Agenda packet — Ukiah City Council, September 18, 2024 (part 5 of 5)

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 79
R15, Widen shoulder
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 30% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits of the new paved shoulder. A minimum of 2 feet width must be added and the new/resulting shoulders must be a minimum of 4 feet wide. This CM is not eligible unless it is done as the last step of an "incremental approach", for which the agency documents that: 1) they have already pursued and installed lower cost and lower impact CMs (i.e. signing/striping upgrades to MUTCD standards/recommendations, rumble strips, etc.), 2) they have already monitored the crash occurrences after these improvements were installed, and 3) the 'after' crash rate is still unacceptably high. This 'incremental approach' (or a special exception from the HSIP program manager) must be documented in the Narrative Questions in the application and a summary of the 'before' and 'after' crash analysis must be attached to the application.

General information
Where to use:

Roadways that have a frequent incidence of vehicles leaving the travel lane resulting in an unsuccessful attempt to reenter the roadway. The probability of a safe recovery is increased if an errant vehicle is provided with an increased paved area in which to initiate such a recovery.

Why it works:

Based on the best available research, adding shoulder or widening an existing shoulder provides a greater area to regain control of a vehicle, as well as lateral clearance to roadside objects such as guardrail, signs and poles. They may also provide space for disabled vehicles to stop or drive slowly, provide increased sight distance for through vehicles and for vehicles entering the roadway, and in some cases reduce passing conflicts between motor vehicles and bicyclists and pedestrians. The likely safety benefits for adding or widening an existing shoulder generally increase as the widening width increases - practitioners should refer to NCHRP Report 500 Series, the CMF Clearinghouse or other references for more details.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Shoulder widening costs would depend on whether new right-of-way is required and whether extensive roadside modification is needed. Since shoulder widening can be a relatively expensive treatment, one of the keys to creating a cost effective project with at least a medium B/C ratio is targeting higher-hazard roadways.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Fixed Object, Run-off Road, Sideswipe CRF: 15 - 75 %
R16, Curve Shoulder widening (Outside Only)
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 45% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits (or influence area) of the new shoulder widening at curves. A minimum of 2-4 feet width must be added to the outside of horizontal curves and the new traversable shoulder must be a minimum of 4 feet wide.

General information
Where to use:

Roadway curves noted as having frequent lane departure crashes due to inadequate or no shoulders, resulting in an unsuccessful attempt to reenter the roadway.

Why it works:

Adding shoulders (outside only) creates a recovery area in which a driver can regain control of a vehicle, as well as lateral clearance to roadside objects.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

To minimize the R/W needs and the cost, only outside shoulder at curves is to be widened. This CM can be implemented in a relatively short timeframe.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: NA

Page 519 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 80
R17, Improve horizontal alignment (flatten curves)
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 50% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits (or influence area) of the improved alignment. This CM is not eligible unless it is done as the last step of an "incremental approach", including: the agency documents that: 1) they have already pursued and installed lower cost and lower impact CMs (i.e. signing/striping upgrades to MUTCD standards/recommendations, rumble strips, etc.), 2) they have already monitored the crash occurrences after these improvements were installed, and 3) the 'after' crash rate is still unacceptably high. This 'incremental approach' (or a special exception from the HSIP program manager) must be documented in the Narrative Questions in the application and a summary of the agency's 'before' and 'after' crash analysis must be attached to the application.

General information
Where to use:

Roadways with horizontal curves that have experienced lane departure crashes as a result of a roadway segment having compound curves or a severe radius. This strategy should generally be considered only when less expensive strategies involving clearing of specific sight obstructions or modifying traffic control devices have been tried and have failed to ameliorate the crash patterns.

Why it works:

Increasing the radius of a horizontal curve can be very effective in improving the safety performance of the curve. Curve modification reduces the likelihood of a vehicle leaving its lane, crossing the roadway centerline, or leaving the roadway at a horizontal curve; and minimizes the adverse consequences of leaving the roadway. Horizontal alignment improvement projects are expected to include standard/improved superelevation elements, which should be considered part of this CM and not an additional CM.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

This strategy is a long-term, higher-cost alternative for improving the safety of a horizontal curve because it usually involves total reconstruction of the roadway. It may also require acquisition of additional right-of-way and an environmental review.

This strategy, albeit costly, has shown that increasing the radius of curvature can significantly reduce total curve-related crashes by up to 80 percent. The expected effectiveness of this CM must be assessed for each individual location.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: All CRF: 24 - 90%

Page 520 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 81
R18, Flatten crest vertical curve
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 25% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits (or influence area) of the improved alignment. This CM is not eligible unless it is done as the last step of an "incremental approach", including: the agency documents that: 1) they have already pursued and installed lower cost and lower impact CMs (i.e. signing/striping upgrades to MUTCD standards/recommendations, rumble strips, etc.), 2) they have already monitored the crash occurrences after these improvements were installed, and 3) the 'after' crash rate is still unacceptably high. This 'incremental approach' (or a special exception from the HSIP program manager) must be documented in the Narrative Questions in the application and a summary of the agency's 'before' and 'after' crash analysis must be attached to the application.

General information
Where to use:

The target for this strategy is usually unsignalized intersections with restricted sight distance due to vertical geometry and with patterns of crashes related to that lack of sight distance that cannot be ameliorated by less expensive methods. This strategy should generally be considered only when less expensive strategies involving clearing of specific sight obstructions or modifying traffic control devices have been tried and have failed to ameliorate the crash patterns.

Why it works:

Adequate sight distance for drivers at stopped approaches to intersections has long been recognized as among the most important factors contributing to overall intersection safety. Vertical alignment improvement projects are expected to include standard/improved superelevation elements, which should be considered part of this CM and not an additional CM.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Projects involving changing the horizontal and/or vertical alignment to provide more sight distance are quite extensive and usually take several years to accomplish. If additional right-of-way is required or environmental impacts are expected, these projects will require a substantial period of time. Since this is usually an expensive treatment, one of the keys to creating a cost effective project with at least a medium B/C ratio is targeting higher-hazard locations.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: All CRF: 20 - 51 % R19, Improve curve superelevation
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 45% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits (or influence area) of the improved superelevation. This CM does not apply to sections of roadways where the horizontal or vertical alignments are changing via another CM.

General information
Where to use:

Roadways noted as having frequent lane departure crashes and inadequate or no superelevation. Safety can be enhanced when the superelevation is improved or restored along curves where the actual superelevation is less than the optimal.

Why it works:

Superelevation works with friction between the tires and pavement to counteract the forces on the vehicle associated with cornering. Many curves may have inadequate superelevation because of vehicles traveling at higher speeds than were originally designed for, because of loss of effective superelevation after resurfacing, or because of changes in design policy after the curve was originally constructed.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

This strategy can be a higher-cost alternative for improving the safety of a curve because it involves reconstruction to some degree. Other projects may be able to be constructed by simple overlays and minimal reconstruction of roadways features.

When simple overlay fixes are pursued, a systematic installation approach may be appropriate. The expected effectiveness of this CM must be assessed for each individual location.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Run-off Road, All CRF: 40 - 50 %

Page 521 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 82
R20, Convert from two-way to one-way traffic
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 35% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits of the new one-way sections.

General information
Where to use:

One-way streets can offer improved signal timing and accommodate odd-spaced signals. One-way streets can simplify crossings for pedestrians, who must look for traffic in only one direction. While studies have shown that conversion of two-way streets to one-way generally reduces pedestrian crashes and the number of conflict points, one-way streets tend to have higher speeds which creates new problems. Care must be taken not to create conditions that cause driver confusion and erratic maneuvers.

Why it works:

Studies have shown a 10 to 50-percent reduction in total crashes after conversion of a two-way street to one-way operation.

While studies have shown that con-version of two-way streets to one-way generally reduces pedestrian crashes, one-way streets tend to have higher speeds which creates new problems. At the same time, this strategy (1) increases capacity significantly and (2) can have safety-related drawbacks including pedestrian confusion and minor sideswipe crashes.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

The costs will vary depending on length of treatment and if the conversion requires modification to signals. Conversion costs can be high to build "crossovers" where the one-way streets convert back to two-way streets and to rebuild traffic signals. It's also likely that these types of modifications will require public involvement and could significantly add to the time it takes to complete the project. The expected effectiveness of this CM must be assessed for each individual location.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: All CRF: 26 - 43 % R21, Improve pavement friction (High Friction Surface Treatments) For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 55% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits of the improved friction overlay. This CM is not intended to apply to standard chip-seal or open-graded maintenance projects for long segments of corridors or structure repaving projects intended to fix failed pavement.

General information
Where to use:

Nationally, this countermeasure is referred to as "High Friction Surface Treatments" or HFST. Areas as noted having crashes on wet pavements or under dry conditions when the pavement friction available is significantly less than actual roadway speeds; including but not limited to curves, loop ramps, intersections, and areas with short stopping or weaving distances. This treatment is intended to target locations where skidding is determined to be a problem, in wet or dry conditions and the target vehicle is one that runs (skids) off the road or is unable to stop due to insufficient skid resistance.

Why it works:

Improving the skid resistance at locations with high frequencies of wet-road crashes and/or failure to stop crashes can result in a reduction of 50 percent for wet-road crashes and 20 percent for total crashes. Applying HFST can double friction numbers, e.g. low 40s to high 80s. This CM represents a special focus area for both FHWA and Caltrans, which means there are extra resources available for agencies interested in more details on High Friction Surface Treatment projects.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

This strategy can be relatively inexpensive and implemented in a short timeframe. The installation would be done by either agency personnel or contractors and can be done by hand or machine. In general, This CM can be very effective and can be considered on a systematic approach.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Wet, Rear-End, All CRF: 17 - 68 %

Page 522 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 83
R22, Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning) For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 15% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the influence area of the new/upgraded signs. This CM is not intended for maintenance upgrades of street-name, parking, guide, or any other signs without a primary focus on roadway safety. This CM is not eligible unless it is done as part of a larger sign audit project, including the study of: 1) the existing signs' locations, sizes and information per MUTCD standards, 2) missing signs per MUTCD standards, and 3) sign retroreflectivity. The overall sign audit scope (or a special exception from the HSIP program manager) must be documented in the Narrative Questions in the application. Based on the scope of the project/audit, it may be appropriate to combine other CMs in the B/C calculation.

General information
Where to use:

The target for this strategy should be on roadway segments with patterns of head on, nighttime, non-intersection, run-off road, and sideswipe crashes related to lack of driver awareness of the presence of a specific roadway feature or regulatory requirement. Ideally this type of safety CM would be combined with other sign evaluations and upgrades (install chevrons, warning signs, delineators, markers, beacons, and relocation of existing signs per MUTCD standards.) Why it works:

This strategy primarily addresses crashes caused by lack of driver awareness (or compliance) roadway signing. It is intended to get the drivers attention and give them a visual warning by using fluorescent yellow sheeting (or other retroreflective material).

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Signing improvements do not require a long development process and can typically be implemented quickly. Costs for implementing this strategy are nominal and depend on the number of signs. When considered at a single location, these low cost improvements are usually funded through local funding by local maintenance crews. However, This CM can be effectively and efficiently implemented using a systematic approach with numerous locations, resulting in moderate cost projects that are more appropriate to seek state or federal funding. When considering any type of federally funded sign upgrade project, California local agencies are encouraged to consider "Roadway Safety Signing Audit (RSSA) and Upgrade Projects". Including RSSAs in the development phase of sign projects are expected to identify non-standard (per MUTCD) sign features and missing signs that may otherwise go unnoticed. More information on RSSA is available on the Local Assistance HSIP webpage.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Head on, Run-off road, Sideswipe, Night CRF: 18 - 35%

Page 523 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 84
R23, Install chevron signs on horizontal curves
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 40% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the influence area of the new signs. (i.e. only through the curve).

General information
Where to use:

Roadways that have an unacceptable level of crashes on relatively sharp curves during periods of light and darkness. Ideally this type of safety CM would be combined with other sign evaluations and upgrades (install warning signs, delineators, markers, beacons, and relocation of existing signs per MUTCD standards.) Why it works:

Post-mounted chevrons are intended to warn drivers of an approaching curve and provide tracking information and guidance to the drivers. While they are intended to act as a warning, it should also be remembered that the posts, placed along the roadside, represent a possible object with which an errant vehicle can crash into. Design of posts to minimize damage and injury is an important part of the considerations to be made when selecting these treatments.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Run-off Road, All CRF: 6 - 64 % R24, Install curve advance warning signs
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 25% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the influence area of the new signs. (i.e. only through the curve)
General information
Where to use:

Roadways that have an unacceptable level of crashes on relatively sharp curves during periods of light and darkness. This countermeasure may also include horizontal alignment and/or advisory speed warning signs. Ideally this type of safety CM would be combined with other sign evaluations and upgrades (install warning signs, chevrons, delineators, markers, beacons, and relocation of existing signs per MUTCD standards.)
Why it works:

This strategy primarily addresses problem curves, and serves as an advance warning of an unexpected or sharp curve. It provides advance information and gives drivers a visual warning that their added attention is needed.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Run-off Road, All CRF: 20 - 30 %

Page 524 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 85
R25, Install curve advance warning signs (flashing beacon) For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 30% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the influence area of the new signs. (i.e. only through the curve)
General information
Where to use:

Roadways that have an unacceptable level of crashes on relatively sharp curves. Flashing beacons in conjunction with warning signs should only be used on horizontal curves that have an established severe crash history to help maintain their effectiveness.

Why it works:

This strategy primarily addresses problem curves, and serves as an enhanced advance warning of an unexpected or sharp curve.

It provides advance information and gives drivers a visual warning that their added attention is needed. Flashing beacons are an added indication that a curve may be particularly challenging.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Use of flashing beacons requires minimal development process, allowing flashing beacons to be installed within a short time period. Before choosing this CM, the agency needs to confirm the ability to provide power to the site (solar may be an option).

In general, This CM can be very effective and can be considered on a systematic approach.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: All CRF: 30 % R26, Install dynamic/variable speed warning signs
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 30% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the influence area of the new signs. (i.e. through the curve) {This CM does not apply to dynamic regulatory speed warning signs. There are currently no nationally accepted CRFs for dynamic regulatory signs (also known as Radar Speed Feedback Signs).

CRFs are being developed and Caltrans hopes to include these CMs and CRFs in future calls for projects.}
General information
Where to use:

Curvilinear roadways that have an unacceptable level of crashes due to excessive speeds on relatively sharp curves.

Why it works:

This strategy primarily addresses crashes caused by motorists traveling too fast around sharp curves. It is intended to get the drivers attention and give them a visual warning that they may be traveling over the recommended speed for the approaching curve. Care should be taken to limit the placement of these signs to help maintain their effectiveness.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Use of dynamic speed warning signs requires minimal development process, allowing them to be installed within a short time period. Before choosing this CM, the agency needs to confirm the ability to provide power to the site (solar may be an option).

In general, This CM can be very effective and can be considered on a systematic approach.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: All CRF: 0 - 41 %

Page 525 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 86
R27, Install delineators, reflectors and/or object markers For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 15% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits / influence area of the new features. {This is not a striping-related CM}
General information
Where to use:

Roadways that have an unacceptable level of crashes on curves (relatively flat to sharp) during periods of light and darkness.

Any road with a history of fixed object crashes is a candidate for this treatment, as are roadways with similar fixed objects along the roadside that have yet to experience crashes. If a fixed object cannot be relocated or made break-away, placing an object marker can provide additional information to motorists. Ideally this type of safety CM would be combined with other sign evaluations and upgrades (install warning signs, chevrons, beacons, and relocation of existing signs per MUTCD standards.) Why it works:

Delineators, reflectors and/or object markers are intended to warn drivers of an approaching curve or fixed object that cannot easily be removed. They are intended to provide tracking information and guidance to the drivers. They are generally less costly than Chevron Signs as they don't require posts to place along the roadside, avoiding an additional object with which an errant vehicle can crash into.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

These improvements do not require a long development process and can typically be implemented quickly. Costs for implementing this strategy are nominal and depend on the number of locations. When considered at a single location, these low cost improvements are usually funded through local funding by local maintenance crews. However, This CM can be effectively and efficiently implemented using a systematic approach with numerous locations, resulting in low to moderate cost projects that are more appropriate to seek state or federal funding. When considering any type of federally funded sign upgrade project, California local agencies are encouraged to consider "Roadway Safety Signing Audit (RSSA) and Upgrade Projects". Including RSSAs in the development phase of sign projects are expected to identify non-standard (per MUTCD) sign features and missing signs that may otherwise go unnoticed. More information on RSSA is available on the Local Assistance HSIP webpage.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: All CRF: 0 - 30 %

Page 526 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 87
R28, Install edge-lines and centerlines
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 25% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits of the new centerlines and/or edge-lines.

This CM is not intended to be used for general maintenance activities (i.e. the replacement of existing striping and RPMs in-kind) and must include upgraded safety features over the existing striping. For two lane roadways allowing passing, a striping audit must be done to ensure the passing limits meeting the MUTCD standards. Both the centerline and edge-lines are expected to be upgraded, unless prior approval is granted by Caltrans staff in writing and attached to application.

General information
Where to use:

Any road with a history of run-off-road right, head-on, opposite-direction-sideswipe, or run-off-road-left crashes is a candidate for this treatment - install where the existing lane delineation is not sufficient to assist the motorist in understanding the existing limits of the roadway. Depending on the width of the roadway, various combinations of edge line and/or center line pavement markings may be the most appropriate. Incorporating raised/reflective pavement markers (RPMs) into centerlines (and edge-lines) should be considered as it has been shown to improve safety.

Why it works:

Installing edge-lines and centerlines where none exists or making significant upgrades to existing lines (paint to thermoplastic, adding audible disks/bumps in the thermoplastic stripes, or adding RPMs) are intended/designed to help drivers who might leave the roadway because of their inability to see the edge of the roadway along the horizontal edge of the pavement or crossover the centerline of the roadway into oncoming traffic. New pavement marking products tend to be more durable, are allweather, more visible, and have a higher retroreflectivity than traditional pavement markings.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

These improvements do not require a long development process and can typically be implemented quickly. Costs for implementing this strategy are nominal and depend on the number and length of locations. This CM can be effectively and efficiently implemented using a systematic approach with numerous and long locations, resulting in low to moderate cost projects that are more appropriate to seek state or federal funding. When considering any type of federally funded striping upgrade project, California local agencies are encouraged to consider "Roadway Safety Striping Audit and Upgrade Projects".

Including wide-scale striping audits in the development phase of striping projects are expected to identify non-standard (per MUTCD) striping/marking features, no-passing zone limits needing adjustment, and missing striping/markings that may otherwise go unnoticed. More information on this concepts is available on the Local Assistance HSIP webpage under an RSSA example document. Note: When federal safety funding is used for these installations in high-wear-locations, the local agency is expected to maintain the improvement for a minimum of 10 years.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Head-on, Run-off Road, All CRF: 0 - 44 %

Page 527 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 88
R29, Install no-passing line
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 45% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits of the new or extended no-passing zones.

General information
Where to use:

Roadways that have a high percentage of head-on crashes suggesting that many head-on crashes may relate to failed passing maneuvers. No-passing lines should be installed where drivers "passing sight distance" is not available due to horizontal or vertical obstructions. General restriping projects can be good opportunities to reevaluate and incorporate new no-passing zones limits. The incorporation 'No Passing Zone' pennants should also be considered when reevaluating the limits of nopassing zones. Installing no-passing limits in areas that are not warranted may reduce the overall safety of the corridor as drivers may become frustrated and attempt passing maneuvers at other locations without the necessary sight distance.

Why it works:

When the centerline markings do not differentiate between passing and no-passing areas, drivers may have difficulty determining where passing maneuvers can be completed safely. Providing clear and engineered passing and no-passing areas can encourage drivers to wait patiently for safe passing areas and avoid aggressively looking for passing opportunities.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Head-on, Side-swipe CRF: 40 - 53% R30, Install centerline rumble strips/stripes
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 20% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits of the new rumble strips/stripes.

General information
Where to use:

Center Line rumble strips/stripes can be used on virtually any roadway – especially those with a history of head-on crashes. It is recommended that rumble strips/stripes be applied systematically along an entire route instead of only at spot locations. For all rumble strips/stripes, pavement condition should be sufficient to accept milled rumble strips. Care should be taken when considering installing rumble strips in locations with residential land uses or in areas with high bicycle volumes.

Why it works:

Rumble strips provide an auditory indication and tactile rumble when driven on, alerting drivers that they are drifting out of their travel lane, giving them time to recover before they depart the roadway or cross the center line. Additionally, rumble stripes (pavement marking in the rumble itself) provide an enhanced marking, especially in wet dark conditions.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

These improvements do not require a long development process and can typically be implemented quickly. Costs for implementing this strategy are nominal and depend on the number and length of locations. This CM can be effectively and efficiently implemented using a systematic approach with numerous and long locations, resulting in moderate cost projects that are more appropriate to seek state or federal funding.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Head-on, Side-swipe, All CRF: 15 - 68%

Page 528 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 89
R31, Install edgeline rumble strips/stripes
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 15% 10 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits of the new rumble strips/stripes.

General information
Where to use:

Shoulder and edge line milled rumble strips/stripes should be used on roads with a history of roadway departure crashes. It is recommended that rumble strips/stripes be applied systematically along an entire route instead of only at spot locations. For all rumble strips/stripes, pavement condition should be sufficient to accept milled rumble strips. Special requirements may apply and care should be taken when considering installing rumble strips in locations with residential land uses or in areas with high bicycle volumes.

Why it works:

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

These improvements do not require a long development process and can typically be implemented quickly. Costs for implementing this strategy are nominal and depend on the number and length of locations. This CM can be effectively and efficiently implemented using a systematic approach with numerous and long locations, resulting in moderate cost projects that are more appropriate to seek state or federal funding.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Run-off Road CRF: 10 - 41% R32, Speed Safety Cameras
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% All 20% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring within the limits of the road sections that Speed Safety Cameras are newly installed.

Agencies should conduct a legal and policy review to determine if Speed Safety Cameras (SSCs) are authorized within a jurisdiction and how the authorization and other traffic laws will affect an SSC program. Please refer to Speed Safety Camera Program Planning and Operations Guide. FHWA, (2023).

General information
Where to use:

Agencies should conduct a network analysis of speeding-related crashes to identify locations to implement SSCs. The analysis can include scope (e.g., widespread, localized), location types (e.g., urban/suburban/rural, work zones, residential, school zones), roadway types (e.g., expressways, arterials, local streets), times of day, and road users most affected by speed-related crashes (e.g., pedestrians, bicyclists). SSCs can be deployed as:

Fixed units—a single, stationary camera targeting one location.

Point-to-Point (P2P) units—multiple cameras to capture average speed over a certain distance.

Mobile units—a portable camera, generally in a vehicle or trailer.

Why it works:

Safe Speeds is a core principle of the Safe System Approach since humans are less likely to survive high-speed crashes. Enforcing safe speeds has been challenging; however, with more information and tools communities can make progress in reducing speeds. Agencies can use speed safety cameras (SSCs) as an effective and reliable technology to supplement more traditional methods of enforcement, engineering measures, and education to alter the social norms of speeding. SSCs use speed measurement devices to detect speeding and capture photographic or video evidence of vehicles that are violating a set speed threshold.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: All CRF: -46 - 61 %

Page 529 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 90
R33PB, Install bike lanes
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% Pedestrian and Bicycle 35% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to "Ped & Bike" crashes occurring within the limits of the Class II (not Class III) bike lanes. When an off-street bike-path is proposed that is not adjacent to the roadway, the applicant must document the engineering judgment used to determine which "Ped & Bike" crashes to apply.

General information
Where to use:

Roadway segments noted as having crashes between bicycles and vehicles or crashes that may be preventable with a buffer/shoulder. Most studies suggest that bicycle lanes may provide protection against bicycle/motor vehicle collisions.

Striped bike lanes can be incorporated into a roadway when is desirable to delineate which available road space is for exclusive or preferential use by bicyclists.

Why it works:

Most studies present evidence that bicycle lanes provide protection against bicycle/motor vehicle collisions. Bicycle lanes provide marked areas for bicyclist to travel along the roadway and provide for more predictable movements for both bicyclist and motorist. Evidence also shows that riding with the flow of vehicular traffic reduces bicyclists’ chances of collision with a motor vehicle. Locations with bicycle lanes have lower rates of wrong-way riding. In combination with this CM, better guidance signs and markings for non-motorized and motorized roadway users should be considered, including: sign and markings directing cyclists on appropriate/legal travel paths and signs and markings warning motorists of non-motorized uses of the roadway that should be expected.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Adding striped bicycle lanes can range from the simply restriping the roadway and minor signing to projects that require roadway widening, right-of-way, and environmental impacts. It is most cost efficient to create bike lanes during street reconstruction, street resurfacing, or at the time of original construction. The expected effectiveness of this CM must be assessed for each individual location. For simple installation scenarios, This CM can be very effective and can be considered on a systematic approach.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Pedestrian, Bicycle CRF: 0 - 53 %

Page 530 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 91
R34PB, Install Separated Bike Lanes
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% Pedestrian and Bicycle 45% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to "Ped & Bike" crashes occurring within the limits of the separated bike lanes.

When an off-street bike-path is proposed that is not adjacent to the roadway, the applicant must document the engineering judgment used to determine which "Ped & Bike" crashes to apply.

General information
Where to use:

Separated bikeways are most appropriate on streets with high volumes of bike traffic and/or high bike-vehicle collisions, presumably in an urban or suburban area. Separation types range from simple, painted buffers and flexible delineators, to more substantial separation measures including raised curbs, grade separation, bollards, planters, and parking lanes. These options range in feasibility due to roadway characteristics, available space, and cost. In some cases, it may be possible to provide additional space in areas where pedestrian and bicyclists may interact, such as the parking buffer, or loading zones, or extra bike lane width for cyclists to pass one another.

Why it works:

Separated bike lanes provide increased safety and comfort for bicyclists beyond conventional bicycle lanes. By separating bicyclists from motor traffic, “protected” or physically separated bike lanes can offer a higher level of comfort and are attractive to a wider spectrum of the public. Intersections and approaches must be carefully designed to promote safety and facilitate leftturns for bicyclists from the primary corridor to cross street.

In combination with this CM, better guidance signs and markings for non-motorized and motorized roadway users should be considered, including: sign and markings directing cyclists on appropriate/legal travel paths and signs and markings warning motorists of non-motorized uses of the roadway that should be expected.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

The cost of Installing separated bike lanes can be low to medium or high, depending on whether roadway widening, right-ofway and environmental impacts are involved. It is most cost efficient to create bike lanes during street reconstruction, street resurfacing, or at the time of original construction. The expected effectiveness of this CM must be assessed for each individual location.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Pedestrian, Bicycle CRF: 3.7 - 100 %

Page 531 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 92
R35PB, Install sidewalk/pathway (to avoid walking along roadway) For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% Pedestrian and Bicycle 80% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to "Ped & Bike" crashes occurring within the limits of the new walkway. This CM is not intended to be used where an existing sidewalk is being replaced with a wider one, unless prior Caltrans approval is included in the application. When an off-street multi-use path is proposed that is not adjacent to the roadway, the applicant must document the engineering judgment used to determine which "Ped & Bike" crashes to apply.

General information
Where to use:

Areas noted as not having adequate or no sidewalks and a history of walking along roadway pedestrian crashes. In rural areas asphalt curbs and/or separated walkways may be appropriate.

Why it works:

Sidewalks and walkways provide people with space to travel within the public right-of-way that is separated from roadway vehicles. The presence of sidewalks on both sides of the street has been found to be related to significant reductions in the “walking along roadway” pedestrian crash risk compared to locations where no sidewalks or walkways exist. Reductions of 50 to 90 percent of these types of pedestrian crashes. In combination with this CM, better guidance signs and markings for nonmotorized and motorized roadway users should be considered, including: sign and markings directing pedestrians and cyclists on appropriate/legal travel paths and signs and markings warning motorists of non-motorized uses of the roadway that should be expected.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Costs for sidewalks will vary, depending upon factors such as width, materials, and existing of curb, gutter and drainage.

Asphalt curbs and walkways are less expensive, but require more maintenance. The expected effectiveness of this CM must be assessed for each individual location. These projects can be very effective in areas of high-pedestrian volumes with a past history of crashes involving pedestrians.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Pedestrian, Bicycle CRF: 65 - 89 %

Page 532 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 93
R36PB, Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing (with enhanced safety features) For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% Pedestrian and Bicycle 35% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to "Ped & Bike" crashes occurring in the influence area (expected to be a maximum of within 250') of the new crossing which includes new enhanced safety features. Note:

This CM is not intended to be combined with the "Install raised pedestrian crossing" when calculating the improvement's B/C ratio. This CM is not intended to be used for high-cost aesthetic enhancements (i.e. stamped concrete or stamped asphalt).

General information
Where to use:

Roadway segments with no controlled crossing for a significant distance in high-use midblock crossing areas and/or multilane roads locations. Based on the Zegeer study (Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations) at many locations, a marked crosswalk alone may not be sufficient to adequately protect non-motorized users. In these cases, flashing beacons, curb extensions, medians and pedestrian crossing islands and/or other safety features should be added to complement the standard crossing elements. For multi-lane roadways, advance "yield" markings can be effective in reducing the 'multiple-threat' danger to pedestrians.

Why it works:

Adding pedestrian crossings has the opportunity to greatly enhance pedestrian safety at locations noted as being problematic.

The enhanced safety elements, which may include curb extensions, medians and pedestrian crossing islands, beacons, and lighting, combined with pavement markings delineating a portion of the roadway that is designated for pedestrian crossing.

Care must be taken to warn drivers of the potential for pedestrians crossing the roadway and enhanced improvements added to the crossing increase the likelihood of pedestrians crossing in a safe manner. In combination with this CM, better guidance signs and markings for non-motorized and motorized roadway users should be considered, including: sign and markings directing pedestrians and cyclists on appropriate/legal travel paths and signs. When agencies opt to install aesthetic enhancement to crossing like stamped concrete/asphalt, the project design and construction costs can significantly increase. For HSIP applications, these costs must be accounted for in the B/C calculation, but these costs (over standard crosswalk markings) must be tracked separately and are not federally reimbursable and will increase the agency's local-funding share for the project costs.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Costs associated with this strategy will vary widely, depending on the extent of the curb extensions, raised medians, flashing beacons, and other pedestrian safety elements that are needed with the crossing. When considered at a single location, these improvements can sometimes be low cost and funded through local funding by local crews. This CM can often be effectively and efficiently implemented using a systematic approach with numerous locations, resulting in moderate to high cost projects that are appropriate to seek state or federal funding.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Pedestrian, Bicycle CRF: 8 - 56%

Page 533 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 94
R37PB, Install raised pedestrian crossing
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% Pedestrian and Bicycle 35% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to "Ped & Bike" crashes occurring in the area with the new raised crossing. Note:

This CM is not intended to be combined with the "Install pedestrian crossing (with enhanced safety features)" when calculating the improvement's B/C ratio.

General information
Where to use:

On lower-speed roadways, where pedestrians are known to be crossing roadways that involve significant vehicular traffic. Based on the Zegeer study (Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations) at many locations, a marked crosswalk alone, may not be sufficient to adequately protect non-motorized users. In these cases, raised crossings can be added to complement the standard crossing elements. Special requirements may apply and extra care should be taken when considering installing raised crossings to ensure unintended safety issues are not created, such as: emergency vehicle access or truck route issues.

Why it works:

Adding a raised pedestrian crossing has the opportunity to enhance pedestrian safety at locations noted as being especially problematic. The raised crossing encourages motorists to reduce their speed and provides improved delineation for the portion of the roadway that is designated for pedestrian crossing. In combination with this CM, better guidance signs and markings for non-motorized and motorized roadway users should be considered, including: sign and markings directing pedestrians and cyclists on appropriate/legal travel paths.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Costs associated with this strategy will vary widely, depending upon the elements of the raised crossing and the need for new curb ramps and sidewalk modifications. This CM may be effectively and efficiently implemented using a systematic approach with more than one location and can have medium to high B/C ratios based on past non-motorized crash history.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Pedestrian, Bicycle CRF: 30 - 46% R38PB, Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% Pedestrian and Bicycle 35% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to "Ped & Bike" crashes occurring in the influence area (expected to be a maximum of within 250') of the crossing which includes the RRFB.

General information
Where to use:

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) includes pedestrian-activated flashing lights and additional signage that enhance the visibility of marked crosswalks and alert motorists to pedestrian crossings. It uses an irregular flash pattern that is similar to emergency flashers on police vehicles. RRFBs are installed at unsignalized intersections and mid-block pedestrian crossings.

Why it works:

RRFBs can enhance safety by increasing driver awareness of potential pedestrian conflicts and reducing crashes between vehicles and pedestrians at unsignalized intersections and mid-block pedestrian crossings. The addition of RRFB may also increase the safety effectiveness of other treatments, such as crossing warning signs and markings.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

RRFBs are a lower cost alternative to traffic signals and hybrid signals. This CM can often be effectively and efficiently implemented using a systematic approach with numerous locations.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Pedestrian, Bicycle CRF: 7 – 47.4%

Page 534 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 95
R39AL, Install Animal Fencing
For HSIP Cycle 12 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed CRF Expected Life 90% Animal 80% 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to "animal" crashes occurring within the limits of the new fencing.

General information
Where to use:

At locations with high percent of vehicular/animal crashes (reactive) or where there is a known high percent of animals crossing due to migratory patterns (proactive).

Why it works:

Animal fencing helps to channelize the identified animals to a natural or man-made crossing, eliminating the conflict between vehicles and animals on the same place. Animal fencing is typically installed at a bridge location with its "run of need" dependent on the surrounding terrain.

General Qualities (Time, Cost and Effectiveness):

Time to install fencing can be moderate to lengthy depending on the environmental commitments and agreed upon solution to mitigating project impacts. Costs will be fairly low and depend on the "run of need" length. There will be minimal reoccurring maintenance costs on keeping the fence intact. The expected effectiveness of this CM must be assessed for each individual location.

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: Crash Types Addressed: Animal CRF: 70 - 90 %

Page 535 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 96
Appendix C: Summary of “Recommended Actions”
The information contained here represent a brief summary of each section of this manual as well as the Summary of “Recommended Actions” from Sections 2 through 7. This is intended to be a quick-reference for local agency practitioners working on a “proactive safety analysis” of their roadway network.

Introduction and Purpose
As safety practitioners consider implementing a ‘proactive safety analysis approach’ they should consider the overall context of the safety issues facing California local agencies and Caltrans primary goals for preparing this manual for California’s local roadway owners. Figure 1 provides a flowchart of the process and Appendices E and F provide examples and lessons learned from recent statewide callsfor-projects.

Identifying Safety Issues
This section provides an overview of the types of data to collect for the identification of roadway safety issues. It discusses sources of crash data and how they can be used. As practitioners gather information they are encouraged to develop one or more separate spreadsheets and/or pin-maps to help track and manage this data.

State and Local Crash Databases
Recommended Action: Obtain at least 3 years of network-wide crash data to identify local roads that have a history of roadway crashes. This will be used to identify predominant roadway crash locations, crash types and other common characteristics.

Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS)
Recommended Action: Consider augmenting your local agency’s data collection approach with information available using the suite of TIMS tools. The TIMS tools (and/or tools from private for-profit vendors) can help the safety practitioner access and manage their crash data.

Law Enforcement Crash Reports
Recommended Action: Develop a working relationship with law enforcement officials responsible for enforcement and crash investigations. This could foster a partnership where sharing crash reports and safety information on problem roadway segments becomes an everyday occurrence. Practitioners with limited access to crash data are encouraged to use TIMS to assess the local crash report data.

Observational Information
Recommended Action: Gather information received from law enforcement and road maintenance crew observations. Develop a system for maintenance crews to report and record observed roadway safety issues and a mechanism to address them.

Page 536 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 97
Public Notifications
Recommended Action: Review and summarize information received from these sources, identifying segments or corridors with multiple notifications and record the locations, dates, and nature of the problem that are cited.

Roadway Data and Devices
Recommended Action: Identify and track roadway characteristics for the intersections, roadway segments, and corridors, including compliance with the minimum standards. At a minimum, this should be done for locations being considered for safety improvements, but ideally agencies would establish an extensive database of roadway data to help them proactively identify high risk roadway features.

Exposure Data
Recommended Action: Consider the availability of exposure data and track it along with the other crash data to help prioritize potential locations for safety improvements.

Field Assessments and Road Safety Audits
Recommended Action: Consider completing formal or informal field assessments and RSAs at certain locations to help ensure all relevant information is collected and available for the safety practitioners to complete their safety analysis and identification of the most appropriate countermeasures. Develop simple straightforward criteria on when one of these will be undertaken.

Safety Data Analysis
This section summarizes the types of analyses that can be conducted to determine what roadway countermeasures should be implemented. This section is the link between the data (Section 2) and the selection of appropriate countermeasures (Section 4). It provides definitions and examples of the qualitative and quantitative factors that should be considered when evaluating roadway safety issues.

Quantitative Analysis
Recommended Action: Complete a quantitative analysis of their roadway data using both Crash Frequency and Crash Rate methodologies, including:

Crash Frequency
Top 10 (or 20) lists of intersections and roadway segments.

For lower volume roadways, network wide pin-maps may be more effective.

Develop collision diagrams showing the direction of movement of vehicles and pedestrians.

Crash Rate
Top 10 (or 20) lists of roadway segments in relationship to length, volumes, and/or density.

Top 10 (or 20) lists of intersections, sorted by crash rate.

Top 10 (or 20) lists of the highest volume intersections, sorted by crash frequency or rate.

Qualitative Analysis

Page 537 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 98
Recommended Action: Consider completing field assessments and RSAs to identify roadway infrastructure characteristics relating to both locations with compliance issues and locations with high crash frequencies/rates. As part the field assessments, common roadway and crash characteristics should be identified for the potential systemic deployment of countermeasures.

Caltrans recommends all agencies complete both quantitative and qualitative analyses before starting their applications for HSIP program funding. The findings from these analyses should be documented in spreadsheets and/or pin-maps similar to the ones discussed in Section 2.

Countermeasures
This Section provides a description of selected countermeasures that have been shown in this manual. It includes a basic set of strategies to implement at locations experiencing a history of crashes and their corresponding crash modification factors (CMF). NOTE: Crash Reduction Factors (CRFs) are directly connected to the CMFs and are another indication of the effectiveness of a particular treatment. The CRF for a countermeasure is defined mathematically as 1 – CMF. The terms CMFs and CRFs are used interchangeably throughout this document.

Selecting Countermeasures and Crash Modification Factors / Crash Reduction Factors Countermeasure Details and Characteristics
Recommended Action: Agencies should use all information and results obtained through completing the actions in Sections 2, 3 and 4 to select the appropriate countermeasures for their HCCLs and systemic improvements. As novice safety practitioners select countermeasures, they must realize that a reasonable level of traffic ‘engineering judgment’ is required and that this manual and should not be used as a simple cheat-sheet for preparing and submitting applications for funding.

Calculating the B/C ratio and Comparing Projects
This section defines a methodology for calculating a benefit to cost (B/C) ratio for a potential safety project. It includes sources for estimating projected costs and benefits and the specific values/formulas Caltrans uses for its statewide evaluations of HSIP projects. This section also discusses the potential value in reevaluating projects’ overall cost effectiveness.

Estimating the Benefit of Implementing Proposed Improvements Recommended Action: Prepare ‘Total Benefit’ estimates for the proposed projects being evaluated in the proactive safety analysis.

Estimating the Cost of Implementing Proposed Improvements Recommended Action: Prepare ‘Total Project Cost’ estimates for the proposed projects being evaluated in the proactive safety analysis.

Page 538 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 99
Calculating the B/C Ratio
Recommended Action: Calculate the B/C ratio for each of the proposed projects being evaluated in the proactive safety analysis.

Compare B/C Ratios and Consider the Need to Reevaluate Project Elements Recommended Action: Compare, reevaluate, and prioritize the potential safety projects. Consider changing the project limits or utilizing lower cost countermeasures for projects with low initial B/C ratios.

Identifying Funding and Construct Improvements
This section identifies existing and new funding opportunities for safety projects that local agencies should be considering. This section also briefly discusses some unique project development issues and strategies for safety projects as they proceed through design and construction.

Existing Funding for Low-cost Countermeasures
Recommended Action: Survey planned maintenance, developer and capital projects to determine whether they overlap any of the proposed safety projects. Where projects overlap, leverage the existing funding sources to include safety countermeasures.

Other Funding Sources
Recommended Action: Consider all potential funding opportunities to incorporate the identified safety countermeasures including the HSIP and ATP Programs.

Project Development and Construction Considerations
Recommended Action: Safety practitioners should follow their safety projects all the way through the project delivery and construction process. In addition, they should establish a safety program delivery plan that brings awareness and support to the expedited delivery of safety projects. Where possible, safety practitioners should involve the media and even consider having their own program intended to “toot their own safety-horn.”
Evaluation Improvements
This section presents the process to complete an evaluation of installed treatments. After the countermeasures are installed, assessing their effectiveness will provide valuable information and can help determine which countermeasures should continue to be installed on other roadways to make them safer as well.

Recommended Action: Develop a spreadsheet to track future safety project installations and record 3+ years of “before” and “after” crash information at those locations. Once safety countermeasures are constructed, schedule and track assessment dates to ensure they happen.

Page 539 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 100
Appendix D: Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) Calculations
This appendix includes the Benefit Cost methodology used in the Caltrans Calls-for-projects in the HSIP programs. The HSM, Part B - Chapter 7, includes more details on conducting Economic Appraisal for roadway safety projects. Local agencies will be required to utilize the HSIP Analyzer to calculate the Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) as part of their application for HSIP funding.

Starting in Cycle 7 call for projects, the fatality and severe injury costs have been combined for calculating the benefit. Because fatality figures are small and are a matter of randomness, this change is being made to reduce the possibility of selecting an improvement project on the basis of randomness. 1) Combined Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) of multiple countermeasures (CMs):

Assume there are 3 CMs with CRF1, CRF2 and CRF3 as their individual CRFs:

CRFcombined = 1 – (1-CRF1)(1-CRF2)(1-CRF3).
2) Annual benefit of project = ∑ CRFcombined×𝑁𝑁𝑠𝑠×CCs
Y
3 s=0
o CRFcombined: Combined CRF of multiple CMs.
o S: Crash severity (0/1/2/3. See the below table.
o Ns: Number of crashes in each severity level.
o CCs: Crash cost of each severity level.
o Y: Crash data time period (year).

Severity (S) Crash Severity * Location Type Crash Cost *** 3 **Fatality and Severe Injury
Combined (KA)
Signalized Intersection $2,162,000
3 Non-Signalized Intersection $3,440,000
3 Roadway $2,978,000
2 Evident Injury – Other Visible (B) $193,000
1 Possible Injury–Complaint of Pain (C) $110,000
0 Property Damage Only (O) $18,000
* The letters in parenthesis (K, A, B, C and O) refer to the KABCO scale; it is commonly used by law enforcement agencies in their crash reporting efforts and is further documented in the HSM. ** Figures were calculated based on an average Fatality (K) / Severe Injury (A) ratio for each area type.

These costs are used in the HSIP Analyzer.
*** Based on Table 7-1, Highway Safety Manual (HSM), First Edition, 2010. Adjusted to 2024 Dollars. 3) Life benefit of project = Annual benefit of project x Service life of project (years) 4) Project BCR = Life benefit of project
Total project cost

Page 540 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 101
Appendix E: Examples of Crash Data Collection and Analysis Techniques using TIMS
As demonstrated throughout the manual, SafeTREC’s TIMS website https://tims.berkeley.edu/ can be used to assist local agencies in completing a proactive safety analysis of their roadway network.

Note: This manual focuses on TIMS as a tool to access and map SWITRS data because TIMS is free to local agencies and the general public. Local agencies are encouraged to try TIMS, but they should not feel obligated to make a switch if they prefer using their vendor-supplied crash analysis software to complete their data collection and analysis process.

SWITRS Query & Map:

The SWITRS Query & Map application is a tool for accessing and mapping fatal and injury crash data from the California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS).

SWITRS GIS Map:

The SWITRS GIS Map offers an interactive map-centric approach to viewing and querying SWITRS collision data with various tools including crash diagram, rank by intersection, etc.

Crash Diagram Tool:

The Crash Diagram tool allows users to generate an interactive crash diagram. The crash diagram is accessible through SWITRS GIS Map after a set of crashes is selected.

ATP Maps & Summary Data:

The ATP Maps & Summary Data tool utilizes interactive crash maps to allow users to track and document pedestrian and bicycle crashes and generate data summaries within specified project and/or community limits. Though it is designed to support the California Active Transportation Program (ATP), this tool may be useful in developing an HSIP project targeting pedestrian and bicycle safety issues.

Page 541 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 102
Appendix F: List of Abbreviations
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ATP Active Transportation Program
B/C Ratio; BCR Benefit Cost Ratio
Caltrans California Department of Transportation (Division of Local Assistance) CA-MUTCD California - Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices CM Countermeasure
CMF Crash Modification Factor
CRF Crash Reduction Factor
“5 E’s of Safety” Education, Enforcement, Engineering, Emergency Response and Emerging Technologies
EMS Emergency Medical Services
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
HCCL High Crash Concentration Location
HR3, HRRR High Risk Rural Roads Program
HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program
HSM Highway Safety Manual
RSA Roadway Safety Audit
SafeTREC Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC) at the University of California, Berkeley
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan
SWITRS Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System
TIMS Transportation Injury Mapping System (a product of SafeTREC)

Page 542 of 594 ends

4/18/2024 Local Roadway Safety Page | 103
Appendix G: References

1. FHWA, Office of Safety website: Local and Rural Road Safety Program • https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_rural/

2. Highway Safety Manual (HSM). Product of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
• http://www.highwaysafetymanual.org/Pages/default.aspx

3. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA): National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Data Resource • https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/

4. California - Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA-MUTCD) • https://dot.ca.gov/programs/safety-programs/camutcd

5. Caltrans’ website on the Highway Design Manual
• https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/manual-highway-design-manual-hdm

6. FHWA, Research and Development website for pedestrian & bicyclist safety • https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/

7. AASHTO - A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (“Green Book”) AASHTO - the Roadside Design Guide
• https://store.transportation.org/

8. FHWA – Public Roads Magazine:
• https://highways.dot.gov/public-roads/home

Page 543 of 594 ends

City of Ukiah
Local Road Safety/Action Plan
APPENDIX F: HSIP ANALYZERS

Page 544 of 594 ends

City of Ukiah
Local Road Safety/Action Plan
APPENDIX G: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION CALCULATION

Page 545 of 594 ends

Project Prioritization
Buckets Value
Highest Value 95
Lowest Value 38
Group Range 19
Bucket 1 below 57
Bucket 2 below 76
Bucket 3 below 95
Priority
Project
Safety Benefits
Benefits to
Vulnerable
Road Users
School Safety
Impact
Equity Impact
Public
Engagement
Ease of
Implementation
Score
1 Project 3 1000 100 1000 100 75
2 Project 1 1000 100 1000 100 75
3 Project 2 20 100 100 1000 100 58
4 Project 4 20 100 100 1000 50 53

Page 546 of 594 ends

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item No: 14.b.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 9/18/2024

ITEM NO: 2024-584

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Receive Presentation Regarding City of Ukiah Housing Trust Fund 2024 Notice of Funding Availability Process, Authorize City Manager to Negotiate and Execute an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with PEP Housing, and Approve Corresponding Budget Amendments.

DEPARTMENT: Community
Development PREPARED BY: Jim Robbins, Housing and Grants Manager PRESENTER: Jim Robbins, Housing and Grants Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. UHTF-2024-NOFA

2. Addendum1_2024-HTF-NOFA

3. Response1_PEP_Housing_AppForm

4. Response2_RCHDC_AppForm
Summary: Staff will give a presentation regarding the 2024 Notice of Funding Availability issued under the Ukiah Housing Trust Fund. Council is then requested to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with PEP Housing and approve corresponding budget amendments.

Background: In 2017, the City Council directed Staff to pursue a housing strategy for Ukiah. The housing strategy deployed a two-pronged approach to facilitate new housing opportunities for Ukiah residents. One prong focused on the facilitation of affordable housing and the other on zoning code amendments to facilitate middle-income housing. With significant reductions at the federal level for affordable housing funding, a key component of the affordable housing strategy includes development of a locally-based housing trust fund, the Ukiah Housing Trust Fund, and the utilization of grant funds to help facilitate the development of affordable housing in Ukiah. The City's 2017 Housing Strategy was memorialized in the City's updated 2019-2027 Housing Element, adopted by Council on October 23, 2019, and certified by the State on December 5, 2019.

The purpose of the Ukiah Housing Trust Fund is to combine funding from multiple sources to help achieve the City's General Plan goals, including those in the Housing Element, to develop and preserve affordable housing in the City of Ukiah. The Ukiah Housing Trust Fund (UHTF) 2024 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) and application process seek to encourage applicants to propose projects, or project concepts, that would use grant funds from HCD to purchase land for the purpose of creating new affordable housing in the city. The principal funding sources for the UHTF 2024 NOFA are a competitive grant award from the Prohousing Incentive Pilot (PIP) Program Round 1 and Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Program funds, which together total approximately $1 million.

Housing Division Staff released the UHTF 2024 NOFA (Attachment 1) on June 10, 2024. Staff released an Addendum #1 to the NOFA (Attachment 2) on June 12 answering questions posed by applicants. The NOFA was designed to facilitate the creation of new housing units through the purchase of deed-restricted land, which would then be made available to an affordable housing developer to generate more housing. The NOFA included bonus points for projects that would provide very-low income housing, incorporate energy efficiency features, offer healthy community components, propose connectivity to bicycle/pedestrian paths, and be located in California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) high or highest resource locations. The NOFA was also designed to encourage innovative infill project design concepts. Applications were due July 8.

Page 547 of 594 ends

Page 2 of 2 ends

Discussion: The City received two applications in response to the June 10 NOFA. Please see Attachment 3 for the application form received from PEP Housing and Attachment 4 for the application form received from Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation (RCHDC). Please note that Attachments 3 and 4 are City application forms only and do not include supporting documents. Complete applications are available for viewing at the Community Development Department.

The applications were ranked on criteria listed in the NOFA. Below is the ranking of the applications received with developer names, project names, and final scores out of a total possible of 260 points:

Application 1 – PEP Housing – Perkins Street Senior Apartments – Score: 155 points Application 2 – Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation (RCHDC) – No project identified – Score: 145 points
Application 1, PEP Housing, scored higher in part due to identifying a project and funding commitments, as well as proposing units for special needs populations and very-low income persons. PEP Housing also proposed use of vacant or underutilized land and integration of healthy community components.

Staff Recommendation
To complete the UHTF 2024 NOFA process, Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with PEP Housing. This will enable PEP Housing to continue to put together additional funding, such as for Low Income Housing Tax Credit funding through the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) and/or other funding sources for the purpose of developing affordable senior housing in Ukiah. Next steps would include the purchase and deed-restriction of land for a proposed project, making use of up to $1,000,000 in grant funds.

Grant timelines, and the timelines of other potential funding sources, may require mixing and matching a variety of sources to complete a funding package. If the proposed project concept is successfully completed as envisioned, a number of units of new housing would be created.

Recommended Action: Receive presentation regarding City of Ukiah Housing Trust Fund 2024 Notice of Funding Availability process; authorize City Manager to negotiate and execute an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with PEP Housing; and Approve Corresponding Budget Amendments.

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: $0.00
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: Grant funding up to $1,000,000
FINANCING SOURCE: HCD grants
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director DIVERSITY-EQUITY INITIATIVES (DEI): Goal 5 – Instill diversity, equity, and inclusion as essential core elements of policy-making, accountability, and delivery of City services.

CLIMATE INITIATIVES (CI): N/A
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP): GP-A8 - Housing Element (2019-2027): Goal H-2 Expand housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community, including special needs populations.

Page 548 of 594 ends

____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Ukiah
Community Development Department
Housing Services Division
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah CA 95482
Ph: 707-463-6708
Email: [email protected]
June 10, 2024

NOTICE OF FUNDING

AVAILABILITY (NOFA)
AND

APPLICATION

CITY OF UKIAH
June 2024 Housing Trust Fund NOFA
ATTACHMENT 1

Page 549 of 594 ends

Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)
Housing Trust Fund Program
June 10, 2024
The City of Ukiah Housing Trust Fund Program is pleased to announce the availability of approximately $1,000,000 in State funding awarded to the City of Ukiah to assist in the acquisition of infill parcel(s) for the predevelopment, development, acquisition, or preservation of affordable housing in the City of Ukiah.

STATEMENT OF INTENT
The Ukiah Housing Trust Fund (UHTF) wishes to make use of the available State funding to facilitate the acquisition of infill parcels in the city limits of Ukiah as part of our goal of expanding the City’s housing stock, especially for low- and moderate-income residents, seniors, and those with special needs. The UHTF seeks to establish an exclusive relationship with a developer to purchase parcels for development of infill housing units in “High” and “Highest Resource Areas” as identified by the 2024 Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) Housing Resource Area Map, which can be found at:
https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp
Funding within the City’s UHTF seeks to implement innovative ideas such as aggregated scattered site infill projects or similar non-traditional approaches to affordable housing. We encourage applicants to include innovative approaches as part of their application.

BACKGROUND
In April 2023 the City of Ukiah was awarded a Prohousing Designation by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) in recognition of the City’s recent success adopting and implementing policies that accelerate housing production, promoting favorable zoning and land use policies, reducing construction and development costs, and providing financial subsidies for housing development in the City.

In October 2023 the City was awarded $455,000 in financial assistance from the State Prohousing Incentive Pilot Program (PIP) to acquire infill parcels to facilitate the development of affordable housing in Ukiah. In deploying PIP funds through the UHTF within this 2024 NOFA, the City will match PIP funds with up to $617,000 of the City’s 2019-2022 Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) and possibly additional funds from the PIP and PLHA programs or other sources.

Affordable housing projects receiving funding from the Ukiah Housing Trust Fund must be affordable to those earning at or less than 60%, 80%, or 120% of the area median family income (AMI). Bonus points will be awarded for developers that commit to allocating a portion of the units to residents of extremely low-income and no income (0-30% AMI). Affordability must be provided by the imposition of rent or resale restrictions recorded with a 55-year affordability covenant. Certain funding sources may have additional restrictions.

Developers responding to this NOFA will be ranked based on scoring criteria provided in this NOFA. Working with a housing loan committee, staff will request the City Council approve the ranked list of projects and a total amount of funds to be awarded.

Page 550 of 594 ends

City loans are provided for the purchase of infill parcels that will lead to the construction of affordable rental and homeownership projects, redevelopment of underutilized land and buildings, and/or the construction of accessory dwelling units, principally for the benefit of lower income households. City loans are intended to partially fill the gap between development costs and financing available from private and other public sources. Applicants are expected to pursue funding from all available sources. Please note that upon approval from the City Council of an award of funding, the developer will be expected to deploy UHTF funding for the purchasing of parcels and initiation of the construction of the affordable housing project within two years of the formal date of award.

Interested applicants should complete the attached application. Completed applications are due Monday, July 8 at 11:59 P.M. and can be emailed, mailed, or hand-delivered to the following address:

Housing Trust Fund Program
Community Development Department
City of Ukiah
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah CA 95482
[email protected]
Questions regarding this NOFA should be addressed to Jim Robbins, Housing and Grants Manager, at [email protected] or 707-463-6708.

Please visit the City’s Housing Services Division web site at https://cityofukiah.com/housingservices/ for more information and updates on the Housing Trust Fund Program.

GENERAL LOAN TERMS
If loan terms other than those listed below are sought for a project, this must be explicitly stated in the cover letter and a separate explanation provided in the application. Such requests are granted at the sole discretion of the City.

Loan Terms
Loans for rental and homeownership projects are typically provided at a simple interest rate of zero to three percent (0-3%) per annum, for a term of fifty-five (55) years. Payments of interest and principal will be due from excess cash flow from operations after payment of operating costs, senior debt, reserves, and deferred developer fees. To the extent payments cannot be made, they may be deferred for the term of the loan. All loans are due on sale, refinancing, transfer (except to a related entity, such as a limited partnership, subject to City approval) or at the end of the fifty-five (55) year term.

City loans will be evidenced by a promissory note secured by a deed of trust on the project. A loan agreement will specify all development obligations. Post-occupancy use restrictions will be enforced through a regulatory agreement recorded against the project, including both the land and the improvements. The minimum term for affordability restrictions is 55 years.

Timeline of City Commitments

Page 551 of 594 ends

Funding for this NOFA is based on State commitments to the City’s housing program, primarily through the Permanent Local Housing Application Program (PLHA) and the Prohousing Incentive Pilot Program (PIP). Loan agreements must be executed with selected developers within the timeframes required by the PLHA and PIP programs.

City financing commitments are made for up to 24 months from the date of City Council approval. All other sources of funds must be committed within that time frame. A one-year extension can be requested with sufficient justification, if such an extension is allowable under all of the project funding sources. If the extension period elapses without the commitment of full project financing, the City funding commitment will be revoked and the project must re-compete for funds through the NOFA. Further extensions will only be granted in extraordinary circumstances. The inability to meet a project schedule may also result in negative points for future NOFA applications.

Scoring – Bonus Points
Given the limited supply of affordable housing, the City will be prioritizing projects in this NOFA that produce additional housing units. Additional bonus points can be attained by the applicant for the following activities:
• Use energy efficiency, net-zero, or other “sustainable/green” features above Title 24 • Utilize other sources of funding in addition to housing trust funds • Convert underutilized land to affordable housing
• Incorporate healthy community components into design – i.e. common areas, open space, community rooms, community gardens, etc.
• Connect the project with existing or proposed pedestrian/bicycle paths and trails • Project application that includes novel, new, or innovative concepts • Location of parcel(s) for new Affordable Housing in a TCAC high or highest resource area in Ukiah

Page 552 of 594 ends

SCORING CRITERIA
Complete applications will be scored in the following categories. Maximum points in each category are noted. Some categories are not applicable for certain types of projects.

Rental Ownership Self-Score

1. Financial Characteristics
A. Leveraging 25 25
B. Funding Commitments 30 30

2. Target Population and Project Attributes*
A. Income targeting 10 10
B. Unit size 5 5
C. Units for people with special needs 10 10
D. Units for homeless 10 10

3. Developer Experience and Capacity
A. Overall affordable housing experience 20 20
B. Experience developing housing in Ukiah 5 5
C. Developer team experience 15 15

4. Readiness
A. Site Control 5 5
B. Development entitlements secured 5 5
C. Pre-development meeting held with City staff 10 10

5. Bonus Points
A. Construction of new affordable housing, 2/3 of 15 15 which are affordable to households with incomes
at or less than 30% AMI
B. Use of energy efficiency, net-zero, or other 10 10
sustainable/green features above Title 24
C. Use of other funding sources in addition to the 10 10 Housing Trust Fund
D. Conversion of vacant or underutilized 10 10
land to affordable housing
E. Healthy community components 10 10
F. Connectivity with existing or proposed pedestrian/ 5 5 bicycle paths and trails
G. Project application that includes innovative 20 20
ideas
H. Location of parcel(s) for new Affordable 30 30
Housing in a TCAC high or highest resource are
in the Ukiah city limits
TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS 260 260

*For Scoring Criterion #2- Target Populations and Project Attributes, applicants are encouraged to review the City of Ukiah’s General Plan Housing Element, located on the City’s website at:
https://cityofukiah.com/housing-element-update-2019-2027/

Page 553 of 594 ends

APPLICATION FOR FUNDING
2024 Ukiah Housing Trust Fund
Project Name: ________________________________________________________________ Project Location (if known): ______________________________________________________ Amount of Loan Requested: _____________________________________________________ Please check the programs and incentives your organization is applying for:
_______ Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF) _______ Prohousing Incentive Pilot (PIP) Program
_______ Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Program

APPLICANT INFORMATION
Organization: ________________________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ Contact Person: ______________________________________________________________ Email: ______________________________________________________________________ Phone: _____________________________________________________________________

PROPOSED PROJECT
Project Name or Concept: ______________________________________________________ Proposed Location Information (if known): __________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ Proposed APN(s) (if known): _____________________________________________________ Target Population:

Page 554 of 594 ends

___________________________________________________________________________ Elderly _____ Disabled _____ Family ______ Other (specify) _______________________ Type of Project:
___________________________________________________________________________ New Construction _____ Acquisition/Conversion _____
Proposed estimated date of project completion:
_______________________________________
Number of Stories: ______ Elevator? __________
Number of units by bedroom size and square footage:
_____ SRO at ______ SF each _____ 0 BR at _____ SF each _____ 1 BR at _____ SF each _____ 2 BR at _____ SF each _____ 3 BR at _____ SF each _____ 4 BR at _____ SF each Total number of units: __________
Other features or amenities:
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ Please feel free to attached additional pages to describe the proposed project.

BONUS POINTS
Please check all of the following the project will incorporate:
_______ Construction of new affordable housing units, 2/3 of which are affordable to households with incomes at or less than 30% Area Median Income _______ Use of energy efficiency, net-zero, or other “sustainable/green” features _______ Utilization of funding sources in addition to the City of Ukiah HTF _______ Conversion of underutilized land and/or buildings to affordable housing _______ Healthy community components – common areas, open spaces, etc. _______ Project connectivity with existing pedestrian/bicycle paths and trails _______ Project application proposes innovative ideas
_______ Location of parcel(s) in a TCAC high or highest resource area in the City of Ukiah

Page 555 of 594 ends

ADDITIONAL REQUESTED DOCUMENTATION
Please attached the following documents to the application, as applicable:
• Narrative Description of the Proposed Development
• Developer Experience and Capacity
• Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws, Tax Exempt Determination from IRS, List of Board Members, Corporate Borrowing Resolution
• Financial Statements
• Community Acceptance Plan
• Any relevant planning and zoning information
• Appraisal
• Rent Role
• Budget (sources and uses)
• Developer Pro Forma, showing developer fees
BORROWER’S CERTIFICATION
Applicant hereby certifies that it has read and understands the regulations governing the Ukiah Housing Trust Fund Loan Program, that it agrees to abide by such regulations, and that violations of these regulations shall constitute grounds for cancellation of any commitment or loan. Applicant hereby certifies that the information submitted in the Loan Application and any supporting materials is true, accurate, and complete to the best of its knowledge. Applicant acknowledges and understands that if facts or information herein are found to be misrepresented, it shall constitute grounds for the default of the Ukiah Housing Trust Fund Loan for which application is being made.

Signature Date
Signature Date

Page 556 of 594 ends

City of Ukiah
Community Development Department
Housing Services Division
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah CA 95482
Ph: 707-463-6708
Email: [email protected]
June 12, 2024
Notice of Funding Availability
And
Application
Addendum #1

CITY OF UKIAH
June 2024 Housing Trust Fund NOFA
ATTACHMENT 2

Page 557 of 594 ends

2 CITY OF UKIAH
Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) – Addendum #1
Housing Trust Fund Program
June 12, 2024
This Addendum #1 is being issued to provide clarification regarding questions received during the application period for the City of Ukiah’s Affordable Housing NOFA, released June 10, 2024.

Please see below for these updates.

1. In addition to accepting applications by mail and by direct delivery, the City of Ukiah will also accept applications by email. Please address your email to [email protected] and insert “2024 City of Ukiah UHTF Application Submittal” in the subject line. Please remember applications are due by Monday, July 8, 2024 at 11:59 p.m.

2. Question: Does the City or County have access to Project Based Vouchers or can one propose the availability of the same?
Answer: The Community Development Commission of Mendocino County (CDC) is Mendocino County’s public housing authority and administers all federal rental assistance programs within each of the four incorporated cities of Mendocino County and including all unincorporated areas of Mendocino County. This includes Project Based Vouchers and Housing Choice Vouchers. Questions regarding CDC’s programs and/or the availability of other forms of project based assistance can be directed to [email protected] or 707-463-5462.

Responders to this Ukiah Housing Trust Fund NOFA should propose the financing formula that will enable their project to be built within the timelines and requirements of the NOFA. As noted on page 4, “City financing commitments are made for up to 24 months from the date of City Council approval. All other sources of funds must be committed within that time frame.”

Page 558 of 594 ends

APPLICATION FOR FUNDING
2024 Ukiah Housing Trust Fund
Project Name: Perkin Senior Apartments
Project Location (if known): 700 E, 705 E & 730 E Perkins Street Amount of Loan Requested: _1_,_00_0_, 0__00_.0_0 _____________ _ Please check the programs and incentives your organization is applying for:

Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF)
Prohousing Incentive Pilot (PIP) Program
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Program

APPLICANT INFORMATION
Organization: PEP Housing
Address: 625 Acacia Street
Santa Rosa, Ca 95409
Contact Person: Jim Wallen
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (707)762-2336 ext. 107

PROPOSED PROJECT
Project Name or Concept: Perkin Street Senior Apartments Proposed Location Information (if known): During a meeting with city officials, the aforementioned surplus parcels were identified as a potential sites to annex to the NOFA within this RFP. The parcels are apart of the City's surplus land inventory and could be used to meet the City's RHNA requirements.

Proposed APN(s) (if known): 7903025, 7903028, 79061 04
Target Population:

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 559 of 594 ends

Page 560 of 594 ends

Page 561 of 594 ends

ATTACHMENT 4

Page 562 of 594 ends

Page 563 of 594 ends

Page 564 of 594 ends

Page 1 of 3 ends

Agenda Item No: 14.c.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 9/18/2024

ITEM NO: 2024-591

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Discussion and Possible Action to Determine the City’s Position on the 2024 Resolution being Considered by the League of California Cities, and Provide Corresponding Voting Instructions to the City of Ukiah’s Voting Delegate.

DEPARTMENT: City Manager /
Admin PREPARED BY: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
PRESENTER: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2024 Annual League Resolution Packet
Summary: Council will discuss and provide direction to the City's voting delegate regarding the 2021 League of California Cities Conference Resolutions to be considered at the League's Annual Conference.

Background: At the City Council Meeting of August 7, 2024, the Council designated Mayor Duenas as the City's voting delegate to represent the City of Ukiah at the League's 2024 Annual Conference October 16-18, to be held in Long Beach. At the General Assembly meeting, the League membership considers and takes action on resolutions that establish League policy and positions.

There is one resolution up for consideration this year:

1. A RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CALLING FOR THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE TO ENACT LAWS THAT ENSURE THAT “WHAT APPLIES TO ONE, APPLIES TO ALL” IN THE FAIR AND EQUAL TREATMENT OF ALL GOVERNMENTAL OFFICIALS

AT ALL LEVELS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Summary provided in the League's packet:

This Resolution states that the League of California Cities shall call upon the Governor of the State of California and the elected members of the California Legislature, including all members of the Senate and Assembly to adopt the following policy: “The California State Legislature shall not enact, and the Governor shall not sign into law, any law or regulation that applies solely to elected officials of California cities and counties, unless such law or regulation also applies equally to members of the California State Assembly and Senate. This prohibition shall not apply to laws or regulations affecting the inherent powers of the legislative branch under the California Constitution.”
Background provided in the League's packet:

Page 565 of 594 ends

Page 2 of 3 ends

• “One-off” exemptions, in the form of Senate Bill No. 174, from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”);
• Rules, in the form of Senate Bill No. 1439, amending the Political Reform Act (the “Act”); and • Rules, in the form of Assembly Bill No. 571, that apply to city and county candidates for local elected office, but not to candidates for state-wide office.

Ralph M. Brown Act
The California Attorney General’s (AG) Office defines The Ralph M. Brown Act (Brown Act) as what governs meetings conducted by local legislative bodies, such as boards of supervisors, city councils and school boards. The AG’s office states the Act represents the Legislature’s determination of how the balance should be struck between public access to meetings of multi-member public bodies on the one hand and the need for confidential candor, debate, and information gathering on the other.

The Ralph M. Brown Act governs local agencies, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act covers all state boards and commissions, and Government code 9027 governs the state Legislature. The California Constitution also mandates open meetings for state agencies, boards, and commissions. Specifically, the Constitution requires that each local agency comply with the Brown Act (Article I, section 3(b)(7)): and that the proceedings of each house of the Legislature be open and public (with exceptions for employment matters; matters affecting security; confer with legal counsel; and to meet as a caucus (Article IV, section 7).

Although fairly detailed requirements apply to state agencies and other state bodies, they do not apply to the Legislature. The Legislature has Constitutional authority to adopt rules for its proceedings that are consistent with the requirement that the proceedings of each house and the committees be open and public.

Another notable difference between the Legislature and a city council is the ability for Legislators to have a caucus to discuss a bill, express how they will vote, and to count votes. This is not allowed under the Brown Act. One other difference is that the laws governing teleconferencing for members of the state Legislature is far less flexible than it is for local bodies. However, state agencies have more flexibility than locals in that regard.

California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”)
The Resolution cites the Legislature's action in exempting from CEQA the reconstruction of the State Capitol Annex building. The State Legislature enacted the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in 1970, establishing it as a public disclosure law for the environmental review of discretionary projects and a process for mitigating or avoiding potential environmental impacts.

SB 174 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review) Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 74, Statutes of 2024 was signed into law July 2, 2024. This bill exempts the work performed under the State Capitol Building Annex Act of 2016 from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In this example the Legislature exempted themselves as not being considered a “public agency,” “state agency,” or “lead agency” under CEQA. A lead agency under CEQA is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project that is subject to CEQA.

Over the years, the Legislature has also created many CEQA exceptions and exemptions for local projects involving local agencies as well.

The Political Reform Act (PRA) - Senate Bill No. 1439
SB 1439 (Glazer) Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 848, Statutes of 2022 amends section 84308 and is aimed at preventing "pay-to-play" practices, in part by prohibiting parties, participants, and their respective agents in a 18 proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use from contributing more than $250 to an officer of an agency during a 12 month period. When the Levine Act was first enacted in 1982, Section 84308 applied to appointed members of boards and commissions who were running for elective office.

SB 1439 expended this law to now apply to local elected officials. Since it is focused on permits and licenses,

Page 566 of 594 ends

Page 3 of 3 ends

it now applies to State agencies and local agencies that approve permits and licenses. Section 84308 does not apply to the Legislature or the Courts. It is important to note that unlike local governments, neither issue permits and licenses.

The Political Reform Act (PRA) - Assembly Bill No. 571
AB 571 (Mullin) Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 556, Statutes of 2019 established default campaign contribution limits for county and city office at the same level as the limit on contributions from individuals to candidates for Senate and Assembly, effective January 1, 2021. This bill permitted a county or city to establish its own contribution limits, which would prevail over these default limits.

The Resolution cites AB 571 as an example of treating cities differently than the State. The Fair Political Practices Commission clarifies in their AB 571 fact sheet that under AB 571 a city may elect to have "no" contribution limit in which case the state contribution limit will not apply as a default for that jurisdiction. A city or county can set contribution limits higher than the default state limit, AB 571 sets a default in line with contributions Assembly Members and Senators if a city or county is silent on contribution limits.

Discussion: Staff recommends that the Council provide direction to the voting delegate on the League of California Cities Resolution (See Attachment 1 for full League Resolution Packet). The City can choose to support, oppose, or abstain.

Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Council provide direction to the voting delegate on the attached League of California Cities Resolution. The City can choose to support, oppose or abstain.

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
DIVERSITY-EQUITY INITIATIVES (DEI): N/A
CLIMATE INITIATIVES (CI): N/A
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP): N/A

Page 567 of 594 ends

2023-2024

CAL CITIES OFFICERS
President
Daniel T. Parra
Mayor
Fowler
First Vice President
Lynne Kennedy
Mayor Pro Tem,
Rancho Cucamonga
Second Vice President
Gabe Quinto
Council Member,
El Cerrito
Immediate Past President
Ali Sajjad Taj
Mayor Pro Tem,
Artesia
Executive Director
and CEO
Carolyn M. Coleman
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org August 28, 2024
TO: Mayors, Council Members, City Managers, and City Clerks RE: Cal Cities 2024 Resolution Packet
Sixty days before the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Cal Cities members may submit resolutions on issues of importance to cities. This year, Cal Cities received one resolution by the Aug. 17 deadline.

The attached packet contains the proposed resolution, supporting letters from city officials, and an analysis of the resolution by Cal Cities. The packet includes detailed information on the resolution process.

We encourage each city council to consider the resolution and determine a city position so your voting delegate can represent your city’s position on the resolution.

Voting Delegates: City councils must appoint a voting delegate to vote during the General Assembly. Each city may also appoint up to two alternate delegates. If your city has not already done so, please appoint your voting delegate by Sept. 25. The voting delegate packet contains more information.

The Cal Cities 2024 General Assembly will be held Oct. 18 at 8:30 a.m. in the Long Beach Convention Center during the Annual Conference and Expo.

For questions about resolutions, voting delegates, or the General Assembly, please contact Zach Seals.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 568 of 594 ends

2024
Resolutions
Packet

Page 569 of 594 ends

2024 Resolutions Packet
Information on 2024 Resolutions Process
Consideration by Policy Committee (pre-conference)
Per the Cal Cities bylaws, the Cal Cities President has referred the submitted resolution to the Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations Policy Committee. The committee will meet on Oct. 3 at 10 a.m. via Zoom to review the resolution and make a recommendation that will be sent to the Resolutions Committee. A public comment period will be held during the meeting. Register for the meeting here.

A list of recommendations the policy committee may make during its meeting are on page three of this packet.

Consideration by Resolutions Committee (during conference) On Oct. 17 at 1:30 p.m. the Resolutions Committee will meet to review the resolution and the recommendation of the policy committee.

The Resolutions Committee consists of one representative from each of Cal Cities caucuses, departments, divisions, and policy committees, as well as up to ten additional appointments made by the Cal Cities President. A public comment period will be held during the meeting. Refer to the onsite conference program for the location.

A list of recommendations the Resolutions Committee may make during its meeting are on page three of this packet.

Consideration by the General Assembly (during conference) The General Assembly will convene on Oct. 18 at 8:30 a.m. to consider any qualified resolutions. To vote during the General Assembly, voting delegates must have checked-in at the voting delegate booth.

Conference attendees will receive materials for the General Assembly on the evening of Oct. 17. For more information on voting and discussion procedures during the General Assembly, see page four of this packet.

Petitioned Resolutions (during conference)
The petitioned resolution is an alternate method to introduce policy proposals during the annual conference. To initiate a petitioned resolution, voting delegates from 10% of member cities must sign the petition. The resolution and signatures are due at least 24 hours before the beginning of the General Assembly. Voting delegates who have checked-in at the voting delegate booth can receive more information on petitioned resolutions at the booth onsite. 1

Page 570 of 594 ends

Sixty days before the
Annual Conference
and Expo, Cal Cities
members may submit
policy proposals on
issues of importance
to cities. The resolution must
have the concurrence of at least
five additional member cities or
individual members.

How it works: Cal Cities
Resolutions and the General Assembly
General Assembly
General Resolutions Policy Committees
Developing League of California Cities policy is a dynamic process that engages a wide range of members to ensure Cal Cities represents cities with one voice. These policies directly guide Cal Cities’ advocacy to promote local decision-making, and lobby against statewide policies that erode local control.

The resolutions process and General Assembly is one way that city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy. Here’s how resolutions and the General Assembly work.

The petitioned
resolution is an
alternate method
to introduce policy
proposals during
the annual conference. The
petition must be signed by
voting delegates from 10% of
member cities, and submitted to
the Cal Cities President at least
24 hours before the beginning
of the General Assembly.

Petitioned Resolutions
The Cal Cities
President assigns
general resolutions
to policy committees
where members
review, debate, and recommend
positions for each policy proposal.

Recommendations are forwarded
to the Resolutions Committee.

Who’s who
The Resolutions Committee
includes representatives
from each Cal Cities
diversity caucus, regional
division, municipal
department, and policy
committee, as well as
individuals appointed by
the Cal Cities president.

Voting delegates
are appointed by each
member city; every city
has one voting delegate.

The General Assembly is a
meeting of the collective
body of all voting
delegates —one from
every member city.

Seven policy committees
meet throughout the year
to review and recommend
positions to take on bills
and regulatory proposals.

Policy committees include
members from each Cal
Cities diversity caucus,
regional division, and
municipal department,
as well as individuals
appointed by the Cal
Cities president.

During the General Assembly, voting delegates
debate and consider general and petitioned
resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions
Committee. Potential Cal Cities bylaws
amendments are also considered at this meeting.

Cal Cities policy
development is a memberinformed process,
grounded in the voices and
experiences of city officials
throughout the state.

For more information visit www.calcities.org/general-assembly Prior to the Annual Conference and Expo
Resolutions Committee
The Resolutions
Committee considers
all resolutions. General
Resolutions approved1 by
either a policy committee
or the Resolutions Committee are next
considered by the General Assembly.

General resolutions not approved, or
referred for further study by both a
policy committee and the Resolutions
Committee do not go to the General
Assembly. All Petitioned Resolutions
are considered by the General
Assembly, unless disqualified.2
During the Annual Conference and Expo
1 The Resolution Committee can amend a general resolution prior to sending it to the General Assembly. 2 Petitioned Resolutions may be disqualified by the Resolutions Committee according to Cal Cities Bylaws Article VI. Sec. 5(f). 2

Page 571 of 594 ends

2024 Resolutions Packet
Policy Committee and Resolutions Committee Actions
The submitted resolution will be heard by the policy committee to which it was assigned, and the Resolutions Committee. The below table shows what recommendations these bodies may make on the resolution.

Policy Committee Actions Resolutions Committee Actions
Approve Approve
Disapprove* Disapprove*
No Action No Action
Amend and approve Amend and approve
Refer to appropriate policy committee
for further study*
Approve as amended
Refer as amended to appropriate
policy committee for further study*
Refer to appropriate policy committee
for further study*
Refer as amended to appropriate
policy committee for further study*
Approve with additional
amendment(s)
Additional amendments and refer to
appropriate policy committee for
further study*
*If a resolution is disapproved or referred for further study by all policy committees to which it is assigned and the Resolutions Committee, it will not proceed to the General Assembly. 3

Page 572 of 594 ends

2024 Resolutions Packet
General Assembly Voting and Discussion Procedures
Discussion Procedures:

Discussion procedures during the General Assembly are guided by two calendars:
the Consent Calendar and the Regular Calendar. As seen below, resolutions are calendared by the recommendations they receive from policy committees and the Resolutions Committee.

For General Resolutions:

Policy Committee
Recommendation
Resolutions Committee
Recommendation Calendar
Approve Approve Consent Calendar
Approve Disapprove or refer Regular Calendar
Disapprove or refer Approve Regular Calendar
Disapprove or refer Disapprove or refer Does not proceed to General Assembly
For Petitioned Resolutions:

Policy Committee
Recommendation Resolutions Committee Action Calendar
N/A
Approve Regular Calendar
Disapprove or Refer Regular Calendar
Disqualified Does not proceed to General
Assembly
Items on the Consent Calendar will be presented as one motion during the General Assembly from the Resolutions Committee chair. Unless an item on the Consent Calendar is set aside by the majority of the General Assembly, a vote will be taken on the whole calendar. It an item is set aside, it will be opened for discussion, followed by a vote.

Items on the Regular Calendar will be presented individually by the Resolutions Committee chair. After a recommendation is presented by the Resolutions Committee chair, the resolution will be opened for discussion by the General Assembly. A vote will take place following discussion.

Voting Procedures:

Per Cal Cities Bylaws Article XII, Sec. 2, all votes will be conducted by voice vote first. If the presiding official cannot determine the outcome a vote will be taken by an alternative method, typically a raise of voting cards by voting delegates. A roll call vote may be called for by delegates of ten percent or more of the General Assembly.
4

Page 573 of 594 ends

2024 Resolutions Packet
2024 Resolution

1. Resolution on Fair and Equal Treatment of All Governmental Officials at All Levels submitted by City of Glendora
• Letters of concurrence submitted by:
i. April A. Verlato, Mayor, City of Arcadia
ii. Robert Gonzales, Mayor, City of Azusa
iii. Tim Hepburn, Mayor, City of La Verne
iv. Bill Uphoff, Mayor, City of Lomita
v. John M. Cruikshank, Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes • Referred to Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations Policy Committee
• Policy Committee Recommendation:
• Resolutions Committee Recommendation:
5

Page 574 of 594 ends

2024 Resolutions Packet
Resolution No. 1: Fair and Equal
Treatment of All Governmental
Officials at All Levels submitted by
City of Glendora
6

Page 575 of 594 ends

2024 Resolutions Packet

1. A RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE LEAGUE OF

CALIFORNIA CITIES CALLING FOR THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE TO ENACT LAWS THAT ENSURE THAT “WHAT APPLIES TO ONE, APPLIES TO ALL” IN THE

FAIR AND EQUAL TREATMENT OF ALL GOVERNMENTAL OFFICIALS AT ALL

LEVELS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Source: City of Glendora
Concurrence of five or more cities/city officials
City Officials: April A. Verlato, Mayor, City of Arcadia; Robert Gonzales, Mayor, City of Azusa; Tim Hepburn, Mayor, City of La Verne; Bill Uphoff, Mayor, City of Lomita; John M. Cruikshank, Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Referred to: Governance, Transparency and Labor Relations Policy Committee
WHEREAS, the General Assembly of the League of California Cities objects to the practice of the California Legislature of imposing rules limiting authority or regulating the conduct of local municipal officials that do not also apply to elected officials of the State of California; and WHEREAS, examples of such rules or regulations that apply to local city elected officials that do not otherwise apply to the elected officials of the State of California include, but are not limited to:

California’s open meeting rules, codified in the Ralph M. Brown Act, Government Code, Chapter 9, §§ 54950 et seq., which purport to “declare[] that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly,” but which limits its application to “local agencies,” but not including elected officials of the State of California; Creating “one-off” exemptions, in the form of Senate Bill No. 174, from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) which purportedly requires all government agencies to consider the environmental consequences of their actions before approving plans and policies or committing to a course of action on a project in order to demolish and then rebuild State offices for the Governor and other State officials; 7

Page 576 of 594 ends

2024 Resolutions Packet
Adopting rules, in the form of Senate Bill No. 1439, amending the Political Reform Act (the “Act”), by removing the exception for local elected officers from contribution limits requiring disqualification on development project decisions,” but not including elected officials of the State of California;
Adopting rules, in the form of Assembly Bill No. 571, that apply to city and county candidates for local elected office, but not to candidates for state-wide office, including, but not limited to: prohibiting the making a contribution over the AB 571 limit to another candidate in jurisdictions subject to the AB 571; requiring a candidate that has qualified as a committee to establish a separate controlled committee and campaign bank account for each specific office; prohibiting a candidate from redesignating a committee for one election for another election.

WHEREAS, the General Assembly of the League of California Cities now calls upon the Governor and the California Legislature to adopt a policy, practice, and procedure requiring, in their legislative activities, that “what applies to one applies to all.”
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED at the League General Assembly, assembled at the League Annual Conference on October 18, 2024 in Long Beach, California, that the League calls upon the Governor of the State of California and the elected members of the California Legislature, including all members of the Senate and Assembly to adopt the following policy:
“The California State Legislature shall not enact, and the Governor shall not sign into law, any law or regulation that applies solely to elected officials of California cities and counties, unless such law or regulation also applies equally to members of the California State Assembly and Senate. This prohibition shall not apply to laws or regulations affecting the inherent powers of the legislative branch under the California Constitution.” 8

Page 577 of 594 ends

2024 Resolutions Packet
Resolution No. 1: Letters of
Concurrence
9

Page 578 of 594 ends

July 10, 2024
The City Council of Glendora
is proposing the following resolution for consideration at the California League of Cities annual conference
on
October 18, 2024
Proposed Resolution: (“To ensure fairness and equal treatment for all government officials in California”)
“The California State Legislature shall not enact, and the Governor shall not approve, any law or regulation that applies solely to elected officials of California cities and counties, unless such law or regulation also applies equally to members of the California State Assembly and Senate. This prohibition shall not apply to laws or regulations affecting the inherent powers of the legislative branch under the California Constitution.”
The following five city council members are in concurrence with their letters of support (attached):
✓ Mayor John Cruikshank, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
✓ Mayor Bill Uphoff, City of Lomita
✓ Mayor Robert Gonzales, City of Azusa
✓ Mayor April Verlato, City of Arcadia
✓ Mayor Tim Hepburn, City of La Verne
Please confirm receipt of this request.

Sincerely,
Michael Allawos
Council Member
City of Glendora
10

Page 579 of 594 ends

Page 580 of 594 ends

Page 581 of 594 ends

Page 582 of 594 ends

Page 583 of 594 ends

Page 584 of 594 ends

2024 Resolutions Packet
Resolution No. 1: Staff Analysis
16

Page 585 of 594 ends

League of California Cities Staff Analysis on Resolution No. 1 Staff: Johnnie Pina, Legislative Affairs, Lobbyist
Committee: Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations Summary:

This Resolution states that the League of California Cities shall call upon the Governor of the State of California and the elected members of the California Legislature, including all members of the Senate and Assembly to adopt the following policy:
“The California State Legislature shall not enact, and the Governor shall not sign into law, any law or regulation that applies solely to elected officials of California cities and counties, unless such law or regulation also applies equally to members of the California State Assembly and Senate. This prohibition shall not apply to laws or regulations affecting the inherent powers of the legislative branch under the California Constitution.”
Background:

This resolution states that examples of the California Legislature imposing rules limiting authority or regulating the conduct of local municipal officials that do not also apply to elected officials of the State of California include, but are not limited to:
• California’s open meeting rules, codified in the Ralph M. Brown Act, Government Code, Chapter 9, §§ 54950 et seq.;
• “One-off” exemptions, in the form of Senate Bill No. 174, from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”);
• Rules, in the form of Senate Bill No. 1439, amending the Political Reform Act (the “Act”); and
• Rules, in the form of Assembly Bill No. 571, that apply to city and county candidates for local elected office, but not to candidates for state-wide office.

The Ralph M. Brown Act governs local agencies, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act covers all state boards and commissions, and Government code 17

Page 586 of 594 ends

9027 governs the state Legislature. The California Constitution also mandates open meetings for state agencies, boards, and commissions. Specifically, the Constitution requires that each local agency comply with the Brown Act (Article I, section 3(b)(7)): and that the proceedings of each house of the Legislature be open and public (with exceptions for employment matters; matters affecting security; confer with legal counsel; and to meet as a caucus (Article IV, section 7).

Over the years, the Legislature has also created many CEQA exceptions and exemptions for local projects involving local agencies as well.

Page 587 of 594 ends

proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use from contributing more than $250 to an officer of an agency during a 12 month period. When the Levine Act was first enacted in 1982, Section 84308 applied to appointed members of boards and commissions who were running for elective office. SB 1439 expended this law to now apply to local elected officials. Since it is focused on permits and licenses, it now applies to State agencies and local agencies that approve permits and licenses. Section 84308 does not apply to the Legislature or the Courts. It is important to note that unlike local governments, neither issue permits and licenses.

Fiscal Impact:

Unknown.

Existing Cal Cities Policy:

Mission Statement
To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians.

We Believe:
• Local self-governance is the cornerstone of democracy. • In the involvement of all stakeholders in establishing goals and in solving problems.
• In conducting the business of government with transparency, openness, respect, and civility. The spirit of honest public service is what builds communities.
• Open decision-making that is of the highest ethical standards honors the public trust.
• The vitality of cities is dependent upon their fiscal stability and local autonomy. The active participation of all city officials increases Cal Cities’ effectiveness.
19

Page 588 of 594 ends

• Partnerships and collaborations are essential elements of focused advocacy and lobbying.
• Ethical and well-informed city officials are essential for responsive, visionary leadership and effective and efficient city operations.

Comments:

Additional Examples
The Legislature has passed and the Governor has signed many laws that apply to local governments and do not apply to the state or the state Legislature. This year AB 2561(McKinnor) was introduced, which requires local governments to present in a public meeting a detailed report about their vacancy rates and detailed information about their hiring practices. This is an attempt to address public sector vacancy rates. This bill does not apply to the state in a time when they are also dealing with high vacancy rates.

Additionally, there were several bills that aim to amend the Levine Act, which now applies to local elected officials, to make changes to SB 1439, referenced previously in the analysis. None of the bills would amend the law to be applicable to Assembly Members or Senators.

AB 817 (Pacheco), co-sponsored by Cal Cities tried to bring parity to the Brown Act by making the teleconference rules for state advisory bodies the same for local advisory bodies but the Legislature struck the bill down.

Applying to elected officials or to the legislative body? Legislature or the State? The resolution also states, “… applies solely to elected officials of California cities and counties, unless such law or regulation also applies equally to members of the California State Assembly and Senate.”
This portion of the resolve clause is specifically speaking to local elected officials and State Assembly Members and Senators. However, many of the “where as” clauses are in reference to laws that apply to cities, the state and the Legislature as government agencies and not specifically to the elected officials on the governing bodies. For example, the Brown Act applies rules to the Legislative body and not the individual council member. Additionally, the city council as a whole is the lead agency under CEQA and not the individual council members.

Inherent Powers of the Legislative Branch
The resolution also states, “This prohibition shall not apply to laws or regulations affecting the inherent powers of the legislative branch under the California Constitution.”
It is unclear what inherent powers of the legislate branch under the California Constitution means in this context. The legislative branch does have the power 20

Page 589 of 594 ends

of preemption over cities and can state that a change in law is a matter of state wide concern. This allows the legislative branch to apply new laws or amend existing laws to apply to general law and charter cities. It seems like the last sentence of the resolve clause could negate the rest of the resolve clause if not clarified.

Support:

The following letters of concurrence were received:

April A. Verlato, Mayor, City of Arcadia
Robert Gonzales, Mayor, City of Azusa
Tim Hepburn, Mayor, City of La Verne
Bill Uphoff, Mayor, City of Lomita
John M. Cruikshank, Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
21

Page 590 of 594 ends

Page 1 of 1 ends

Agenda Item No: 14.d.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 9/18/2024

ITEM NO: 2024-582

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Receive Updates on City Council Committee and Ad Hoc Assignments, and, if Necessary, Consider Modifications to Assignments and/or the Creation/Elimination of Ad Hoc(s).

DEPARTMENT: City Clerk PREPARED BY: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk PRESENTER: Mayor Dueñas and Various Councilmembers
ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2024 City Council Special Assignments and Ad Hocs
Summary: City Council members will provide reports and updates on their committee and ad hoc assignments. If necessary, the Council may consider modifications.

Background: City Council members are assigned to a number of committees and ad hoc activities. These assignments are included as Attachment 1.

Discussion: Previously, the City Council discussed having more time allocated to reporting on committee and ad hoc activities. Often, the Council Reports section of the regular agenda is rushed due to impending business (i.e., public hearings), and not enough time is afforded for reports beyond community activities.

In an effort to foster regular updates on committee and ad hoc assignments, this item is being placed on the agenda to provide the City Council members an expanded opportunity to report on assignments and modify assignments as necessary.

Recommended Action: Receive report(s). The Council will consider modifications to committee and ad hoc assignments along with the creation/elimination ad hoc(s).

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: No
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
DIVERSITY-EQUITY INITIATIVES (DEI): N/A
CLIMATE INITIATIVES (CI): N/A
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP): N/A

Page 591 of 594 ends

2024 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT LIST

LOCAL / UKIAH VALLEY MTG DATE/TIME MEETING LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT City Broadband Project TBD TBD
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
to evaluate the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Internet Service Provider (ISP) for the California's Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Last Mile Broadband
Orozco
Jim Robbins, Grants Manager, 463-6708;
[email protected]
Investment Oversight Committee Varies
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
Reviews City investments, policies, and strategies
Crane
Orozco - Alternate
Alan Carter, Treasurer
Dan Buffalo, Director of Finance; 463-6220
[email protected]
Disaster Council
Shall meet a minimum of
once a year at a time and
place designated upon
call of the chair
Place designated upon call of the chair or, if
she/he is unavailable or unable to call such
meeting, the first vice chair and then the City
Manager or her/his designee.

Office of Emergency Management
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
467-5720 - Traci Boyl
Develop any necessary emergency and mutual aid plans, agreements, ordinances, resolutions, rules, and regulations.

Orozco
Duenas- Alternate
Traci Boyl, City Manager's Office Management
Analyst; 467-5720; [email protected]
Greater Ukiah Business & Tourism
Alliance (GUPTA)
4th Monday of month,
10 a.m.
200 S School St.

Ukiah, CA 95482
200 S School St.

Ukiah, CA 95482
Promotes tourism and works to strengthen and promote the historic downtown and businesses within the greater Ukiah area
Marianne Davison - Community
Services Department Staff
Duenas - Alternate
Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager;
467-5793 [email protected]
Mendocino County Inland Water and
Power Commission (IWPC)
2nd Thursday of month,
6:00 p.m.

Civic Center
300 Seminary Avenue
conference room 5
IWPC Staff
P.O. Box 1247
Ukiah, CA 95482
391-7574 - Candace Horsley
Develops coordination for water resources and current water rights: Potter Valley project - Eel River Diversion
Rodin
Orozco - Alternate
Sean White, Director of Water Resources;
463-5712 [email protected]
North Coast Opportunities (NCO) 4th Wednesday of
month, 2 p.m. Alternating locations - Ukiah and Lakeport Governing Board Chair
North Coast Opportunities
413 North State Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
Assist low income and disadvantaged people to become self reliant Burgess Jake Burgess, Community Services Supervisor;
463-6201
[email protected]
Sun House Guild ex officio 2nd Tuesday of month,
4:30 p.m.

Sun House
431 S. Main St.

Ukiah, CA
431 S. Main Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
467-2836
Support and expand Grace Hudson Museum Duenas
Neil Davis - Alternate
David Burton, Museum Director; 467-2836
[email protected]
Ukiah Valley Basin Groundwater
Sustainability Agency (GSA)
2nd Thursday of month,
1:30 p.m.

Board of Supervisors Chambers; 501 Low
Gap Road
Ukiah, CA
County Executive Office
501 Low Gap Rd., Rm. 1010
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-4441
GSA serves as the Groundwater Sustainability Agency in the Ukiah Valley basin
Crane
Duenas- Alternate
Sean White, Director of Water Resources;
463-5712 [email protected]

MENDOCINO COUNTY MTG DATE/TIME MEETING LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT City Selection Committee Called as required by the
Clerk of the Board
BOS Conference Room
501 Low Gap Rd. Rm. 1090
Ukiah, CA
C/O: BOS
501 Low Gap Rd., Rm 1090
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-4441
Makes appointments to LAFCO and Airport Land Use Commission (Mayor - Primary; Vice Mayor - Alternate)
Mayor Duenas
Vice Mayor Crane - Alternate
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk; 463-6217
[email protected]
Economic Development & Financing
Corporation (EDFC)
2nd Thursday of month,
2:00 p.m.

Primarily 631 S. Orchard Street
(location varies)
Executive Director
631 South Orchard Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
467-5953
Multi-agency co-op for economic development and business loan program Riley (appointed 12/19/18)
Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager;
467-5793 [email protected]
Library Advisory Board
3rd Wednesdays of
alternate months; 1:00
p.m.

Various Mendocino County Libraries Ukiah County Library 463-4491 Review library policy and activities Sher
Rodin - Alternate
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk; 463-6217;
[email protected]
Mendocino County 1st District Liaison Monthly; TBD
Civic Center Annex
conference room #5
411 West Clay St.

Ukiah, CA 95482
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
To coordinate activities and policy development with the City's 1st District Supervisor
Rodin
Crane- Alternate
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager;
463-6221; [email protected]
Mendocino County 2nd District Liaison 1st Wednesdays of month, 8:00 a.m.

Civic Center Annex
conference room #5
411 West Clay St.

Ukiah, CA 95482
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
To coordinate activities and policy development with the County's 2nd District Supervisor
Rodin
Duenas - Alternate
Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager;
467-5793 [email protected]
Mendocino Council of Governments
(MCOG)
1st Monday of month,
1:30 p.m.

Board of Supervisors Chambers
501 Low Gap Road
Ukiah, CA
Executive Director
367 N. State Street, Ste. 206
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-1859
Plan and allocate State funding, transportation, infrastructure and project County wide
Duenas
Sher - Alternate
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer;
463-6280 [email protected]
Mendocino County Airport Land Use
Commission As needed
BOS Conference Room
501 Low Gap Rd., Rm. 1090,
Ukiah, CA
Mendocino County Executive Office
501 Low Gap Rd. Rm. 1010
Ukiah, CA 95482
To formulate a land use compatibility plan, provide for the orderly growth of the airport and the surrounding area, and safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity
Liaisons: Owen/Schlatter
Greg Owen, Airport Manager; 467-2855;
[email protected]
Craig Schlatter, Director of Community
Development; 463-6219;
[email protected]
Mendocino County Local Area
Formation Commission (LAFCO)
1st Monday of month,
9:00 a.m. Board of Supervisors Chambers
Executive Director
200 S. School Street, Ste. 2
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-4470
Required by legislation - planning spheres of influence, annexation, service areas, and special districts
Rodin
Crane - Alternate for both city seat
members on Commission
Craig Schlatter, Director of Community
Development; 463-6219;
[email protected]
Updated: 6/6/2024
ATTACHMENT 1

Page 592 of 594 ends

2024 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT LIST

MENDOCINO COUNTY
Continued MTG DATE/TIME MEETING LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT Mendocino Solid Waste Management
Authority (MSWMA)
3rd Thursday of every
other month (varies),
10:00 a.m.

Willits Council Chambers
Solid Waste Director
3200 Taylor Drive
Ukiah, CA 95482
468-9710
County-wide Solid Waste JPA Crane
Sher - Alternate
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer;
463-6280 [email protected]
Mendocino Transit Authority (MTA)
Board of Directors
Last Wednesday of
month, 1:30 p.m.

Alternating locations - Ukiah Conference
Center or Fort Bragg, or Point Arena
Executive Director
241 Plant Road
Ukiah, CA 95482
462-1422
County-wide bus transportation issues and funding Sher
Duenas - Alternate
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City
Engineer; 463-6280 [email protected]
Mendocino Youth Project JPA Board of
Directors
3rd Wednesday of
month, 7:45 a.m. 776 S. State Street Conference Room
Mendocino Co. Youth Project
776 S. State Street, Ste. 107
Ukiah, CA 95482
707-463-4915
Targets all youth with a focus on drug and alcohol prevention, healthy alternatives and empowering youth to make healthy choices Cedric Crook, Police Chief
Duenas - Alternate
Cedric Crook, Police Chief; 463-6771;
[email protected]
Russian River Flood Control District
(RRFCD) Liaison
1st Monday of month,
5:30 p.m.
151 Laws Ave.,Suite D
Ukiah, CA
151 Laws Ave., Ukiah, CA 95482;
[email protected]; 462-5278
Proactively manage the water resources of the upper Russian River for the benefit of the people and environment of Mendocino County White/Orozco Sean White, Director of Water Resources;
463-5712 [email protected]
Ukiah Players Theater Board of
Directors
3rd Tuesday of month,
6:00 p.m
1041 Low Gap Rd
Ukiah, CA 95482
462-1210
1041 Low Gap Rd
Ukiah, CA 95482
462-1210
To oversee the activities, organization and purpose of the Ukiah Players Theater
Greg Owen, Airport Manager
(appointed 12/19/18)
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk; 463-6217
[email protected]
Ukiah Unified School District (UUSD)
Committee Quarterly 511 S. Orchard, Ste. D
Ukiah, CA 95482
511 S. Orchard
Ukiah, CA 95482
Information exchange with UUSD Board Chair, Mayor, Superintendent, and City Manager
Duenas
Rodin - Alternate
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
Cedric Crook, Police Chief
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager; 463-6221
[email protected]

REGIONAL MTG DATE/TIME LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT Great Redwood Trail Agency Bi-monthly, 3rd
Thursdays, 10:30 a.m. Various Locations - announced
419 Talmage Road, Suite M
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-3280
Provides a unified and revitalized rail infrastructure meeting the freight and passenger needs of the region
Rodin
Duenas - Alternate
Neil Davis, Community Services Director
467-5764 [email protected]
League of California Cities Redwood
Empire Legislative Committee
Prior to Division
Meetings, meets 3x in
person and then via
conference call
Various locations that are announced
Redwood Empire League President;
Public Affairs Program Manager
(916) 658-8243
Elected city officials and professional city staff attend division meetings throughout the year to share what they are doing and advocate for their interests in Sacramento
Duenas
Orozco - Alternate
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager; 463-6221
[email protected]
Russian River Watershed Association
(RRWA)
4th Thursday of month,
9:00 a.m. (only 5 times a
year)
Windsor Town Hall
Russian River Watershed Association
2235 Mercury Way, Suite 105
Santa Rose, CA 95407
[email protected]
707-508-3670 (message only)
Consider issues related to Russian river - plans projects and funding requests
Rodin
Sher - Alternate
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer;
463-6280 [email protected]
Northern California Power Agency
(NCPA) - Commission
4th Thursday of month,
9:00 a.m. (see NCPA
calendar)
Roseville, CA
and other locations
651 Commerce Drive
Roseville, CA 95678
916-781-4202
Pool of State and local power utilities developing and operating power generation, providing scheduling and related energy services and providing regulatory and legislative support.

Crane - Commissioner
Sher - City Council Alternate
Sauers - Alternate and Commissioner in
absence of Commissioner Crane
Cindi Sauers - Electric Utility Director;
463-6286 [email protected]
Northern California Power Agency
(NCPA) – Lodi Energy Center (LEC)
Appointment
2nd Monday of month,
10:00 AM
Lodi, CA and other locations
651 Commerce Drive
Roseville, CA 95678
916-781-4299
Committee oversees the operation, maintenance and expenditures of the LEC 300 MW generating project.

Sauers – Project Participate
Appointee
Cindy Sauers, Electric Utility Director,
463-6286, [email protected]
Transmission Agency of Northern
California (TANC)
4th Wednesday of
month, 10 a.m. 35 Iron Point Circle Suite 225 Folsom, CA 35 Iron Point Cir #225
Folsom, CA 95630
916-852-1673; [email protected]
Provide electric transmission to its Member utilities through transmission line ownership or contract arrangements.

Crane
Sauers - Alternate
Cindi Sauers - Electric Utility Director;
463-6286 [email protected]

STANDING COMMITTEES MTG DATE/TIME LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT Diversity and Equity TBD Virtual Meeting Room
(link to be created)
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
Improve diversity and equity in the City’s workforce and municipal services Orozco/Duenas Traci Boyl, City Manager's Office Management
Analyst; 467-5720; [email protected]
Fire Executive Committee
2nd Tue, every other
month beginning in
January; 5:00 p.m.

Ukiah Valley Conference Center,
200 S. School Street
Ukiah, CA
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
[email protected]
Per the recently adopted agreement between the City of Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley Fire Protection District Orozco/Sher
Doug Hutchison, Fire Chief; 463-6263;
[email protected]
Countywide Oversight Board to the
RDA Successor Agencies
4th Thursday of January,
4:00 p.m.; meets annually
Ukiah Valley Conference Center,
200 S. School Street
Ukiah, CA
City of Ukiah
ATTN: City Clerk
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
Oversee and direct the Successor Agencies of the former redevelopment agencies
Crane
Dan Buffalo, Director of Finance; 463-6220
[email protected]
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk; 463-6217,
[email protected]
Water Executive Committee
(Ukiah Valley Water Authority)
1st Tue of each month
at 6:00 p.m.

Ukiah Valley Conference Center,
200 S. School Street
Ukiah, CA
City of Ukiah
ATTN: Sean White
300 Seminary Ave.

Ukiah, CA 95482
Oversight of UVWA; set annual budget for the combined water system; Manage rates and collect levies; modify existing water rights for the provision of water service; mediation and dispute resolution; Crane/Orozco
Sean White, Director of Water Resources;
463-5712 [email protected]
Updated: 6/6/2024

Page 593 of 594 ends

COMMITTEE ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT
Electric Grid Operational Improvements Crane/Orozco Cindy Sauers, Electric Utility Director; 463-629586 [email protected]
Trench Cut Policy Development Crane Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer; 463- 6280 [email protected]
Advance Planning & Policy for Sphere of Influence
(SOI), Municipal Service Review (MSR), Annexation,
Tax Sharing, Detachment, and Out of Area Service
Agreements
Crane/Rodin
Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director
463-6219 [email protected]
UVSD/ City Relations
Ad hoc committee to address specific issues with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District, including discussion of overall sewer system service delivery policies, operating policy revisions, potential revisions to the current Operating Agreement, and cost sharing
Crane/Orozco
Dan Buffalo, Director of Finance;
463-6220 [email protected]
Sean White, Water Resources Director
463-5712 [email protected]
Orr Street Bridge Corridor Rodin/Sher Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer; 463- 6280 [email protected]
Complete Streets Rodin/Crane
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer; 463-
6280 [email protected]
Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager
467-5793 [email protected]
Neil Davis, Community Services Director
467-5764 [email protected]
Special Districts (Water District Consolidation) Orozco/Crane Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager 467-5793 [email protected]
Corp Yard Planning Crane/Orozco Jason Benson, Senior Civil Engineer 463-6284 [email protected]
Mendocino County Courthouse Project and Reuse Sher/Orozco Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager 467-5793 [email protected]
Climate Action Plan
Will coordinate with the Community Development Director to identify and assign representation to each of the identified categories, and also coordinate with the Community
Development Director and the Climate Action Plan Working Group related to other outreach efforts during the development of the draft municipal Climate Action Plan related to the 2040 General Plan
Sher/Duenas
Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director
463-6219 [email protected]
City's 150-Year Anniversary Planning Orozco/Rodin Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager 467-5793 [email protected]
Zoning Reform
(previously was the Community Development Fee Review
ad hoc)
function is to explore creation of a new ministerial zoning permit and identify additional zoning streamlining and reform efforts to provide better and more consistent development outcomes Crane/Orozco
Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director
463-6219 [email protected]
Community Health Needs Assessment (CHNA)
Steering Committee
assist in the creation of the 2025 CHNA Report for the
communities served by the three Adventist Health hospitals in Mendocino County. providing insight, identifying, gathering and analyzing the health needs of our community. Additionally Rodin/Sher
Jeremy Malin, NP
Director of Community Health Analytics
Adventist Health Howard Memorial
Adventist Health Ukiah Valley
Adventist Health Mendocino Coast
978-289-3330; [email protected]
Parks & Recreation Special District Exploration Rodin/Orozco Neil Davis, Community Services Director 467-5764 [email protected]
Downtown Zoning code Crane/Rodin Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director 463-6219 [email protected]
TOT 3% Tax Measure Material Development Rodin/Sher Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager 467-5793 [email protected]
City Council Handbook Review and Update Sher Kristine Lawler, City Clerk 463-6217; [email protected]
2024 AD HOC COMMITTEES
Updated: 7/19/2024

Page 594 of 594 ends

Ukiah City CouncilSeptember 18, 2024

Ukiah City Council
September 18, 2024