringing professional
experience in land use, economic, and
community development consulting.

She has provided strategic planning
services for a variety of public, pri-
vate, and institutional clients, includ-
ing analysis of market and economic
conditions, development feasibility
and fiscal impact modeling, and pol-
icy recommendations. She also has
extensive experience in stakeholder
and community engagement.

Andrew brings academic and pro-
fessional experience in economic
development, battery supply chain
research, and environmental policy.

He has provided strategic planning
services for a variety of public and
private clients as a project manager
and technical analyst, including anal-
ysis of markets and economic condi-
tions and economic and fiscal impact
modeling. Beforejoining EPS, Andrew
worked in public health, focusing on
the social determinants of health in
communities across the US.

De Novo Planning Group 14

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
Jason Pack, PE Katy Cole, PE Ian Adam, MESM, CPSWQ, QSD Principal -in -Charge, Fehr & Peers Principal + PM, Fehr & Peers Vice President, Fuscoe Jason is actively involved in a wide
variety of project work but also finds
time to lead the firm's research and
development efforts in Emergency
Evacuation assessment. Jason has an
extensive background in travel de-
mand forecasting, traffic operations
assessment (including micro -simu-
lation assessment), VMT analysis, big
data analysis, transit ridership fore-
casting, and transportation impact
studies involving NEPA and CEQA. His
focus is to utilize his experience and
the technical resources of the compa-
ny to help clients answer their tough-
est questions related to mobility.

Sue Williams, PE, MS, QSD/P
Vice President, Fuscoe
Susan has 25+ years of experience in
the civil engineering field o f water
resources for land development and
public works. She is a very conscien-
tious and responsible Technical Man-
ager who acts as a central design
team leader. Susan is highly proficient
in designing the layout of project
drainage facilities using applicable
design standards, agency process-
ing requirements and client expec-
tations. Her specialties include drain-
age design (hydrology, hydraulics,
stormwater) and preparation of H&H
reports (including Drainage Reports,
SWDR, WQMP, SWPPR SUSMP) for
entitlement and final design and con-
struction plans (PS&E).

De Novo Planning Group
Katy is a principal and registered en-
gineer with over 22 years of project
management experience, based lo-
cally in the Fehr & Peers San Diego
office. Katy's professional experience
includes managing hundreds of proj-
ects across disciplines. Her expertise
spans travel demand management
plans/quantification, multimodal
corridor studies, traffic micro -simu-
lation analysis, transportation master
planning, parking studies, access and
circulation studies, traffic operations
analyses, and transportation impact
studies.

Andrew Watkins
Partner, JZMK
Andrew Watkins is an architect, urban
designer, and planner with over 20
years of professional experience. An-
drew is licensed in California and Mas-
sachusetts. As a principal at JZMK,
his work focuses on large-scale ur-
ban design projects that explore the
confluence of ecology and urbanism.

Andrew has led the design of com-
munity plans, urban design and new
city planning projects in diverse lo-
cales, the United States, China, Indo-
nesia, India,South Africa, Botswana,
Ethiopia, Germany, Italy, Armenia and
Mexico.

Ian is Vice President, Specialty Prac-
tices and Fuscoe's Stormwater Man-
agement team leader. His specialty
is water resources, with an emphasis
in water quality regulations, sea -level
rise policy, Clean Water Act Citizen
Suits and resource agency negoti-
ation. Since joining Fuscoe in 2001,
Ian has served as an effective leader
and technical resource for numerous
projects and clients. Ian has worked
on over 80 General Plan Updates and
Specific Plans throughout California.

Katja Martinez
Principal/Senior Designer, JZMK
Katja joined JZMK Partners in 2000
after graduating from the University
of Applied Science, Stuttgart, Germa-
ny with a Bachelor Degree in Archi-
tecture. As a Principal at JZMK, she
has lead the Design Team on a variety
of major residential projects in Califor-
nia, Texas, China and the Middle East.

Her innovative designs range from
Custom Residences, Recreational Fa-
cilities, Resort Clubhouses, Mixed -use
Facilities and High-rise Residential
Buildings. Katja's diligent, thorough
and decisive approach consistently
results in meeting or exceeding cli-
ent's expectations.
15 City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
Jenna Tourje-Maldonado Danielle Berger Eddie Torres
Principal, Kearns & West Director, Kearns & West Department Manager, MBI Jenna Tourje-Maldonado is a Princi-
pal at Kearns & West with 18 years of
experience in stakeholder facilitation,
public engagement, and planning.

She is dedicated to creating healthy,
inclusive, and vibrant communities
where residents feel a strong connec-
tion and have an active role in shaping
their future. With a background as an
outreach professional, urban planner,
and educator, Jenna brings a distinct,
informed perspective to each project
she leads. Jenna designs outreach
processes that foster connections
among neighbors and strengthen
ties between cities and their commu-
nities.

Zhe Chen, MBA
Project Manager, MBI
Ms. Chen is a project manager and
senior climate change specialist. She
has rich experience in climate action
planning, using her technical and
analytical skills to provide climate
change and environmental due dili-
gence services to local governments
and regional jurisdictions. She is pro-
ficient in utilizing climate change
tools to develop GHG inventories and
Climate Action Plans (CAP), recom-
mending sustainability strategies and
programs to local governments, and
performing climate risk, vulnerability,
and adaptation assessment.

Danielle Berger is a senior project
manager with 10 years' professional
experience as a land use planner spe-
cializing in creative public outreach
and meeting facilitation. Danielle's
approach to outreach focuses on
equity and inclusivity and increasing
opportunities for engagement and
consensus building to meaningfully
engage community members in the
planning and design process. Dan-
ielle has experience working with
various Southern California agencies,
community -based organizations, and
stakeholders to successfully plan and
implement a variety of sustainability,
planning, and equity -focused pro-
grams.

Samantha Murray, MA, RPA
Director, South Environmental
Samantha Murray is the cultural re-
sources director and archaeological
principal investigator at South En-
vironmental with over 18 years' ex-
perience in all elements of cultural
resources management, including
project management, archaeology
and architectural history studies, and
significance evaluations in consider-
ation of the National Register of His-
toric Places (NRHP), California Reg-
ister of Historical Resources (CRHR),
and local -level designation criteria.

Mr. Torres leads Michael Baker's ef-
forts to be at the forefront of Global
Climate Change studies. Mr. Torres
has prepared numerous analyses that
are consistent with climate change
legislation such as Assembly Bill 32,
Senate Bill 97 Executive Order 5-3-
05, and Senate Bill 375. In addition to
analyzing climate change impacts,
Mr. Torres has led the development of
numerous greenhouse gas inventory
models which calculate greenhouse
gas emissions from such sources as
vehicular traffic, stationary sources,
electricity consumption, water con-
sumption, wastewater treatment,
and construction processes.

Sarah Corder, MFA
Architectural, South Environmental
Sarah Corder is the Principal Archi-
tectural Historian at South Environ-
mental with 20 years' experience in all
elements of cultural resources man-
agement, including project manage-
ment, historic preservation planning,
rehabilitation of historic buildings,
community engagement, inten-
sive -level field investigations, citywide
surveys, architectural history studies,
and historical significance evalua-
tions in consideration of the NRHP,
CRHR, and local -level evaluation crite-
ria. of Historic Properties (Standards)
and local design guidelines.

De Novo Planning Group 16

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

PROJECT EXAMPLES AND REFERENCES

SELECTED DE NOVO PROJECT EXAMPLES AND REFERENCES
Please contact our references to hear first-hand our commitment to our clients and their budgets and schedules. For each project we pursue, we carefully evaluate our staffing resources and availability to ensure that our team can be fully dedicated to the work effort. We completed this level of review and analysis for these projects and are confident that our existing staff have sufficient time to dedicate to the City of Temecula. Project profiles for the references listed below, and other relevant projects, are provided on the following pages.

Ii fir,:IL ...... .....
r�
21 morm IL
��. —■1
City of San Jacinto
General Plan Update, Housing Element, Zoning, EIR
Travis Randal, Assistant City Manager
951-654-7337 x 400 1 [email protected]
595 S. San Jacinto Ave, San Jacinto, CA 92583
City of La Verne
General Plan Update, Housing Element, and EIR
Candice Bowcock, Principal Planner
909-596-8706 1 [email protected]
3660 D St, La Verne, CA 91750
City of Indian Wells
General Plan Update and EIR
Chris Freeland, City Manager
760-346-2489 1 [email protected]
44-950 Eldorado Dr., Indian Wells, CA 92210-7497
City of Lake Forest
General Plan Update, EIR, Housing Element, Safety Element Gayle Ackerman, Director of Development Services
949-461-3463 1 [email protected]
100 Civic Center Dr., Lake Forest, CA 92630
City of San Marcos
General Plan Update and EIR
Beth Herzog, Administrative Services Manager
760-744-1050 x3280 I [email protected]
1 Civic Center Drive, San Marcos CA 92069
De Novo Planning Group 17

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, FOCUSED ZONING CODE UPDATE, AND EIR City of San Jacinto
De Novo Planning Group led a group of consultants to work with the City of San Jacinto to prepare a comprehensive update to the City's General Plan and the corresponding EIR, as well as a focused update to its Zoning Ordinance, and Cultural Landscape Study. Integrating innovative engagement techniques and creative communication methods are key to this important project in San Jacinto. Like the rest of the Inland Empire, the City of San Jacinto is experiencing changes to who lives, works, and visits the community. Its residents are more diverse than ever; its population is get- ting older, but relatively affordable home prices and new development in the Downtown (spurred by the forthcoming Downtown Specific Plan) will attract new residents to this charming community. People who call San Jacinto home celebrate the City's history and culture and are proud of its special place in the Inland Empire.

Building off the excitement of Envision San Jacinto's Go Human event, the City's General Plan Update continued to engage a wide range of community members and key stakeholders through traditional in -person and online outreach strategies. As part of our elevated work program, De Novo prepared a brief 3-minute video celebrating the history of San Jacinto and describing how the City is preparing for its future by updating its General Plan. The team is also meeting with key stakeholders in a series of focus groups to discuss important issues in San Jacinto, including housing opportunities, economic development, cultural and historic resources, and farmworker issues. Kearns & West prepared and released a bilingual direct mailer to every address in San Jacinto; this represented the first time the method was used in San Jacinto, and resulted in the highest levels of engagement the City had ever experienced.

Based on information gathered from the community, the team was able to assemble a new land use plan that expands the range of housing and business development opportunities throughout the City. This involved a process of direct property owner engagement, as well as review by the Planning Commission and City Council. De Novo implemented the General Plan through an update to the Zoning Code, including Housing Element Implementation.

Date Range: 2018-Ongoing
Key Considerations
Economic development
Climate planning
Downtown revitalization
Multilingual engagement
Use of technology
Implementation actions
Financing strategy

WHAT WE HEARD
bee oovooemxmn
bee
;� seo xomixc
How We Spread the Word
• Passbook a W;tn
• Nrt 9 0{a
• Ne#Doer 4C
• Emoib
• Direst Mailer C 15,000+
households
a.— —
Aeq Wen
so
�
n :Fa
Wlwt wFrd& "a dcscri(w �% ju ate 1* ZONO?
bustling opportunity grural thrivingproduc ive
trafficoptionsoutdoor modern home CAA
loving walkable laceartmcerC a
smallera m
centerdow tOWW
r
r, live cECo m mil n Y
o~ �Amainstr etjob �
aoshoppingsafe Viewwork
arbor -city emetgrowthless tear le°cula
E prosperou development
De Novo Planning Group 18

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

LA VERNE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, HOUSING ELEMENT, ZONING CODE

AND EIR
City of La Verne
De Novo Planning Group worked with the City of La Verne to update its General Plan Update and prepare the EIR, which was unamimously adopted in early 2025. The La Verne General Plan Update is based on a robust and meaningful engagement process consisting of General Plan Advisory Committee meetings, Visioning Workshops, Community -wide Workshops, a dedicated project website, newsletters, social media advertisements, and surveys.

Since the City of La Verne last updated their General Plan in 1998, there have been significant changes to the com- munity that warrant a special look as part of this General Plan Update, including extension of the Gold Line to the community, completion of the 1-210 extension, changes to demographics, and land use questions for the City's Sphere of Influence areas. The La Verne General Plan Website can be viewed at: laverne.generalplan.org.

De Novo Planning Group worked with a 15-member General Plan Advisory Committee to develop draft goals and policies for the General Plan Update. The team hosted a series of 10 meetings to cover topics important to the community, including economic development, community health and wellness, land use and urban design, and mobility. The City is also home to a future Gold Line Station (set to open in 2026) and has recently adopted a Spe- cific Plan to guide the growth and development of land uses around the Gold Line Station, which is to be located just outside of Old Town La Verne and the University of La Verne. Working together, these institutions and agencies envision a vibrant shopping, dining, and living experience in Old Town. The General Plan continues to seek ways to support this vision while maintaining the character and quality of the City's established neighborhoods in North La Verne.

Date Range: 2017-Ongoing
Key Considerations
°°°"" """'°`°'°'°
Historic preservation
........

Transit -oriented development
Corridor planning
Economic development
Community health
Active transportation
Land use alternatives
Outreach
Environmental impacts
a wme a m nb°r° 17
De Novo Planning Group 19

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, EIR, HOUSING ELEMENT, AND SAFETY

ELEMENT
City of Lake Forest
De Novo Planning Group prepared the City of Lake Forest General Plan Update. Three years after the City incorpo- rated in 1991, Lake Forest adopted its first General Plan to help guide the City's physical development. Since then, the City has undergone a number of significant changes including the annexations of Portola Hills and Foothill Ranch, the closure of the EI Toro Marine Corps Base, and the launch of the Opportunities Study Area. De Novo served as the Prime Consultant and directly managed a robust community engagement program including one - one -one interviews, community open houses, visioning workshops, General Plan Advisory Committee meetings, online surveys and feedback tools, and social media campaign. The new General Plan is based on the community's vision and values and will guide the long-term growth and development in Lake Forest for the next 20 years.

A key component of the work program is establishing a range of contemporary technical studies with updated data on which to base future decisions. The project includes a branding program and outreach materials. Three Visioning Workshops were hosted for the community throughout the summer of 2018 to understand community priorities and values related to a long-term vision statement, land use and community character, and mobility.

In particular, the City is looking at how new technologies will impact best planning practices over the life of the General Plan and how to develop a plan, policies, and programs which will respond to new technologies as they emerge.

The City also formed a General Plan Advisory Committee which met ten times. De Novo Planning Group served as the Chair of the GPAC and facilitated the conversation with key community members and representatives to ensure that the new General Plan accurately reflects community values.

Date Range: 2018-2020
Key Considerations
Cohesive community identify
Traffic and parking
New technologies
Regional access and amenities
Housing
Air quality
Outreach to stakeholders
Coordination with employers
Branding
_ Lake
Forest
2040
if
1`
WORKSHOP #1
Wednesday, May 16th
6:30 PM to 8:00 PM
Lake Forest Cny Hall
25550 Commementie Dr.

Topic: Vision and Values
-• I ' 1 t WORKSHOP#2
Wednesday, June 13ft
lake 1­1 Cily Hall
6:30 PM to 800 PM
25550
E
`I ED Topic:: TranPo,ou nreannd
l Mobiy
G 1 WORKSHOP#3
Wednesday, July 11th
1 1 1 6:30 PM to 8:00 PM
Lake Forest City Hall
25550 Commercentm Dr.

Topic: Land Use and
wWW.[aKeFore9LGoneralPlan.org Community Design
771W., amxe roiest General Plan Ilpda
De Novo Planning Group 20

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

SAN MARCOS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, FOCUSED ZONING CODE

UPDATE, AND EIR
City of San Marcos
De Novo Planning Group and Kearns & West worked with the City of San Marcos to prepare a comprehensive update to the City's General Plan and the corresponding EIR, as well as a focused update to its Zoning Ordinance. Originally launched in 2019, the project was placed on a brief hold as the City addressed issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Upon the project's relaunch in mid-2021, De Novo and Kearns & West reengaged the public using a mix of traditional in -person events as well as new online tools. This included facilitating General Plan Advisory Committee meetings in -person some months and virtually other months, preparing and distributing bilingual advertisements, sending direct mailers (twice), hosting in -person visioning workshops, and manging multiple online surveys and community briefings.

The project team assembled a series of land use alternatives and, in mid-2022, led a transparent public engagement process to solicit feedback on these ideas and develop a proposed land use map for the General Plan. Although this can be a challenging and controversial process, by listening closely to community concerns and property owner requests early -on, the City has the support of the community for these land use alternatives and has confirmed that they repre- sent the vision for the community.

Date Range: 2019-Ongoing
Key Considerations
Economic development
Educational institutions
Congestion
Affordable housing
Fire safety
Environmental justice
Rural history

SAN MARCOS

SAN MARCOS

GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE

OPEN HOUSE INVITATION
pleasejoin us at one of our upcoming open
houses on the Land Use Alternatives Report Ito
be released In May 20221.

Please feel free to o.m. and go anytime
during the open house hours.

OPEN HOUSE #1
wednesday]une8,2022l5 p.m.

San Marcos Senior Center
III Richmar Avenue, San Marcos, CA 92069
OPENHOUSE#2
Thursday ]une 9, 202215-7 p.m.

San Marcos Community Center
3 Civic Center Drive, San Marcos CA 92069
Op —
se tlays.times, and loca[ionsaresubJec[[o
change based on public health and safety protocols.

Check G eral Plawrg poor to each
The City of San Marcos is updating its General Plan, including the General Plan Land Use Map. Based on community input, property requests, and market trends, the City will prepare a series of "lend use alternatives" for public review in May 2022.

Upon release of the Land Use Alternatives Report, w rite the unity to provide feedback by attending an in -person open house or completing an online survey. As you evaluate the land use alternatives, consider the following questions:
. How should our City plan to accommodate future growth and development?
. Doesthe City providea sufficient range fland—opportunities to accommodate residential choices for persons of different Incomes, ages, and needs?
. Do our major employmentcentersand businesses have adequate room to grow and expand?
. How will changes to the City's Land Use Map impact
transportation, utilities, financial stability, and other factors? Porinforma11-1—tthe project,tosign Afore -notifications, and to review work products, please visit
Sal n Ma rcos.G enera l Pla n.org

SAN MARCOS

GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE
What's New
Land Use Alternatives Report
Paential changes to the City's Land Use Map
is a key component of thi s Ge ne dA Plan
Update. The Land Use Alternatives RePld,
available now, pmWes the City with a tool to
examine dill—nt possible approaches to
ac mmoda[e luturedevdopment,economic
grotWn, mandamfscal surtainability, and
ensure adegua. protMion of resources and
ope`spLce-Weencou VWutosM1areyour_
Home FAQ Meetings & Events Background Work Product
Welcome
The Cityof San Marcos is excitedto announce Ihatwe
have reported our Comprehensive General Plan Update!
The General Plan servesasthe guidingdocumentfor
a<hievingthecommunitysvisiorforthef.ture rdthl
General Plan UpdMe Drocesswill provide residents and
businesses the opportunity to provide inDu[[o M1elp
shape the direRion of the City going forward.

Incarparared in 1%3, San Marcos isa vibntand
omoressiw rommunirv. Sin Marcos nfersa ranceof recmatinn and nnen snare exnedenres s De Novo Planning Group 21

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

SELECTED EPS PROJECT PROFILES AND REFERENCES
`rFA:

Reference:

Matthew Taylor, Principal Planner,
City of Riverside
951-826-5944
MTaylor(a)riversideca.gov
3900 Main St, Riverside, CA 92522

RIVERSIDE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
EPS is engaged as part of a multidisciplinary team to support the General Plan Update for the City of Riverside. As the largest city in the Inland Empire, Riverside is seeing significant investment in housing, employment, and green technology. The City aims to ensure it remains a thriving, sustainable, and inclusive community in the face of continued growth and transformation.

Phase I of the General Plan Update began in 2020 and included updates to the Housing and Public Safety Elements, the development of environmen- tal justice policies, and revisions to Title 19 - Zoning of the Riverside Munic- ipal Code. Phase 11, currently underway, presents an opportunity to estab- lish a new set of strategic priorities to guide Riverside's future. As part of the team completing the Phase 11 work, EPS is preparing a baseline analysis of socio-economic, real estate, and fiscal trends; evaluating the fiscal impacts of proposed land use alternatives; and drafting a new Economic and Innovation Development Element that focuses on sustaining a high quality of life for res- idents while advancing employment and revenue -generating opportunities to meet the evolving needs of the City.

NAPA DOWNTOWN SP AND GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
After decades of gradual decline and lack of investment, the City of Napa sought strategies to help its historic downtown better capitalize on the cache of its location in the heart of the Napa Valley and "wine country." As part of the Downtown Specific Plan, EPS conducted market and feasibility analysis to identify and opportunity sites and develop realistic options to encourage redevelopment of underutilized properties with the goal of creating a more vibrant, mixed -use district. EPS also evaluated financing and implementa- tion options to deliver public infrastructure and amenities. Guided by Specific Plan policies and implementation measures, Napa's Downtown has evolved into a successful visitor destination with new hotels, restaurants, mixed -use residential, and enlivened entertainment venues.

Reference:

Building on this success, EPS was subsequently retained by the City as part of multidisciplinary team to provide economic analysis in support of the Gen - Michael Walker, ACID,a
eral Plan Update. With a growing tourist economy, the City's priorities for the Senior Planner,
General Plan had evolved to include opportunities for economic diversifica- City of Napa Planning Department
tion, sustaining desirable employment prospects for residents, and strategic 707-257-9345
mwalkerCc)cityofnapa.org
redevelopment withing a largely built -out city. EPS completed an economic, City Hall, 955 School Street,
demographic, and real estate profile that identified Napa's competitive attri- butes and positioning as well as challenges to sustainable long-term growth Napa, CA 94559
that might be addressed by the General Plan Update. While EPS gave special consideration to retail and visitor serving uses and their continued role in eco- nomic development, the analysis was expanded to include other emerging sectors such as health care and tech. The work culminated in an Econom- ic Development Element with a focus on sustainable and equitable growth strategies to avoid an over reliance on tourism sectors.

De Novo Planning Group 22

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

SELECTED FEHR & PEERS PROJECT PROFILES AND

REFERENCES

TEMECULA TRANSPORTATION DISCOVERY
Fehr & Peers prepared a detailed transportation existing conditions assess - travel patterns Z� ment and review of the current Circulation Element for the City of Temecula 2s°i a. .. called the Transportation Discovery Project. The purpose of the Transportation �s%,k
Discovery Project is to help the City of Temecula develop a General Plan Cir- 34%;
z3i° acre a°aatl[3s°i culation Element update strategy to encourage an integrated, multimodal °r °� g transportation system that meets the needs of Temecula. The Transportation d,o12%
Discovery project reviews several aspects of transportation mobility along with ,
���*��+��.t;,,,,,,,,,; key takeaways and potential updates to consider in the Circulation Element, 23% °(xrorkinS iii;nrrgir,'ii;i;iiii+��+
reaide°Is Gve&work w �"wiii:irii•�i:iiii;iii;
...iii:irir,..........
,itiiati,city. including regulatory setting, travel characteristics, streets and roadways along ii" •iiinnnmi; .
with their functional classifications, pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, similar VMT ta°°ighb°nngcifin.1a 89%
roadway safety, transit services and facilities, goods movement, parking, and 'II'''' maae.yvaM<la, „^t1VP the future trends of transportation. Additionally, Fehr and Peers performed „o. trail&bik
lao°°oetwarkA'dP.id,� travel demand modeling using the RivCOM regional travel demand model to test the congestion benefits of several major roadway projects currently Reference: identified in the Circulation Element such as the Eastern Bypass, Rancho Way Matt Peters, Director of Community Overcrossing, De Portola Road Widening, Diaz Road connection to Murrieta, Development, and several others.

City of Temecula, (951) 694-6408, Successes/ Innovations: The Temecula Transportation Discovery project al- [email protected] lowed testing of several major roadway projects in advance of the Circulation Element allowing for a great base understanding before embarking on the update. The results were also presented in a user friendly graphics heavy ex- ecutive summary PowerPoint presentation.

De Novo Planning Group 23

RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Fehr & Peers updated the Community Mobility Element of the General Plan for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The update was based on a comprehen- sive analysis of the existing transportation system serving Rancho Cucamon- ga, including the roadway system, commuter rail service, bus service, pedes- trian facilities, bicycle facilities and collision statistics.

The Mobility Element was developed consistent with the identified goals and values derived from the City's public outreach process. Key elements includ- ed capitalizing on the high -capacity transit investments occurring in Rancho Cucamonga (Brightline project to the Rancho Cucamonga Transit Station, tunnel to the Ontario Airport, and future transit connections to the Civic Cen- ter and beyond).

In addition to updating the Mobility Element, Fehr & Peers also completed the Reference:

Citys Emergency Evacuation study that addressed SIB99 requirements relat- ed to mapping parcels in high -fire severity zones with only one point of access Matt Buris, Deputy City Manager,
and addressing AB 747 requirements related to addressing the capacity and (951) 801-5350
viability of the transportation system under a range of evacuation scenarios.

[email protected]
Successes/ Innovations: Fehr & Peers assisted the City with goals and policies that complement and leverage regional/statewide transit investments such as Brightline and connections to the Ontario Airport. Fehr & Peers provided detailed evacuation analysis to comply with SIB 99 and AB 747. The analysis considered numerous hazards and scenarios.

Reference:

Jason Geldert, PE, Engineering
Manager & Land Development,
(760) 814-0229,
[email protected]

CARLSBAD ON CALL SERVICES AND HOUSING ELEMENT
Fehr & Peers has been a partner with the City of Carlsbad on VMT Implemen- tation since 2019. We developed the City's VMT Analysis Guidelines and has worked with the City to further refine the guidelines and offer support related to the SAN DAG travel demand model. Fehr & Peers assisted the City with de- velopment of VMT related screening criteria, thresholds, calculation method- ology, and mitigation options. We utilized the SANDAG travel demand model to produce VMT/capita and VMT/employee maps at a traffic analysis zone geography. We are one of only a few consultants that has access to and can run SANDAG's travel demand model. We also worked with the City to refine the VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee calculations (through a post processing script that utilizes the SANDAG model output) to address external trips and to isolate work related travel. In addition, we review VMT analysis for CEQA documents within the City as an extension of City Staff. We have reviewed over a dozen VMT studies, provided detailed comments, coordinated with project applicants, and attended public hearings to provide testimony on be- half of City staff.

In addition, Fehr & Peers prepared the transportation modeling and VMT impact assessment for the City's Housing Element. As part of the project, residential growth citywide was analyzed for VMT impacts and a mitigation measure checklist was created.

Successes/ Innovations: Fehr & Peers analyzed VMT for residential growth city- wide to provide the City the option of using CEQA streamlining for future residential projects consistent with the General Plan/Housing Element. .

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

SELECTED FUSCOE PROJECT PROFILES AND

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

CITY OF YUCAIPA
Benjamin Matlock, Deputy Director of Community
Development
34272 Yucaipa Blvd., Yucaipa, CA 92399
909.797.2489 Ext. 261 / [email protected]

CITY OF LONG BEACH
> Christopher Koontz, Deputy Director, Development
Services
333 W. Ocean Blvd., 4th Flr, Long Beach, CA 90802
562.570.6288/[email protected]

CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
Matisse Reischl, Assistant City Manager
30448 Rancho Viejo Rd., San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
> 949.443.6315/[email protected]
fe

CITY OF LOMITA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Lomita, CA I De Novo Planning Group for the City of Lomita Through a competitive bidding process, the City of Lomita selected De Novo Planning Group to support its first comprehensive General Plan Update (GPU) since 1998. The GPU will address elements of the City's General Plan, zoning and ordinance maps, objective design and development standards, and related environmental review in conformance with CEQA.

As a subconsultant to De Novo Planning Group, Fuscoe Engineering's stormwater management team is providing services to assist with the GPU, including preparing technical studies in supportof the Environmental Impact Report. Our scope includes developing an existing conditions memorandum, 238TH ST & NARBONNE %
240TH ST&PENNSYLVANIA (EMERGENCY.ONLY) - reviewingd land alternatives the In impacts On (EMERGENCYONLY) proposed anuse aernaves ane varying g P l infrastructure, conducting a water supply evaluation, and preparing a CEQA "' r EIR Technical Report. Through our experience providing infrastructure I 2a2ry P
support for over 80 EIR, Specific and General Plan projects, our team has \\\ WB.� Hof developed efficiencies and knowledge that make us an ideal project partner. i

CONTACT & STATUS
Starla Baker, 949.396.8793
I Hari' Completed 2024
� � 151stSE
��� 1h2ntl gl
MtldY
Plea 2u,tl, til
fLLf
Legend WELL NO.5
O City Limits7RESER
- I 252m St
® ReservoirRESS W8-8 &. j
VOIR APPIAN WAY,PS a
SupplyWell--'""".

E _
® Interconnection I - PALO$ VERDE
Pump Station r: r I I (EMERGENCY
PRV
Pipeline Diameter H°I r- 11 us
2&4mci— -.,• a
8 inches - P`
— 8 inches - �,55
10inches F U L L C I R C L E T H I N K I N G 12 inches
14& 16 inches °'" '� HARBOR HILLS
—
RESERVOIR son 1, no

RESERVOIR
Fed tih I.k ii:

SAN BERNARDINO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
& SPECIFIC PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT
San Bernardino, CA I PlaceWorks
The City of San Bernardino enlisted PlaceWorks to assist in developing a new Specific Plan for its50-acre downtown districtfor inclusion into a new General Plan Update, as well as help with related development code modifications and proper CEQA documentation.

As a subconsultant to PlaceWorks, Fuscoe Engineering's stormwater management team provided General Plan Update services consisting of Existing Conditions & Infrastructure Assessment, Existing Infrastructure Documentation, GIS Infrastructure Base Map, Proposed Infrastructure Assessment and Technical Infrastructure Report. Also included in the scope of work was a Specific Plan Infrastructure Report encompassing an Existing Conditions & Infrastructure Assessment, Existing Infrastructure Documentation, Infrastructure & Property Line Map, Opportunities & Con- straints, Proposed Infrastructure Assessment & Stormwater Strategy and Infrastructure Technical Memorandum.

CONTACT & STATUS
Mark Hoffman, 909.989.4449
Ongoing

F U L L C I R C L E T H I N K I N G

r

CITY OF YUCAIPA WINE COUNTRY SPECIFIC PLAN
Yucaipa, CA I PlaceWorks
The Fuscoe Engineering team is providing infrastructure support for the Wine Country Specific Plan within the City of Yucaipa. The level of analysis is consistent with a programmatic Specific Plan.

SERVICES PROVIDED
� Existing Conditions Data Collection
� Existing Conditions Infrastructure Exhibit
� Hydrology Evaluation
a
� Water and Sewer Evaluation & Utility Layout
� Technical Report

CONTACT & STATUS
Nicole Vermillion, 774.966.9220
QI (2HCFS) Completed March 2023
Q,A, (7a CFS)
rnW sUS1 (2°
—^----—S--I ---- p
.,Q.M0111) A_ I,••
i
Q (65 CFS)
* } � QuolAesces} .

Q..(1,022 CF5) +�~' ; ..
4 ,00 (1,022 CFS)
oo (163 CFS) {
Q, 1p71 CFS) QAw 19l9 cps) -�
A I . Q'- (1se CFs) °
40 4 !
Qu9 (23 CFS] ,m (5,071CF5}
!
'! I
Q—(n CPS) 1 U Q—(95 CFS)
40 Q'``O-Q� 32CF5)
tj wl I 43.]I 123.19 1 +,ee I 1 ]99]

U L L C I R C L E T H I N K I N G
rew, ns2 2
14AI r"-•- Bxu xceae
,r Burin Ai.e. 15a..]8 95.A
Rwii,q C3�]]%
AbVLhpl

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

SELECTED JZMK PROJECT PROFILES AND

REFERENCES

CITY REFERENCES

KEVIN JACKSON
Planning & Building Director
City of Piedmont
120 Vista Avenue
Piedmont, CA 94611
510-420-3039
https://www.piedmont.ca.gov/

GAYLE ACKERMAN
Director of Community Development
City of Lake Forest
100 Civic Center Drive
Lake Forest, CA 92630
949-461-3460
https://www.lakeforestca.gov/

JENNIFER HAGEN
Senior Planner, Community Development
City of Brentwood
150 City Park Way
Brentwood, CA 94513
925-516-5405
https://www.brentwood.ca.gov/
[email protected]

ELAINE LISTER
City Manager
City of Mission Viejo
200 Civic Center
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
949-470-3051
https://www.cityofmissionviejo.org/
government
De Novo Planning Group 29

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

LOCATION LOMITA, CALIFORNIA

CLIENT CITY OF LOMITA

LOMITA GENERAL PLAN AND OBJECTIVE DESIGN

STANDARDS
Multifamily Residential
Single Family
Residential
Privacy Fenced , ti--o-r Single Family Residential Side yard Setback 1 I--0 F Multifamily Residential Side yard Setback
1 f s•-(a Stepback
0 Ground level Screensing
Property Boundary

PROJECT TYPE GENERAL PLAN AND OBJECTIVE

DESIGN STANDARDS

DATE IN PROGRESS
De Novo Planning Group
Pri,
JZMK provided urban design and planning services in support of the Lomita General Plan. This included planning analysis, land use studies, zoning code modifications and the development of Objective Design Standards (ODS).The ODS establishes an agreed upon level of quality from the City that gives developers clear direction for their development projects. The code include chapters covering site design, building design, architectural styles and landscape.
30 LOCATION LAKE FOREST, CA City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

CLIENT CITY OF LAKE FOREST

LAKE FOREST GENERAL PLAN
*COMPLETED BY ANDREW WATKINS WHILE A PRINCIPAL AT SWA GROUP

PROJECTTYPE GENERAL PLAN

PROJECT LEAD DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP
AWARDS 2021 APA ORANGE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE

PLAN OF THE YEAR

REFERENCE GAYLE ACKERMAN

DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
949-461-3460
[email protected]
Urban design and planning services were provided for
the City of Lake Forest General Plan Update. Lake Forest was pursuing a modern General Plan that would reflect
contemporary community values and priorities — and
provide the framework to balance quality of life with
improved economic and fiscal conditions. As part of the larger General Plan Land Use Map, five focus areas were identified as potential locations for future growth, to support economic development, maintain fiscal sustainability, and help create activity nodes.

De Novo Planning Group 31

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

LOCATION SAN MARCOS, CA

CLIENT CITY OF SAN MARCOS

SAN MARCOS GENERAL PLAN
r.. J
9 ! N9� & UNIVERSITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE
i '\ FOR HEALTH SCIENCES
�•� j`g PALOMAR COLLEGE T a//
�\ /! • EDWIN AND FRANCES HUNTER ARBORETUM
f to AT PALOMAR COLLEGE
�! ! SAN MARCOS MIDDLE SCHOOL
SUNSET PARK ®
I I
� �1 I •��` -.WFST!kfsg/p Ro a":
•� I i ! �1
1 i l r` �I •NEstsn��--------'
---------- ■ ■
A�:

F.
e` ► �'�i" . ® yd�
Vista
o:
c
T
1 ♦ �r� t
40' 1 ®_
ter— f
■ Rancho
Santa Fe
*COMPLETED BY ANDREW WATKINS WHILE A PRINCIPAL AT SWA GROUP

PROJECT TYPE GENERAL PLAN

PROJECT LEAD DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP
CA-78
1 .. Rf1Ndlp PgCKPAp PKWY
I
y
g }�

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY
StAN MARCOS ,{,F
i �� T�
Ve. ;sue , a-_,; ' >r ``: y,,.,,-„ x.■R9
The San Marcos General Plan provides contemporary
updates on the key topics of land use, equity, housing, economic development, transportation, and parks and
recreation. The process is a community -driven effort to ensure the community's needs and objectives are reflected in an update intended to guide development over the next 10 to 20 years.

De Novo Planning Group 32

SELECTED KEARNS & WEST PROJECT PROFILES

AND REFERENCES
Project Examples
City of Irvine - General Plan Update
Christian Mendez facilitating an interactive land use activity at a workshop for the City of Irvine General Plan Update
Marika Poynter, Manager of Planning Services
City of Irvine, 1 Civic Center I Irvine, CA 92606
949-724-6000
[email protected]
Project: City of Irvine - General Plan Update
March 2022 - October 2024
The City of Irvine is preparing a focused update to its General Plan. Irvine 2045 General Plan Update will contain goals and policies to help the City reach its vision ensuring Irvine's high quality of life is preserved and enhanced as the City matures. The City of Irvine is utilizing a community engagement process that will foster community members' and stakeholders' participation in planning for a General Plan reflective of community values and aspirations. Kearns & West is leading engagement for the general plan update, facilitating two series of focus groups, in -person and virtual workshops, developing workshops- in -a -box for staff to lead, and developing outreach and engagement trainings for City staff to build capacity.

City of Newport Beach - General Plan Update
Jenna Tourje-Maldonado facilitating a community workshop for the City of Newport Beach General Plan Update
James Campbell, Deputy Director of Community Development City of Newport Beach, 100 Civic Center Dr, Newport Beach, CA 92660 949-644-3210
[email protected]
Project: City of Newport Beach - General Plan Update
5eptember2019 - Present
In 2019, Newport Beach launched a "Listen & Learn" process to hear from the community to develop a vision for a future General Plan Update. Kearns & West, working closely with city staff and the planning and design consultants, is utilizing a multi -pronged approach of popup outreach, a series of community workshops, digital communication, and web -based engagement opportunities. As the State released RHNA numbers that were significantly higher than previous cycles, the City pivoted its strategy to focus on the Housing and Circulation Element. Residents in Newport Beach were highly engaged, educated, and vocal about the future shape and form of their City. Kearns & West had led a robust community engagement effort with the City for the Housing Element. The team has implemented a series of virtual meetings, stakeholder conversations, surveys and online input tools, and provides insight to the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee. The Housing Element was coordinated closely with the Circulation Element, and Kearns & West manages outreach for both projects to align community engagement objectives and outcomes.

In 2023, Newport Beach launched the official General Plan update process, which is influenced by the previous work done during the "Listen & Learn" phase. Kearns & West is continuing to work closely with the city staff, planning and design consultants, and the General Plan Advisory Committee to develop a comprehensive engagement and outreach strategy to inform the community about the general plan update and solicit the community input, vision, and feedback for the General Plan elements. Similar to the "Listen & Learn" phase, engagement will follow a multi -pronged approach, to include pop-up events, go -to meetings, workshops, surveys, open houses, and community partnerships to gather input from a diverse representation of stakeholders.

KEARNS t WEST

City of San Marcos - General Plan Update
Jenna Tourje-Maldonado facilitating a visioning workshop for the City of San Marcos General Plan Update Dahvia Lynch, Development Services Director
City of San Marcos, 1 Civic Center Drive, San Marcos, CA 92069 (760) 744-1050 x3281; (760) 560-7730
[email protected]
Project: San Marcos General Plan Update
November 2019 to March 2020
When the City launched its General Plan Update in 2019, the Kearns & West team supported and facilitated community outreach as part of the consultant team that included EPS. Kearns & West prepared an effective comprehensive community and stakeholder engagement strategy with special focus on involving Spanish-speaking residents and other communities underrepresented in civic dialogue. The outreach program included launching and facilitating the general plan advisory committee (GPAC) process, facilitating a series of visioning workshops and open houses, and a digital survey. The team conducted weekly internal meetings to review project deliverables and budgets. All deliverables were managed through the Kearns & West QA/QC process before being sent to the client. Kearns & West prepared an effective comprehensive community and stakeholder engagement strategy, provided support on for online content and activities, helped to launch the community advisory committee process, facilitated the first meeting, and conducted a well -received public workshop on goals, needs, and opportunities with nearly 80 participants.

KEARNS WEST

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

SELECTED MICHAEL BAKER PROJECT PROFILES

AND REFERENCES
County of Riverside 2025 Climate Action Plan Update I February 2023-Present AmmM John Hildebrand, Planning Director
1:1 Lemon Street 12th Floor,Riverside, CA 92502
• :::
[email protected]
Michael Baker in helping the County of Riverside update its CAP in compliance with the 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan adopted by the California Air Resources Board in December 2022. This project is a continuous work of the County's 2019 CAP Update, which Zhe Chen served as the Deputy Project Manager and Technical Lead for. The 2025 CAP Update includes updates to the County's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory, the GHG forecasts and reduction targets, and the GHG reduction measures and local actions to help the County achieve the reduction targets. The GHG reduction measures and local actions incorporate the latest local regulations and policies, and take into account feedback from various County departments. The project scope also includes development of CAP Update Consistency Checklists to enable developers to easily understand how to use the plan as a CEQA tiering document and CEQA review to allow the plan to be a qualified GHG reduction plan under CEQA Section 15183.5.

Jeffrey King, Director, Climate, Energy, and Air Programs 777 North Capitol St., NE #300, Washington, DC 20002
(202) 962-3238
Michael Baker is providing support to Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) for greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation, climate adaption, and similar projects from related programs. Specific tasks include GHG inventory development, climate mitigation and energy/sustainability program planning and implementation support, climate vulnerability and risk assessments, and resilience planning, strategy development, and implementation support. Task orders under this contract include Charles County Climate Action Planning, which Michael Baker is leading a multi -firm team developing a CAP for the County that covers both community -wide and internal government operations, with a robust outreach and engagement plan that encompasses survey and website development as well as the planning, facilitation, summarization, and incorporation of feedback received from over 30 meetings (in -person, virtual, and hybrid) throughout project. Michael Baker is also providing support to the City of Laurel to develop a CAP under this contract, which consists of both sustainable organization implementation and sustainable community implementation, and involves identifying, analyzing, prioritizing, developing KPIs, and implementing tracking mechanisms for multi -sector sustainability strategies within city internal operations.

Belinda Deines, AICP, Principal Planner
33282 Golden Lantern, Dana Point, CA 92629
(949)248-3570
bdeines c-Oannoint.orq
Michael Baker assisted the City of Dana Point with the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Doheny Village Zoning District Update. The purpose and intent of the proposed project is to preserve and enhance the eclectic combination of commercial, light industrial, and residential mixed uses in Doheny Village. The zoning district update provides the following three new zoning districts specific to the project area: Village Commercial/Industrial; Village Commercial/Residential; and Village Main Street. In addition to a Zoning Code Amendment, implementation of the proposed project required a General Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to reflect the new land use and zoning district classifications.

De Novo Planning Group 36

i
TEMECULA •
f
al
r�
Yilr; t s

TECHNI
APPROA

TIMELIP

PROJECT APPROACH
The City of Temecula is seeking a highly qualified con- sultant team to partner with to update its General Plan, prepare a Climate Action Plan, and prepare associated
environmental documents. The goal of the General Plan
Update is to modernize the document, build off of recent city plans, programs, and research to support a strong
quality of life, and proactively address the current chal- lenges and opportunities facing Temecula, including the upcoming 7th Cycle Housing Element.

The successful consultant team must be familiar with
the unique needs of communities in western Riverside
County and communities with similar contexts, and have
proven success implementing a mix of innovative and
inclusive community outreach methods to maximize
meaningful public participation, gain broad community
support, and ensure that the General Plan carries forward the vision and values of Temecula residents, businesses, and leadership. As shown throughout this proposal, the
De Novo team is exceptionally qualified to undertake this project.

The City desires a team to lead and manage all aspects
of the General Plan Update, while coordinating with staff (including the City's deesignated Project Manager), the public, Planning Commission, and City Council. The team should be able to complete this comprehensive work ef-
fort in an efficient manner (within a 24-month schedule as proposed) and will maintain strict adherence to the
project budget. The General Plan will be prepared in ac- cordance with State of California General Plan Guidelines and California Government Code Section 65350 et seq.

The project also involves completing related environmen- tal review consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), recommended as a Program Envi-
ronmental Impact Report (EIR).

A comprehensive General Plan Update —whereby the
City updates the entire General Plan at once (minus the Housing Element) and prepares a Program EIR—provides
the City with an opportunity to engage residents, busi- nesses, and stakeholders in a robust discussion regarding the community's vision and values. This is a chance for the City to create a Vision Plan and clearly articulate the community's contemporary goals, policies, and desired
De Novo Planning Group 39

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
implementation actions. By tackling all topics at once, the City can address critical issues from a broad perspec- tive, realize better public involvement due to increased scope and momentum, achieve full CEQA coverage at
once, and benefit from a shorter schedule and reduced
costs.

Like the rest of western Riverside County, Temecula is
experiencing changes to who lives, works, and visits the community. The City plays an important role in the region and is connected (literally and figuratively) to the region through shared history, environment, and infrastructure.

The City of Temecula must clearly understand its own is- sues and opportunities, make sure the General Plan artic- ulates the community's vision for the future, and imple- ment the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan to make that vision a reality. At the same time, Temecula must continue to think strategically about its role in the region and how its decisions influence or are impacted
by its neighbors, particularly in terms of regional issues like transportation, economic development, sustainabil- ity, and resiliency.

A solid General Plan is the bedrock for future growth and development in Temecula and it supports other critical
City plans and programs, including specific plans, park planning, fees, and infrastructure master plans. While we believe that the program we have included fully address- es the needs of your community, we welcome the oppor-
tunity to refine our approach as needed to ensure that
the City's expectations are realized.

Temecula is a dynamic and growing community with a
strong sense of identity, shaped by its history, family -ori- ented neighborhoods, and economic opportunities. As
the city looks ahead through its General Plan update,
our team is excited to guide the City through a diligent, effective, and efficient process that results in an imple- mentable set of policy documents rooted in the priorities of residents, businesses, and stakeholders.

De Novo Planning Group 40

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

SCOPE OF WORK
We have prepared the following work plan in response
to the City's Request for Proposals, our experience pre- paring an update to the City's Housing and Safety Ele-
ment as well as preparing environmental documents
for projects in the City, experience working on other
General Plan Update projects throughout California for
communities facing similar issues and opportunities as
Temecula. We have also placed a special emphasis on
creating easy to understand documents and other best
planning practices to create time and financial efficien- cies that result in easy -to -understand documents and
implementable actions.

All work products will be delivered in an electronic for- mat to reduce waste; where hardcopies of products are
to be provided, they are specifically identified in the as- sociated task deliverable.

TASK 1 PROJECT INITIATION
The project will begin with the consultant team provid- ing a high-level project overview and refined timeline
at an in -person meeting with City staff, collecting data, analyzing existing conditions, and evaluating opportu-
nities and issues. In order to achieve our objectives for Task 2, our experienced team will kick-off and execute a detailed existing conditions study, including preparation of background reports and other documents which will
later streamline policy development and environmental
review.

TASK 13 KICK-OFF MEETING AND TOUR
Within two weeks of project commencement, the De
Novo team will meet with City staff to kick-off the project and provide a project overview, including a schedule for completion of the project, with clear deadlines and spe- cific action items identified for each task. In addition to refining/confirming the timeline, we anticipate discuss- ing the following:
• Confirm/finalize project scope of work and
schedule;
• City preferences for point of contact, method
of communication, meeting and workshop
responsibilities;
• Discuss community outreach approach,
including Visioning Workshops, identification
of stakeholders, General Plan Update website,
General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), and
format for community workshops; and
• Data request for relevant background
documents (adopted documents, reports, and
studies)
For this effort to be as successful as possible, we recom- mend representatives from all City departments partici- pate in the kick-off meeting. Following the meeting, the team will take a tour of the City to discuss key issues and opportunities.

Task 1.1 Deliverables:
• Meeting agenda, data needs list, summary
notes, tour photos, project schedule/work plan
with major work components and milestones
De Novo Planning Group 41

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 1.2 AUDIT OF EXISTING CITY PLANS
De Novo will review and evaluate the City's existing plans and use the information gathered through this analysis
to inform the General Plan Update project. This will in- clude:

1. Reviewing Temecula's current General Plan in-
cluding all its associated elements, organization,
goals, policies, and implementation actions.

2. Auditing the City's Specific Plans and Planned
Development Overlays.

3. Reviewing other policy documents, including
those listed in the RFP.

Fehr &Peers will play an important role in this task. F&P has a great start on this task since many of the City's transportation related documents were reviewed and
summarized as part of the Transportation Discovery Ex-
isting Conditions report, which they authored. F&P will review and refresh the audit of the City's existing city plans. F&P will also do a thorough review of the current General Plan Circulation Element Goals, Policies, and Im- plementation Actions and will identify those that may
need to be updated or removed based on the transpor-
tation system, alignment with current city policies, and transportation best practices. In addition, F&P will pro- vide guidance on incorporating several new transporta-
tion related requirements into the General Plan Update
including the following:
• AB 1358
• SB 932
• SIB 99
• AB 747
• AB 98
F&P will also review the specific plans and planned de- velopment overlays and identify transportation related
items that should be included or referenced in the Cir- culation Element.

Finally, F&P will review regional transportation planning efforts and documents from WRCOG, Caltrans District 8,
and Riverside Transit Agency.

F&P will prepare a matrix summarizing the City's trans- portation planning policy and guidance on how to utilize it for the Circulation Element.

1.2 Deliverables:
• Memorandum and matrix highlighting existing
policy relationships and conflicts and strategies
to resolve issues and improve useability of the
General Plan and other policy plans.

TASK 1.3 SOCIOECONOMIC, DEMOGRAPHIC,

AND REAL ESTATE MARKET STUDY
EPS will prepare a socioeconomic, demographic, and
real estate market conditions study to serve as a baseline profile for the Temecula General Plan Update. Utilizing Costar, ESRI, and other data sources, the study will an- alyze key economic and real estate factors affecting the City and its role in the broader region. The report will analyze supply and demand conditions and trends for
a variety of land uses —including retail, hospitality, office, industrial, and residential —in the City. For each land use category and associated market sector, EPS will consider historical trends, recent market activity and performance (including rents and absorption rates), and future growth pressures and opportunities to identify core strengths, emerging niches, and under -served markets. EPS will
also conduct a high-level review of the City's tax revenue sources to understand the City's existing tax base and
fiscal resilience.

Using this analysis, EPS will summarize the strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) affect-
ing the City's long-term land use and economic devel-
opment potential in both the medium and long-term,
consistent with the City's goals.

1.3 Deliverables:
• Socioeconomic, Demographic, and Real Estate
Market Profile (Administrative Draft and Final)
De Novo Planning Group 42

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 1.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS DATA

COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
To prepare a meaningful General Plan, existing condi-
tions must be well understood and clearly documented.

The Existing Conditions Report (ECR) will be a valuable resource for the General Plan Advisory Committee, City
Council, Planning Commission, City staff, and the De
Novo team to refer to as goals and policies are developed and the EIR is prepared. While there will be a significant amount of narrative discussion included in the ECR, we
will also make extensive use of maps, graphics, and us- er-friendly non -technical terms to help make it accessi- ble to the public.

The De Novo team has found that preparing a compre-
hensive Existing Conditions Report early in the process provides the entire team clarity on issues facing the City, and fosters a deeper level of understanding of key topics that must be addressed from multiple angles through-
out the project. The Existing Conditions Report will ad- dress, at a minimum, the following topics:
• Land Use
• Mobility
• Demographic
Trends
• Community
Character/Urban
Design
• Market Trends
• Historical and
Cultural Resources
• Community
Services and
TASK 2 OUTREACH
Temecula's population includes long-standing residents
who have seen the city evolve, young families investing in the future, and a growing business community that
fuels the local economy. There are also those who work
in Temecula but live elsewhere, contributing to the city's vibrancy but not always having a clear voice in long-term planning. Effective outreach must acknowledge these
distinct perspectives, meeting people where they are —
both physically and in terms of their level of engagement with city processes.

Our approach will focus on inclusive, activity -based en- gagement that goes beyond traditional public meetings
to create interactive and accessible opportunities for in- put. Rather than expecting the community to come to
City Hall, we will embed engagement within the places
and spaces where people already gather —local events,
schools, businesses, and digital platforms. Engagement
will prioritize dialogue over one-way communication,
allowing residents to share their lived experiences and shape planning decisions in ways that feel tangible and relevant.

Facilities
This approach also recognizes the importance of cultur- e Environmental
ally responsive engagement, ensuring that outreach is
Justice
accessible to Temecula's diverse population. Strategies • Conservation
will include multilingual materials, if desired by the City, • Greenhouse Gas
partnerships with trusted local organizations, and a mix and Climate Change
of in -person and digital outreach to ensure broad partic- • Hazards, Safety, and
ipation.

Noise
Data collection and analysis for the CAP will occur
concurrently with preparation of the ECR to promote
consistency. Note that several technical studies will be prepared as part of the project, including reports on
transportation, noise, infrastructure, and cultural resourc- es. These reports will inform the ECR and General Plan
and are delineated as part of the Environmental Impact
Report task.

As a separate document, we will prepare a concise Com-
munity Profile Summary to highlight the most important
issues. This stand-alone summary (which we've prepared
for other communities including La Verne, Lake Forest,
and Campbell) will be prepared in a magazine format
and shared via viewing platform like Blurb or Issue to en- hance the user experience.

1.4 Deliverables:
• Administrative Draft Existing Conditions Report,
Final Existing Conditions Report (25 copies), Ad-
ministrative Draft Executive Summary, Final Ex-
ecutive Summary (25 copies)
Finally, our engagement will be iterative and transparent, creating a feedback loop so that community members
see how their input is reflected in the process. By making engagement engaging, equitable, and impactful, we will
build trust and foster a shared vision that reflects Teme- cula's identity and aspirations for the future.

De Novo Planning Group 43

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 23 COMMUNITY OUTREACH PROGRAM
Following the project kick off meeting, the team will pre- pare a Community Outreach Program, which will serve as
a guide to the community and stakeholder engagement
process modeled after IAP2 values and principles. The
Community Outreach Program will include elements
necessary for the consultant team and City staff to cre- ate pathways for active public engagement in the Gener- al Plan Update. It will incorporate goals for participation from all segments of the community, stakeholder anal-
ysis, a communications plan, programs & activities, roles and responsibilities, and a calendar. For each outreach activity, a schedule, date, target group, purpose, and
public participation goal. In addition to outlining meth- ods for how residents will be engaged in the process
through workshops, pop -ups, focus groups and digital
engagement, the plan will provide recommendations on
how the City should structure the Visioning process and how to engage the public on the current General Plan
themes. The Community Outreach Program will also in-
clude tools and methodology to meaningfully engage
underrepresented and non-English speaking commu-
nity members. Specifically, that will include the identifi- cation of organizations representing these communities
and proposed means for engaging them meaningfully
throughout the process.

2.1 Deliverables:
• Draft and Final Community Outreach Plan
TASK 2.2 GRAPHIC IDENTITY TEMPLATE
To provide a consistent look and feel for all materials, and to ensure that the GPU process activities are instantly recognizable as such, our team will work with the City to develop a project identity and branding. This includes a set of project logo, phrase, colors, fonts, and layout tem- plates that can be used for slides, presentation boards, handouts and collateral materials, the project website, survey forms, workshop and open house signage, sign
in sheets, and other uses where appropriate. During this task, the project team and the City will create a flexible design that can be applied to appropriate materials and products identified in the Community Engagement Plan.

2.2 Deliverables:

Project logo/branding design sheet
TASK 2.3 DIGITAL ENGAGEMENT
Our team is on the cutting edge of designing and im-
plementing intuitive, empowering, and engaging collab-
orative technologies that help our clients achieve their communications goals by connecting with audiences
in innovative ways. Additionally, our approach to digital engagement and the selection and timing of applying
specific tools are geared toward reaching all audiences, especially those that have historically not engaged in
public planning processes. In other words, our approach reduces barriers to entry in the planning process and al- lows the public to engage at a time and manner that is
convenient and accessible.

We propose using a suite of strategies to keep the com- munity interested and engaged. While potential options
are included below, specific activities and methods will be confirmed through the development of the Commu-
nity Outreach Program and may be adapted/altered as
the project progresses.

Website
De Novo will create and manage a dynamic and interac-
tive dedicated project website to share information and gather public input (De Novo owns the domain "Gener-
alPlan.org" so the project website will be easily identi- fiable, such as "Temecula.GeneralPlan.org"). The website will identify the schedule of upcoming meetings, serve
as a library of General Plan documents (including staff reports, meeting agendas and minutes, technical re-
ports, and public review drafts), and allow the public an opportunity to participate in polls and comment on the
General Plan Update process.

Online Surveys
Our team has found SurveyMonkey to be a cost-effi-
cient yet engaging tool to gather meaningful feedback.

Surveys will be conducted in both English and Spanish
and will based on the programs and activities defined
in the Community Outreach Program. The project team
will design two surveys, one during the visioning stage and the other during the alternatives stage. QR codes
will be generated for these surveys for utilization in pop- up events and educational materials. Our team has ex-
perience with GIS-based mapping survey platforms like
Maptionairre and can involve them if the City is looking for placed -based survey feedback for an additional fee.

De Novo Planning Group 44

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
Virtual Interactive Tools
There are a multitude of digital engagement tools we
have the capacity to utilize across the various outreach activities outlined above. This includes digital white - boarding tools, such as Miro and Mural, which can be
utilized to allow all participants to simultaneously share written feedback in a group discussion. Mobile polling, through platforms like PollEverywhere, can provide an
opportunity to engage the full audience at once, re-
viewing and presenting results in real-time. Where ap-
propriate, results can be tabulated to allow for detailed quantifiable analysis, informing ongoing discussions and decision -making
Educational and Engagement Material
We will also work with City staff to share all educational and engagement materials, along with project updates,
via the City's website, the project website, existing com- munication and stakeholder networks, and social media
outlets. The team will develop a flyer for each workshop, email blasts, website content, and a social media plan
with sample social media blurbs for the project. Our
team will work with City staff to develop shorthand proj- ect updates and educational content in the form of Nex- tdoor posts, Facebook posts, and website updates.

Notifications Plan
Our team will develop a suite of notification collateral for specific outreach events and the project overall. This can include flyers (digital and print), e-mail blasts, and a social media plan with sample postings. Our team will work
with City staff to develop shorthand project updates and educational content in the form of Nextdoor posts, Face - book posts, Instagram posts, and website updates.

General Plan Video
The way people learn about General Plans has evolved
over time and new multimedia engagement programs
are more relevant than ever. A picture, or a video, is often worth a thousand words. To help engage the public and
educate the community on why the City is updating its
General Plan and how it will impact them, we will pre-
pare a brief (2-3 minute) General Plan Update overview
video. Animated text graphics will help to call -out key ideas and facts. Videos will be formatted for web and
internal distribution.

2.3 Deliverables:
• Project website development and management
• Two online surveys and summary results
• Coordination of interactive tools via the project
website
• One 2-3 minute General Plan Update overview
video
TASK 2.4 EVERY DOOR DIRECT MAILER
To ensure maximum inclusivity in the General Plan Up-
date process, we propose preparing and delivering a
postcard -sized advertisement to every residential and
business address in the City. To maximize the effective- ness of the direct mailer, we recommend that the mailer be prepared and delivered at the very beginning of the
project. A bilingual mailer is envisioned to include the following information:
• A brief message regarding the project compo-
nents and objectives
• The specific days, times, locations, and topics for
the Visioning Workshops
• A link to the project website/contact information
The De Novo team will design the mailer and work with
a local printer to prepare and deliver the mailers using the USPS Every Door Direct Mail (EDDM) delivery system.

Based on USPS records, there are approximately 50,000
residential and business addresses in the City. This task includes preparation, printing, coordination with the
USPS EDDM program, and delivery (postage).

2.4 Deliverables:
• One postcard -sized direct mailer, two-sided, in
black and white; English and Spanish language;
approximately 50,000 mailers printed and deliv-
ered to every residential and business address
in the City
We, yWp All At arc of �* famP,❑
The City of San Jacinto is excited to announce that we are What do you low about San Jacinto? updating our General Plan! The General Plan is a roadmap that includes long-term policies to guide San Jacinto for the What Is your vision next 20 years. It addresses a range of significant community for the future of our Cll topics like land use, housing, economic development,
transportation, parts and recreation, public safety, and more. What opportunities and cholleagas do you think face San Jacinto as It
_- grows over the next 20 years?
W.—tto Marhorn sowearn
- - chart a path forward for son Jacinto's continued prosperity. — pe•� to diiiiiiiiiis yew Wwa
hr �rar.rr�.wtir�r�.e.wwJr..rw.si
g g �+il!1si�iL:uluj
Thundasn February 21, 2019 Tuesday March 12, =9 Thursday March 28, 2019 6re0-9 pm areas — a pm 6430—gpm
Conn, C— carsresagy Cmter conrau s,c «•••••• ECRWSS•• •"'•• fan
f PIa,A- ells Fho Aw _s F1ioaw i ?.oral Postal Customer lesiMgGnser fan lodneo,Gp2ew son lmhda, CA
921ee
"parlsbr-the, fod•reaa use b.prere 'at ag 9411sNng WaMbp De Novo Planning Group 45

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 2.6 POP-UP EVENTS
Popup events are an effective engagement tool for
bringing information to community members and ask-
ing for their input in an informal setting. They provide the community with the ability to engage and provide
feedback on their own terms rather than participating
within the confines of a formal workshop. Our team will support City staff develop a strategy for implementing
popup events (at least one in each Council District) that align key junctures of the project and highly attended
community events. Specifically, this will include develop- ing:
• Event -specific materials.
• Interactive processes for collecting and docu-
menting the public's feedback.
• A list of proposed events, such as the Rod Run
and Temecula Farmers' Market.
• A logistics guide for the events.
• Attendance at up to five pop-up events.

Prior to the first popup event, Kearns & West will host a training session to brief City staff on the intent of these events, input sought, and roles and responsibilities for staffing the events, among other considerations. This
training will allow City staff to navigate popup events confidently, in an informed manner, and collect needed
feedback from the community.

2.6 Deliverables:
• Preparation of process design and logistics
memo, in -person training; Attendance and facil-
itation by a facilitator and a support staff mem-
ber at training with City staff; Attendance and
facilitation by a facilitator and a support staff
member at five in -person events
TASK 2.5 VISIONING WORKSHOPS AND
OPEN HOUSES (8)
Our team will host a series of workshops and open hous- es during the General Plan Update process, with the first five workshops occurring as part of an intensive visioning process and subsequent open houses designed to gath-
er feedback on draft work products such as the Land Use Alternatives Report and Draft General Plan. All materials will be translated into Spanish and Spanish interpreta- tion services will be provided during the workshops and open houses.

Visioning Workshops (5)
At the outset of the General Plan Update process, five
Visioning Workshops will be held (one in each Coun-
cil District). The Visioning Workshops will introduce the community to the project and will focus on: 1) commu-
nicating the intent of the project to the public and in- viting public input; 2) identifying the overall vision and core values that will guide the project; and 3) identifying the community priorities, land use, design, and mobility preferences of City residents and stakeholders.

Community Open House (3)
Our team will host three community open houses to
present and solicit feedback on key work products, in-
cluding the Land Use Alternatives Report and the Draft
General Plan Update. The intent of the Community Open
Houses is to highlight the "big ideas" of the Land Use Al- ternatives Report and Draft General Plan, answer any
questions the public may have, and take notes on the
public's feedback in order to share it with the Planning Commission and City Council as they consider 1) a draft proposed land use map and 2) the project's approval.

2.5 Deliverables:
• Facilitation of five (5) Visioning Workshops and
three (3) Community Open House, including all
handouts, PowerPoint presentations, large -for-
mat exhibits, and workshop advertisements,
Spanish translation of materials and in -person
interpretation
De Novo Planning Group 46

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 2.7 GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY
COMMITTEE (6 MEETINGS)
We understand that the City intends to assemble a
General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) to serve as a
sounding board for the General Plan Update. Forming
a GPAC is an effective, efficient way to engage a variety of stakeholders. De Novo has experience managing var-
ious GPAC compositions and we can work with the City
during project kick-off to evaluate how the committee
could be appointed and who should be represented.

For the GPAC to be an effective advisory body, the City must clearly articulate the committee's charge (their
roles and responsibilities). In addition to advising on the committee's formation, our recommendations to the
City will also include example charges, and the opportu- nities and challenges that come with different degrees
of empowerment and responsibility. It is our recommen-
dation that the City will be responsible for managing the committee's appointment and membership, while the
consultant team will be responsible for presentations
and materials.

As specified in the RFP, the De Novo team expects to
prepare five special topic white paper which will be pro- vided to the GPAC in advance of each meeting. We ex-
pect to prepare a paper to support each of the first five meetings described below. Our initial work plan antic-
ipates that the meetings could generally be organized
as follows:

1. Vision/Priorities (September 2025)

2. Land Use and Economic Development (October
2025)

3. Mobility (November 2025)

4. Land Use Alternatives (January 2026)

5. Infrastructure and Sustainability (February 2026)

6. Feedback on Draft General Plan (May 2026)
As an optional task, De Novo is prepared to facilitate up to two additional GPAC meetings (for a total of eight
meetings) without delay to the proposed project sched-
ule.

2.7 Deliverables:
• Preparation and facilitation of six (6) General
Plan Advisory Committee meetings including
PowerPoint presentations, large-scale maps,
and all meeting materials including topic area
white papers for meetings one through five
• Optional two (2) additional General Plan Adviso-
ry Committee meetings
TASK 2.8 STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS
The team will plan and facilitate up to ten (10) individual/ group stakeholder interviews. It is expected that a repre- sentative from De Novo Planning Group will participate
in all interviews, and additional participation from sub - consultants may be appropriate depending on the inter-
viewee. These interviews may be conducted virtually (via Zoom/Teams), in -person, or a combination of formats.

To the extent possible, in -person interviews should be scheduled on the same day as other in -person activities (i.e., visioning workshops, pop-up events, study sessions).

2.8 Deliverables:
• Preparation for and facilitation of up to ten (10)
individual/group stakeholder interviews (virtual,
in -person, or a combination of formats)
TASK 2.9 VISION REPORT
The public engagement and visioning process will result in a comprehensive Vision Report that will serve as the foundation for the goals, policies, and actions identified in the General Plan. In the Vision Report, the team will summarize the community engagement program, input
received, and outreach outcomes. It will also identify the community's goals and vision for the future as well as
specific issue areas that must be carefully addressed in the General Plan and/or Environmental Impact Report.

The document will be stylized using the project identity and will be a visually appealing document designed for
ease of reading and understanding by the community. It
will be in full color and will include pictures of activities conducted.

2.9 Deliverables:
• Administrative Draft Vision Plan Document, Fi-
nal Vision Plan Document (English and Spanish,
25 copies each)
TASK 230 STUDY SESSIONS AND PUBLIC

HEARINGS
Throughout the process it will be necessary to provide in- formation and receive feedback from City boards, com-
missions, and the City Council, including the Vision Plan and Preferred Land Use Plan. At the conclusion of the
project, it will also be necessary to present the updated General Plan, CAP, and EIR to the Planning Commission
and City Council for their respective review and approval during a public hearing.

2.10 Deliverables:
• Facilitation of up to eight study sessions and/or
public hearings with City boards, commissions
and/or City Council and up to four public hear-
ings with Planning Commission and City Council
De Novo Planning Group 47

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 3 LAND USE ALTERNATIVES
As described in the Project Understanding, if the City
desires to complete the project within two years from
kick-off, it is important that we arrive at a preferred land use plan by the end of Q1 2026. This is a relatively ag- gressive timeline and will require a highly efficient and effective process led by a team of subject -area experts.

De Novo's extensive experience in preparing and eval-
uating land use alternatives best positions the City for success. Once a preferred land use plan is confirmed, the team will move forward expeditiously with the environ-
mental review. To facilitate this process, De Novo has pro- posed a strategic alternatives evaluation work program
that heavily relies on existing City plans, input from the community through the Visioning Workshops and GPAC
meetings, and a collaborative effort working with City
staff to quickly and efficiently establish the alternatives.

TASK 3.1 ALTERNATIVE PREPARATION AND

EVALUATION
De Novo will host a collaborative working session with
City staff to develop two land use alternatives, plus the baseline condition, based on feedback received from
the public and other pertinent market information. This effort will result in three maps and a set of land use defi- nitions to support the maps.

The team will prepare a Land Use Alternatives Report to study the alternatives. As part of the Land Use Alternatives Report, the De Novo team will develop population and
employment projections based on the reasonable build -
out of each alternative. The De Novo team will evaluate the land use alternatives in terms of impacts on an identified set of topics, such as existing/programmed public facili- ties or networks, the natural environment, the economy, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, and City finances.

Additionally. F&P will support the Project Team in review- ing land use assumptions, developing land use model in- puts/changes by Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ), and running the RIVCOM Model for up to three (3) land use scenarios.

It is assumed that land use/socio-economic data (SED)
assumptions will be provided at TAZ level by the Project team/City staff for Fehr & Peers to review and incorporate into the model.

F&P will utilize the version of the 2045 RIVCOM Model
that was developed for the mobility testing in the Trans- portation Discover project. This model version has more roadway network detail than the "off the shelf' version, providing more detailed results. The following metrics
will be obtained from the model runs for each land use
scenario:
• Daily roadway volumes on arterials and collec-
tors.
• AM and PM peak hour volumes at the 12 study
intersections identified in the existing condi-
tions analysis.
• VMT per service population, VMT/capita, and
VMT/employee.
• Total VMT, calculated using both boundary
method (VMT contained with the City limits)
and CAP method (all internal to internal VMT,
one-half of external to internal and internal to
external VMT, and no external to external VMT).
• Average trip length for residential and employ-
ment land uses and to the extent possible, av-
erage trip length by trip type (home based work
and home based other).
• Mode share information.

The model analysis will be used to determine roadway
network needs to support each land use alternative. The roadway needs will be identified based on vehicular con- gestion, complete streets, and other community values
identified through outreach and engagement tasks.

As part of the Land Use Alternatives Report, the De Novo team and City staff will develop policy options to address identified key assets, issues, and opportunities., which will be more fully developed during preparation of the
General Plan Policy Document.

The team will present the Land Use Alternatives Report
to the public, Planning Commission, and City Council for consideration and feedback.

3.1 Deliverables:
• Preparation for and facilitation of working ses-
sion with City staff; three land use alternative
maps and associated land use designations
• Land Use Alternatives Report (Administrative
Draft and Final)
De Novo Planning Group 48

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 3.2 FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
To assist in evaluating the Land Use Alternatives and re- fining a Preferred Alternative, EPS will analyze the fiscal impacts of proposed land use programs (up to four sce-
narios provided by De Novo) on General Fund revenues
and costs. EPS will employ a planning -level approach,
based on an evaluation of the City's budget and esti-
mates related to primary revenue generators (for exam-
ple, property and sales tax). EPS expects that the City will provide budget documents and any other supporting
information regarding the General Fund. For quantify-
ing fiscal revenue impacts, EPS will employ a per -cap- ita methodology, supplemented where necessary with
a limited case -study approach, to estimate increases
in General Fund revenues attributable to new develop-
ment. For quantifying public service cost impacts re-
sulting from the Proposed Plan, EPS will use an average cost methodology for forecasting increases in service
demand and associated expenditures by land use cate-
gory. (Note: this analysis will be conducted after program alternatives have been developed).

3.2 Deliverables:
• Fiscal Impact Analysis Report (Administrative
Draft and Final)
TASK 3.3 PREFERRED LAND USE PLAN DE-

VELOPMENT
The team will present the Land Use Alternatives Report
to the public, Planning Commission, and City Council for consideration and feedback. Based on the information
and direction received, the team will prepare a Preferred Land Use Plan and conduct the necessary analysis to de- velop a detailed project description for use in the EIR. The De Novo team expects the Preferred Plan to reflect com- ponents of more than one alternative; in other words, it is not likely that an alternative will be "perfect" and select- ed as the Preferred Plan. Once a Preferred Land Use Plan has been defined, final demographic information will be generated and EPS will update the fiscal model to proj- ect the Preferred Plan's net fiscal impacts.

3.3 Deliverables:
• Preferred Land Use Plan and associated build -
out summary information, fiscal analysis on the
Preferred Plan
TASK 4 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Our team is committed to providing the City a Gener-
al Plan of the highest quality and will actively engage the community to develop a vision for the General Plan, prepare a policy document that reflects the desires of
the City, and create measurable implementation actions
that are consistent with the City's vision for the future.

TASK 4J GENERAL PLAN FRAMEWORK
(GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS)
This task involves both organizing the structure of the General Plan and developing the goals, policies, and
implementation programs (actions), which will become
the backbone of the policy document. De Novo's Project
Manager —Amanda Tropiano—lead's the firm's policy
writing practice and regularly instructs on the mechan- ics of adequate policy writing, ensuring that every word included in the General Plan is meaningful. This includes writing specific, actionable, and measurable implemen-
tation programs integrated into the body of each Gener- al Plan element. In preparing the General Plan Update,
the De Novo team will prepare each element to ensure
that all goals, policies, and actions:
• Support the community's vision and values;
• Address requirements of State law;
• Avoid or mitigate potential environmental im-
pacts, or are balanced by social, economic, legal,
or other relevant considerations;
• Are grounded in recent and sound community
planning and conservation trends; and
• Are internally consistent.

De Novo will integrate the environmental analysis with
the development of the goals, policies, and programs.

This highly successful approach, tested and proven by the De Novo Principals and numerous satisfied General Plan
clients, involves identifying potential environmental im- pacts at the outset of General Plan policy development to ensure that the General Plan is "self -mitigating" and that the EIR does not result in policies and implementation
programs that would change the intent of the General
Plan. This approach maximizes the use of previously de- veloped information, reducing the overall project budget, and provides consistency between the two documents.

4.1 Deliverables:
• Administrative, Screencheck, and Public Review
Draft Goals, Policies and Programs for all eight
required General Plan Elements and an unlimit-
ed number of City -identified optional elements
such as, but not limited to, Economic Develop-
ment, Community Design, and Public Services
and Facilities.

De Novo Planning Group 49

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 4.2 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Using the City -approved goals, policies, and programs
developed in the prior task, the De Novo team will as-
semble the General Plan Policy Document. The docu-
ment will conform with all aspects of the California Gen- eral Plan Guidelines and meet all applicable legislative requirements.

To streamline the process and create a clear, concise
General Plan, we propose to maintain the Existing Con-
ditions Report as a separate document that identifies
background conditions, allowing the General Plan doc-
ument to have a minimum amount of background text.

Instead, the document will have a streamlined goal,
policy, and program structure that is easy for the reader (whether it be Staff, elected and appointed officials, or the public) to understand. The General Plan will include a liberal use of graphics and visual depictions of informa- tion, including photographs, tables, matrices, drawings, maps, and other graphics to ensure that the document
is easy to understand. The General Plan will reflect the City's aspirations for the coming decades and achieve
maximum utility. Specifically, JZMK will prepare one ren- dering for up to four opportunity sites to convey possible development outcome and character. These images are
a powerful tool to communicate the vision of the Gen-
eral Plan.

The De Novo team will provide City staff with an Admin- istrative Draft General Plan for review; comments on the Administrative Draft General Plan will be used to create a Screencheck Draft General Plan; comments on the
Screencheck Draft General Plan will be used to create a Public Review Draft General Plan. We anticipate meeting with City staff to review comments and reach agreement
on how to address potentially conflicting comments.

4.2 Deliverables:
• Administrative, Screencheck, and Public Review
Draft General Plan Policy Document
• Final General Plan (25 hardcopies)
All General Plan maps, tables, and images (elec-
tronic format including GIS shapefiles of all
maps)

4.3 SUMMARY OF ZONING AND SPECIFIC

PLAN AMENDMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
We anticipate that the General Plan will include specif- ic actions directing the City to amend the Zoning Code
and Map and/or Specific Plans or Planned Development
areas in order to implement the General Plan and create consistency with the Plan goals, policies, and programs.

De Novo has recently completed the required zoning
code and zoning map amendments to create consis-
tency with the recently updated General Plans for oth-
er clients in Orange County, including Lake Forest and
Westminster, and recently completed the Envision San
Jacinto project, which included an update to the Gener- al Plan and concurrent implementation of the General
Plan through an update to the Development Code and
Zoning Map.

Our team will prepare recommendations for these
amendments and deliver these recommendations to
the City in a summary matrix listing issues that require attention, a list of next steps, and potential map amend- ments.

4.3 Deliverables:

Administrative Draft and Final Summary Report of Zon-
ing, Specific Plan, and Planned Development Amend-
ment Recommendations
De Novo Planning Group SO

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 5 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
TASK 5.1 LITERATURE REVIEW OF PLANNING

DOCUMENTS AND REGULATIONS
As the first step of developing the CAP Update and ob-
taining a thorough understanding of the City's climate
change efforts, Michael Baker will collect and review
the City's existing planning documents, including those completed in the recent past and those still being de-
veloped. Michael Baker will review the City's 2022 green- house gas (GHG) emissions inventory prepared in 2024
and the 2022 Western Riverside Council of Governments
Subregional Climate Action Plan - City of Temecula. Fehr & Peers will review the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data used in the inventory. Michael Baker will also summa-
rize the applicable Statewide and regional programs and regulations related to GHG emission reduction. These
programs and regulations will serve as the basis for GHG emissions assessment. In addition, Michael Baker will
collaborate with the City to determine the appropriate
role for the City in the CAP development process.

TASK 5.2 GHG EMISSIONS FORECAST AND

REDUCTION TARGET -SETTING
Assembly Bill (AB) 32 established the State's goal of re- ducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and 80
percent below 1990 levels by 2050. With Senate Bill (SB) 32, the State has committed to reducing GHG emissions
to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The latest 2022 Scoping Plan sets a target of reducing anthropogenic
emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045 and
achieving carbon neutrality by reducing GHGs to meet
the anthropogenic emissions target and by expanding
actions to capture and store carbon through the State's natural and working lands. In accordance with these reg- ulations and based off of the City's 2022 GHG emissions inventory, Michael Baker will forecast short-term 2030
and long-term 2045 and 2050 GHG emissions under
business -as -usual (BAU) conditions and identify all key socioeconomic and other assumptions for the emissions
forecasts. The BAU forecasts will be based on historical trends and growth projections, including the City's pro- jected population, number of households, employment,
and projected vehicle miles traveled (VMT), consistent
with the City's General Plan Update. The VMT data will
be prepared by Fehr & Peers using the origin -destination based methodology that accounts for all VMT starting
and ending within the City, one-half of VMT starting or ending within the City, and no VMT starting and ending
outside of the City.

Following the BAU forecasts, Michael Baker will identi- fy the latest applicable Statewide programs and regu-
lations and associated potential emission reductions.

Michael Baker will then develop Adjusted BAU (ABAU)
forecasts by incorporating emission reductions from
Statewide programs and regulations. The BAU and ABAU
forecasts will be prepared using the ICLEI ClearPath tool, consistent with the City's 2022 GHG emissions inventory, for efficient and effective data management.

Michael Baker will identify options for preliminary emis- sions reduction targets that will serve as the basis for evaluating objectives in the CAP to reach these targets.

Initial targets will be identified, and a gap analysis will be conducted by comparing the initial targets with the
ABAU forecasts. Michael Baker will initiate an iterative process with the City to refine the targets, ensuring that the targets are both ambitious and achievable. Michael
Baker will summarize options for different targets and
show the resultant reduction amounts required for the
City to reach the identified targets.

TASK 5.3 GHG EMISSION REDUCTION

MEASURES DEVELOPMENT
Michael Baker will deliver a comprehensive strategy for reducing GHG emissions through 2050. Our approach
will draw on our project team's innovative and diverse ex- perience related to GHG reduction measures, extensive
research conducted throughout previous tasks, stake-
holder engagement and a collaborative process across
the entire project team to identify a diverse range of
emission reduction measures. Throughout this process,
Michael Baker will actively engage with City staff to dis- cuss our findings and seek alignment with the City's sus- tainability objectives. Furthermore, we will present our findings and actively solicit feedback during outreach
activities.

Utilizing our in-house expertise in energy engineering, transportation planning, and land use planning, we will proactively identify a range of reduction measures relat- ed to municipal and community operations with an em-
phasis on energy and transportation sectors - the two
largest contributors of GHG emissions. The energy sector reduction measures will compromise projects to reduce
emissions through facility improvements and retrofits,
while considering the projected reduction in GHG emis-
sions as a result of electricity and natural gas consump- tion. We will outline strategic measures to reduce emis- sions in various land use types across the City. Through our understanding of emissions profiles for different
types of community developments, combined with ex-
isting land use data for community developments, we
De Novo Planning Group 51

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
can establish GHG reduction strategies that could be im- plemented across a range of land use types.

Michael Baker will also provide recommendations on
and quantify the VMT and GHG emissions reduction po-
tential of transportation -related measures with technical guidance from Fehr & Peers, based on the latest Califor- nia Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Re-
ductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advanc- ing Health and Equity (December 2021).

Reduction measures from other emission sources, in-
cluding water, wastewater, and solid waste will also be identified, and the GHG emissions reductions from these measures will be quantified using the methodologies
prescribed in the CAPCOA Handbook. The co -benefits
of these measures will also be identified. The reduction measures will be summarized in a memorandum and
discussed with the City via a virtual meeting. The reduc- tion measures will be integrated into corresponding ele- ments of the City's General Plan Update.

TASK 5.4 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND

ADAPTATION MEASURES
Michael Baker team will analyze climate change related
risk and vulnerabilities and identify adaptation measures for each identified risk based on levels of security. Michael Baker will utilize the Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) as a basis for the analysis and build upon
an existing risk/vulnerability assessment. It is anticipated that climate risks to be evaluated will include drought, extreme heat, air quality, precipitation, high wind, and wildfire. The primary source is anticipated to include Cal - Adapt tool but will integrate other publicly accessible data sources as applicable. The climate risks will be pre- sented in maps generated using ArcGIS. The vulnerability assessment will also identify and address any projected disproportionate impacts that climate change may have
on socially vulnerable populations across the City.

Based on the findings of the vulnerability assessment
and findings associated with the GHG inventory and fore- casts, Michael Baker will prepare adaptation measures
accordingly. Adaptation measures will include commu-
nity adaptation measures, as well as those for municipal government operations.

Michael Baker will summarize the vulnerability assess-
ment and adaptation measures in a memorandum and
discuss with the City via a virtual meeting. The adapta- tion measures will be integrated into corresponding ele- ments of the City's General Plan Update.

TASK 5.5 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN

PREPARATION
Once the GHG emission forecasts, targets, reduction
measures, and adaptation measures have been identi-
fied, Michael Baker will prepare a draft CAP. The CAP will be prepared in a simple, user-friendly style in order to serve as the basis for future policy decisions of the City.

The CAP will suggest the type of performance criteria
that should be established to help measure progress
towards the target reductions. The Draft CAP will make
substantial use of graphics, charts, diagrams, and tables to convey key information. Prior to preparing the Draft CAP, Michael Baker will provide a detailed annotated
outline of the proposed contents of the CAP for review
and approval. The Draft CAP chapters will be provided to the City staff for review prior to publication of the public review draft. Michael Baker assumes a single set of con- solidated staff comments on each chapter of the Draft
CAP will be provided. Michael Baker will work with City staff to develop an appropriate distribution list and circu- late the Draft CAP to the public and applicable agencies and interest groups.

The Final CAP will consist of an introductory chapter and appropriate revisions to the text based upon comments
received on the Draft CAP. Michael Baker will provide a summary characterization of the nature of comments
for staff consideration prior to preparing the Final CAP.

Michael Baker assumes that no new information will be
raised in the comments that require substantive revi-
sions to the Draft CAP. If the volume or complexity of
the comments requires additional effort, an adjustment
to the work plan and budget may be needed. Michael
Baker will discuss the findings of the CAP and comments with the City via a virtual meeting.

De Novo Planning Group 52

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 5.6 ONGOING MONITORING AND

REPORTING
The City will monitor the progress of the implementa-
tion of the CAP and report the emissions and reduction
measures implementation status annually. Michael Bak-
er will develop a reporting template in Word for quick
and easy generation of the annual report and set up the ICLEI ClearPath tool for the City staff to input the data and generate the emissions summary. Michael Baker
will hold a workshop to provide instructions to City staff on how to properly use the reporting template and the
ClearPath tool.

To educate the public on the CAP implementation prog-
ress, Michael Baker will prepare web content for a public facing website, branded, and formatted consistent with
the City's guidelines. Content is anticipated to include deliverables produced from this scope of work, including community outreach summaries, GHG inventories, fore-
casts, and targets, GHG reduction measures, vulnerabil- ity assessment and adaptation measures, and the Final
CAP. Keyweb content will also include messaging on the
CAP's purpose, process, and outcomes. The webpage
will include a section of the City's annual GHG emissions and measures implementation summary that will be up-
dated annually by the City staff. Michael Baker assumes the City webmaster will be responsible for publishing
and maintaining the CAP website. This scope excludes
Michael Baker producing and hosting a standalone CAP
website for the purposes of this work effort.

In addition, upon adoption of the CAP and its associat- ed CEQA document, the CAP will become a qualified
GHG reduction plan to provide a streamlined review
process for proposed new development projects in the
City that are subject to discretionary review and trigger environmental review pursuant to CEQA. Michael Baker
will develop a CAP Consistency Checklist that contains
measures that are required to be implemented on a
project -by -project basis to ensure that the specified GHG reduction targets identified in the CAP are achieved. Im- plementation of these measures will ensure that new
developments are consistent with the CAP assumptions
for relevant reduction measures. The CAP Consistency
Checklist will be tailored for each type of development and provide adequate flexibility to the developers, re- ducing administrative burden to City staff. Projects that are consistent with the CAP as determined using this
Checklist could rely on the CAP for the impact analysis of GHG emissions, making the CEQA document more le-
gally defensible. Michael Baker will hold a workshop to provide instructions to City staff on how to properly use the Checklist.

Phase 5 Deliverables:
• PowerPoint presentation summarizing the GHG
emission inventories, forecasts, and target set-
ting.
• Memorandum summarizing GHG emissions in-
ventories, forecasts, target setting, and reduc-
tion measures, including the emissions reduc-
tions and co -benefits of each measure.
• Memorandum summarizing climate vulnerabili-
ty assessment and adaptation measures.
• Draft and Final CAP.
• ICLEI ClearPath tool set up for annual reporting.
• Annual report template in Word.
• CAP Consistency Checklist for CEQA in Word.
• One (1) workshop to provide instructions to City
staff on how to properly use the reporting tem-
plate, the ICLEI ClearPath tool, and the CAP Con-
sistency Checklist.
• Branded website content, including CAP's pur-
pose, process, and key findings, and template for
future annual reporting.

De Novo Planning Group 53

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT
De Novo will prepare a Program Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) that addresses all potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed General Plan Up-
date work program, inclusive of the Climate Action Plan (CAP), Specific Plan Updates, and Zoning Code Updates.

A Program -level EIR is the expected environmental docu- ment for a project of this scale and impact potential and will serve as a "tiering document" to facilitate streamlined environmental review of subsequent development, plan-
ning, and infrastructure projects undertaken in the city, which are consistent with the General Plan.
63 EIR NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND

SCOPINC

6.1.1 Notice of Preparation
De Novo will prepare the Notice of Preparation (NOP) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082. The
NOP will indicate the City's decision to prepare an EIR; a detailed Initial Study will not be prepared, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060 (d), which states if a lead agency can determine an EIR will be clearly required for a project, the agency may skip further initial review and begin work directly on the EIR.

The Draft NOP will be provided to the City for review. De Novo will revise the NOR providing the City with a Sec- ond Draft NOP with revisions in tracked changes for ease of review. Upon acceptance by the City, De Novo will fi- nalize the NOP for public distribution. This task includes filing the NOP with the County Clerk, State Clearinghouse through the CEQA Submit portal, and mailing the NOP
to a City -approved distribution list. It is assumed City staff will prepare and publish the newspaper notice. Com-
ments received in response to the NOP will be evaluated during the preparation of the EIR.

6.1.2 Scoping Meeting
A public scoping meeting is anticipated to be scheduled during the NOP public review period. De Novo will pre-
pare presentation materials and facilitate the meeting.

The scoping meeting will include an overview of the Gen- eral Plan Update project and the environmental review
process, as well as identification of environmental issues that will be addressed in the EIR. After completion of
the scoping meeting, De Novo will provide a summary
of environmental issues raised. Additional follow-up with agencies, if necessary, will be completed as part of the Administrative Draft EIR preparation.

6.1.3 Native American Consultation
De Novo will assist the City with Native American consul- tation as required under both AB 52 and SB 18. De Novo
will contact the Native American Heritage Commission
(NAHC) to request an SB 18 contact list and draft consul- tation letters notifying the Tribes of the project and invite comments and consultation with the City. The letters will be provided to the City for review. De Novo will send the letters via certified mail.

De Novo will assist the City in meeting AB 52 require-
ments by drafting consultation letters to those Tribes
that have previously requested notification from the City regarding projects within the City's jurisdiction and with- in the Tribe's traditional use area. The letters will be pro- vided to the City for review. De Novo will send the letters via certified mail.

It is important to note that the consultation required un- der both AB 52 and SB 18 is between Tribes and the City and the City will be responsible for responding to any
requests for consultation received from the Tribes. How- ever, De Novo will assist the City with consultation if such consultation is requested.

6.1 Deliverables:
• One (1) electronic (Word and PDF)
Administrative Draft, Revised Draft, and Final
Notice of Preparation
• Up to fifty (50) copies of the NOP to agencies/
interested parties on the City's distribution list
• Electronic submittal of the NOP to the State
Clearinghouse CEQA Submit portal
• Filing of the NOP with the County Clerk
• Facilitation of one (1) Scoping Meeting and
summary notes
• One (1) electronic (Word and PDF) Draft and
Final AB 52 and SB 18 consultation letters
• Final AB 52 and SB 18 consultation letters
sent via certified mail

6.2 PREPARATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE

DRAFT EIR
The Draft EIR will be a Program EIR prepared consistent with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines,
and relevant case law. The Draft EIR will be a readable, useful document that can be used to streamline review
of future planning, infrastructure, and development proj- ects that are consistent with the General Plan.

We will rely on the content developed for the Existing
Conditions Report (ECR) when preparing the Draft EIR.

In particular, the Existing Setting and Regulatory Frame- work for each topic area will be discussed in the ECR and then integrated in the Draft EIR as appropriate in Sec - De Novo Planning Group 54

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
tion 3: Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation
Measures (described below). This streamlined approach
ensures consistency across documents, maintains an ex-
peditious project schedule, and reduces costs associated with development of the EIR.

The Draft EIR will consist of the sections described be- low.

Executive Summary
This section will summarize the characteristics of the
General Plan Update, describe areas of controversy, and provide a concise summary matrix of the project's en-
vironmental impacts and associated mitigation mea-
sures as required under State CEQA Guidelines Section
15123. The matrix will also identify proposed General
Plan Update policies and actions that provide mitigation of identified environmental impacts. Alternatives to the proposed project will be summarized and the environ-
mentally superior alternative will be identified.

Section 1: Introduction
This section of the Draft EIR will provide an introduction and overview describing the intended use of the EIR and the review and certification process. This section will de- scribe the purpose of the EIR, identify CEQA Guidelines and Public Resources Code requirements for a Program
EIR, and describe how the Program EIR can be used to
streamline environmental review of subsequent projects.

Section 2: Project Description
The Project Description will be consistent with the re- quirements of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15124 and
will provide a detailed description of the General Plan Update appropriate for the programmatic analysis of en- vironmental impacts. This section will describe project components (e.g., land use map, policies/actions, phas- ing of the project, etc.), development potential associat- ed with implementation of the General Plan Update, and
provide clear identification of what would be defined as a "subsequent project" under the General Plan Update.

The City's objectives for the project will be described.

In addition, graphics illustrating the proposed project, and a description of anticipated actions associated with the project will be provided. The Project Description will support the anticipated development intensity and land
uses envisioned for the General Plan Update and will
provide flexibility regarding the evaluation of subsequent projects.

Section 3: Environmental Setting, Analysis and
Impacts, and Mitigation Measures
The baseline setting, general assumptions, and environ- mental analysis used in determining the environmental
effects of the project will be provided. This chapter will include an introductory section providing details on the "baseline conditions" assumptions for the analysis, land use forecasts for residential and non-residential uses, level of detail of programmatic analysis, consideration of key components of the project (e.g., location of future growth, continued highest and best use of resources,
conservation of natural resources, circulation system
modifications, risks associated with seismic and soil con- tamination hazards), and definition of the cumulative
setting (e.g., geographic extent) and impact analysis. This chapter will also describe how direct and indirect envi- ronmental impacts are addressed associated with imple-
mentation of the General Plan Update and the multiple
actions that may occur associated with its implementa-
tion (e.g., adoption of infrastructure master plans, update of CIPs, public service improvements, zoning ordinance
updates).

Population, housing units, and non-residential uses, in- cluding employment, will be projected under buildout
conditions. The Draft EIR will analyze impacts associated with buildout conditions. This chapter will describe the basis of and approach to the impact analysis in the Draft EIR.

The EIR will evaluate each of the following environmen- tal issues in detail, consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines:
• Aesthetics
• Agricultural and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology/Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology/Water Quality
• Land Use/Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population/Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Transportation
• Tribal Cultural Resources
• Utilities/Service Systems
• Wildfire
De Novo Planning Group 55

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
For each issue area, we will discuss in detail the exist- ing setting (based on the information provided in the
Existing Conditions Report), regulatory framework, and
impacts and proposed General Plan Update policies and
actions that will reduce potential impacts. De Novo's ap- proach to General Plan's is to provide a self -mitigating document to the extent possible. If it is determined that mitigation measures beyond the proposed General Plan
Update goals and policies may be necessary to reduce
impacts, De Novo will work closely with City staff on
crafting mitigation measure language and timing that
is appropriate for inclusion in the General Plan Update and is suitable for use in the typical development review process.

A series of technical studies and analyses will be pre- pared as part of this effort to assess the potential en- vironmental impacts associated with implementation
of the General Plan Update. Our proposal includes the
following necessary studies/analyses, which will also sup- port the Existing Conditions Report.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
De Novo will prepare an air quality and greenhouse gas
emissions (GHG) analysis as sections within the EIR to
support significance determinations.

The City is located within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Imple-
mentation of the General Plan Update will result in short- term construction -related emissions and long-term op-
erational emissions. De Novo will conduct an analysis of potential air quality and GHG emissions based on assess- ment methodologies developed by the SCAQMD and
accepted industry standards. The Air Quality and GHG
analyses will include the following:
• Regional air quality and local air quality will be
described. Meteorological conditions that could
affect air pollutant dispersal or transport will
be described. Applicable air quality regulatory
framework, standards, and significance thresh-
olds will be discussed.
• Short-term (i.e., construction) increases in region-
al criteria air pollutants and GHGs will be quan-
titatively assessed. The APB -approved California
Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) emis-
sions inventory computer model will be used to
estimate regional mobile source and particulate
matter emissions associated with the potential
construction activities with implementation of
the proposed General Plan Update.
• Localized construction emissions at sensitive
uses for projects envisioned within the Gener-
al Plan update will be addressed qualitatively
based on the Localized Significance Thresh-
olds (LST) developed by the SCAQMD. The LST
are used for the assessment of project -level im-
pacts where specifics of an individual project are
known.
• Long-term (operational) increases in regional
criteria air pollutants and GHGs will be quanti-
tatively assessed for area, mobile, and station-
ary sources for the General Plan. The CalEEMod
computer model will be used to estimate emis-
sions associated with the proposed General Plan
Update.
• Localized operations phase emissions at sen-
sitive uses proximate to the Project site will
be qualitative addressed based on the Local-
ized Significance Thresholds developed by the
SCAQMD and the primary land uses described
as part of the General Plan update.
• Local mobile -source carbon monoxide (CO) con-
centrations will be assessed through a qualita-
tive CO screening method detailed in Caltrans'
Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monox-
ide Protocol. This document found that mobile
sources of CO are conducive to the formation of
CO hotspots when signalized intersections are
expected to operate at unacceptable levels of
service (i.e., LOS E or worse). No quantitative anal-
ysis of CO hotspots is included in this Proposal
due to substantial reductions in CO emissions
from vehicle catalytic converters and improved
average vehicle fuel economy.
• Exposure to odorous or toxic air contaminants
will be assessed through a screening method
as recommended by the SCAQMD and compli-
ance with SCAQMD Rule 402 which prohibits
public nuisances.

This impact analysis will provide discussions related to assessment methodology, SCAQMD thresholds of signif-
icance, a consistency analysis with air quality attainment plans and GHG Climate Action Plans or sustainability
measures, cumulative impact analysis, and a discussion
of any needed mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts on air quality.

De Novo Planning Group 56

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
Cultural Resources
South Environmental will prepare a Cultural Resources
Technical Report to support the ECR and environmental
analysis. As part of this work effort, South Environmental will:

CHRIS Records Search. Request a California Historical
Resources Information Systems (CHRIS) records search of the Planning Area and a 200-foot radius from the South
Coastal Information Center (SCIC) at San Diego State Uni- versity (SDSU). The purpose of a records search is to iden- tify any previously recorded cultural resources; review historical maps of the city; review the Archaeological
Determinations of Eligibility and Built Environment Re- source Directory lists; and gather information on ethnog- raphies. In addition, South Environmental will review the lists for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and the lists of California State Historical Landmarks, and California Points of Historical Interest.

Native American Coordination. Contact the California Na- tive American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a review
of their Sacred Lands File. The NAHC will determine if any NAHC-listed Native American sacred lands are located
within or adjacent to the Planning Area. In addition, the NAHC will provide a list of Native American contacts for the project who should be contacted for additional in-
formation. South Environmental will prepare and email
a letter to each of the NAHC-listed contacts, requesting that they contact us if they know of any Native American cultural resources within or immediately adjacent to the Planning Area. South Environmental will also conduct
and document follow-up outreach to non -responsive
contacts. This task does not include tribal consultation pursuant to SIB 18 and AB 52 (provided as a separate
task).

Cultural Resources Technical Report. Prepare a report
that includes environmental, cultural, and regulatory
settings, and describes the results of the CHRIS records search, NAHC Sacred Land File results, and Native Amer- ican coordination. The report will also provide a brief his- toric context statement and will summarize any areas
of known significance for archaeological and historical resources. Finally, the report will provide programmatic mitigation measures/potential policies to conduct cul-
tural resources analysis at the project -specific level when discretionary projects are proposed within the Planning Area.

Infrastructure
Fuscoe Engineering (Fuscoe) will prepare an Infrastruc- ture Report to support the technical analysis included
in the environmental document and for inclusion in the
ECR. As part of this work effort, Fuscoe will:

Existing Conditions Infrastructure Evaluation & Technical Report. Request, obtain and review the most current wet infrastructure CIS data including drainage, water and
sewer as well as any associated master plans. Perform
outreach to agencies to assist with obtaining data in-
cluding City of Temecula Public Works, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Eastern
Municipal Water District and Rancho California Water
District. Evaluate the existing wet infrastructure systems within the City (storm drain, water and sewer) and master plans to determine overall adequacy to meet the current General Plan build out conditions. Based on information provided by each agency, evaluate the most current Cap- ital Improvement Project (CIP) priorities within the City/ County/EMWD/RCWD for storm drain, water and sewer
improvements and summarize recent improvements.

Review and evaluate Master Plans of Sewer and Water to
determine overall capacity and integrity of the sewer and water systems including any regional studies covering
the City. Provide a brief summary of the City's local MS4 program consistent with City-wide General Plan environ- mental goals including hydromodification requirements.

Identify infrastructure opportunities and constraints
based on the existing conditions analysis and objectives of the GPU land use considerations. Prepare summaries,
conclusions and exhibits (GIS-based) for incorporation
into the existing conditions component of the EIR.

General Plan Update Infrastructure Goals. Policies and
Implementation. Assist the Project team with the de-
velopment of infrastructure related goals, policies and implementation associated with the General Plan doc-
ument. Considerations will include sustainability, water conservation, regional stormwater project, green streets/ complete streets and water supply. All goals and policies identified will be linked to an implementation action. - Proposed Condition Infrastructure Evaluation. Assist with evaluation of land use alternatives (up to 3) by determin- ing water and sewer demands per land use. Upon re-
ceipt of the preferred proposed land use and maximum
build out conditions, qualitatively evaluate the impact of the full build out conditions associated with the land uses changes on the drainage, water quality, water and
sewer system. Evaluate the changes in water and sew-
er demands utilizing locally accepted generation factors to identify peak sewer and water demands over existing
conditions and current General Plan maximum build out
De Novo Planning Group 57

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
conditions. Coordinate with the Public Works/Utilities
Department staff within the City to determine if infra- structure improvements are anticipated to support the
future land uses including drainage, water, sewer and
water quality. Summarize the findings into a technical
report including CEQA thresholds analysis for incorpora- tion into the EIR.

Project Meetings and Coordination. Participate in team
meetings, city meetings and any external agencies if
needed. Coordinate with the team, City staff and agency staff to complete the existing condition memorandum
and CEQA infrastructure documentation for the project.

Budget assumes up to 27 hours of meetings and coor-
dination.

Noise and Vibration
De Novo will prepare an assessment of noise and vibra-
tion based on the CEQA Appendix G Checklist questions
for noise and vibration as well as the regulations adopted by Temecula within the Municipal Code and policies and
goals identified within the existing General Plan Noise Element.

To characterize the existing ambient noise environment, we will identify existing noise sources and noise -sensitive receptors. This will include an ambient noise measure-
ment program that includes up to ten (10) short-term
noise measurements of at least 20 minutes each at var-
ious locations within the City to characterize the noise environment within the City.

Temporary noise and vibration from the General Plan
Update's potential construction activities will be quanti- fied based on noise levels provided in the Federal Tran- sit Administration's Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. Noise and vibration exposure levels
will be evaluated against significance thresholds adopt- ed either by the lead agency or criterion published by
the FTA.

Long-term Operations phase noise impacts to local
noise sensitive receptors will be assessed for mobile and stationary sources attributable to the proposed General Plan Update. The operations phase of subsequent de-
velopment will generate noise by both mobile sources
related to vehicle travel onsite and local roadways. Sta- tionary on -site sources and their potential exposure to nearby land uses will also be analyzed. The analysis will compare these impacts against the standards outlined
in the General Plan Noise Element and the relevant noise ordinances. Traffic noise contours representing existing and buildout traffic noise modeling results for the plan- ning area will be depicted in graphic form as well as in a numeric table.

Vibration exposure related to the operations phase will be evaluated qualitatively due to the absence of vibra- tion intensive sources associated with the General Plan Update.

The noise assessment will include summaries of noise
terminology, applicable regulations, an overview of the ambient noise environment, and details on any increases in noise levels.

Transportation
Fehr and Peers (F&P) will support the Program EIR. As
part of this work effort, F&P will:
• Evaluate VMT impacts using the City's CEQA
Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines (2020)
using the VMT analysis performed as part of the
Land Use Alternatives analysis. The impact anal-
ysis will study buildout of the updated general
plan's land use and roadway network.
• Provide guidance to the Project Team on the
transportation section of the EIR and respond-
ing to comments on the Draft EIR.

Note that the City desires a "self -mitigating" document to the extent feasible and identifies their desire to struc- ture the EIR to facilitate streamlining. This is consistent with De Novo's preferred approach to preparing General
Plans. Since mitigating VMT impacts is challenging both to implement and to monitor effectiveness of, a signifi- cant VMT impact may be an outcome of the transporta-
tion impact analysis for the EIR. F&P will work with the Project Team and City to understand the implications of having a significant and unavoidable VMT impact and
how that would affect development in the City and po-
tentially help with General Plan streamlining through
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.

Section 4: Cumulative Impacts
De Novo will assess the impacts of General Plan imple-
mentation in combination with other known, approved,
or reasonably foreseeable development activities in the region. This analysis will be performed consistent with State CEQA Guidelines and be based on local and region- al development forecasts. A table summarizing projected regional growth will be provided. A clear cumulative set- ting for each environmental topic will be described in the Draft EIR.

The cumulative analysis will address each topic covered in the environmental analysis (e.g., water supply, traffic, bi- ological resources, etc.) and will identify appropriate miti- gation measures for any significant impacts identified.

De Novo Planning Group 58

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
Section 5: Other CEQA Requirements
Other topics required by CEQA including significant irre- versible environmental effects, a summary of significant and unavoidable impacts of the project, identification
of environmental areas that would have no or less than
significant impact, and an evaluation of the project re- lated to each of the mandatory findings of significance identified in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines will be provided.

Section 6: Alternatives Analysis
De Novo will coordinate with City staff in the develop- ment of up to three alternatives to the proposed project, including the CEQA-required No Project Alternative. The alternatives analysis in the Draft EIR will focus on alter- natives that avoid or minimize environmental effects as compared to the proposed General Plan Update and
may result from development of the land use alterna-
tives. These alternatives will be described qualitatively and quantitatively and contrasted with the proposed
project in terms of the extent that the alternatives can achieve project objectives or reduce adverse impacts.

This analysis will be presented in a separate section of the EIR and will include a comparative matrix of the al- ternatives to the proposed project based on the signif- icant environmental effects identified in the Draft EIR.

Based on this analysis, the environmentally superior al- ternative will be identified as required by CEQA.

Section 7: Report Preparers and References
This section will identify all people assisting in the prepa- ration of the EIR and referenced agencies/materials.

6.2 Deliverables:
• One (1) electronic copy of the Administrative
Draft EIR prepared in Microsoft Word and
PDF
• One (1) electronic copy of the complete
Administrative Draft EIR Appendices

6.3 PREPARATION OF REVISED DRAFT AND

DRAFT EIR
A Revised (Second) Draft EIR will be provided to City
staff with all revisions made in track changes to assist in review of the document. De Novo will respond to a
second review of the Draft EIR. Upon approval, De Novo
will prepare the Draft EIR for the required 45-day pub- lic review period. In addition, the Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of Availability (NOA) will be prepared.

This task includes filing the NOA with the County Clerk and submitting the NOC, Draft EIR, and Appendices to
the State Clearinghouse through the CEQA Submit por-
tal. De Novo will mail the NOA/NOC to the City -approved Distribution List. It is assumed City staff will prepare and publish the newspaper notice. Our budget includes the
County Clerk filing fee.

6.3 Deliverables:
• One (1) electronic copy of the Revised (Second)
Administrative Draft with incorporation of City
comments in track changes
• One (1) electronic copy of the complete
Revised (Second) Administrative Draft EIR
Appendices
• One (1) electronic copy of the Public Review
Draft EIR prepared in Microsoft Word and
Exhibits (jpeg or pdf file format, as requested
by City staff)
• Three (3) bound hardcopies of the Public
Review Draft EIR (with Draft document and
Technical Appendices on USBs provided with
each hardcopy)
• One (1) electronic copy of the Notice of
Availability (NOA)
• Up to fifty (50) copies of the NOA sent to the
City's distribution list
• Electronic submittal of the Public Review
Draft EIR and Technical Appendices, NOC,
and NOA to the State Clearinghouse CEQA
Submit portal
• Filing of NOA with the County Clerk
De Novo Planning Group 59

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update

6.4 FINAL EIR AND MMRP
At the conclusion of the Draft EIR public review period, the De Novo team will respond to written comments re-
ceived by the City. Upon completion, copies of the Ad-
ministrative Final EIR will be forwarded to the City for review. The Final EIR document, which will be separately bound, will include the comment letters, responses, re- visions, or Errata to the Draft (text to be revised will be shown as an excerpt demarcated with underline for new
text and strikethrough for deleted text), and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), if required.

At this time, the extent of public and agency comments
that will result from the review process is unknown. This task assumes a maximum budget of staff time for the
preparation of responses by the De Novo team. Should
the level of comments and responses exceed our bud-
geted estimate, De Novo will submit additional funding
requests to the City. The scope of work does not assume supplemental technical studies or extensive additional
analysis will be required to provide responses to com-
ments. If it is determined that supplemental technical
studies or additional analysis are needed, De Novo will work with the City to determine the associated scope of work and additional funding necessary.

We assume one round of City review of the Administra-
tive Final EIR and one round of City review of the Revised (Screencheck) Final EIR prior to public release.

A MMRP will also be prepared to identify appropriate
monitoring steps/procedures and provide a basis for
monitoring mitigation measures during and upon proj-
ect implementation, if required. The Mitigation Monitor- ing and Reporting Checklist will serve as the foundation of the MMRP. The Checklist will identify the mitigation measure outlined in the EIR, the Monitoring Milestone
(what agency/department is responsible for verifying
implementation of the measure), Method of Verification
(documentation, field checks, etc.), and a verification sec- tion for the initials of the verifying individual, date of ver- ification, and pertinent remarks. A Draft MMRP will be
prepared for review by City staff.

CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Consid-
erations (Findings) will be prepared that identify each potentially significant and significant impact, describe mitigation for the impact, and the resultant level of sig- nificance after mitigation. The Findings will identify each alternative and, if the alternative was not selected as the proposed project, identify why the alternative was not
feasible, and considerations for not selecting the alter- native. For each significant and unavoidable impact, the Findings will identify economic, legal, social, technical, or other defensible reasons why the project should be ap-
proved despite the significant effects of the project.

6.4 Deliverables:
• One (1) electronic copy of the Administrative
Draft, Revised (Second) Administrative Draft,
and Final Responses to Comments
• One (1) electronic copy of the Administrative
Draft, Revised (Second) Administrative Draft,
and Final MMRP
• One (1) electronic copy and three (3)
hardcopies of the Final EIR (Final Responses
to Comments, Errata, and MMRP, if necessary)
• One (1) electronic copy of the Draft and
Final Findings and Statement of Overriding
Considerations (if necessary)
TASK 6.5 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
De Novo will prepare and file a Notice of Determination (NOD) with the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse
within five days of EIR certification and project approval.

Our budget includes the filing fees for the County Clerk; however, any applicable California Department of Fish
and Wildlife (CDFW) fees are excluded.

6.5 Deliverables:
• One (1) electronic copy of the Notice of
Determination
• Filing of the NOD with the County Clerk and
State Clearinghouse
De Novo Planning Group 60

City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update
TASK 7 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
De Novo will serve as the Prime Consultant and manage
all regular communications with the City of Temecula,
presentations to community, boards, and commissions
including the Planning Commission and City Council,
and overall project management and adherence to the
project schedule and budget. De Novo Principal Aman-
da Tropiano will serve as the Project Manager for this as- signment. As the Project Manager for the City's recent
Housing Element and Safety Element Updates, Amanda
is deeply experienced working collaboratively with City Staff to successfully resolve complex planning challeng- es on -time and on -budget and will carry that experience into the General Plan.

TASK 7.1 MEETINGS WITH CITY STAFF
De Novo will facilitate twice monthly virtual meetings
with City staff (via Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet, or other app) to ensure that the project is on time, on budget, and that any issues are quickly resolved. These meetings are in addition to other outreach programs
identified in Task 2.

7.1 Deliverables:
• Twice monthly virtual meetings with City staff
TASK 7.2 PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
As described previously in this proposal, our strategy
includes a dedicated project manager and assistant
project manager who will be hands-on throughout the
project. Our internal administration procedures include:
regular check -ins with subconsultant teams; internal
weekly conference calls with the management team
from De Novo and each subconsultant (as relevant to
the timing of the task of each subconsultant); weekly up- dates to the task list, including internal deliverables nec- essary to meet our deliverables to the City; and establish- ment of a secure online file sharing site to ensure that all background documents, technical reports, updated
schedules, and approach memos are readily available to
each team member.

7.2 Deliverables:

OPTIONAL TASK: SPHERE OF

INFLUENCE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
OP.1 GROWTH AND SERVICES ASSUMPTIONS
EPS will work with City staff to review the services to be provided to the annexation areas ("Services Plan"), ser- vice standards, additional staff and expenditure require- ments (or a methodology to estimate future needs) for
the annexation area, and costs per staff or other met-
rics. The assumptions for expenditure assumptions will
leverage EPS's evaluation of the City budget completed
in the Fiscal Impact Analysis of Land Use Alternatives.

Cost inflators applicable to future costs will also be dis- cussed and documented. The Services Plan and the cost
assumptions and methods will provide the basis for es-
timating future cost. Additionally, EPS will consult with City staff and the Consultant Team to develop a forecast of future growth in the SOI areas. This effort may include discussions with staff from specific departments repre- senting major service providers to the SOI areas.

OP.2 FISCAL ANALYSIS
EPS will utilize the Services Plan, service standards, and growth projections developed in Subtask 4.1 to both es- timate the costs and potential revenues to the City asso- ciated with existing and future development in the SOI
areas. This analysis will build on the model developed
in EPS's Fiscal Impact Analysis of Land Use Alternatives, as well as incorporate any need to increase various ad- ministrative and overhead expenditures and set -asides
for reserves and contingencies identified by City staff. A comparison of annual revenues to annual operating ex-
penditures will indicate the potential magnitude of fiscal impacts of annexation. If any fiscal shortfalls are detect- ed, mitigation measures will be recommended.

For the purposes of this analysis, EPS will not evaluate the magnitude of revenues that would shift from the
County to the City under an annexation negotiation. This evaluation would be required by the Local Agency For-
mation Commission (LAFCO) in the course of the annex-
ation approval process, and can be added via a scope
and budget amendment if desired by the City.
• Ongoing project administration led by the Proj
OP Deliverables:
ect Manager and Assistant -Project Manager
• Technical memorandum summarizing the fiscal
impact results and documenting methodology,
assumptions, and calculations.

De Novo Planning Group 61

SCHEDULE
Our team recognizes that the City desires to complete the project within 24 months and we have a provided a schedule con- sistent with that timeline, as shown below. This schedule is relatively aggressive; in practice, General Plan Updates typically take between 30-36 months from kickoff to adoption. To meet the requested 24 month schedule, we must arrive at a preferred land use map by the end of the first year of the work program, leaving the second year for preparation of the policy and environmen- tal documents, facilitation of public review, and the required series of public hearings. This schedule will require close coordina- tion with Staff to ensure timely preparation and review of material. De Novo recently lead a multidisciplinary project team in the City of Lomita to complete a comprehensive General Plan Update and RNHA rezoning program in 18 months. Working together with Staff, we are confident we can accomplish this schedule for the City.

De Novo Planning Group 2025 2026
Temecula General Plan Update Schedule May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan 2027
Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION

1.1: Kick-off Meeting and Tour

1.2: Audit of Existing City Plans
----------------------------------------------
13: Socioeconomic, Demographic, and Market Study

1.4: Existing Conditions Report
-----------------------------------------------
TASK 2: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLIC OUTREACH
Community Outreach Program

2.2: Graphic Identity Template

2.3: Digital Engagement

2.4: Direct Mailer

2.5: Visioning Workshops and Open Houses

2.6: Pop-up Events
Committee2.1:

2.7: General Plan Advisory
-----------------------------------------------

2.8: Stakeholder Interviews
-----------------------------------------------

2.9: Vision Document

2.10: Study Sessions and Public Hearings
TASK 3: LAND USE ALTERNATIVES

3.1: Alternative Preparation and Evaluation
cal Impact Analysis

3.3 Preferred Land Use Plan Development
TASK 4: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE

4.1: Framework (Goals, Policies, and Programs)

4.2: General Plan Update
----------------------------------------------

4.3. Summary ofZoning and Specific Plan Recommendations TASK 5: CLIMATE •
Literature Review of Planning Documents and Regulations Forecast5.1:
-duction Target-Setting5.3:
-----------------------------------------------
GHG Emission Reduction Measures Development
Vulnerability-ssment and Adaptation Measures5.5:
-----------------------------------------------
Climate Action Plan Preparation

5.6: Ongoing Monitoring and Reporting
TASK 6: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW & CEQA DOCUMENTS

6.1: EIR Notice of Preparation and Scoping

6.1.1: Notice of Prepa ration
--
-----------------------------------------------

6.13: Native American Consultation

6.2: Preparation of the Administrative Draft EIR

6.3: Preparation of the Revised Draft and Draft EIR

5.4: Final Environmental Impact Report
-----------------------------------------------

6.5: Notice of Determination

7.1: Meetings with City Staff

7.2: Project Administration
•• • PF
OPA: 501 Economic Analysis
OP.2: Two Additional GPAC Meetings (Scheduled as Needed) Consultant Team Work
Milestone Staff Review -Critical Path Study Session/Public Hearing De Novo Planning Group 62

PRIC

TASK/ACTIVITY
Principal/
Project Manager
Principal Planner
Senior Planner+ Urban
Designer
Associate Planner/
Assistant PM
Assistant Planner/
GIS
De Novo Subtotals
Traffic
Design
CAP
Economics
Outreach
Cultural
I Infrastructure
Direct Costs

ACTIVITY
TOTALS
Fehr & Peers
JZMK Partners
Michael Baker
International
EPS
Kearns & West
Environmental South
Fuscoe
Printin g/
Mailing/
Translation
TOTALS
Hours
$185
Hours
$160
Hours
$125
Hours
$115
Hours
$100
Hours
Fee
Fee
TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION

1.1: Kick-off Meeting and Tour
8 $1,480
8 $1,280
8 $1,000
8 $920
0 $0
32 $4,680
$2,840
$7,520

1.2: Audit of Existing City Plans
16 $2,960
24 $3,840
0 $0
40 $4,600
60 $6,000
140
$17,400
$10,030
$10,000
$37,430

1.3: Socioeconomic, Demographic, and Market Study
12 $2,220
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
12 $2,220
$35,000
$37,220

1.4: Existing Conditions Report
60 $11,100
24 $3,840
100
$12,500
160
$18,400
280
$28,000
624
$73,840
$39,510
$20,000
$18,317
$151,667
TASK 1 SUBTOTAL
96 $17,760
56 $8,960
108
$13,500
208
$23,920
340
$34,000
808
$98,140
$52,380
$30,000
$0
$35,000
$0
$0
$18,317
$0
$233,837
TASK 2: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLIC OUTREACH

2.1: Community Outreach Program
8 $1,480
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
8 $1,480
$7,130
$8,610

2.2: Graphic Identity Template
20 $3,700
0 $0
40 $5,000
0 $0
0 $0
60 $8,700
$5,715
$14,415

2.3: Digital Engagement
40 $7,400
0 $0
100
$12,500
24 $2,760
0 $0
164
$22,660
$5,198
$30,120
$1,500
$59,478

2.4: Direct Mailer
6 $1,110
0 $0
24 $3,000
0 $0
0 $0
30 $4,110
$17,000
$21,110

2.5: Visioning Workshops and Open Houses
40 $7,400
0 $0
0 $0
64 $7,360
64 $6,400
168
$21,160
$2,950
$20,000
$8,338
$72,273
$8,000
$132,721

2.6: Pop-up Events
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
20 $2,300
0 $0
20 $2,300
$5,040
$1,000
$8,340

2.7: General Plan Advisory Committee
48 $8,880
16 $2,560
16 $2,000
80 $9,200
60 $6,000
220
$28,640
$13,110
$8,370
$1,200
$51,320

2.8: Stakeholder Interviews
22 $4,070
4 $640
0 $0
22 $2,530
0 $0
48 $7,240
$7,240

2.9: Vision Document
24 $4,440
0 $0
60 $7,500
0 $0
0 $0
84 $11,940
$1,950
$1,100
$14,990

2.10: Study Sessions and Public Hearings
100
$18,500
40 $6,400
0 $0
100
$11,500
0 $0
240
$36,400
$11,760
$20,000
$14,088
$11,700
$93,948
TASK 2 SUBTOTAL
308
$56,980
60 $9,600
240
$30,000
310
$35,650
124
$12,400
1042
$144,630
$29,770
$40,000
$27,624
$11,700
$128,648
$0
$0
$29,800
$412,172
TASK 3: LAND USE ALTERNATIVES

3.1: Alternative Preparation and Evaluation
40 $7,400
16 $2,560
60 $7,500
100
$11,500
80 $8,000
296
$36,960
$36,200
$40,000
1 1
1 $113,160

3.2: Fiscal Impact Analysis
16 $2,960
0 $0
0 $0
$0
$0
16 $2,960
$17,460
$20,420

3.3 Preferred Land Use Plan Development
24 $4,440
8 $1,280
16 $2,000
24 $2,760
40 $4,000
112
$14,480
$14,480
TASK 3 SUBTOTAL
80 $14,800
24 $3,840
76 $9,500
124
$14,260
120
$12,000
424
$54,400
$36,200
$40,000
$0
$17,460
$0
$0
$0
$0
$148,060
TASK 4: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE

4.1: Framework (Goals, Policies, and Programs) 100 $18,500 60 $9,600
80 $10,000
260 $29,900
100 $10,000 600
$78,000
$6,000
$15,960
$3,720
$103,680

4.2: General Plan Update
60 $11,100
40 $6,400
120
$15,000
80 $9,200
120
$12,000
420
$53,700
$49,720
$60,000
$5,000
$168,420

4.3: Summary of Zoning and Specific Plan Recommendations 24 $4,440
36 $5,760
60 $7,500
80 $9,200
0 $0
200
$26,900
$2,180
$30,000
$59,080
TASK 4 SUBTOTAL
184
$34,040
136
$21,760
260
$32,500
420 $48,300
220
$22,000
1220
$158,600
$57,900
$90,000
$0
$15,960
$0 $0
$3,720
$5,000
$331,180
TASK 5: CLIMATE ACTION PLAN

5.1: Literature Review of Planning Documents and Regulations 2 $370
4 $640
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
6 $1,010
$5,952
$6,962

5.2: GHG Emissions Forecast and Reduction Target -Setting 6 $1,110
12 $1,920
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0 $3,030
$5,4201
$8,794
$17,244

5.3: GHG Emission Reduction Measures Development
6 $1,110
12 $1,920
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
18 $3,030
$4,070
$18,250
7 $25,350

5.4: Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Measures
4 $740
8 $1,280
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
12 $2,020
$17,152
$19,172

5.5: Climate Action Plan Preparation
4 $740
8 $1,280
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
12 $2,020
$19,928
$21,948

5.6: Ongoing Monitoring and Reporting
0 $0
2 $320
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
2 $320
$15,6401
$15,960
TASK 5 SUBTOTALI
22 $4,070
46 $7,360
0 $01
0 $01
0 $01
s0
$11,430
$9,490
$0
$85,716
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$106,636
TASK 6: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW & CECW DOCUMENTS
or

6.1: EIR Notice of Preparation and Scoping

6.1.1: Notice of Preparation
4 $740
12 $1,920
20 $2,500
16 $1,840
16 $1,600
68 $8,600
$500
$9,100

6.1.2: Scoping Meeting
$0
12 $1,920
12 $1,500
8 $920
2 $200
34 $4,540
$250
$4,790

6.1.3: Native American Consultation
$0
8 $1,280
8 $1,000
$0
8 $800
24 $3,080
$150
$3,230

6.2: Preparation of the Administrative Draft EIR
80 $14,800
300
$48,000
360
$45,000
280
$32,200
260
$26,000
1280
$166,000
$10,310
$15,575
$20,414
$212,299

6.3: Preparation of the Revised Draft and Draft EIR
60 $11,100
150
$24,000
180
$22,500
140
$16,100
140
$14,000
670
$87,700
$1,500
$89,200

6.4: Final Environmental Impact Report
40 $7,400
40 $6,400
401
5,000
32 $3,680
32 $3,200
184
$25,680
$5001
$26,180

6.5: Notice of Determination
1 $0
2 $320
1 $0
$0
2 $200
4 $520
1 1
$50
$570
TASK 6 SUBTOTAL
184
$34,040
524
$83,840
620
$77,500
476
$54,740
460
$46,000
2264
$296,120
$10,310
$0
$0
$0
$0
$15,575
$20,414
$2,9501
$345,369
TASK 7: PROJECT MANAGEMENT

7.1: Meetings with City Staff
100
$18,500
40 $6,400 40
$5,000
100
$11,500
0 $0
280
$41,400
$41,400

7.2: Project Administration
48 $8,880
48 $7,680 0
$0
0 $0
0 $0
96 $16,560 $27,712 $16,4161
$47,965 $7,060
$115,713
TASK 7 SUBTOTAL
148
$27,380
88 $14,0801 40
$5,000
100
$11,500
0 $0
376
$57,960 $27,712 $0 $16,4161
$0
$47,965 $0 $7,060 $0
$157,113
Subtotals 1,022 $ 189,070 934 $ 149,440 1,344 $ 168,000 1,638 $ 188,370 1,264 $ 126,400 6,184

FEE (NOT TO
1' •
TOTAL• • EXCEED, WITH CONTINGENCY)1
$ 821,280 $ 223,762 $ 200,000 $ 129,756
$ 80,120
$ 176,613 $ 15,575 $ 49,511 $ 37,750 $ 1,734,367
:14

TASK/ACTIVITY
Principal/
Project Manager
Principal Planner
Senior Planner
Associate Planner
Assistant Planner/
GIS
De Novo Subtotals
Traffic
Design
CAP
Economics
Outreach
Cultural
Infrastructure
Direct Costs

ACTIVITY
TOTALS
Fehr & Peers
JZMK Partners
Michael Baker
International
EPS
Kearns & West
South
Environmental
Fuscoe
Printin g/
Mailing/
Translation
TOTALS
Hours
$185
Hours
$160
Hours
$125
Hours
$115
Hours
$100
Hours
Fee
Fee
OPA: Sol Economic Analysis
1 12
$2,220
0 $01
0 $01
0 $01
0 $01
0 $2,2201
1 1
1 $11,7001
1 1
$13,920
OP.2: Two Additional GPAC Meetings
116
$2,9601
01 Sol
8 $1,000
40 $4,600
0 $01
0 $8,5601
1 1
1 1
1 1
1$8,560
De Novo hourly rates represent fully burdened rates. Subconsultants and Direct Costs are billed at no markup. De Novo Planning Group reserves the right to reallocate budget between various consulting team members and between tasks, provided the overall project budget does not change.

De Novo Planning Group 64

Ink
RESU

EDUCATION
MA, Urban and Regional Planning,
University of California, Irvine
BA, Urban Studies and Planning,
University of California, San Diego
BA, Political Science: Comparative
Politics,
University of California, San Diego
Study Abroad Program,
University of Sussex

ORGANIZATIONS
Urban Land Institute
International Association for Public
Participation (IAP2)
American Planning Association
Amanda Tropiano

PRINCIPAL
Amanda Tropiano is responsible for leading the firm's Southern California practice.

Amanda has successfully managed a wide variety of land use and environmental planning projects for public and private sector clients, including numerous General Plans, specific plans, corridor plans, strategic plans, sustainability programs, visioning projects, transit -oriented development plans, zoning documents, outreach programs, and CEQA projects. Amanda is also an IAP2 trained public outreach practitioner and has completed project management training with PSMJ. Amanda consistently brings to the table her passion, creativity, and strategic thinking to make sure every project exceeds her client's expectations. Amanda brings a unique project management style to her clients, where she relies on collaboration, communication, and creativity to identify and proactively address potential opportunities and challenges. She is a skilled public speaker and enjoys working with members of the public, stakeholders, and elected and appointed officials throughout the planning process.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Focus General Plan Update, Brea
Core Specific Plan, and EIR,
City of Brea
General Plan Update and EIR,
City of Lake Forest
General Plan Update and EIR,
City of Laguna Niguel
General Plan Update, Rezoning, ODS,
and EIR,
City of Lomita
General Plan Update, Hawthorne Blvd
Specific Plan Update, and EIR,
City of Lawndale
General Plan Update and EIR,
County of Orange
General Plan Update and EIR,
City of La Verne
General Plan Update and EIR,
City of San Jacinto
General Plan Update and EIR,
City of Indian Wells
Housing Element Updates,
Cities of Avalon, Hawthorne, Indian
Wells, Glendale, La Verne, Lake Forest,
Lawndale, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel,
San Jacinto, San Marcos, Stanton,
Temecula
Housing Element, Rezoning Program,
ODS, and CEQA Compliance,
City of Laguna Hills
Housing Element Update,
Comprehensive Zoning Code, Mixed -
Use Implementation Program,
City of Westminster
Comprehensive Development Code
Update,
City of Laguna Beach
Environmental Justice Element,
City of Goleta
Objective Design Standards,
City of Palos Verdes Estates
Springs Specific Plan and EIR,
Sonoma County
General Plan Update, Zoning Update, Irvine Neighborhood Plan, and EIR, City of Irvine
City of San Marcos
1300 Bristol Mixed -Income Project,
Focus General Plan Update and EIR, City of Newport Beach City of Glendale
De Novo Planning Group
■ ■ ■ ■
A Land Ilse Planning, Design, and F.nvirannental Firm

EDUCATION
Masters, Urban and Regional
Planning, California State Polytechnic
University, Pomona
BA, Business Economics, University
of California, Riverside

ORGANIZATIONS
American Planning Association

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS
American institute of Certified
Planners, 2009, No. 024079
Starla Barker, AICP

PRINCIPAL PLANNER
Starla Barker, AICP, is a principal planner with De Novo Planning Group whose primary responsibilities are the management and preparation of environmental documents (Initial Studies, Negative Declaration, Environmental Impact Reports, and Environmental Assessments), as well as other planning documents including General Plans and Specific Plans. With over 20 years of professional planning experience Starla has successfully managed a wide range of projects with particular emphasis in General Plans, urban infill, downtown, and redevelopment projects. Utilizing her experience in community planning, Starla is regularly involved in land use and policy planning, including the development and implementation of community outreach programs, and frequently manages and prepares environmental clearance documents for citywide policy planning and redevelopment projects. Through her extensive experience in both policy and environmental planning, Starla is keenly aware of the interaction between the two and consistently takes a proactive and comprehensive approach to understanding planning and environmental issues and developing solutions.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
General Plan Update and Rezoning EIR, Marlin Drive IS/ND City of Lomita City of Laguna Beach
Housing Element, Rezoning Program,
and ODS CEQA Compliance,
City of Laguna Hills
Housing and Safety Element Update
CEQA Compliance
City of Rancho Santa Margarita
Land Use Element, Zoning Code, and
Zoning Map Amendment CEQA
Compliance
City of Rancho Santa Margarita
General Plan and Zoning Update EIR
City of San Jacinto
Downtown Core EIR
City of Fontana
General Plan Land Use and Zoning
Amendments EIR
City of Gardena
General Plan Update EIR
City of La Verne
General Plan Update EIR
City of Lawndale
The Commons at Aliso Viejo IS/MND
City of Aliso Viejo
2500 North Hollywood Way Hotel EIR
City of Burbank
The Harper Mixed Use Project EIR
City of West Hollywood
385 Nyes Place IS/MND
City of Laguna Beach
2354 San Clemente IS/MND
City of Laguna Beach
820 Gainsborough IS/MND
City of Laguna Beach
Hotel Development Standards GPA &
Zone Change IS/MND
City of Gardena
1500 Raymond Ave Industrial IS/MND
City of Fullerton
1901 Via Burton Industrial CEQA
City of Fullerton
General Plan Transportation &
Mobility Element Update ND
City of Bell Gardens
Applied Medical Expansion IS/MND
City of Lake Forest
Lock & Leave Self Storage IS/MND
City of Lake Forest
Melia Evergreen Residential IS/MND
City of Gardena
Olson Townhomes IS/MND
City of Gardena
2550 Orange Industrial IS/MND
City of Signal Hill
Paradise Chevrolet IS/MND
City of Temecula
Bedford Court IS/MND
City of Temecula
De Novo Planning Group
A Land Use Planning, Design, and Environmental Firm

EDUCATION
Master of City and Regional
Planning,
Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo
BA, Political Science,
University of California, Los Angeles

ORGANIZATIONS
American Planning Association
Association of Environmental
Professionals
Congress for the New Urbanism

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS
American Institute of Certified
Planners, 2023, No. 343661
Erik Anderson, AICP

ASSOCIATE PLANNER
Erik has worked on a diverse range of projects for public and private sector clients, with a focus on land -use planning, policy development, and environmental and sustainability planning. Erik provides project support in the preparation of CEQA documentation and long-range planning documents, including General Plans, Housing Elements, Zoning updates, and Local Hazard Mitigation Plans. His background experience includes grassroots lobbying with a non-profit environmental organization and work in the legal field. Erik is passionate about serving communities and creating innovative work through place -based development strategies.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
General Plan Update, Zoning Update,
and EIR,
City of Lomita
Housing Element, Rezoning Program,
and ODS CEQA Compliance,
City of Laguna Hills
General Plan Update, Zoning Update,
and EIR
City of San Jacinto
General Plan Update, Hawthorne Blvd
Specific Plan Update, and EIR
City of Lawndale
Zoning Update and Addendum to
General Plan EIR
City of Westminster
General Plan Land Use and Zoning
Amendments EIR
City of Gardena
General Plan Update and EIR
City of Red Bluff
Downtown Core EIR
City of Fontana
Mountain House Incorporation IS/ND
San Joaquin County
SR-120 Interchange IS/MND
City of Lathrop/Caltrans
Circulation Element Update IS/ND
City of Bell Gardens
U-Haul Expansion IS/MND
City of Gardena
2354 San Clemente IS/MND
City of Laguna Beach
16800 Magnolia Addendum
City of Fountain Valley
1500 Raymond Ave Industrial IS/MND
City of Fullerton
1901 Via Burton Industrial CEQA
City of Fullerton
1941 White Avenue Mixed -Use CEQA
Exemption
City of La Verne
2500 North Hollywood Way Hotel EIR
City of Burbank
The Harper Mixed Use Project EIR
City of West Hollywood
The Commons at Aliso Viejo IS/MND
City of Aliso Viejo
Paradise Chevrolet IS/MND
City of Temecula
Focused General Plan Update
City of Glendale
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Laguna Hills, CA
Housing and Safety Element Update
City of Rancho Santa Margarita
Housing Element Update (6th Cycle)
Cities of Lawndale, Glendale,
Hawthorne, La Verne, Avalon, Lake
Forest, Rancho Santa Margarita,
Westminster, Martinez, Temecula, and
San Jacinto
De Novo Planning Group
A Land Ilse Planning, Design, and F.nvirannental Firm
NONE

EDUCATION
MCP, City Planning, Urban Design
Concentration
University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia
BS, Urban, Rural, and
Environmental Planning,
Brigham Young University, Provo
Research,
Cambridge University (UK), Pembroke
College

ORGANIZATIONS
Urban Land Institute
AICP Certified, American Planning
Association
AICP Certification # 35377
U.S. Green Building Council
LEED AP BD+C,
Credential Id # 10433552-AP-BD+C
Megan Thorne, AICP, LEED AP SD+C
SENIOR PLANNER + DESIGNER
Megan Thorne is a senior planner and project manager with De Novo Planning Group. With over 15 years of professional planning experience, Megan has worked on a wide variety of planning projects for public and private sector clients, including numerous specific plans, general plans, corridor plans, site plans, design guidelines, strategic plans, sustainability programs, visioning projects, transit - oriented development plans, zoning documents, outreach programs, and 3D visualizations. Megan possesses the ability to think creatively and envision change while keeping projects grounded with achievable benchmarks and implementable policy goals. She excels at communicating complex information and policy ideas in a compelling and simple manner. As a designer, Megan has differentiated herself with her hand -drawing abilities as well as her technical skills. Her technical expertise includes 3D modeling, graphic design, and web design. She continues to pioneer ways new technology can improve old processes from community outreach approaches to the web -publication of planning documents.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Burbank Media District Specific Plan
City of Burbank*
Rialto Specific Plan Update
City of Rialto*
River Walk Specific Plan
Stanislaus County
Downtown Bellflower Transit -
Oriented Development Specific Plan
City of Bellflower*
West Carson Transit -Oriented
Development Specific Plan
City of West Carson*
Morena Corridor Specific Plan
City of San Diego*
Long Beach Southeast Area (SEASP)
Specific Plan
City of Long Beach*
Stanton Plaza Specific Plan
Amendment and EIR Addendum
City of Stanton*
Airport Gateway Specific Plan
Inland Valley Development Agency*
Harmony Specific Plan
Lewis Companies, City of Highland*
De Anza Revitalization Plan
City of San Diego*
Fontana Downtown Design
Guidelines
City of Fontana
Irvine Neighborhood Plan
City of Irvine
General Plan Update and EIR
City of San Jacinto
General Plan Update and EIR
City of La Verne
General Plan Update and EIR
City of Lake Forest
General Plan Update and EIR
City of Westminster*
General Plan Update and EIR
City of San Marcos
South El Monte Zoning Code Update
City of South El Monte*
Hemet Zoning Code Update
City of Hemet*
ADU Ordinance and Guidebook
City of lone
City of Bellflower Sign Code Update
City of Bellflower
Temecula CAP Baseline Study
City of Temecula*
OCCOG Geospatial Solutions
Orange County Council of
Governments*
Housing Policy Leadership Academy
Southern California Association of
Governments*
Livermore Downtown Visioning & Site
Planning
City of Livermore*
* Project was completed by Ms. Thorne while she was employed at another planning firm De Novo Planning Group
A Land Ilse Planning, Design, and F.nvirann—tal Firm
NONE

EDUCATION
BA, Political Science,
University of California, San Diego
Master of City and Regional
Planning,
Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo

ORGANIZATIONS
American Planning Association
Association of Environmental
Professionals
AWARDS
2023 City and Regional Planning
Outstanding Student Award
2023 Academic Award of Excellence,
APA Central Coast Division
Abdul jama

ASSISTANT PLANNER
Abdul holds a Master's Degree in City and Regional Planning from Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. He brings a strong interest and comprehensive experience in environmental and long-range planning. Abdul has contributed to a wide range of public and private sector projects, focusing on environmental review, land use planning, and policy development. His work includes CEQA document preparation such as initial studies, environmental impact reports, and mitigated negative declaration documents. His long-range planning efforts includes General Plan Update, Zoning Code Update, and Local Hazard Mitigation Plan preparation. Abdul is excited to provide top quality environmental, land use and policy development to all communities and individuals.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
General Plan Update and EIR
City of Lomita
General Plan Update and EIR
City of Laguna Niguel
General Plan Update
City of Brea
General Plan Update
County of Orange
General Plan Update
Town of San Anselmo
General Plan Update EIR
City of Glendale
Dixon 257 EIR
City of Dixon
Housing Rezones EIR
City of Tracy
UC Villages EIR
City of Merced
Vineyard One EIR
City of Saratoga
Sustainability Implementation Program
City of Lake Forest
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
City of Glendora
Grevillea-Imperial Hotel CE
City of Hawthorne
Riddle Field Park CE
City of Laguna Beach
The Commons IS/MND
City of Aliso Viejo
385 Nyes Place IS/MND
City of Laguna Beach
820 Gainsborough Drive IS/MND
City of Laguna Beach
Paradise Chevrolet IS/MND
City of Temecula
De Novo Planning Group
A Land Ilse Planning, Design, and F.nvirannental Firm

Education
Master of Public Policy, University of
California, Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts in Economics,
University of California, Santa Cruz
Employment History
Budget Analyst for City of San
Francisco (1995)
Research Analyst, Fisher Center for
Real Estate and Urban Economics
(1994-5)
Business Analyst, Port Authority of
New York/New Jersey (1994)
Print Media Journalist, States News
Service, Washington, DC (1989-1992)
Affiliations
International Downtown Association
International Economic
Development Council
Publications/Presentations
"Retail versus Housing: Rethinking
the Fiscal Paradigm" Meta -hosted
webinar, June 10, 2022
"Bay Area Downtowns: Place Types
and Post Pandemic Prospects." San
Mateo Council of Cities, May 22, 2022
"Repositioning Languishing Assets:

Building for the Missing Middle." ULI
Urban Revitalization Council, Fall 2020
"COVID-19: Cross -Cutting Trends
toward a New Reality." Lambda Alpha
International Spring /Summer, 2020
"Town Centers: Typologies and
Policy Directions," Bay Area Planning
Directors Association (BAPDA),
Spring 2017 Meeting
"Urban -Suburbia;" Urban Land
Magazine, October 2008
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.

The Economics of Land Use
www.epsys.com
Jason Moody
Managing Principal
Jason Moody has worked at the firm for over 30 years and has been instrumental in building the firms presence in Southern California.

He has extensive experience in the areas of real estate market and financial analysis, socio-economic forecasting, regional economics, and corridor revitalization. He regularly works for both public and private sector clients, focusing on the feasibility and economic implications of individual projects as well as larger areas, including mixed -use districts, corridors, and entire cities. Jason has applied this expertise in numerous land use planning and policy efforts, including General Plans, Specific Plans, and Master Plans, as part of multidisciplinary teams. • CITY OF LAKEWOOD INTERACTIVE FISCAL MODEL
EPS developed an interactive and comprehensive fiscal modeling tool for the City of Lakewood that measured the differential impacts of various land uses (e.g., single-family, multi -family, office, retail, warehouse -industrial) and potential policy changes (e.g., zoning, tax or fee rates, etc.).
• WESTMINSTER MALL SPECIFIC PLAN
EPS provided analysis of development feasibility and public financing options for the Implementation Chapter of the Westminster Mall Specific Plan designed to reposition and revitalize an under- performing shopping center with mixed -use development. The Specific Plan was approved in 2022 and won the 2023 APA Orange Section "Economic Planning & Development Award of Excellence". • SIGNAL HILL CIVIC CENTER MASTER PLAN
EPS evaluated financing options to support a master plan to include a new Community Center, a performing arts amphitheater, and related infrastructure to be integrated within the City of Signal Hill's existing civic center and community park.
• LAKE FOREST GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND MIXED -USE ZONING CODES
EPS was part of a team that developed the City of Lake Forest's General Plan Update, which was APA Orange County's 2021 Comprehensive Plan of the Year, and that project was followed by a mixed -use zoning codes effort to advance the vision and transform largely industrial areas into high -quality mixed -use developments. • SAN JACINTO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Evaluated long-term economic and market conditions, analyzed development opportunities and feasibility, and formulated economic development goals and policies for General Plan Update in this Riverside County bedroom community.
• LA VERNE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Evaluated long-term economic and market conditions and fiscal considerations relevant to the General Plan Update for this mature and successful community.
o
1330 Broadway, Suite 450, Oakland, CA 94612 510 841 9190 [email protected]

Education
Master of Public Policy,
Harris Public Policy at
the University of Chicago
Certificate in Municipal
Finanace
Bachelor of Arts,
International Studies,
University of Chicago
Previous Employment
Associate, Development
Strategies, Saint Louis, MO
(2014-2018)
Policy Intern, Center
for Neighborhood
Technology, Chicago, IL
(2013)
Research Assistant,
Energy Policy Institute at
Chicago, Chicago, IL (2012-
2013)
Affiliations
American Planning
Association
Urban Land Institute
NABE Los Angeles
Chapter
Westside Urban Forum
Lambda Alpha
International
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.

The Economics of Land Use
www.epsys.com
Julie Cooper
Principal
Julie Cooper joined EPS's Los Angeles office in 2018, bringing professional experience in land use, economic, and community development consulting. She has provided strategic planning services for public, private, and institutional clients, including analysis of market and economic conditions, development feasibility and fiscal impact modeling, and policy recommendations. She also has extensive experience in stakeholder and community engagement.
• SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GENERAL PLAN UPDATES
Julie is serving or has recently served as principal-in-chaarge and project manager for EPS's engagement on teams updating the General Plans in the cities of Riverside, Lomita, Laguna Niguel, San Jacinto, Lawndale, San Marcos, and Lake Forest. Firm tasks include evaluating demographic, economic, market, and fiscal conditions in the cities; identifying real estate and economic development opportunities; testing the fiscal impacts of proposed land use alternatives; and preparing Economic Development and Fiscal Sustainability Elements as part of the General Plan document.

The work includes engagement with city staff and stakeholders. For these projects, Julie has been responsible for coordinating EPS's work with the lead consultant, attending meetings with staff and stakeholders, and producing deliverables. She has also served as lead technical analyst, researching existing conditions, conducting fiscal impact analysis, and contributing to policy recommendations.
• RIVERSIDE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PROGRAM
EPS was engaged by the City of Riverside to study an inclusionary housing requirement for new residential development. EPS's tasks included developing market -rate housing prototypes likely to be built in the City, identifying a range of potential inclusionary requirements, and testing the feasibility impacts of these requirements on new market -rate development.

EPS additionally completed a nexus analysis and assisted the City with drafting an inclusionary housing ordinance. As Project Manager, Julie was responsible for coordinating and communicating with the City staff, conducting research and technical analysis, and overseeing stakeholder and community outreach efforts.
0 LOST HILLS COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT FEASIBILITY STUDY EPS was engaged by a major regional employer to support the creation of a Community Service District (CSD) in the unincorporated community of Lost Hills in Kern County. EPS's work assessing costs associated with providing services through a CSD; identifying potential revenue sources to support the CSD; and developing a fiscal feasibility analysis for the proposed district as required by LAFCo as part of the CSD formation process. Julie served as project manager and primary researcher/analyst for EPS's work. o
800WilshireBoulevard, Suite 410,Los Angeles, CA90017 2134893838 [email protected]

Education
Gonzaga University -
Bachelor of Arts Political
Science
University of California, Los
Angeles- Master of Urban
and Regional Planning
Previous Employment
Jesuit Volunteer Corps
Northwest, Homeless
Services Coordinator at
Corpus Christi House,
Boise, ID
Institute for Healthcare
Improvement, Project
Coordinator in Triple Aim
Portfolio, Boston, MA
Brigham and Women's
Hospital, Project
Coordinator, Boston, MA
AECOM, Economics
Intern, Los Angeles, CA
Affiliations
American Planning
Association
Urban Land Institute
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.

The Economics of Land Use
www.epsys.com
Andrew Williams
Senior Associate
Andrew Williams joined Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) in 2022, bringing academic and professional experience in economic development, battery supply chain research, and environmental policy. He has provided strategic planning services for a variety of public and private clients as a project manager and technical analyst, including analysis of markets and economic conditions and economic and fiscal impact modeling. Before joining EPS, Andrew worked in public health, focusing on the social determinants of health in communities across the US. • SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GENERAL PLAN UPDATES
EPS is currently or has recently been engaged as part of multidisciplinary teams to update the General Plans for several cities in Southern California, including the cities of Lawndale, Indian Wells, San Marcos, and Laguna Niguel. Firm tasks include researching and evaluating long-term demographic, economic, market, and fiscal conditions in the cities; identifying real estate and economic development opportunities; testing the fiscal impact on the municipal budget of proposed land use alternatives; and preparing Economic Development and Fiscal Sustainability Elements as part of the General Plan document. The projects include engagement with city staff and stakeholders. Andrew is providing a key role in the analysis, creating fiscal impact models, conducting stakeholder interviews, and contributing to economic and fiscal policy recommendations. • UC RIVERSIDE ECONOMIC, FISCAL, AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS
STUDY (2023)
EPS is working with the City of Riverside to perform a fiscal and financial analysis of the impacts of the University on City infrastructure and service provision as well as the University's larger economic impact.

Andrew led technical efforts to understand the economic impact on the City and County of Riverside based on current economic activity and projected growth patterns
• TULARE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (2023-ONGOING)
EPS is part of a multidisciplinary team preparing an updated Master Plan for Tulare's historic Downtown. The goals of the Plan are to drive redevelopment of Downtown properties, improve the public and private realm, and leverage City initiatives to revitalize Downtown into an activity center for residents, workers, and visitors. EPS's role has included a review of real estate market trends impacting the City and the Downtown, an evaluation of the financial feasibility of several catalyst projects on opportunity sites, and recommendations for economic development initiatives, financial incentives, and financing tools that the City might utilize to achieve the Plan's goals. Andrew is serving as the lead technical analyst in conducting market research and financial feasibility models.
800 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 410, Los Angeles, CA 90017 213 489 3838 [email protected]

EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering,
University of California, Davis

REG ISTRATION S
Professional Engineer (Nevada #19078)
Professional Engineer (Hawaii #17490)

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
Total: 22
With Fehr & Peers: 22

AFFILIATIONS
• Member, American Planning Association
(APA)
• Modeling Sub Committee Chair, Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE), San Diego
Chapter
• Member, Women in Transportation
Seminars (WTS)

EXPERTISE
• Bicycle & Pedestrian Planning
• Climate Planning
• Highway Operations Analysis
• Parking, Site Access & Circulation Studies
• Transportation/Master Planning
• Traffic Impact Analysis
• Travel Demand Management
FEHR t PEERS
Katy Cole, PE
Principal I Project Manager
ABOUT
Katy is a principal and registered engineer with over 22 years of project management experience, based locally in the Fehr & Peers San Diego office. Katy's professional experience includes managing hundreds of projects across disciplines. Her expertise spans travel demand management plans/quantification, multimodal corridor studies, traffic micro -simulation analysis, transportation master planning, parking studies, access and circulation studies, traffic operations analyses, and transportation impact studies.

← All documents from this meeting