Ukiah City Council
April 15, 2026

City Council
Regular Meeting
AGENDA
(to be held both at the physical and virtual locations below) Civic Center Council Chamber ♦ 300 Seminary Avenue ♦ Ukiah, CA 95482 To participate or view the virtual meeting, go to the following link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89019237754 Or you can call in using your telephone only:
• Call (toll free) 1-888-788-0099
• Enter the Access Code: 890 1923 7754
• To Raise Hand enter *9
• To Speak after being recognized: enter *6 to unmute yourself Alternatively, you may view the meeting (without participating) by clicking on the name of the meeting at www.cityofukiah.com/meetings.

April 15, 2026 - 5:15 PM

1. ROLL CALL

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. AB 2449 NOTIFICATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

4. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS

5. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS

6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

6.a. Approval of the Minutes for the April 1, 2026, Special Meeting.

Recommended Action: Approve the Minutes for the April 1, 2026, Special Meeting.

Attachments:

1. 2026-04-01 Draft Minutes - Special Meeting

6.b. Approval of the Minutes for the April 1, 2026, Regular Meeting.

Recommended Action: Approve the Minutes for the April 1, 2026, Regular Meeting.

Attachments:

1. 2026-04-01 Draft Minutes - Regular Meeting

7. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION

Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged.

8. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council.

Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations.

8.a. Report of Disbursements for the Month of March 2026.

Recommended Action: Approve the report of disbursements for the month of March 2026.

Attachments:

1. March 2026 Summary of Disbursements

2. Account Codes for Reference

3. Object Codes for Reference

4. March 2026 Disbursements Detail

8.b. Approval of Contract with Lee Mechanical, Inc. for On-call Maintenance and Troubleshooting Services for Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant in the Amount of $125,000 and Approve Corresponding Budget Amendment.

Recommended Action: Approve contract with Lee Mechanical Incorporated for on-call maintenance and troubleshooting services at Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant for $125,000 and approve corresponding budget amendment.

Attachments:

1. LMI Site Rate 2026

8.c. Approval of a Three-Year Renewal of the Microsoft Enterprise Licensing Agreement with Dell Marketing, Inc., at an Annual Cost of $194,769.42 for a Total Three-Year Cost of $584,308.26 Plus Annual True-Up Costs for Installed Licensed Products, and Approval of the Associated Budget Amendment.

Recommended Action: Approve a three-year renewal of the Microsoft Enterprise Licensing Agreement with Dell Marketing, Inc., at an annual cost of $194,769.42, for a total three-year cost of $584,308.26, plus annual true-up costs for installed licensed products, and approve the associated budget amendment.

Attachments:

1. City of Ukiah - EA Renewal M365 F3 Dell Quote Rev 4-13-26

8.d. Approval of Purchase of Multiple Fleet Replacement Vehicles for Fiscal Year 2025/26 from Visalia Ford for a Total of $439,535.18.

Recommended Action: Approve purchase of multiple fleet vehicles for various City departments for Fiscal Year 2025/26 from Visalia Ford for a total of $439,535.18.

Attachments:

1. Vehicle Justifications

2. Ford F-150 Lightning Letter

3. Fleet Bid Tabulations

4. Visalia Ford Bids

5. 8d Staff Correspondence Received - Myles Fisette, Purchasing Manager

8.e. Approval of a Budget Amendment for the Purchase of a Vehicle in the Amount of $71,169.88 for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Grant Agreement for the Climate Resilient Forests Project and Receive Notification of the Planned Purchase.

Recommended Action: Approve a budget amendment for the purchase of a vehicle in the amount of $71,169.88 for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection grant agreement for the Climate Resilient Forests Project and receive notification of the planned purchase.

Attachments:

1. Madera Ford Proposal

8.f. Approval of Contract Amendment with EBA Engineering for Additional Design, Permitting and Document Submittals for the City of Ukiah Landfill Closure Project in the Amount of $145,330 and Approval of Corresponding Budget Amendment.

Recommended Action: Approve contract amendment with EBA Engineering for additional design, permitting and document submittals for the City of Ukiah Landfill Closure Project in the amount of $145,330 and approve corresponding budget amendment.

Attachments:

1. Original Agreement

2. Ukiah LF - Updated General Services Proposal Revised 04.07.26

9. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda.

9.a. Handouts Received.

Attachments:

1. Public Comment Handout

10. COUNCIL REPORTS

11. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS

11.a. Correspondence Received.

Attachments:

1. 11 Staff Correspondence Received - Traci Boyl (City Manager Reports)

12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (5:30 PM)

12.a. Consideration and Possible Adoption of a Resolution Updating Rates for Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services and Ambulance Transportation Provided by the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority.

Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution updating the rates for pre-hospital emergency medical services and ambulance transportation provided by the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority.

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution

13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

14. NEW BUSINESS

14.a. Presentation and Acceptance of the School Street Multimodal Transportation Corridor Study.

Recommended Action: Receive the presentation on the completed School Street Multimodal Transportation Corridor Study, including the final report and preferred concept, and accept report (inclusive of any grantor-required modifications).

Attachments:

1. School Street Plan_Final

2. 14a Correspondence Received - Andrew Lutsky

3. 14a Correspondence Received - Linda Sanders

4. 14a Correspondence Received - Pinky Kushner

5. 14a Correspondence Received - Dennis O'Brien

6. 14a Correspondence Received - Jared Soinila_Redacted

14.b. Presentation of Annual Report for Code Enforcement, Including Updates on Cannabis, Tobacco, Nitrous Oxide, and Shopping Carts Ordinances; and the Annual Status Update and Report Regarding the Building Bridges Community Center and Winter Homeless Shelter at 1045 South State Street.

Recommended Action: Receive the 2025 annual report on Code Enforcement activities and provide direction to Staff as necessary.

Attachments:

1. Code Enforcement Annual Report - 2025

2. UPD Calls Log- 1045 S State St- 2.6.25-2.6.26

3. RCS B2 Update.ECM flyer 4.7.26

14.c. Annual Review and Possible Introduction by Title Only of an Ordinance Amending Section 62 of Division 1, Chapter 2, Article 2 of the Ukiah City Code, Pertaining to Compensation of the Mayor and City Councilmembers.

Recommended Action: Council will conduct an annual review of Section 62 of the Ukiah City Code, pertaining to compensation of the Mayor and City Council members, and if warranted, introduce an amended ordinance by title only.

Attachments:

1. Senate Bill (SB) 329

2. Government Code Section 36516.5

3. Ordinance - redline and clean

4. Government Code Section 36516(b)

14.d. 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).

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

Attachments:

1. 2026 City Council Special Assignments & Ad Hocs

14.e. Possible Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Successor Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Ukiah and Ukiah Professional Fire Fighters Association, Effective September 19, 2025, Through September 18, 2028, and Corresponding Salary Schedule; and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Agreement and Amend the Budget Accordingly.

Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution approving the successor Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Ukiah and Ukiah Professional Fire Fighters Association, effective September 19, 2025, through September 18, 2028, and corresponding salary schedule; and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement and amend the budget accordingly.

Attachments:

1. Resolution_Successor_MOU_2025-2028

2. 9.19.25-9.18.28 Fire Unit MOU_Final

3. UPFA Unit Salary Schedule Effective 4.26.26 - 9.27.26

15. CLOSED SESSION - CLOSED SESSION MAY BE HELD AT ANY TIME DURING THE MEETING

15.a. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4))
Initiation of litigation (2 cases)

15.b. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2))
Significant exposure to litigation (2 cases)

15.c. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Nui Rising Moon Trust v. City of Ukiah, et al.; Case No. 3:25-cv-08320

15.d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Vichy Springs Resort v. City of Ukiah, Et Al; Case No. SCUK-CVPT-2018-70200

15.e. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Vichy Springs Resort, Inc v. City of Ukiah, et al.; Case No. 24-cv-07106-JSC

15.f. Conference with Real Property Negotiators
(Cal. Gov't Code Section 54956.8)
Property: APN Nos: 001-020-78-00, 001-030-01, 001-090-01 Negotiator: Maya Simerson, Senior Management Analyst, City Manager’s Office Negotiating Parties: Tayman Park Golf Group
Under Negotiation: Price & Terms of Agreement

15.g. Conference with Labor Negotiator (54957.6)
Agency Designated Representative: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager Employee Organizations: All bargaining units
Unrepresented Employee: Police Chief

15.h. Public Employment (City Attorney)
(Cal. Gov. Code § 54957(b)(1))

16. ADJOURNMENT
Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend. The City complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at the front counter at the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482, during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. Any handouts or presentation materials from the public must be submitted to the clerk 48 hours in advance of the meeting; for handouts, please include 10 copies.

I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda.

Araceli Sandoval, Deputy City Clerk
Dated: 4/10/2026

AGENDA ITEM 6a

CITY OF UKIAH

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Special Meeting

CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482
Virtual Meeting Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89360282732 April 1, 2026
3:30 p.m.

1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Ukiah City Council met at a Special Meeting on April 1, 2026, having been legally noticed on March 27, 2026. The meeting was held in person and virtually at the following link:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89360282732. Mayor Sher called the meeting to order at 3:32 p.m. Roll was taken with the following Councilmembers Present: Mari Rodin, Heather Criss, and Susan Sher. Councilmember Absent by Prearrangement: Douglas F. Crane and Juan V. Orozco. Staff

Present: Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney; and Araceli Sandoval, Deputy City Clerk.

MAYOR SHER PRESIDING.

The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Sher.

2. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
No public comment was received.

3. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Mid-Year Departmental Budget and Objectives Progress Review for Fiscal Year 2025-26, Review of Draft Objectives, and Review of Individual Departmental Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan Updates for Fiscal Year 2026-27.

Presenters: Department Directors.

Finance:

Financial Department Overview – Dan Buffalo, Finance Director (3:35 p.m.) Utility Billing & Customer Service – Lori Martin, Billing and Customer Services Manager (3:37 p.m.) Accounting & Budget – Oliver MacDonald, Finance Controller; Erica Valencia, Finance Controller; and Olga Keough, Finance Controller (3:42 p.m.)
Financial Services and Grants – Joel Zavala, Financial Services Manager (3:51 p.m.) Procurement and Capital – Myles Fisette, Purchasing Manager (3:55 p.m.) Treasury Management – Dan Buffalo, Finance Director (4:05 p.m.) Information Technology – Scott Shaver, IT Manager/Special Projects and Michael Hemry, I.T.

Manager (4:06 p.m.)
City Manager’s Office:

Overview and City Council – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager (4:14 p.m.) City Manager’s Office – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager (4:14 p.m.) City-Wide Admin – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager (4:16 p.m.) Community Outreach – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager (4:16 p.m.) Economic Development – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager (4:17 p.m.) Emergency Management – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager (4:18 p.m.) Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager (4:19 p.m.) City Clerk – Araceli Sandoval, Deputy City Clerk (4:22 p.m.)

City Council Minutes for April 1, 2026, Continued:

4. NEW BUSINESS
No new business items were placed on the agenda.

5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m. ________________________________
Araceli Sandoval, Deputy City Clerk

AGENDA ITEM 6b

CITY OF UKIAH

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Regular Meeting

CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482
Virtual Meeting Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84940223510 April 1, 2026
5:15 p.m.

1. ROLL CALL
Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on April 1, 2026, having been legally noticed on March 27, 2026. The meeting was held in person and virtually at the following link:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84940223510. Mayor Sher called the meeting to order at 5:18 p.m. Roll was taken with the following Councilmembers Present: Mari Rodin, Heather Criss, and Susan Sher. Councilmembers Absent by Prearrangement: Douglas F. Crane and Juan V. Orozco. Staff

Present: Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney (arriving at 5:19 p.m.); and Araceli Sandoval, Deputy City Clerk.

MAYOR SHER PRESIDING.

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Rodin.

3. AB 2449 NOTIFICATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

4. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS
a. Acknowledgements.

Presenter: Mayor Sher.

Mayor Sher recognized:
• March 23-27 as Government Finance Professional Week
• April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month
• April 12-18 as National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week • April 22nd as Earth Day
• April as Arts, Culture, and Creativity Month
Staff Comment: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director.

5. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Deputy City Clerk, Araceli Sandoval, stated that no communications had been received.

6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. Approval of the Minutes for the March 18, 2026, Special Meeting. b. Approval of the Minutes for the March 18, 2026, Regular Meeting. c. Approval of the Minutes for the March 25, 2026, Special Meeting.

City Council Minutes for April 1, 2026, Continued:

Motion/Second: Criss/Rodin to approve the Special and Regular meeting minutes of March 18 and March 25, 2026. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Rodin, Criss, and Sher. NOES:

None. ABSENT: Crane and Orozco. ABSTAIN: None.

7. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION

8. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Approval of Notice of Completion for the Urban Core Rehabilitation Project (2324-170), Specification No. 23-07, Contract Change Order for $392,523.77, Final Payment of the 5% Retention to Ghilotti Construction Company Inc, and Corresponding Budget Amendment – Public Works.
b. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution (2026-14) Approving Records Destruction for the Police Department – City Clerk.
c. Notification of Purchase (2526-192) of Existing Conduit Segments from Sonic Telecom, LLC, in the Amount of $63,100 for the Ukiah Gigabit Fiber Project – Community Development.

Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer answered questions regarding Agenda Item 8a.

Motion/Second: Rodin/Criss to approve Consent Calendar Items 8a-8c, as submitted. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Rodin, Criss, and Sher. NOES: None. ABSENT: Crane and Orozco. ABSTAIN: None.

9. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
No public comments were received.

10. COUNCIL REPORTS
Presenters: Councilmember Criss and Mayor Sher.

11. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS
No reports were received.

12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (5:30 PM)
a. Conduct a Public Hearing to Solicit Public Comment; and Consider Authorizing Staff to Proceed with Submittal of an Application to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for a New Pierce 107-foot Single Rear Axle Aerial Apparatus (Ladder Engine) for the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority.

Presenters: Jim Robbins, Housing and Grants Manager. Also present at staff table: Justin Buckingham, Fire Battalion Chief.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 5:37 P.M.

No public comment was received.

PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 5:37 P.M.

Motion/Second: Criss/Rodin to authorize Staff to submit an application (2526-201ga) to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to fund the purchase (2526-201gb) of a new Pierce 107- foot Single Rear Axle Aerial Apparatus (Ladder Engine) for the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Rodin, Criss, and Sher. NOES: None. ABSENT: Crane and Orozco. ABSTAIN: None.

City Council Minutes for April 1, 2026, Continued:

13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
No unfinished business items were placed on the agenda.

14. NEW BUSINESS
a. Approval of a Demolition Permit to Remove an Existing Commercial Structure Subject to Historical Review at 228 East Perkins (APNs 002-192-17 and 002-192-22); File No. 25- 000256; Permit No. PA25-000001.

Presenter: Katherine Schaefers, Planning Manager.

Applicant Comment: Daniel Grassi, VP of Development & Construction, OneTogether Solutions, LLC
Motion/Second: Rodin/Criss to approve a Demolition Permit to remove an existing commercial structure subject to historical review at 228 East Perkins (APNs 002-192-17 and 002-192-22); File No. 25-000256; Permit No. PA25-000001. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES:

Rodin, Criss, and Sher. NOES: None. ABSENT: Crane and Orozco. ABSTAIN: None. b. Adoption of a Resolution Establishing the Location and Associated Standards for City Gateways Consistent with 2040 General Plan Policy LU-11.2 and Related Implementation Measures.

Presenter: Jesse Davis, Chief Planning Manager. Also present at staff table: Katherine Schaefers, Planning Manager.

No public comment was received.

Motion/Second: Rodin/Criss to adopt a resolution (2026-15) establishing the location and associated standards for City gateways consistent with 2040 General Plan Policy LU-11.2 and related implementation measures. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Rodin, Criss, and Sher. NOES: None. ABSENT: Crane and Orozco. ABSTAIN: None. c. 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).

Presenters: Councilmember Rodin and Mayor Sher.

15. CLOSED SESSION
a. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4))
Initiation of litigation (2 cases)
b. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2))
Significant exposure to litigation (1 case)
c. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Nui Rising Moon Trust v. City of Ukiah, et al.; Case No. 3:25-cv-08320 d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Vichy Springs Resort v. City of Ukiah, Et Al; Case No. SCUK-CVPT-2018-70200

City Council Minutes for April 1, 2026, Continued:

e. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Vichy Springs Resort, Inc v. City of Ukiah, et al.; Case No. 24-cv-07106-JSC f. Conference with Real Property Negotiators
(Cal. Gov't Code Section 54956.8)
Property: APN Nos: 001-020-78-00, 001-030-01, 001-090-01 Negotiator: Maya Simerson, Senior Management Analyst, City Manager’s Office Negotiating Parties: Tayman Park Golf Group
Under Negotiation: Price & Terms of Agreement
g. Conference with Labor Negotiator (54957.6)
Agency Designated Representative: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager Employee Organizations: All bargaining units
Unrepresented Employee: Police Chief
h. Public Employment (City Attorney)
(Cal. Gov. Code § 54957(b)(1))
No Closed Session was held.

16. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:09 p.m. ________________________________
Araceli Sandoval,
Deputy City Clerk

Agenda Item No: 8.a.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 4/15/2026

ITEM NO: 2022-1479

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Report of Disbursements for the Month of March 2026.

DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: MaryJo Reynolds, AJ Johnson, Finance Services Specialist
PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:

1. March 2026 Summary of Disbursements

2. Account Codes for Reference

3. Object Codes for Reference

4. March 2026 Disbursements Detail
Summary: The Council will review and consider approval of the report of disbursements for the month of March 2026.

Background: Payments made during the month of March 2026 are summarized in the Report of Disbursements. Further details are supplied on the Schedule of Bills, representing the four (4) individual payment cycles within the month.

Accounts Payable Check Numbers (City & UVFA): 3066969-3067072, 3067073-3067166, 3067167-3067265, 3067266-3067384
Accounts Payable EFT#: 1
Accounts Payable Wire Transfer: 166, 170-171, 173-177
Payroll Check Numbers: 519509-519572; 519573-519638
Payroll Manual Check Numbers: 519509
Direct Deposit Numbers: 144476-144860; 144861-145244
Manual Direct Deposit Numbers: NA
Void Check Numbers: 3068914, 3067154, 3066657, 3067357, 3067369 Void Direct Deposit Numbers: NA
Discussion: This report is submitted in accordance with Ukiah City Code Division 1, Chapter 7, Article 1.

Attachment #1: March 2026 Summary of Disbursements
Attachment #2: Account Codes for Reference
Attachment #3: Object Codes for Reference
Attachment #4: March 2026 Disbursement Detail

Recommended Action: Approve the report of disbursements for the month of March 2026.

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
REVENUE: N/A GRANT: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
STRATEGIC PLAN (SP): N/A
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP): N/A

Attachment 1
FUNDS:
100 General Fund $215,200.72 700 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund $67,474.51 101 GF-(Sub-Fund) Visit Ukiah $869.04 701 Landfill Corrective Fund 105 GF-(Sub-Fund) Fire Authority $73,787.65 702 Disposal Closure Reserve Fund 106 USDA Forest Serv CWDG $4,088.25 704 Post Closure Fund - Solid Waste 110 Special General Fund 710 Ambulance Services Fund $73,016.10 120 Streets Capital Improvement 720 Golf Fund $1,848.86 130 Gov'tl Debt SVC/Reserve Fund $2,247,205.66 730 Confernence Center Fund $12,036.17 131 Debt Service Reserve 2022 LRB $2,419,481.25 750 Visit Ukiah 200 City Adminstrative Services $47,962.41 777 Airport Fund $21,281.68 201 Worker's Comp Fund $81,506.57 778 Airport Capital Improvement Fund 202 Liability Fund $18,559.23 779 Special Aviation Fund 203 Garage Fund $11,608.68 800 Electric Fund $885,486.40 204 Purchasing Fund $1,772.53 801 Electric Capital Reserve Fund 205 Billing & Collections Fund $22,239.41 803 Lake Mendocino Bond Reserve 206 Public Safety Dispatch Fund $6,987.20 805 Street Lighting Fund $9,073.95 207 Payroll Posting Fund $480,454.17 806 Public Benefits Fund $6,194.83 208 Building Maintenance/Corp Yard Fund $255,385.92 807 Cap and Trade 209 IT Fund $252,396.82 808 Electric Low Carbon Fuel STDS 220 Equipment Reserve Fund 820 Water Fund $98,792.84
249 City Housing Bond Proceeds 821 Water Capital Reserve Fund 250 Special Revenue Fund 822 Water Capital Improvement Fund $75.13 251 Special Projects Reserve Fund 825 UVWA Water Shared Expneses $7,948.01 252 Streets/ROW Improvement Fund 830 Recycled Water Fund $6,831.15 253 CITY PROP 172 840 City/District Sewer Fund $174,096.26 300 Park Development Fund 841 Sewer Contruction Fund $999,264.54 301 Anton Stadium Fund 843 Sewer Capital Fund
302 Observatory Park Fund 846 UVWA Water Shared Expneses $2,382.08 303 Playground & Park Amenities Fund 900 Special Deposit Trust $16,043.00 304 Swimming Pool Fund 901 General Service (Accts Recv) $975.02 305 Riverside Park Fund 902 U.S.W. Billing & Collection $73,207.22 306 Skate Park Fund 903 Public Safety - AB 109 $0.00
308 Opioid Settlement Fund 905 Federal Emergency Shelter Grant 310 Museum Grants $0.00 905 Mendocino Emergency Service Authority 311 Alex Rorbaugh Recreation Center Fund $5,459.89 911 Russian River Watershed Association $65,209.26 312 Downtown Business Improvement Fund 915 UVFD
313 LMIHF Housing Asset Fund 916 UVFD PROP 172
314 Winter Special Events $3,853.80 917 UVFD Measure B
315 Advanced Planning Fund 918 UVFD Mitigation
316 SPECIAL RECREATION EVENTS 920 MSWMA Operations $89,963.96 500 2106 Gas Tax Fund $3,165.90 922 Millview County Water District $96,731.49 501 2107 Gas Tax Fund 923 Milview Capital Charge
503 2105 Gas Tax Fund 927 Redwood Valley Water District $96,183.45 505 Signalization Fund 932 Willow Water District Operations $49,397.97 506 Bridge Fund 937 Calpella Water District Operations $9,777.40 507 1998 STIP Augmentation Fund 937 Calpella Sewer $1,462.46 508 SB325 Reimbursement Fund 940 Sanitation District Special Fund 509 S.T.P. Fund 942 Rate Stabilization - UVSD Fund
510 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief Fund 943 Sanitation District Capital Improvement Fund 511 Rail Trail Fund $11,218.09 945 River Estate Operations $4,229.66 600 Community Development Block Grant 947 Hopland Water Operations $53,977.28 601 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan 950 Hopland Sewer Operations $8,401.11 602 Community Development Fund 952 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund 603 08-HOME-4688 960 Community Redevelopment Agency
604 CDBG Grant 09-STBG-6417 961 RDA Housing Pass-Through 605 11-HOME-7654 Fund $0.00 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund 606 CDBG Grant 10-EDEF-7261 963 Housing Debt
607 Prop 84 Grant Fund 964 RDA Capital Pass-Through
609 13-CDBG-8940 965 Redevelopment Capital Improvement Fund 610 City RDA Projects Fund 966 Redevelopment Debt Service 613 Home Program Activities 967 Housing Bond Proceeds
620 CASP Train 968 Non-Housing Bond Proceeds
630 Asset Seizure Fund 969 RDA Obligation Retirement Fund 631 Asset Seizure Fund (Drug/Alcohol) 844/944 Sewer Capital Projects Fund $4,000.00 633 H & S Education 11489(B)(2)(A1)
634 Federal Asset Seizure Grants
635 SUP Law Enforcement Service Fund
636 CBTHP Officer Retainage Withheld
637 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant 611 CDBG 16-CDBG-11147 638 Asset Forfeiture 11470.2 H & S
639 Special Revenue - Police
640 Parking District Fund $611.70
670 Federal American Rescue Fund
691 Museum Fund
695 Transfer Station Fund
696 Solid Waste Mitigation Fund $2,282.46
PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 519509-519572
DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS: 144476-144860
PAYROLL PERIOD:02/15/2026-02/28/2026
PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 519573-519638
DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS:144861-145244
PAYROLL PERIOD: 03/01/2026-03/14/2026
PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS:

DIRECT DEPOST NUMBERS:

PAYROLL PERIOD: TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS- A/P CHECKS $9,101,459.14 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS- EFT's $367.00
VOID CHECK NUMBERS: TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS & DIRECT DEPOSITS $1,751,191.80 3068914, 3067154, 3066657, 3067357 TOTAL PAYROLL EFT's (TAXES, PERS, VENDORS) $940,163.22 3067369 * vendor name( if applicable)
519509
WIRE TRANSFER NUMBERS:
166, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177
TOTAL PAYMENTS $11,793,181.16

CERTIFICATION OF CITY CLERK
This register of Payroll and Demand Payments was duly approved by the City Council on ____________________.

City Clerk

APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER
I have examined this Register and approve same. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy
and available funds.
____________________________________________ ________________________________________________ City Manager Director of Finance
MANUAL CHECK NUMBERS:

CITY OF UKIAH

REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS

REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS
FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2026

Account Code Summary Attachment 2
10000000 GENERAL FUND 20012300 COMMUNITY OUTREACH/PUBLIC INFO 10017200 SUCCESSOR AGENCY 20012500 CITY CLERK
10020000 POLICE - GEN FUND 20012600 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 10020210 POLICE PATROL 20012800 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
10020214 POLICE VOLUNTEERS 20013540 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
10020216 COPS GRANT 20016300 PAYROLL
10020217 POLICE ANIMAL CONTROL 20013400 ACCOUNTING
10020218 POLICE CSO 20013401 BUDGET MANAGEMENT
10020220 CODE ENFORCEMENT 20014000 CITY ATTORNEY
10020224 MAJOR CRIMES TASK FORCE 20015100 CITY TREASURER 10021210 CITY FIRE 20016100 HUMAN RESOURCES
10022100 PARKS 20023510 HOUSING GRANTS
10022300 AQUATICS 20023520 NON-HOUSING GRANTS
10022700 MUSEUM - GEN FUND 20100000 WORKER'S COMP FUND
10022810 RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 20116220 WORKERS COMPENSATION 10022821 ADULT BASKETBALL 20200000 LIABILITY FUND
10022822 ADULT SOFTBALL 20216200 RISK MANAGEMENT
10022824 CO-ED VOLLEYBALL 20300000 GARAGE FUND
10022831 YOUTH BASKETBALL 20324100 GARAGE
10022832 YOUTH SOFTBALL 20324110 FLEET MAINTENANCE
10022840 DAY CAMP 20400000 PURCHASING FUND
10022850 CLASSES & CLINICS 20413500 PURCHASING
10022860 SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 20413510 CAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT 10022900 COMM SVCS SPECIAL SERVICES 20413520 GRANTS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 10023100 PLANNING SERVICES 20414000 LEGAL SERVICES/EXPENSES 10023110 CURRENT PLANNING 20500000 BILLING AND COLLECTION FUND 10023300 BUILDING INSPECTION 20513300 UTILITY BILLING
10023320 BUILDING INSPECTION 20513380 METERING-ELECTRIC 10023411 CDBG GENERAL ADMIN 20513382 METERING-WATER
10024200 ENGINEERING/STREETS 20600000 PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCH FUND 10024210 ENGINEERING 20620231 POLICE UKIAH DISPATCH
10024214 TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS 20620232 POLICE FT BRAGG DISPATCH 10024224 STORM WATER 20700000 PAYROLL POSTING FUND
10024310 CORP YARD MAINTENANCE 20800000 BUILDING & MAINTENANCE 10024620 STREETS 20822500 BUILDING & MAINTENANCE
10100000 GF- (SUB-FUND) VISIT UKIAH 20824300 BLDG MAINT CORP YARD 10112700 GF-(SUB-FUND) VISIT UKIAH 20900000 IT FUND
10500000 MEASURE S GENERAL FUND 20913900 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 10521210 FIRE AUTHORITY 22000000 FIXED ASSET FUND
10600000 USDA FOREST SERV CWDG 25100000 SPECIAL PROJECTS RESERVE FUND 12000000 STREET REHABILITATION 25200000 STREETS/ROW IMPROVEMENT FUND 12024200 PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING 25224220 STREETS/ROW IMPROVEMENT FUND 13000000 GOV'TL DEBT SVC/RESERVE FUND 25300000 PROP 172 FUND 13100000 DEBT SERVICE RESERVE 2022 LRB 25321210 CITY FIRE 20000000 CITY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 30000000 PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES FUND 20010000 CITY COUNCIL 30022200 PARK DEVELOPMENT
20012100 CITY MANAGER 30100000 ANTON STADIUM FUND

Account Code Summary Attachment 2
20012200 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT 63500000 SUP.LAW ENFORCE.SVC.FD(SLESF) 30200000 OBSERVATORY PARK FUND 63520210 SLESF
30300000 PLAYGROUND & PARK AMENITIES FU 63600000 CBTHP OFFICER 30322230 PLAYGROUND AND PARK AMENITIES 63620210 CBTHP OFFICER 30400000 SWIMMING POOL FUND 63800000 ASSET FORFEITURE 11470.2 H&S F 30522250 RIVERSIDE PARK 63820210 ASSET FORFEITURE 11470 EXPENDI 30600000 SKATE PARK FUND 63900000 SPECIAL REVENUE POLICE 30700000 SOFTBALL COMPLEX FUND 64000000 PKG. DIST. #1 OPER & MAINT FUN 30800000 OPIOD SETTLEMENT FUND 64012600 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 31100000 ARRC GENERAL OPERATING FUND 64020213 POLICE PARKING ENFORCEMENT 31122000 ARRC 67000000 FEDERAL AMERICAN RESCUE FUNDS
31200000 DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT 69500000 TRANSFER STATION 31212600 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 69624000 SOLID WASTE MITIGATION FUND 31300000 LMIHF HOUSING ASSET FUND 70000000 SANITARY DISPOSAL SITE FUND 31323400 HOUSING 70024500 LANDFILL 700
31323431 LMI GENERAL ADMIN 70124500 LANDFILL CORRECTIVE 31500000 ADVANCED PLANNING FUND 70200000 DISPOSAL CLOSURE RESERVE FUND 31523100 COMMUNITY PLANNING 70224500 LANDFILL CLOSURE
31600000 SPECIAL RECREATION EVENTS 70400000 POST CLOSURE FUND-SOLID WASTE 31622861 SPECIAL RECREATION EVENTS 71000000 AMBULANCE SERVICES FUND 50000000 GAS TAX FUND 71021100 AMBULANCE SERVICES
50024214 TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS 72000000 GOLF FUND
50500000 SIGNALIZATION FUND 72022400 GOLF
50800000 SB325 REIMBURSEMENT FUND 73000000 CONFERENCE CENTER FUND 50824210 SB325 ENGINEERING 73022600 CONFERENCE CENTER
50900000 S.T.P. 77700000 AIRPORT FUND
50924210 STP ENGINEERING 77714000 CITY ATTORNEY
51100000 RAIL TRAIL FUND 77725200 AIRPORT OPERATIONS
51124210 Rail Trail 77800000 AIRPORT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FU 60000000 COMM. DEVELOPMT. BLOCK GRANT F 77825200 AIRPORT CAPITAL 60023411 CDBG GENERAL ADMIN 77900000 SPECIAL AVIATION FUND 60023412 CDBG ACTIVITY DELIVERY 77925200 AIRPORT SPECIAL 61100000 CDBG 16-CDBG-11147 80000000 ELECTRIC FUND
61112600 CDBG ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 80014000 CITY ATTORNEY 61123410 16-CDBG-11147 80026110 ELECTRIC OVERHEAD
61123411 CDBG GENERAL ADMIN 80026120 ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND 61200000 FUND 612 UNASSIGNED 80026200 TELEMETRY & CALIBRATION 61223400 HOME CDD HOUSING 80026210 SUBSTATION
61223422 HOME ACTIVITY DELIVERY 80026220 HYDROELECTRIC PLANT 61323400 HOME HOUSING ACTIVITIES 80026400 ELECTRIC ADMINISTRATION 61323421 HOME GENERAL ADMIN 80026440 POWER PURCHASES
62000000 CASP CERTIF & TRAINING 80100000 ELECTRIC CAPITAL RESERVE FUND 62023320 CASP CERTIF & TRAINING 80126100 ELECTRIC CIP
63000000 ASSET SEIZURE FUND 80126220 HYDROELECTRIC PLANT 63020210 ASSET SEIZURE EXPENDITURE 80500000 STREET LIGHTING FUND 63300000 H&S EDUCATION 11489(B)(2)(A1) 80526150 STREET LIGHTING 63320210 H&S ASSET SEIZURE EXPENDITURE 80600000 PUBLIC BENEFITS CHARGES FUND

Account Code Summary Attachment 2
63400000 FEDERAL ASSET SEIZURE GRANTS F
63420250 FED ASSET SEIZURE EXPENDITURE
80626450 PUBLIC BENEFITS
80700000 ELECTRIC CAP AND TRADE FUND
80800000 ELECTRIC LOW CARBON FUEL STDS
80826100 ELECTRIC LOW CARBON FUEL STDS
82000000 WATER FUND
82027110 WATER
82027111 PROD OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
82027114 DISTRIB OPERATIONS & MAINT
82100000 WATER CAPITAL RESERVE FUND
82200000 WATER CONNECTION FEE FUND
82227113 WATER DISTRIBUTION CAPITAL
82500000 UVWA WATER SHARED EXPENSES
83000000 RECYCLED WATER
83027330 RECYCLED WATER
84000000 CITY/DIST. SEWER OPERATING FUN
84027220 WASTE WATER
84027221 CITY WASTE O & M
84027225 WASTE TREATMENT O & M
84100000 SEWER BOND DEBT SERVICE FUND
84127226 WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPITAL
84200000 RATE STABILIZATION-CITY FUND
84300000 CONNECTION FEE SEWER FUND (CAP
84400000 CITY SEWER CAPITAL PROJECTS FU
84427221 CITY WASTEWATER O&M 844
84427222 CITY WASTE CAPITAL
84600000 UVWA SEWER SHARED EXPENSES
90000000 SPECIAL DEPOSIT TRUST FUND
91500000 UKIAH VALLEY FIRE DEPARTMENT
91521400 UVFD FIRE ADMINISTRATION
91600000 UVFD PROP 172
91621400 UVFD PROP 172
91700000 UVFD MEASURE B UNASSIGNED
91721400 UVFD FIRE
91800000 UVFD MITIGATION FEES
91821400 UVFD MITIGATION
92000000 MSWMA OPERATIONS
92200000 MILLVIEW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
92300000 MILLVIEW CAPITAL CHARGE
92700000 REDWOOD VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
93700000 CALPELLA WATER DISTRICT OPERATION
93800000 CALPELLA SEWER
94500000 RIVER ESTATES OPERATIONS
94700000 HOPLAND WATER OPERATIONS
95000000 HOPLAND SEWER OPERATIONS
96900000 REDEVELOPMENT OBLIGATION RETIR

Account Code Summary Attachment 2
96917200 SUCCESSOR AGENCY
96995669 969 - RDA OBLIGATION RETIREMEN

51211 PERS UNFUNDED LIABILITY 54101 POSTAGE
51220 INSURANCE 54102 SMALL TOOLS
51230 WORKERS COMP 54103 LAB SUPPLIES
51240 MEDICARE 54106 SPECIALTY SUPPLIES
51260 FICA 54107 EMS SUPPLIES
51270 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 54120 PW - SPECIAL SUPPLIES
51290 CELL PHONE STIPEND 54121 PW - ASPHALT CONCRETE
52100 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 54122 PW - AGGREGATE BASE
52110 AMBULANCE BILLING 54124 PW - CONCRETE/SUPPLIES
52111 DEFIBRILLATOR MAINTENANCE 54125 PW - TRAFFIC PAINT 52112 M. S. OVERSIGHT 54126 PW-PREMARKS
52113 PLANNING STUDIES 54127 PW - SIGN POSTS/SHEETING
52114 COMPLIANCE STUDIES 54128 PW - COLD PATCH MATERIAL 52130 EDUCATIONAL & MARKETING MATL'S 54129 PW - TACK OIL 52131 ASSISTANCE TO SENIORS 54130 PW - SAFETY
52133 MONTHLY DISCOUNT PROGRAM 54131 PW - BARRICADES & CONES 52134 GENERAL ADMIN 54161 BACKGROUND & PHYSICALS
52135 ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM 54162 ADVERTISING
52137 PUBLIC BENEFITS PROGRAM MGMT 54163 INTERVIEW SUPPLIES 52139 RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT & DEMO 54165 NEW EMPLOYEE FINGERPRINT 52150 LEGAL SERVICES/EXPENSES 54166 DOT TESTING PROGRAM 52151 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT ADMIN FEES 54167 EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT 52155 ACTIVITY DELIVERY 54169 LIVESCAN
52180 SECURITY SERVICES 54201 PRISONER EXPENSE
52181 VOLUNTEER EXPENSES 54202 MAJOR CRIME INVESTIGATIONS 52301 PROPERTY TAX ADMIN FEE 54203 RECRUITMENT
52304 LAFCO FEES AND PROP TAX EXP 54320 SOFTWARE
52500 TRUSTEE FEES 54330 COMPUTER AND TECHNOLOGY
52510 ADVERTISING & PROMOTION 54500 EQUIP RENTS AND LEASES 52515 ADVERTISING & PUBLICATION 54700 FINES & PENALTIES 52521 LIABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM 55100 TELEPHONE
52522 LIABILITY & PROPERTY DEDUCT 55200 PG&E
52524 PROPERTY INSURANCE PREMIUM 55210 UTILITIES
52525 WORKER'S COMP. EXPENSE 56100 VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT MAINT. & R 52526 REMIF ASSESSMENT PAYMENTS 56112 EQUIPMENT PARTS FOR RESALE 52527 A.D.P. PREMIUM & DEDUCTIBLE 56120 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 52528 LIABILITY INSURANCE 56125 LAB EQUIP-REPAIR & MAINT. 52529 EARTHQUAKE & FLOOD (DIC) 56130 EXTERNAL SERVICES
52532 SAFETY & TRAINING SUPPORT 56210 FUEL & FLUIDS
52533 UVFA RETIREE HEALTH INS 56300 BUILDING MAINT. & REPAIR 52600 RENT 56410 EQUIPMENT RENTAL - PRIVATE
52601 DATA STORAGE & CONNECTIVITY 56504 FACILITY MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 52602 RENTAL OF CITY PROPERTY 56600 AIRFIELD MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 52841 SUCCESSOR AGENCY ADMIN 57100 LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT 53000 LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT 57101 CONF & TRAINING-AQUATICS 54100 SUPPLIES 57300 MEMBERSHIPS & SUBSCRIPTIONS
Object Code Summary Attachment 3

58101 NCPA PLANT GENERATION
58102 NCPA POWER PURCHASES
58103 NCPA TRANSMISSION
58104 NCPA MANAGEMENT SERVICES
58105 NCPA THIRD PARTY SALES
58202 CHEMICALS
58401 AVIATION FUEL
58410 GARAGE LUBRICANTS & PARTS
58510 REIMBURSABLE JOBS
59100 PROPERTY TAXES PAID
59101 FEES
59102 FRANCHISE FEES
59105 CONTRIBUTIONS TO OTHER AGENCY
59106 SENIOR TRASH SUBSIDY
59108 BANK FEES
59400 OTHER EXPENSES
59500 LOANS ISSUED
59502 SCHOLARSHIPS
61200 PURCHASING ALLOCATION
61300 BILLING & COLLECTION ALLOCATIO
61410 RENT ALLOCATION
61420 BUILDING MAINTENANCE ALLOCATIO
61422 IT ALLOCATION
61430 CORP YARD ALLOCATION
61500 INSURANCE ALLOCATION
61600 GARAGE ALLOCATION
61700 DISPATCH
62100 ADMIN & OVERHEAD ALLOCATION
63000 INTERFUND SERVICES USED
70101 LOAN PAYMENTS MADE
70102 BOND INTEREST EXPENSE
70103 LOAN INTEREST
70201 LOAN PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS
70202 BOND PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS
74500 CAPITAL LEASE PRINCIPAL
74501 CAPITAL LEASE INTEREST
80100 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT
80210 LAND ACQUISITION
80220 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS
80230 INFRASTRUCTURE
90100 LOAN PROCEEDS
90101 LOAN PAYMENT RECEIVED

ATTACHMENT 4

TO: Accounts Payable
CC: Joel Zavala
FROM: Lauren Ruffin
RE: Payroll & Vendor Checks for Agenda Item
DATE: 03/20/26
FOR PAY DATE OF: 03/20/26
03/01/26 TO 03/14/26
PAYROLL CHECK #'s: 519573 TO 519638
PAYROLL STUB #'s: 144861 TO 145244
TOTAL EMPLOYEE CHECKS:

TOTAL ACH TRANSACTIONS:

SUBTOTAL: PAYROLL CKS & DIRECT DEPOSITS
TOTAL VENDOR CHECKS:

TOTAL VENDOR EFT PAYMENTS

TOTAL EFT PAYMENTS - COU
SUBTOTAL: EFT PAYMENTS
GRAND TOTAL:

REISSUE OF VOID CK
OR MANUAL CHECK: PAYABLE TO:

MISC check
VOID CHECK NO: PAYABLE TO:
$ 459,901.89
$ 474,020.45
$ 1,356,470.46
PAYROLL PERIOD:
$ 52,043.74
$ 830,406.27
$ 882,450.01
$ 612.50
$ 13,506.06

Agenda Item No: 8.b.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 4/15/2026

ITEM NO: 2026-555

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of Contract with Lee Mechanical, Inc. for On-call Maintenance and Troubleshooting Services for Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant in the Amount of $125,000 and Approve Corresponding Budget Amendment.

DEPARTMENT: Electric Utility PREPARED BY: Cindy Sauers, Electric Utility Director PRESENTER: Cindy Sauers, Electric Utility Director
ATTACHMENTS:

1. LMI Site Rate 2026
Summary: City Council will consider approving a contract with Lee Mechanical Incorporated for on-call maintenance and troubleshooting services at Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant for $125,000 and corresponding budget amendment.

Background: Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant (LMHP) has been in service since 1986 and currently provides approximately 10% of the City’s electricity from a clean, renewable source. Like any long-term infrastructure investment, the plant’s equipment and systems require ongoing maintenance and periodic repair to ensure reliable operation. The City’s Utility Technicians demonstrate a high level of skill and dedication operating and maintaining the facility, consistently keeping the plant running safely and efficiently. However, certain components within the plant are highly specialized and complex, and on occasion, the City benefits from engaging contractors with focused expertise and experience working on this unique equipment. Utilizing this supplemental support helps ensure work is completed safely, in accordance with industry best practices, and to the highest standard of quality.

Over the past several months, Staff has actively sought support for various plant projects, but have received little to no interest. Two engineering firms currently under contract with the Utility have been unable to provide the level of support required, and a third firm has not responded to repeated outreach attempts.

Gary Lee, owner of Lee Mechanical Inc., has been involved in multiple projects at LMHP since its original construction in the 1980s. He possesses extensive knowledge of the facility and brings a highly specialized skill set that has proven difficult to find. He has periodically supported the Utility in diagnosing complex equipment issues and has consistently demonstrated a deep and valuable level of industry experience.

Discussion: Lee Mechanical will provide general maintenance and troubleshooting tasks assigned by the Electric Utility on an as-needed basis. See Attachment 1 for hourly rates.

Staff recommends approving an on-call, professional services contract with Lee Mechanical, Inc., in the amount of $125,000 and approve corresponding budget amendment.

Recommended Action: Approve contract with Lee Mechanical Incorporated for on-call maintenance and troubleshooting services at Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant for $125,000 and approve corresponding budget amendment.

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 80026220.52100: $85,805.88

PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 80026220.52100: $210,805.88
FINANCING SOURCE: 800 Fund
REVENUE: No GRANT: No
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager; Myles Fisette, Purchasing Manager STRATEGIC PLAN (SP): SP 2B - Identify and/or develop funding for essential and vital infrastructure for the long-term.

GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP):GP-A4 - Public Facilities, Services, and Infrastructure Element

LEE MECHANICAL

INCORPORATED
SITE RATES for 2026
ENGINEERS:

Straight Time................................................................................................ $ 170.00/hr.

Overtime....................................................................................................... $ 190.00/hr.

Sundays and Holidays.................................................................................. $ 205.00/hr.

PROJECT MANAGERS & TECHNICIANS:

Straight Time................................................................................................ $ 145.00/hr.

Overtime....................................................................................................... $ 150.00/hr.

Sundays and Holidays.................................................................................. $ 185.00/hr.

SITE SUPERVISOR:

Straight Time................................................................................................ $ 100.00/hr.

Overtime and Nightshift................................................................................ $ 105.00/hr.

Sundays and Holidays.................................................................................. $ 165.00/hr.

SITE LABOR:

Journeyman Level 1 -
Straight Time................................................................................................ $ 80.00/hr.

Overtime....................................................................................................... $ 95.00/hr.

Sundays and Holidays.................................................................................. $ 115.00/hr.

Clerical, Helper, Site Checker -
Straight Time................................................................................................ $ 65.00/hr.

Overtime....................................................................................................... $ 76.00/hr.

Sundays and Holidays.................................................................................. $ 91.00/hr.

All onsite expenses are included in the above pricing except for the following;

1. Travel time to and from home port to project will be billed at ½ straight time rate for all personnel.

2. Site Supervisor, Labor, Engineer, Technicians and Checker rental car, hotel room, airfare and fuel will be billed at actual rate plus 5%.

3. Site Truck and Tool Trailer will be billed at $1000.00 per week each or any portion of a week, if supplied.

4. Supply of material, equipment and subcontracts will be cost plus 15%.

5. All employees will receive $ 75.00/day per diem including travel days.

6. Payment terms are net 30 days from date of invoice, with 7% late fee.

Attachment 1

Agenda Item No: 8.c.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 4/15/2026

ITEM NO: 2026-609

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of a Three-Year Renewal of the Microsoft Enterprise Licensing Agreement with Dell Marketing, Inc., at an Annual Cost of $194,769.42 for a Total Three-Year Cost of $584,308.26 Plus Annual True-Up Costs for Installed Licensed Products, and Approval of the Associated Budget Amendment.

DEPARTMENT: Information Services PREPARED BY: Scott Shaver, I.T. Manager, Michael Hemry, Information Technology Manager
PRESENTER: Michael Hemry, IT Manager and Scott Shaver, IT Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. City of Ukiah - EA Renewal M365 F3 Dell Quote Rev 4-13-26 Summary: Council will consider approval of a three-year renewal of the Microsoft Enterprise Licensing Agreement with Dell Marketing, Inc., at an annual cost of $194,769.42, for a total three-year cost of $584,308.26, plus annual true-up costs for installed licensed products, and approval of the associated budget amendment.

Background: The City's three-year Microsoft Enterprise Agreement (MEA) is due to expire at the end of this month. This agreement has proven to be a very cost-effective way to purchase Microsoft software to address the City's key organizational objectives, such as building a secure and well-managed data center, maintaining line-of-business applications using the Microsoft Windows Operating System, SQL Database Software, and standardizing Microsoft's productivity software, known as Office 365 and Microsoft 365.

The MEA also includes access to Microsoft Azure with the same discounted pricing benefits. The MEA has provided the City with the best overall pricing based on its organization's size, the benefits of Software Assurance, as well as simplified licensing management. Software Assurance, included in the MEA, is a core set of benefits that improves workforce productivity, streamlines software deployment, and reduces costs.

These benefits include access to new product demonstrations, rights to new software versions, deployment planning days, 24/7 phone and web support, and training for both end-users and technical staff.

Software Assurance provides the City's Information Technology Department with a supported release of its Microsoft software, whether on the back-end servers or on the business user's desktop workstations. Renewal of the MEA will provide the City with continued flexibility.

With the use of Microsoft Office 365 and Microsoft 365, the City will be able to implement Microsoft line of business applications, such as Outlook, Word, PowerPoint and Excel, either on-site (on premise) or in the cloud (hosted). Other applications supported are Microsoft Project and Microsoft Visio. This flexibility will allow the City to determine and provide for different departmental needs to more efficiently manage its computing environment and to optimize spending of its technology dollars.

Discussion: A quote was requested from Dell Marketing L.P. for the Microsoft Enterprise Renewal based on the Riverside County Master Agreement (ITARC-00934 (8084445)). Please refer to Attachment 1 for a copy of the quote from Dell. The Riverside County agreement is a cooperative-type agreement that allows any participating government agency to take advantage of cost savings. Per Municipal Code Section 1522, the City is allowed to participate in cooperative agreements. Also, since the City uses Dell equipment extensively,

it is an additional advantage to have Dell as the Microsoft licensing provider.

Staff is requesting approval of a three-year Microsoft Enterprise Agreement with Dell Marketing L.P. in the annual amount of $194,769.42, for a total three-year cost of $584,308.26.

The proposed agreement includes Microsoft 365 G3 licensing, Windows G5 Security step-up licensing, Azure Government services, additional file storage, and supporting applications such as Project, Visio, and Teams Audio Conferencing. The renewal also includes Microsoft 365 Copilot licensing to support productivity and efficiency improvements across the organization.

The requested approval also authorizes Staff to process and pay the annual true-up of licensed products. The annual true-up accounts for any additional users and/or servers deployed during the contract year, with the City responsible for the associated licensing costs.

A budget amendment is also requested for approval to support the increased cost of the agreement. The current fiscal year budget includes $140,500 for Microsoft licensing; however, the annual cost under the proposed agreement is $194,769.42. The increase is primarily due to annual cost escalation and the addition of licenses during the prior three-year agreement term. The IT Team further analyzed where savings might be possible by reviewing all license counts to determine if any were not necessary. The results of that analysis did reduce the cost of the annual license by a little over $17,787 and is factored into the additional $54,269.42. Therefore, an increase to the current year appropriation of $54,269.42 is required to fund the agreement. The additional appropriation will be funded by the indirect cost allocation.

Recommended Action: Approve a three-year renewal of the Microsoft Enterprise Licensing Agreement with Dell Marketing, Inc., at an annual cost of $194,769.42, for a total three-year cost of $584,308.26, plus annual true-up costs for installed licensed products, and approve the associated budget amendment.

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 20913910.54320: $140,500
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 20913910.54320: $194,769.42
FINANCING SOURCE: IT Fund Allocation
REVENUE: No GRANT: No
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: 2223-198
COORDINATED WITH: Myles Fisette, Purchasing Manager; Oliver MacDonald, Finance Controller STRATEGIC PLAN (SP): N/A
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP): N/A

Gerard Ear
[email protected]
512.720.3258
Customer: City of Ukiah
Contract: Riverside County Master Agreement - ITARC-00934 (8084445) Date of Issue: 4/13/2026 Microsoft Enterprise Agreement (EA) #: (renewal of 5888562, 4/30/2026) Quote Expires: 4/30/2026 Dell Customer# 6971104 Quote#: UkiahEA41326
Product Description Mfg# Quantity Unit Price Ext. Price CIS Suite Datacenter Core ALng SA 2coreLic 9GS-00135 72 $187.94 $13,531.68 CIS Suite Standard Core ALng SA 2coreLic 9GA-00313 36 $40.06 $1,442.16 SQL Server Standard Core ALng SA 2coreLic 7NQ-00292 6 $662.43 $3,974.58 Annual Payment Section 1: $18,948.42
Product Description Mfg# Quantity Months Unit Price Ext. Price Enterprise Online Services Products
M365 G3 Unified FUSL GCC Sub Per User AAD-34704 270 12 $32.94 $106,725.60 Win G5 Step-up Win G3 GCC AAF-21855 270 12 $4.59 $14,871.60 Additional Online Services Products
M365 F3 Unified GCC Sub Per User AAD-63092 70 12 $7.10 $5,964.00 Power Automate Premium GCC Sub Per User 1O5-00001 1 12 $13.72 $164.64 Azure prepayment - US Gov J5U-00001 4 12 $104.00 $4,992.00 M365 Copilot GCC Sub Add-on EP2-24658 15 12 $31.20 $5,616.00 O365 Extra File Storage GCC Sub Add-on Extra Storage 1 GB (6,144 = 6TB) M9T-00002 6144 12 $0.18 $13,271.04 Project P3 From SA GCC Sub Per User 7E7-00001 3 12 $19.84 $714.24 Teams Audio Conferencing with Dial Out US/CA GCC Sub Add-on ($0.00) NYH-00001 345 12 $0.00 $0.00 Visio P2 From SA GCC Sub Per User 9K4-00003 3 12 $9.92 $357.12 Annual Payment Section 2: $152,676.24
Notes: Total Annual Payment Yr 1 $171,624.66
Microsoft Enterprise Agreement (EA) Master#: 8084445 Total Annual Payment Yr 2 $171,624.66 Microsoft Enterprise Agreement (EA) Enrollment#: Future/TBD Total Annual Payment Yr 3 $171,624.66 Total of 3 years of Payments $514,873.98
Dell Quote for 3 year Microsoft EA Renewal adding 70 M365 F3 + 1 Power Automate Premium GCC users for renewal of 5888562 expiring 4/30/2026 Notes:

Quote prepared by: Chris A Johnson
Section 1- Licenses and Software Assurance
Section 2- Monthly Subscriptions

Agenda Item No: 8.d.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 4/15/2026

ITEM NO: 2026-187

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of Purchase of Multiple Fleet Replacement Vehicles for Fiscal Year 2025/26 from Visalia Ford for a Total of $439,535.18.

DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: Myles Fisette, Purchasing Manager PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Vehicle Justifications

2. Ford F-150 Lightning Letter

3. Fleet Bid Tabulations

4. Visalia Ford Bids

5. 8d Staff Correspondence Received - Myles Fisette, Purchasing Manager Summary: Council will consider approval of the purchase of multiple replacement fleet vehicles for various City departments for Fiscal Year 2025/26 from Visalia Ford for a total of $439,535.18, in accordance with the City’s Fleet Replacement Plan and department vehicle justifications.

Background: The City maintains a diverse fleet that supports core municipal operations, including Water Resources, Wastewater, Electric Utility, Finance/Utility Billing and Finance/Purchasing. To ensure reliability, safety, and cost-effective operations, the City uses a structured fleet replacement process that evaluates age, mileage/hours of use, maintenance history, operational role, and compliance with applicable standards such as California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirements.

As part of the FY 2025/26 budget development process, departments submitted Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification forms (Attachment 1) documenting the need to replace specific units or add new vehicles where operational demands have increased. These requests were reviewed by the Fleet Manager and department heads to confirm that replacements are necessary, alternatives have been considered, and the proposed vehicles are appropriately sized and specified for their intended functions.

Discussion: In December 2025, Ford notified fleet customers (Attachment 2) that production of the current F-150 Lightning has ended and that Ford is shifting its truck electrification strategy toward future hybrid, Extended-Range Electric Vehicle (EREV), and new EV platforms beginning in 2027 and 2029. In light of this announcement and the uncertainty around near-term availability and lifecycle support for the current F-150 Lightning, Staff is not recommending an F-150 Lightning EV truck for this role at this time and instead proposes acquisition of a conventionally powered light-duty pickups, while continuing to monitor upcoming EV and hybrid offerings for future replacement cycles.

The proposed FY 2025/26 fleet actions include a combination of replacement and new-request vehicles across several departments, summarized as follows.
• Wastewater Treatment Plant
o Replacement of aging Ford F-250 and similar trucks used daily for operation and maintenance of the Water & Sewer System, Booster Pump Stations, lift stations, the Wastewater Treatment

Plant, wells, reservoirs, and the Recycled Water System. These vehicles are in fair condition with high mileage, limited remaining useful life (typically 10–15 years total), and growing maintenance needs; replacements will provide reliable, properly sized equipment for daily operations and on-call response.
• Water Treatment Plant
o Replacement of a Ford F-250 with service body and lift gate that is used for daily operation of the Water Treatment Plant, wells, reservoirs, booster stations, and on-call and recycled water duties. The new unit (2026 Ford F-250 service body with lift gate or equivalent) is expected to reduce downtime and support safe, efficient transport of tools, materials, and equipment. • Water & Sewer
o Replacement of a Ford F-350 service-body truck used daily for Water & Sewer operations, including Booster Pump Stations, lift stations, and recycled water maintenance. The existing unit has exceeded 100,000 miles and is in only fair condition; replacement will improve reliability for on-call response and routine field work. • Water & Sewer
o Replacement of a 2014 Ford F-250 Crew Cab (approx. 95,000 miles, fair condition) used daily for operation of the Water & Sewer system, Booster Pump Stations, and lift stations. The new 2026 Ford F-250 Crew Cab (or equal) will ensure reliable access to critical sites, reduce downtime associated with an aging unit approaching the end of its 10–15 year useful life, and maintain operational readiness for routine and on-call response. • Electric Utility
o Purchase of a new truck (2026 Ford F-250 Super Cab or equal) for Technical Services, with the existing Ford E-150 van to be purchased and repurposed by the Information Technology division. The new truck will better support field technical work, while the transfer of the van maximizes remaining value of an existing asset and supports internal reuse of equipment. • Finance / Utility Billing & Meter Reader
o Replacement of a 2004 Dodge Dakota, originally handed down from another department and now experiencing reliability issues with heating, air conditioning, and parts availability. A 2026 Ford F-150 (or equivalent) will provide a dependable vehicle for Utility Billing and Customer Service field work, reduce the risk of breakdowns, and ensure parts availability. • Finance – Purchasing
o New request for a Ford F-150 to support Purchasing operations across multiple City facilities.

The requested vehicle will provide dependable daily transportation for the Buyer, whose primary responsibilities include utilities-related purchasing and who is based at the EUD Hastings Service Center. This vehicle will be used for regular travel between the Service Center, Corporation Yard, Civic Center, and other City locations, as well as for the delivery and transport of inventory and routinely purchased items, and for site visits to support procurement activities.

On Mach 30, 2026, Staff issued three Request for Bids, separating the models to provide clearer bid comparison, and received multiple responses (Attachment 3). The responsive low bidder for each model was Visalia Ford (Attachment 4). We received an additional low bid for the F-350s from Peoria Ford, but the submission was missing unfit costs and the dealer agreed to withdraw their bid as non-responsive.

Collectively, these replacements and additions will improve reliability, reduce unplanned downtime, and support safe and efficient delivery of core municipal and emergency services. Several requests also note limited parts availability for older vehicles, increasing risk of extended outages if a critical component fails; replacing these units now avoids higher future maintenance costs and potential service disruptions.

Staff requests Council approve the purchase of multiple replacement fleet vehicles for various City departments for Fiscal Year 2025/26 from Visalia Ford for a total of $439,535.18.

Recommended Action: Approve purchase of multiple fleet vehicles for various City departments for Fiscal Year 2025/26 from Visalia Ford for a total of $439,535.18.

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 82027114.80100.V3285: $45,000; 84027221.80100.V3285: $45,000; 82027114.80100.V3753: $45,000; 84027221.80100.V3753: $45,000; 84027225.80100.V3720: $90,000; 82127115.80100.V3754: $70,000; 80126100.80100.V3715: $90,000; 20513300.80100.V3281: $50,000; 20413500.80100.V3735: $65,000
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: Water, Sewer, Electric, Utility Billing Fund Reserves, and Purchasing Fund Reserves REVENUE: No GRANT: No
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Dave Kirch, Fleet & Facilities Maintenance Manager STRATEGIC PLAN (SP): SP 1C - Encourage and support an environmentally sustainable and resilient community by embracing new technology, setting policy, and evaluating critical infrastructure.

GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP): GP-A4 - Public Facilities, Services, and Infrastructure Element.

ESTIMATED COST $90,000.00

FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR

SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
$9,800.00
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFIT: N/A
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: N/A
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: This vehicle will be used on a daily basis for the operation of the Water & Sewer , Booster Pump Stations and lift stations.

PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2026 Ford F-250

MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE

PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR

EACH DEPT/DIV

ESTIMATED LIFE IN ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUE

MILEAGE/HOURS
CITY EQUIPMENT # YEAR

ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
3283
MODEL

CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
84027221.80100 $45,000.00
82027114.80100
Water/Sewer 3285

ESTIMATED OUT-OF-SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS? None
100,000 miles
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:

Water Resources

DEPARTMENT(S)

PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
95000 miles
Yes
CURRENT CONDITION: Fair
$8,000.00
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification

DIVISION(S)

PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Ford F-250 Crew Cab
SUBMITTED BY: Dave Kirch, Fleet & Plan Maintenance Supervisor 75 hours Yes
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2025/2026
2014 Ford

EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED

ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE

DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: The vehicle will be used with in the department. 10,000 miles
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10-15 years
1FTFX1CTWEKG34753
VIN/SERIAL #
$45,000.00
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: Replacemnet
Attachment 1

ESTIMATED COST: $50,000

FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR

DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: The Dodge Dakota was a hand down from another department 10 years ago. Heat and air are not reliable/replacement parts are not readily available when needed 5000-7000 miles
270 No OEM and minimal after market
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:

PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: There are no or minimal truck parts that can be ordered if vehicle breaks down PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2026 Ford F-150 6/9/2025
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10-15 years
1D7GL12K54S719075
VIN/SERIAL #
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: Replacement
Finance
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2025/2026
2004 Dodge Dakota

EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED

ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
20513300.80100

DEPARTMENT(S)
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification

DIVISION(S)

PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: 2026 Ford F-150 Truck
SUBMITTED BY: Lori Martin, Utility Billing & Customer Service Manager YES
CURRENT CONDITION:
$1,000

ESTIMATED OUT-OF-SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS? 100,000
MODEL

CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
Utility Billing 3281 $50,000
87,694

PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR

EACH DEPT/DIV

ESTIMATED LIFE IN ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUE

MILEAGE/HOURS
CITY EQUIPMENT # YEAR

ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
3280

SIGNATURE
Lori Martin
DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
$14,500.00
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED:

OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: Reliability in a newer vehicle COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS:

MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE

ESTIMATED COST $90,000

FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification

DIVISION(S)

PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Ford F-250 Crew Cab
SUBMITTED BY: DAVE KIRCH, FLEET & PLANT MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2025/2026

ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10-15 YEARS
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: REPLACEMENT

DEPARTMENT(S)

MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE

PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
60,000
N/A
CURRENT CONDITION: Fair
$500.00
100 hours N/A
1997 Ford

EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED Wastewater Treatment Plant 3720

ESTIMATED OUT-OF-SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS? N/A
100,000
Water Resources
1FTCR10AXVTA69155
VIN/SERIAL #
$6,562.00
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2026 Ford F-250 Crew cab or equal 5,000 - 7,000 miles per year

PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR

EACH DEPT/DIV

ESTIMATED LIFE IN ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUE

MILEAGE/HOURS
CITY EQUIPMENT # YEAR

ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
3282
MODEL

CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
84027225.80100 $90,000.00

SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: NONE

DEPARTMENT HEAD
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: None
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: None.

COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: Based on past history, use of the vehicles should extend well beyond the standard useful life of 5-10 year, to most likely 10-15 years. Based on this estimation, the cost for the vehicle alone will be approximately $4,400 per year. The benefit it will provide is the necessary equipment needed for staff to perform adequate maintenance and operation of the Wastewater Treatment Plant and an easier ability to deliver samples tothe off-site lab.

JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: The vehicle will be used on a daily basis to operate and maintain the Wastewater Treatment Plant facility. This includes pond level inspection, transporting tools/supplies and equipment as well as samples to the off-site lab for analysis. The new vehicle will be more size appropriate than the current one

ESTIMATED COST $50,000.00

FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR

SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

DEPARTMENT HEAD
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED:None
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: None.

COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: EV vehicle lower maintenance cost to maintain JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED:

PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2026 FORD F-150 EV PRO TRUCK OR EQUAL

PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR

EACH DEPT/DIV

ESTIMATED LIFE IN ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUE

MILEAGE/HOURS
CITY EQUIPMENT # YEAR

ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
MODEL

CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
Purchasing 3735 20413500.80100 $60,000.00

ESTIMATED OUT-OF-SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS? N/A
Finance
VIN/SERIAL #
N/A

MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE

PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
No
CURRENT CONDITION:

N/A N/A

EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification

DIVISION(S)

PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Ford F-150 Pick-Up EV
SUBMITTED BY: DAVE KIRCH, FLEET & PLANT MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2025/2026

ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10-15 YEARS
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: New Request

DEPARTMENT(S)

ESTIMATED COST $85,000.00

FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR

DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: None
5,000-7,000 miles
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10-15 years
1FDNF205X7EA61120
VIN/SERIAL #
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: Replacemnet
230 hours Yes
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2025/26
2007 Ford

EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED

ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification

DIVISION(S)

PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Ford F-250 with Service Body and Lift Gate
SUBMITTED BY: Dave Kirch, Fleet & Plan Maintenance Supervisor REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:

Water Resources

DEPARTMENT(S)

PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
133,000
Yes
CURRENT CONDITION: Fair
$5,000.00

ESTIMATED OUT-OF-SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS? None
100,000 miles
MODEL

CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
Water Treatment Plant 3754 82027111.80100 $85,000.00
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: This vehicle will be used on a daily basis for the operation of the Water Treatment Plant, Water Wells, Reservoirs and Booster Pump Stations. This vehicle will also be used at the On-Call vehicle. This vehicle will also be used for operation and maintenance of the Recycled Water System
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY):2026 Ford F250 Service Body and Lift Gate

MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE

PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR

EACH DEPT/DIV

ESTIMATED LIFE IN ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUE

MILEAGE/HOURS
CITY EQUIPMENT # YEAR

ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
3746

SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
$22,500.00
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: N/A
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: N/A

ESTIMATED COST $90,000.00

FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR

DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: The vehicle being replaced will be transferred to another deparment. 10,000 miles
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10-15 years
1FDBF3A61EEB27664
VIN/SERIAL #
$45,000.00
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: Replacemnet
100 hours Yes
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2025/2026
2014 Ford

EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED

ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification

DIVISION(S)

PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Ford F-350 with Service Body
SUBMITTED BY: Dave Kirch, Fleet & Plan Maintenance Supervisor REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:

Water Resources

DEPARTMENT(S)

PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
101300 miles
Yes
CURRENT CONDITION: Fair
$15,000.00

ESTIMATED OUT-OF-SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS? None
100,000 miles
MODEL

CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
84027221.80100 $45,000.00
82027221.80100
Water/Sewer 3753
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: This vehicle will be used on a daily basis for the operation of the Water & Sewer , Booster Pump Stations and lift stations. This vehicle will also be used as the On-Call vehicle water & sewer. This vehicle will also be used for operation and maintenance of the Recycled Water System
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2026 Ford F350 Service Body

MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE

PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR

EACH DEPT/DIV

ESTIMATED LIFE IN ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUE

MILEAGE/HOURS
CITY EQUIPMENT # YEAR

ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
3739

SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
$13,500.00
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: N/A
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: N/A

ESTIMATED COST: $90,000

FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR

DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: N/A
5000 to 8000
150 No OEM just aftermarket
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:

PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED:

PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2026 Ford-F250 Super Cab 7000, ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 5-10 YEARS
FTNE14W88DA64805
VIN/SERIAL #
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: New Request
Electric
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2025/2026
2007 Ford E150

EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED

ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
80126100.80100

DEPARTMENT(S)
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification

DIVISION(S)

PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: TRUCK - TECHNICAL SERVICES
SUBMITTED BY: Cindy Sauers, Electric Utility Director
yes
CURRENT CONDITION: Good. The Information Technology department is planning on purchasing the van and outfitting it for their use. $8,000

ESTIMATED OUT-OF-SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS? 100,000
MODEL

CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
Technical Services 3715 $90,000
104,748

PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR

EACH DEPT/DIV

ESTIMATED LIFE IN ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUE

MILEAGE/HOURS
CITY EQUIPMENT # YEAR

ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
V3001

SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
$18,216.00
$7,800.00
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: N/A
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: N/A

MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE

December 15th, 2025
Attention Valued Customers –
I wanted to reach out personally following Ford’s announcement today to ensure you understand the key parts of the news and how it impacts your fleet. We have announced changes to our product lineup that aƯect our vehicle portfolio both today and in the future.

Immediate Changes to the F-150 Lightning
The primary change aƯecting our current lineup concerns the all-electric F-150 Lightning.

We have announced that production of the current F-150 Lightning has ended. If your business has already placed fleet orders for 26MY F-150 Lightning trucks, our Ford Pro sales team and account managers will be in touch. We will follow-up on all orders in the coming days to discuss any alternative options available to you.

Continuing Our Commitment to Electrification
Despite this shift, we remain committed to providing electric solutions where they make the most sense for your business. We will continue to oƯer the all-electric Mustang Mach-E and E-Transit models for fleets looking to deploy fully electric vehicles immediately.

Future Roadmap: Hybrids, EREVs, and New EV Platforms
Moving forward, we are shifting our powertrain strategy to focus more on aƯordable electric vehicles and an expanded range of hybrid models. This includes the debut of a new EREV (Extended Range Electric Vehicle) technology in our lineup.  Starting in 2027: We will focus our fully electric lineup around our newly developed UEV (Universal Electric Vehicle) platform. This advanced platform will feature incredible software capabilities and underpin multiple aƯordable vehicles in our lineup – starting with a new pick-up truck in 2027.
 Starting from 2029: I am excited to confirm that Ford will launch a new wave of vehicles designed to support your business, including a new F-150 Lightning as an EREV that will target an estimated 700+ miles of range, a new gas and hybridpowered van, and new gas-powered "Built Ford Tough" pickup trucks, including a new Super Duty with multiple powertrain choices.

Attachment 2

New Opportunity: Battery Energy Storage
Finally, I wanted to share a new area of business that we have just announced. Ford plans to shift manufacturing to advanced 5-megawatt-hour battery energy storage systems designed for U.S. industrial and commercial customers. LFP prismatic cells, BESS modules and 20-ft DC container systems are planned to be manufactured starting in 2027. If you think there could be a need for your business in this space, you can register your interest at [email protected].

I wanted you to hear this news directly from me. We deeply value our partnership, and I look forward to talking to you more, and sharing more details about these new technologies and products soon.

The full details of our announcement can be found here:
https://www.fromtheroad.ford.com/us/en/articles/2025/ford-reinvests-trucks-hybridsaƯordable-electric-vehicles Sincerely,
Matt Atkenson
Executive Director, Ford Pro N.A. Sales & Operations

Matt Atkenson Eric Rice
Exec Director General Manager
Sales & Operations Commercial & Government Sales

ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL 1 TRUCK #1 2026 FORD F-150 4X4
REGULAR CAB 122.5 WHEELBASE OR

EQUIVALENT AS PER EQUIPMENT
SPECIFICATION.
1 $ 41,155.75 $ 41,155.75 $ 41,364.68 $ 41,364.68 $ 41,746.75 $ 41,746.75 $ 42,194.00 $ 42,194.00 $ 42,154.33 $ 42,154.33 $ 48,300.00 $ 48,300.00 $ 44,870.00 $ 44,870.00 2 TRUCK #2 2026 FORD F-150 4X4
REGULAR CAB 122.5 WHEELBASE OR

EQUIVALENT AS PER EQUIPMENT
SPECIFICATION.
1 $ 47,505.75 $ 47,505.75 $ 47,925.00 $ 47,925.00 $ 48,884.75 $ 48,884.75 $ 49,344.00 $ 49,344.00 $ 49,354.33 $ 49,354.33 $ 48,300.00 $ 48,300.00 $ 51,870.00 $ 51,870.00 3 TRUCK #3 2026 FORD F-150 4X4
REGULAR CAB 122.5 WHEELBASE OR

EQUIVALENT AS PER EQUIPMENT
SPECIFICATION.
1 $ 47,505.75 $ 47,505.75 $ 47,925.00 $ 47,925.00 $ 48,884.75 $ 48,884.75 $ 49,344.00 $ 49,344.00 $ 49,354.33 $ 49,354.33 $ 48,300.00 $ 48,300.00 $ 51,870.00 $ 51,870.00 SUBTOTAL $ 136,167.25 $ 137,214.68 $ 139,516.25 $ 140,882.00 $ 140,862.99 $ 144,900.00 $ 148,610.00 TAX $ 12,084.84 $ 12,177.80 $ 12,382.07 $ 12,503.28 $ 12,501.59 $ 12,859.88 $ 13,189.14 FREIGHT $ - $ 1,699.95 $ 750.00 $ - $ - $ 675.00 $ -
GRAND TOTAL $ 148,252.09 $ 151,092.43 $ 152,648.32 $ 153,385.28 $ 153,364.58 $ 158,434.88 $ 161,799.14 Lead Time 150 DAYS 2-4 MONTHS 180 DAYS 180 DAYS 3-6 MONTHS 120 DAYS 3-4 MONTHS

HANSEL FORD

SANTA ROSA, CA
2025 Ford F-150 or Equivalent
BIDS DUE 4/3/2026

VISALIA FORD

VISALIA, CA

PEORIA FORD

PEORIA, AZ

SAGER FORD

ST HELENA, CA

HARPER MOTORS

EUREKA, CA

DUPRATT FORD

DIXON, CA

MADERA FORD

MADERA, CA
Attachment 3

ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL EQUIVALENT UNIT TOTAL 1 TRUCK #1 2026 FORD 4X4 F-250-XL
CREW CAB, 6 ¾ BOX 160” WHEELBASE

OR EQUIVALENT AS PER EQUIPMENT
SPECIFICATION.
1 $ 55,751.75 $ 55,751.75 $ 55,928.75 $ 55,928.75 $ 56,300.68 $ 56,300.68 $ 56,648.00 $ 56,648.00 $ 61,105.00 $ 61,105.00 2026 RAM
2500 BIG
HORN 4X4
$ 60,683.75 $ 60,683.75
2 TRUCK #1 2026 FORD 4X4 F-250-XL
CREW CAB, 6 ¾ BOX 160” WHEELBASE

OR EQUIVALENT AS PER EQUIPMENT
SPECIFICATION.
1 $ 62,101.75 $ 62,101.75 $ 62,928.80 $ 62,928.80 $ 63,225.68 $ 63,225.68 $ 63,648.00 $ 63,648.00 $ 68,105.00 $ 68,105.00 2026 RAM
2500 BIG
HORN 4X4
$ 60,683.75 $ 60,683.75
SUBTOTAL $ 117,853.50 $ 118,857.55 $ 119,526.36 $ 120,296.00 $ 129,210.00 $ 121,367.50 TAX $ 10,459.50 $ 10,548.61 $ 10,607.96 $ 10,676.27 $ 11,467.39 $ 10,771.37 FREIGHT $ - $ 500.00 $ 1,133.30 $ 750.00 $ - $ -
GRAND TOTAL $ 128,313.00 $ 129,906.16 $ 131,267.62 $ 131,722.27 $ 140,677.39 $ 132,138.87 Lead Time 150 DAYS 180 DAYS 2-4 MONTHS 3-4 MONTHS 120 DAYS

ELK GROVE AUTO

ELK GROVE, CA
2025 Ford F-250 or Equivalent
BIDS DUE 4/3/2026

HANSEL FORD

SANTA ROSA, CA

VISALIA FORD

VISALIA, CA

SAGER FORD

ST HELENA, CA

PEORIA FORD

PEORIA, AZ

MADERA FORD

MADERA, CA

ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL 1 TRUCK #1 2026 FORD 4X4 F-350-XL
SUPER CAB, 8 BOX 164” WHEELBASE

TRUCK OR EQUIVALENT AS PER
EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION.
1 $ 53,800.68 $ 53,800.68 $ 72,572.75 $ 72,572.75 $ 72,621.68 $ 72,621.68 $ 73,220.75 $ 73,220.75 $ 78,636.00 $ 78,636.00 2 TRUCK #1 2026 FORD 4X4 F-350-XL
SUPER CAB, 8 BOX 164” WHEELBASE

TRUCK OR EQUIVALENT AS PER
EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION.
1 $ 53,925.68 $ 53,925.68 $ 77,112.75 $ 77,112.75 $ 77,261.00 $ 77,261.00 $ 78,534.75 $ 78,534.75 $ 84,284.00 $ 84,284.00 SUBTOTAL $ 107,726.36 $ 149,685.50 $ 149,882.68 $ 151,755.50 $ 162,920.00 TAX $ 9,560.71 $ 13,284.59 $ 13,302.09 $ 13,468.30 $ 14,459.15 FREIGHT $ 1,133.30 $ - $ 750.00 $ 500.00 $ -
GRAND TOTAL $ 118,420.37 $ 162,970.09 $ 163,934.77 $ 165,723.80 $ 177,379.15 Lead Time 2-4 MONTHS 150 DAYS 120 DAYS 180 DAYS 3-4 MONTHS Non-responsive
2025 Ford F-350 or Equivalent
BIDS DUE 4/3/2026

SAGER FORD

ST HELENA, CA

HANSEL FORD

SANTA ROSA, CA

PEORIA FORD

PEORIA , AZ

VISALIA FORD

VISALIA, CA

MADERA FORD

MADERA, CA

Attachment 4

MEMORANDUM
300 Seminary Avenue • Ukiah • CA • 95482
Phone: (707) 463-6200 · Fax: (707) 463-6204 ·www.cityofukiah.com Date: 4/14/2026
To: Ukiah City Council
Cc: City Clerk
From: Myles Fisette, Purchasing Manager
Subject: Item 8.d. – Approval of Purchase of Multiple Fleet Replacement Vehicles for Fiscal Year 2025/26 from Visalia Ford for a Total of $439,535.18.

This memo is to inform the City Council members of the details surrounding the recommended fleet purchases and the availability of electric vehicle options.

The recommended fleet purchases presented under Agenda Item 8.d. are the result of a competitive, transparent procurement process and reflect the City’s ongoing commitment to maintaining reliable, safe, and operationally effective equipment for essential services. As part of this process, the City released Requests for Bids that were publicly advertised through our online bidding platform, which distributed notifications to over 500 registered dealers and vendors. The bid documents explicitly invited vendors to submit alternative proposals, including electric and hybrid vehicle options. Throughout this process staff also evaluated cost impacts across all funding sources, with particular attention given to vehicles funded by the Sewer Fund due to current budget constraints, and prioritized cost effective options that meet operational needs while minimizing financial impact. Despite this broad outreach and flexibility in submittals, the City did not receive any bids offering electric or hybrid vehicles.

In addition, under Agenda Item 8.e., the City issued a separate solicitation that was specifically limited to electric vehicle models only. This solicitation also resulted in zero bid responses, not only from Ford, but from all major manufacturers and dealers, including Chevrolet, GMC, Dodge, and others. After satisfying the City’s competitive procurement requirements through this unsuccessful solicitation, staff proceeded with direct outreach to dealerships to identify any available options. This direct inquiry process ultimately allowed staff to locate a 2025 model year EV that was still in existing dealer inventory; however, it further demonstrated the limited availability of EVs in the current market that meet municipal fleet specifications. It is also important to note that this vehicle was pursued specifically to meet the requirements of an applicable grant program, which mandated the purchase of an electric vehicle.

Many of the vehicles included in this procurement are used in field based operations that support core City services. These applications require vehicles that can reliably support the transport of personnel, tools, materials, and equipment across multiple sites on a daily basis. As a result, staff must ensure that fleet vehicles provide sufficient capacity, operational flexibility, and dependable performance over extended use throughout the workday and under varying conditions.

ITEM 8.D. PAGE 2 April 15, 2026
The absence of EV bids is not due to a lack of interest or effort by the City but rather reflects the limited availability of commercially produced electric and hybrid truck models that meet municipal fleet specifications. At this time, there are very few manufacturers offering vehicles in this class, and those that do exist are either not available for order, have limited production, or do not support the configurations required for municipal use. As a result, vendors are often unable to submit responsive bids for these vehicle types. This constraint is further compounded by ongoing industry transitions, including the discontinuation of certain electric truck models and a shift by manufacturers toward future platforms that are not expected to be available for several years.

Routine replacement of fleet vehicles, particularly trucks, is essential to ensure the City can continue to deliver services efficiently and effectively. As vehicles age, they experience increased wear and reduced reliability, limiting their ability to perform the same duties as when they were first placed into service. Older vehicles also require more frequent repairs, and replacement parts often become more difficult and expensive to obtain as models are phased out. Additionally, modern vehicles rely heavily on integrated software systems and maintaining or updating outdated software platforms can become increasingly costly or infeasible over time. Delaying replacement of aging units can lead to higher long term costs, increased downtime, and potential disruptions to critical public services.

While no EVs are recommended with this current bid, the City remains committed to monitoring advancements in electric and hybrid vehicle technology and will continue to evaluate opportunities for fleet electrification as the market evolves and as vehicles become available that meet operational and financial requirements. The current recommendation reflects a balanced approach that prioritizes service reliability, fiscal responsibility, and readiness, while positioning the City to adopt emerging technologies when they are viable for municipal use.

Agenda Item No: 8.e.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 4/15/2026

ITEM NO: 2026-628

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of a Budget Amendment for the Purchase of a Vehicle in the Amount of $71,169.88 for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Grant Agreement for the Climate Resilient Forests Project and Receive Notification of the Planned Purchase.

DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: Mary Horger, Assistant Finance Director, Erica Valencia, Finance Controller
PRESENTER: Daniel Buffalo, Director of Finance
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Madera Ford Proposal
Summary: Staff requests Council approve a budget amendment for the purchase of a vehicle in the amount $71,169.88 for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) grant agreement for the Climate Resilient Forests Project, to be financed through an internal lease/purchase arrangement between the General Fund and the grant fund with quarterly repayments over 24 months. Staff is also providing notification to the City Council of the planned purchase in accordance with the City’s purchasing thresholds.

Background: The CAL FIRE Grant Agreement No. 8FG23408 for the City of Ukiah Climate Resilient Forests Project (Climate Resilient Forests Grant) provides funding to support the expansion and long-term sustainability of the City’s urban forest, including resources necessary for implementation, maintenance, and field operations.

The approved grant budget included funding for a vehicle to support program operations. Staff initially pursued a lease/purchase arrangement with an external vendor, consistent with the original grant assumptions.

However, after issuing a solicitation, no responsive bids were received.

Discussion: The Request for Bids (RFB) was issued by Staff on March 25, 2026. By releasing the RFB to the public, Staff satisfied the City's requirement for a competitive process. Following the unsuccessful solicitation, Staff searched for a vehicle to meet the specification requirements and obtained a quote from Madera Ford for a 2025 Ford F-150 Lightning. The negotiated total purchase price is $71,169.88. Please refer to Attachment 1 for a copy of the proposal. While recent broader fleet procurement efforts identified limited availability and uncertainty surrounding the current model of the Ford F-150 Lightning, this specific vehicle was available due to it being a prior model year unit remaining in dealer inventory. As a result, Staff was able to secure a compliant vehicle that meets the project specifications within the required timeframe. This opportunity allowed the City to proceed with the purchase despite the broader market constraints noted in other procurement efforts.

The Climate Resilient Forests Grant will fund up to $40,000 of the vehicle cost, with the remaining balance to be funded by the General Fund. Due to the inability to secure an external lease option, Staff is proposing an alternative financing approach through an interfund vehicle lease agreement. Under this structure, the General Fund will fund the upfront purchase of the vehicle, and the Climate Resilient Forests Grant fund will reimburse the General Fund through quarterly lease payments over a 24-month period.

As with a typical vehicle lease agreement, the grant will have exclusive use to the vehicle during the lease

term, at the end of which the vehicle will be transferred to the Parks Division. This approach achieves the same financial intent as originally planned while ensuring compliance with grant funding limitations and allowing the City to procure the necessary equipment in a timely manner.

In accordance with the City’s purchasing thresholds, purchases between $60,000 and $75,000 require notification to Council but do not require prior approval. This report serves as notification of the planned purchase.

A budget amendment is required to establish the necessary expenditure authority and to properly account for the interfund financing arrangement. Staff requests Council approve a budget amendment for the purchase of a vehicle for the Ukiah Climate Resilient Forests Project, as well as receiving notification of this planned purchase.

Recommended Action: Approve a budget amendment for the purchase of a vehicle in the amount of $71,169.88 for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection grant agreement for the Climate Resilient Forests Project and receive notification of the planned purchase.

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 10023800.46130.VXXX: $0; 10023800.80100.VXXX: $0 PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 10023800.46130.VXXX: $40,000; 10023800.80100.VXXX: $71,170 FINANCING SOURCE: General Fund: $31,170; CAL FIRE Grant Agreement No. 8FG23408 (City of Ukiah Climate Resilient Forests Project), funded through the Inflation Reduction Act Urban and Community Forestry Program: $40,000
REVENUE: No GRANT: No
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Myles Fisette, Purchasing Manager; Aaron Yang, Urban Forest Manager STRATEGIC PLAN (SP): SP 1B - Provide services that support a high quality of life for all residents, including fostering diverse, inclusive, sustainable, and accessible neighborhoods.SP 2B - Identify and/or develop funding for essential and vital infrastructure for the long-term.SP 2A - Continue the development and maintenance of a comprehensive Capital Improvement Plan that considers the climate impacts of those improvements.

GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP): GP-A5 - Environment and Sustainability Element, Goal ENV-2: To maintain and enhance the urban forest to create a sense of urban space and cohesiveness with the surrounding natural environment.

ATTACHMENT 1

Fuel Economy and Environment
S
m
artphone
QR Code™
fueleconomy.gov
Calculate personalized estimates and compare vehicles
Annual fuel cost Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating (tailpipe only) Smog Rating (tailpipe only) You
over 5 years
compared to the
average new vehicle. 72 79 65 47
0 50 100 150 200 250

13.7 (240V) 300
Standard Pickup Trucks range from 12 to
87 MPGe. The best vehicle rates 140
MPGe. $3,750
$1,150 2
€B^^^B€
j9F=jr

MvG<
€B^^^B€
$<$/+5Ys>1
7rcdR2'
*6
b€^
VGvClf*A/9LXq8R(>FPyA
@!///!@
w} ]cO
)oe€
*~hOrG
AAAAAAA
AAAA
AA
A

AAAA

A
A

This vehicle emits 0 grams CO per mile. The best emits 0 grams per mile (tailpipe only). Does not include emissions from generating electricity, learn more at fueleconomy.gov.

Actual results will vary for many reasons, including driving conditions and how you drive and maintain your vehicle. The average new vehicle gets 28 MPG and costs $9,500 to fuel over 5 years. Cost estimates are based on 15,000 miles per year at $.16 per kW-hr. MPGe is miles per gasoline gallon equivalent. Vehicle emissions are a significant cause of climate change and smog.

Fuel Economy
combined city/hwy
MPGe
city highway kW-hrs per
100 miles Driving Range
When fully fueled, vehicle can travel about...
miles Charge Time: hours
save in fuel costs Not Rated Not Rated Not Rated Not Rated Not Rated ĀÂÞÞÞÂĀ„Û¸íЍ”¹¦»Ä¤­äýЁĀÂÞÞÞÂĀ
¢“¡›¯«œ±öÝõׁõ¦Žî‘ïáêÊÅùªœ©ŽˆŠŽœ
¬²ƒªºÑÖ½À¬ÿ°
ò§¬žô ³Ïûöɋÿ±‘¹Åô‡
¬³‹ƒÛã¬éþíÊ­÷ޏíÙáÅÍè»õ
Ā™Ëé°Ð£Ëò
ý
õõõ
ý¥Áå‰Å¡Ù©É™¡¥ÅýÅáéñɁ¥Ñ
Scan The QR Code to
get more details about
this vehicle
1FT6W3LU6SWG29027
ĬēĂĐĞćġĄĖğćĝġđăĊāăĈĬ
REV-012684 CA 9-NORMAL,NB,012684,SJ101 14142 120250929
BLEND 8059 W
CERTCERTCERT TRD RAMPBUMPCAMPBOOKEXFLROTABATT 1FT6W3LU6 SWG29027 NB VU12

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION
F-150 LIGHTNING SW G29027
2025 F-150 4X4 SUPERCREW EXTERIOR
145" WHEELBASE OXFORD WHITE
123KWH EXT BAT-SINGLE CHGR INTERIOR

SINGLE-SPEED TRANSMISSION SLATE ACTIVE X TRIMMED
1202509298059
ƬŏƈśƐťƦŚƧijƃŒƥŊƒţƪœŸijƘĸƌŨžŗ
ƬŕŌůűŁƘũŮƝijŭŅŏƎĹŐĿžŚƤŲƀƌĺƂ
ƬňƉřŁƦŽƔŰńĽƜŏōźƎŠƔĭƋƐĿřŘŤŗ
ƩʼnƉƁũŁűʼnřŁőũšŁƑŹƙĹƙšőƑƩƁűƁ
031785
81/218
Madera Ford TOTAL MSRP 200 Madera Avenue
Madera CA 93637
72V 486
Madera Ford 72V 486
200 Madera Avenue
Madera CA 93637

GFX-ROTUNDA
13750 ROTUNDA DR

DEARBORN MI
CA84

SOLD TO RAMP ONE

SHIP TO (IF OTHER THAN SOLD TO) RAMP TWO

SHIP THROUGH
$75,435.00

FINAL ASSEMBLY PLANT

ROUGE ELECTRIC
METHOD OF TRANSP.

CONVOY
ITEM #:
72-0423 O/T 2
SJ101 N RB 2X 570 012684 09 10 25

INCLUDED ON THIS VEHICLE
EQUIPMENT GROUP 312A
ŸFLASH

OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT/OTHER
.20" ALLOY DARK CARBONIZED GRA
.ZERO EMISSIONS VEHICLE
.275/60R20 BSW ALL-SEASON
8550# GVWR PACKAGE

FRONT LICENSE PLATE BRACKET NO CHARGE
FLOOR LINER - TRAY STYLE 200.00
BLUECRUISE EQUIP: 1 YEAR PLAN 495.00
MAX TRAILER TOW PACKAGE 1,100.00
.ELECTRIC DRIVE E-LOCK RR AXLE
.INTEGRATED TRAILER BRAKE CONT
MOBILE POWER CORD (120V/240V) 600.00
BEDLINER-TOUGHBED SPRAYIN*ACCY 625.00

DEALER INSTALLED OPTIONS
SecuriCodeÖ Wireless Keyless E 225.00

PRICE INFORMATION
BASE PRICE $69,995.00
TOTAL OPTIONS/OTHER 3,245.00
____________
TOTAL VEHICLE & OPTIONS/OTHER 73,240.00
DESTINATION & DELIVERY 2,195.00
(MSRP)(MSRP)
Proudly designed and
engineered in Michigan by
the Ford Model e Electric
Vehicle Team.
23_frd_f15l_xlt_scc5_oxwh.jpg

STANDARD EQUIPMENT INCLUDED AT NO EXTRA CHARGE

EXTERIOR
Ÿ BOX LIGHTING-LED
Ÿ DOOR HANDLES - BODY COLOR
Ÿ HEADLAMPS - AUTO HIGH BEAM
Ÿ HEADLAMPS - AUTOLAMP
(ON/OFF)
Ÿ LED PROJECTOR W/ DYNAMIC

BENDING HEADLAMPS
Ÿ LOCKING REMOVABLE TAILGATE
Ÿ MEGA POWER FRUNK
Ÿ MIRRORS - HTD, PWR GLASS/

MANUAL-FOLD/TURN SIGNALS
Ÿ PICKUP BOX TIE DOWN HOOKS
Ÿ POWER UP/DOWN FRONT HOOD

INTERIOR
Ÿ 10-WAY PWR DRV & MULTI-ADJ

PWR FRT PASS
Ÿ 12" DIGITAL INSTRMNT CLSTR
Ÿ 1TOUCH UP/DOWN DR/PASS WIN
Ÿ 60/40 FOLD-UP REAR BENCH
Ÿ A/C W/DUAL CLIMATE CONTROL
Ÿ ACTIVEX WRAPPED STR WHEEL
Ÿ AUTO-DIM REARVIEW MIRROR
Ÿ HEATED STEERING WHEEL
Ÿ ILLUMINATED ENTRY
Ÿ MESSAGE CTR: OUTSIDE TEMP,

COMPASS, TRIP COMPUTER
Ÿ PEDALS - POWER ADJUSTABLE
Ÿ POWERPOINT - 2 120V
Ÿ REAR-WINDOW DEFROSTER

FUNCTIONAL
Ÿ 360-DEGREE CAMERA
Ÿ ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL
Ÿ B&O SOUND SYSTEM, 8 SPKR
Ÿ BLIS W/CROSS-TRAFFIC ALERT
Ÿ CLASS IV TRAILER HITCH
Ÿ EVASIVE STEERING ASSIST
Ÿ FORDPASS® CONNECT
Ÿ FORWARD SENSING SYSTEM
Ÿ INTELL ACCESS W/PUSH START
Ÿ LANE-KEEPING SYSTEM
Ÿ PRE-COLLISION ASSIST W/AEB
Ÿ SYNC®4A W/EVR & 15.5" SCRN
Ÿ TOW TECHNOLOGY PKG
Ÿ WIRELESS APPLE CARPLAY®
AND ANDROID AUTO™

SAFETY/SECURITY
Ÿ ADVANCETRAC™ WITH RSC®
Ÿ AIRBAGS - FRONT SEAT

MOUNTED SIDE IMPACT
Ÿ AIRBAGS - SAFETY CANOPY®
Ÿ LED CTR HIGH MNT STOP LAMP
Ÿ PERIMETER ALARM
Ÿ SOS POST-CRASH ALERT SYS™

WARRANTY
Ÿ 3YR/36,000 BUMPER / BUMPER
Ÿ 5YR/60,000 POWERTRAIN
Ÿ 5YR/60,000 ROADSIDE ASSIST
Ÿ 5YR/60,000 SAFETY

RESTRAINT SYS
Ÿ 8YR/100,000 ELECTRIC

VEHICLE COMPONENTS

Agenda Item No: 8.f.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 4/15/2026

ITEM NO: 2026-646

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of Contract Amendment with EBA Engineering for Additional Design, Permitting and Document Submittals for the City of Ukiah Landfill Closure Project in the Amount of $145,330 and Approval of Corresponding Budget Amendment.

DEPARTMENT: Public Works PREPARED BY: Seth Strader, Public Works Management Analyst II PRESENTER: Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer ATTACHMENTS:

1. Original Agreement

2. Ukiah LF - Updated General Services Proposal Revised 04.07.26 Summary: The City Council will consider approving a contract amendment with EBA Engineering for additional design, permitting and document submittals for the City of Ukiah Landfill Closure Project in the amount of $145,330 and approving a corresponding budget amendment.

Background: At the regular City Council meeting on August 8, 2025, Council approved a contract with EBA Engineers to pursue landfill closure activities (Attachment 1). That agreement was intended to initiate closure work following issuance of the Fifth Amendment of Notice and Order by the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA), which established a detailed compliance schedule for monthly regulatory meetings, landfill gas monitoring, excessive gas remediation, permit applications, and final closure construction.

EBA Engineering has served as the City’s technical consultant for the landfill since 2002, preparing closure plans, supporting environmental review, coordinating with multiple agencies, and responding to evolving regulatory requirements. EBA has performed all contracted work to the Staff's satisfaction.

Discussion: EBA’s updated February 5, 2026, proposal, revised April 7, 2026 (Attachment 2), outlines additional services needed to continue addressing critical landfill closure and compliance tasks. Since approval of the original agreement in August 2025, EBA has continued work on preliminary closure assessment, responses to the Fifth Amendment of Notice and Order, surface emissions monitoring and reporting, aerial topographic survey, updates to closure and landfill gas collection system design documents, flare specifications and bid support, refuse confirmation borings, and preparation of an updated water corrective action cost estimate for financial assurance purposes. As of March 31, 2026, the original $250,000 agreement has been fully expended.

The updated proposal includes continued coordination with the Local Enforcement Agency, CalRecycle, Mendocino County Air Quality Management District, California Air Resources Board, and North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board; completion of updates to closure construction drawings, technical specifications, and the Construction Quality Assurance Plan; landfill gas system permitting support; streambed alteration permitting; preparation of draft Waste Discharge Requirements and Monitoring and Reporting Program documents; development of an updated closure engineer’s estimate by an independent third party; preparation of a Joint Technical Document addendum; and implementation of Phase I of the Excessive Gas Remediation Work Plan. EBA has indicated these design, permitting, and document submittal efforts are intended to be completed by August 2026 in advance of anticipated Regional Water Board action on closure and postclosure Waste Discharge Requirements later in 2026 or early 2027.

Some work items, such as Phase II and Phase III of the Excessive Gas Remediation Work Plan, are not included in the proposed amendment. EBA has indicated estimated costs for those phases will be provided upon completion of Phase I. Approval of this amendment will allow the City to continue moving the landfill closure effort forward, maintain compliance with regulatory requirements, and support the next phase of permitting, design, and coordination activities. The proposed contract amendment amount is $145,330. A budget amendment of $154,459.15 is requested to fund this contract amendment and true-up the existing deficit of $9,129.15 in Landfill Contracting Services for ongoing testing and compliance services.

Recommended Action: Approve contract amendment with EBA Engineering for additional design, permitting and document submittals for the City of Ukiah Landfill Closure Project in the amount of $145,330 and approve corresponding budget amendment.

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: YES
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 70024500.52100 $532,180.25
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 70024500.52100: $686,639.40
FINANCING SOURCE: Landfill Closure Funds
REVENUE: No GRANT: No
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: 2526-099
COORDINATED WITH: EBA Engineering
STRATEGIC PLAN (SP): N/A
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP): GP-A4 - Public Facilities, Services, and Infrastructure Element.

COU No. 2526-099
PAGE 1 OF 7

AGREEMENT FOR

PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
This Agreement, made and entered into this 3rd day of September, 2025 (“Effective Date”), by and between CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA, hereinafter referred to as "City" and EBA Engineering, a corporation organized and in good standing under the laws of the state of California, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant".

RECITALS
This Agreement is predicated on the following facts:
a. City requires consulting services related to Landfill Closure Consulting and Engineering Services.
b. Consultant represents that it has the qualifications, skills, experience and properly licensed to provide these services, and is willing to provide them according to the terms of this Agreement.
c. City and Consultant agree upon the Scope-of-Work and Work Schedule attached hereto as Attachment "A", describing contract provisions for the project and setting forth the completion dates for the various services to be provided pursuant to this Agreement.

TERMS OF AGREEMENT

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT

1.1 The Project is described in detail in the attached Scope-of-Work (Attachment "A").

2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES

2.1 As set forth in Attachment "A".

2.2. Additional Services. Additional services, if any, shall only proceed upon written agreement between City and Consultant. The written Agreement shall be in the form of an Amendment to this Agreement.

3.0 CONDUCT OF WORK

3.1 Time of Completion. Consultant shall commence performance of services as required by the Scope-of-Work upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed from City and shall complete such services within a reasonable timeframe as coordinated with the City. Consultant shall complete the work to the City's reasonable satisfaction, even if contract disputes arise or Consultant contends it is entitled to further compensation.

4.0 COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES

4.1 Basis for Compensation. For the performance of the professional services of this Agreement, Consultant shall be compensated on a time and expense basis not to exceed a guaranteed maximum dollar amount of $250,000. Labor charges shall be based upon hourly billing rates for the various classifications of personnel employed by Consultant to perform the Scope of Work as set forth in the attached Attachment A, ATTACHMENT 1

COU No. 2526-099
PAGE 2 OF 7
which shall include all indirect costs and expenses of every kind or nature, except direct expenses. The direct expenses and the fees to be charged for same shall be as set forth in Attachment A. Consultant shall complete the Scope of Work for the not-toexceed guaranteed maximum, even if actual time and expenses exceed that amount.

4.2 Changes. Should changes in compensation be required because of changes to the Scope-of-Work of this Agreement, the parties shall agree in writing to any changes in compensation. "Changes to the Scope-of-Work" means different activities than those described in Attachment "A" and not additional time to complete those activities than the parties anticipated on the date they entered this Agreement.

4.3 Sub-contractor Payment. The use of sub-consultants or other services to perform a portion of the work of this Agreement shall be approved by City prior to commencement of work. The cost of sub-consultants shall be included within guaranteed not-to-exceed amount set forth in Section 4.1.

4.4 Terms of Payment. Payment to Consultant for services rendered in accordance with this contract shall be based upon submission of monthly invoices for the work satisfactorily performed prior to the date of the invoice less any amount already paid to Consultant, which amounts shall be due and payable thirty (30) days after receipt by City. The invoices shall provide a description of each item of work performed, the time expended to perform each task, the fees charged for that task, and the direct expenses incurred and billed for. Invoices shall be accompanied by documentation sufficient to enable City to determine progress made and to support the expenses claimed.

5.0 ASSURANCES OF CONSULTANT

5.1 Independent Contractor. Consultant is an independent contractor and is solely responsible for its acts or omissions. Consultant (including its agents, servants, and employees) is not the City's agent, employee, or representative for any purpose.

It is the express intention of the parties hereto that Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee, joint venturer, or partner of City for any purpose whatsoever. City shall have no right to, and shall not control the manner or prescribe the method of accomplishing those services contracted to and performed by Consultant under this Agreement, and the general public and all governmental agencies regulating such activity shall be so informed.

Those provisions of this Agreement that reserve ultimate authority in City have been inserted solely to achieve compliance with federal and state laws, rules, regulations, and interpretations thereof. No such provisions and no other provisions of this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed as creating or establishing the relationship of employer and employee between Consultant and City.

Consultant shall pay all estimated and actual federal and state income and selfemployment taxes that are due the state and federal government and shall furnish and pay worker's compensation insurance, unemployment insurance and any other benefits required by law for himself and his employees, if any. Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold City and its officers, agents and employees harmless from and against any claims or demands by federal, state or local government agencies for any such taxes or benefits due but not paid by Consultant, including the legal costs associated with defending against any audit, claim, demand or law suit.

COU No. 2526-099
PAGE 3 OF 7
Consultant warrants and represents that it is a properly licensed professional or professional organization with a substantial investment in its business and that it maintains its own offices and staff which it will use in performing under this Agreement.

5.2 Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibility is solely to City. Consultant has no interest and will not acquire any direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of the Agreement. Consultant shall not in the performance of this Agreement employ a person having such an interest. If the City Manager determines that the Consultant has a disclosure obligation under the City’s local conflict of interest code, the Consultant shall file the required disclosure form with the City Clerk within 10 days of being notified of the City Manager’s determination.

6.0 INDEMNIFICATION

6.1 Insurance Liability. Without limiting Consultant's obligations arising under Paragraph 6.2 Consultant shall not begin work under this Agreement until it procures and maintains for the full period of time allowed by law, surviving the termination of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with its performance under this Agreement.

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

1. Insurance Services Office ("ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage Form No. CG 20 10 10 01 and Commercial General Liability Coverage – Completed Operations Form No. CG 20 37 10 01.

2. ISO Form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, Code 1 "any auto" or Code 8, 9 if no owned autos and endorsement CA 0025.

3. Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability Insurance.

4. Errors and Omissions liability insurance appropriate to the consultant’s profession. Architects’ and engineers’ coverage is to be endorsed to include contractual liability.

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

1. General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage including operations, products and completed operations. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work performed under this Agreement, or the aggregate limit shall be twice the prescribed per occurrence limit.

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

COU No. 2526-099
PAGE 4 OF 7

3. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability: Worker's compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident.

4. Errors and Omissions liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence.

C. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.

D. Other Insurance Provisions
The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages a. The City, it officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects; liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, products and completed operations of the Consultant, premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, hired or borrowed by the Consultant for the full period of time allowed by law, surviving the termination of this Agreement. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope-of-protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. b. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
c. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
d. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.

2. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from Consultant's performance of the work, pursuant to this Agreement.

COU No. 2526-099
PAGE 5 OF 7

3. Professional Liability Coverage
If written on a claims-made basis, the retroactivity date shall be the effective date of this Agreement. The policy period shall extend one (1) year from the date of final approved invoice.

4. All Coverages
Each Insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.

E. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with admitted California insurers with an A.M. Best's rating of no less than A- for financial strength, AA for long-term credit rating and AMB-1 for short-term credit rating.

F. Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with Certificates of Insurance and with original Endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement. The Certificates and Endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The Certificates and Endorsements are to be on forms provided or approved by the City. Where by statute, the City's Workers' Compensation - related forms cannot be used, equivalent forms approved by the Insurance Commissioner are to be substituted.

All Certificates and Endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before Consultant begins the work of this Agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. If Consultant fails to provide the coverages required herein, the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to purchase any or all of them. In that event, the cost of insurance becomes part of the compensation due the contractor after notice to Consultant that City has paid the premium.

G. Subcontractors
Consultant shall include all subcontractors or sub-consultants as insured under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor or sub-consultant. All coverage for sub-contractors or sub-consultants shall be subject to all insurance requirements set forth in this Paragraph 6.1.

6.2 Indemnification. Notwithstanding the foregoing insurance requirements, and in addition thereto, Consultant agrees, for the full period of time allowed by law, surviving the termination of this Agreement, to indemnify the City for any claim, cost or liability that arises out of, or pertains to, or relates to any negligent act or omission or the willful misconduct of Consultant in the performance of services under this contract by Consultant, but this indemnity does not apply to liability for damages for death or bodily injury to persons, injury to property, or other loss, arising from the sole negligence, willful misconduct or defects in design by the City, or arising from the active negligence of the City.

COU No. 2526-099
PAGE 6 OF 7
“Indemnify,” as used herein includes the expenses of defending against a claim and the payment of any settlement or judgment arising out of the claim. Defense costs include all costs associated with defending the claim, including, but not limited to, the fees of attorneys, investigators, consultants, experts and expert witnesses, and litigation expenses.

References in this paragraph to City or Consultant, include their officers, employees, agents, and subcontractors.

7.0 CONTRACT PROVISIONS

7.1 Ownership of Work. All documents furnished to Consultant by City and all documents or reports and supportive data prepared by Consultant under this Agreement are owned and become the property of the City upon their creation and shall be given to City immediately upon demand and at the completion of Consultant's services at no additional cost to City. Deliverables are identified in the Scope-of-Work, Attachment "A".

All documents produced by Consultant shall be furnished to City in digital format and hardcopy. Consultant shall produce the digital format, using software and media approved by City.

7.2 Governing Law. Consultant shall comply with the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, and all local governments having jurisdiction over this Agreement. The interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by California law and any action arising under or in connection with this Agreement must be filed in a Court of competent jurisdiction in Mendocino County.

7.3 Entire Agreement. This Agreement plus its Attachment(s) and executed Amendments set forth the entire understanding between the parties.

7.4 Severability. If any term of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in effect.

7.5 Modification. No modification of this Agreement is valid unless made with the agreement of both parties in writing.

7.6 Assignment. Consultant's services are considered unique and personal. Consultant shall not assign, transfer, or sub-contract its interest or obligation under all or any portion of this Agreement without City's prior written consent.

7.7 Waiver. No waiver of a breach of any covenant, term, or condition of this Agreement shall be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach of the same or any other covenant, term or condition or a waiver of the covenant, term or condition itself.

7.8 Termination. This Agreement may only be terminated by either party: 1) for breach of the Agreement; 2) because funds are no longer available to pay Consultant for services provided under this Agreement; or 3) City has abandoned and does not wish to complete the project for which Consultant was retained. A party shall notify the other party of any alleged breach of the Agreement and of the action required to cure the breach. If the breaching party fails to cure the breach within the time specified in the notice, the contract shall be terminated as of that time. If terminated for lack of funds or abandonment of the project, the contract shall terminate on the date notice of termination is given to Consultant. City shall pay the Consultant only for services

COU No. 2526-099
PAGE 7 OF 7
performed and expenses incurred as of the effective termination date. In such event, as a condition to payment, Consultant shall provide to City all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed hereunder, subject to off-set for any direct or consequential damages City may incur as a result of Consultant's breach of contract.

7.9 Execution of Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in duplicate originals, each bearing the original signature of the parties. Alternatively, this Agreement may be executed and delivered by facsimile or other electronic transmission, and in more than one counterpart, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. When executed using either alternative, the executed agreement shall be deemed an original admissible as evidence in any administrative or judicial proceeding to prove the terms and content of this Agreement.

8.0 NOTICES
Any notice given under this Agreement shall be in writing and deemed given when personally delivered or deposited in the mail (certified or registered) addressed to the parties as follows:

CITY OF UKIAH EBA ENGINEERING
DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS 825 SONOMA AVENUE, SUITE C
300 SEMINARY AVENUE SANTA ROSA, CA 95404
UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482-5400

9.0 SIGNATURES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the Effective Date:

CONSULTANT
BY: __________________________ ____________________
Date
PRINT NAME: _________________
__________________
IRS IDN Number

CITY OF UKIAH
BY: ____________________
Date

CITY MANAGER
ATTEST
____________________
CITY CLERK Date
Nazar Eljumaily
09/03/2025
68-0181868
09/11/2025
Kris
Kristine tine Lawler (Sep 11, 2025 15Lawler :49:13 PDT) 09/11/2025 Page 193 of 436
Attachment A

825 Sonoma Avenue, Suite C  Santa Rosa, California 95404 (707)544-0748  FAX (707)544-0866  www.ebagroup.com
February 5, 2026 (revised April 7, 2026)
Mr. Tim Eriksen
Public Works Director
City of Ukiah (City)
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482-5400
RE: UPDATED GENERAL SERVICES PROPOSAL

LANDFILL CLOSURE SERVICES

CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL, MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
EBA JOB No. 02-907
Dear Mr. Eriksen:

Per your request, EBA Engineering (EBA) is providing the City with this update to the original General Services Proposal dated July 7, 2025 to outline estimated future costs related to the landfill closure services for the City of Ukiah Landfill (Landfill). As of March 31, 2026, the entirety of the original $250,000 contract was expended. In addition to ongoing meetings and correspondence with the City and regulatory agencies, other services partially or fully completed under the original agreement have included: a preliminary closure assessment; various responses to the Fifth Amendment of Notice and Order 2013-01 dated January 30, 2025 as issued by the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA); surface emissions monitoring and reporting; an aerial topographic survey of the Landfill; updating of the construction drawings and landfill gas (LFG) collection system design, Technical Specifications, and Construction Quality Assurance (CQA) Plan, including sampling and testing of on-site LFG; preparation of flare specifications, bid assistance, and meetings; implementation of refuse confirmation borings; and preparation of an updated water corrective action cost estimate for financial assurance purposes.

In regards to moving forward, the intent is to have all the design, permitting, and document submittals completed by August 2026 in advance of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (NCRWQCB’s) issuance of the closure and postclosure maintenance Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) and Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) that are tentatively scheduled for December 2026 or February 2027. The services to be provided that extend beyond the March 2026 contract completion are summarized below. Please note that the task numbers identified below coincide with the ATTACHMENT 2

Ukiah LF - Updated General Services Proposal Revised 04.07.26 2 task numbers utilized in the original general services contract, as applicable. Task numbers that are missing correspond to tasks that have already be completed, while new task numbers represent new scopes of work that were added following the original contract execution.
 Task 1 – General Research, Correspondence & Meetings: Continued attendance and participation in meetings with the City and multiple regulatory agencies, including the LEA, CalRecycle, Mendocino County Air Quality Management District (MCAQMD), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and NCRWQCB, as well as other miscellaneous requests from the City as needed over the period of April through August, 2026. For the purpose of this Proposal, EBA is assuming the above services will include the participation in three (3) regulatory progress meetings by Mr. Max Kruzic and Mr. Mike Delmanowski and eight (8) additional hours per month by both individuals and two (2) hours per month by our Principal Engineer (Mr. Damon Morelli), as needed. Estimated Cost = $19,140.  Task 6 – Update Construction Drawings: Completion of design modifications to the construction drawings based on changes in grades due to landfill settlement and consultation feedback from WatershedGeo (i.e., ClosureTurf manufacturer), as well as subcontractor services related to structural design of the flare station’s concrete sub-slabs and design/code review of the previous electrical design in response to the new flare manufacturer’s design. Also complete updates to the Technical Specifications and CQA Plan. Estimated Cost = $35,840.  Task 7 – LFG System Updating/Permitting: Completion of the LFG collection system modifications, technical assistance to the flare contractor during the design phase, and implementation of the Authority to Construct permit process for the flare and LFG collection system through the MCAQMD. Estimated Cost = $19,820.  Task 8 – Streambed Alteration: Implement the 401, 404, and 1602 Federal and State streambed alteration permitting processes. Estimated Cost = $20,000.  Task 9 – Updated Water Corrective Action Estimate: Completion of the Landfill’s water corrective action cost estimate for financial assurance purposes as requested by the NCRWQCB. Estimated Cost = $3,100.
 Task 11 – Prepare Draft WDR-MRP: Prepare draft WDR and draft MRP as discussed with the NCRWQCB in a meeting on March 13, 2026 and as described in an EBA proposal previously provided to the City also dated March 13, 2026.

Estimated Cost = $10,000.
 Task 12 – Update Closure Engineer’s Estimate: Update the final closure cost estimate to reflect changes to the final design and to represent current dollars. Per discussions with Mr. Eriksen on March 3, 2026, this work will be subcontracted to an independent third party who specializes in developing construction estimates. This provision was deemed prudent based on recent construction bids

Ukiah LF - Updated General Services Proposal Revised 04.07.26 3 for the South Coast Landfill (similar cover system design; i.e., ClosureTurf) that revealed appreciably higher costs than previous engineered estimates. Estimated Cost = $8,460.
 Task 13 – Joint Technical Document (JTD) Addendum Preparation & Submittal:

Prepare a JTD amendment to address informational requests from the RWQCB in support of their development of the closure WDRs, including updates to sections and appendices that have changed since the April 2019 Final Closure and Postclosure Maintenance Plan and presentation of other miscellaneous documents. Estimated Cost = $8,970.
 Task 14 – Explosive Gas Work Plan Implementation: Implementation of Phase I of the Excessive Gas Remediation Work Plan. Phase I consists of a site-wide assessment of the integrity and functionality of the perimeter LFG monitoring network which was requested by CalRecycle in a letter dated August 12, 2025.

The Excessive Gas Remediation Work Plan was subsequently revised to include this additional scope of work. Estimated Cost = $20,000.

The total cost to provide the above described services is $145,330. All of the above services represent “not to exceed” costs, except for the Task 1 and Task 13 bullet items which are partially dictated by requests from the City and/or regulatory agencies that cannot be fully defined at this time and are out of EBA’s control. Also not included herein is the cost to implement Phase II and Phase III of Task 14 for evaluation and corrective action measures as described in the Revised Excessive Gas Remediation Work Plan dated October 24, 2025 for which the associated estimated costs will be provided upon completion of Phase I.

EBA appreciates the opportunity to provide the City with this Proposal. If you should have any questions or would like to discuss further, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (707) 544-0784.

Regards,

EBA ENGINEERING
Mike Delmanowski, P.G., C.E.G., C.Hg.

Senior Hydrogeologist

501 Low Gap Rd, Rm 1010 Office: 707-463-4441
Ukiah CA 95482-3734 Fax: 707-463-5649

MENDOCINO COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICE

NEWS RELEASE
CONTACT: Executive Office (707) 463-4441
TO: MENDOCINO COUNTY NEWS MEDIA
FR: MENDOCINO COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICE
Ukiah, California: April 6, 2026
Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan for Public Review and Comment The County of Mendocino is inviting residents, businesses, and community stakeholders to review and provide feedback on the draft Mendocino County Hazard Mitigation Plan, a comprehensive strategy designed to reduce the risks and impacts of natural disasters across the county.

The Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies vulnerabilities to hazards such as wildfires, floods, drought, earthquakes, tsunamis, and severe weather events, and outlines actions to enhance community resilience, protect lives and property, and reduce long-term recovery costs.

This plan covers the entire county, including the unincorporated communities of Fort Bragg, Point Arena, Ukiah, and Willits. It also includes some special districts, including the Covelo Fire Protection District, the Mendocino County Office of Education, the Noyo Harbor District, and the Redwood Coast Fire Protection District.

The public review period will be open April 6 – April 20, 2026.

The survey to collect responses, which includes links to the updated mitigation plan, can be accessed at the following website: https://bit.ly/MendoHMP-PublicComment About the Hazard Mitigation Plan - The Hazard Mitigation Plan is updated periodically in accordance with federal requirements under the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). An approved plan allows the county and participating jurisdictions to remain eligible for certain types of federal disaster assistance and mitigation funding. The plan represents a collaborative effort involving county departments, local agencies, tribal partners, and community stakeholders.

Agenda Item No: 12.a.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 4/15/2026

ITEM NO: 2026-635

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Consideration and Possible Adoption of a Resolution Updating Rates for Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services and Ambulance Transportation Provided by the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority.

DEPARTMENT: Fire PREPARED BY: Doug Hutchison, Fire Chief PRESENTER: Doug Hutchison, Fire Chief
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Proposed Resolution
Summary: Council will consider adopting a resolution updating the rates for pre-hospital emergency medical services and ambulance transportation provided by the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority.

Background: The Ukiah Valley Fire Authority (UVFA) regularly assesses the rates charged for pre-hospital emergency medical services and ambulance transportation provided by them to ensure adequate reimbursement for services.

Discussion: The current rate structure for these services was last updated by the Council in late 2024. Since that time, there have been dramatic increases in the cost of supplies and equipment, along with negotiated Staff compensation, necessitating an adjustment to ensure rates more accurately reflect the cost of providing service.

It is important to note that these rates apply to a limited number of transports. The majority are reimbursed through government programs such as Medicare and Medi-CAL, which have fixed reimbursement rates. Additionally, state regulations limit what may be billed to uninsured patients.

The Fire Authority's rate structure was evaluated by its Emergency Medical Services (EMS) consultant, AP Triton LLC, which performs these types of analysis nationally. The evaluation considered total cost of providing services, including personnel and equipment, call volumes, medical cost inflation factors, and destination mileages, including the difference between 911 responses and Inter-Facility Transfers. Based on this analysis, AP Triton has recommended the rate structure included in Exhibit A of the proposed resolution (Attachment 1).

Public notice was published in the Ukiah Daily Journal as required.

Therefore, Staff requests Council adopt a resolution updating the rates for pre-hospital emergency medical services and ambulance transportation provided by the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority.

Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution updating the rates for pre-hospital emergency medical services and ambulance transportation provided by the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority.

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: No
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A

REVENUE: Yes GRANT: No
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director; Traci Boyl, Sr. Management Analyst STRATEGIC PLAN (SP): N/A
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP):GP-A4 - Public Facilities, Services, and Infrastructure Element

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF UKIAH ADOPTING RATES FOR PREHOSPITAL EMERGENCY SERVICES AND AMBULANCE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

PROVIDED BY THE UKIAH VALLEY FIRE AUTHORITY
BE IT RESOLVED that effective immediately the City Council adopts updated rates for the provision of Pre Hospital Emergency Medical services and Ambulance Transportation Services provided by the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority, as outlined in Exhibit A.

FURTHERMORE, these fees are to be evaluated annually at minimum and adjusted as necessary.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this15th day of April, 2026, by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Susan Sher, Mayor
ATTEST:

Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
911 proposed rate structures:

Proposed ALS Rates Proposed BLS Rates Current Rates
Base Rate: $4,000 Base Rate: $4,000 Base Rates: $3,000
Bundle Rate: $250 Bundle Rate: $175 N/A
*Oxygen: $120 *Oxygen: $120 Oxygen: $120
*Night Charge: $100 *Night Charge: $100 Nigh Charge: $100 Cardiac Monitor: $375 N/A Cardiac Monitor: $60
Mileage (per mile): $120 Mileage (per mile): $120 Mileage: (per mile) $30 First Responder/Treat no
Transport: $499.83
First Responder/Treat
no Transport: $499.83
First Responder/Treat
no Transport: $390.23
*No rate adjustment currently
IFT proposed rate structures:

ALS Patient Transportation BLS Patient Transportation Current Rates Base Rate: $4,725 Base Rate: $4,725 Base Rate: $3,000
ALS Bundle: $250 BLS Bundle: $175 N/A
*Oxygen: $120 *Oxygen: $120 Oxygen: $120
*Night Charge: $100 *Night Charge: $100 Night Charge: $100 Cardiac Monitor: $375 N/A Cardiac Monitor: $60
Mileage (per mile): $180 Milage (per mile): $180 Milage: $30 IFT-CCT proposed rate structures:

CCT Patient Transportation CCT Patient Transportation
Base Rate: $5,925 Base Rate: $5,925
ALS Bundle: $250 BLS Bundle: $175
Oxygen: $120 Oxygen: $120
Night Charge: $100 Night Charge: $100
Cardiac Monitor: $375 Cardiac Monitor: N/A
Milage (per mile): $180 Milage (per mile): $180
*New Fee Structure
Ukiah Valley Fire Authority Ambulance Transportation Rates Proposed 04/2026 Page 219 of 436

Agenda Item No: 14.a.

MEETING DATE/TIME: 4/15/2026

ITEM NO: 2026-659

AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Presentation and Acceptance of the School Street Multimodal Transportation Corridor Study.

DEPARTMENT: Public Works PREPARED BY: Jason Benson, Senior Civil Engineer PRESENTER: Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager and Tim
Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer
ATTACHMENTS:

1. School Street Plan_Final

2. 14a Correspondence Received - Andrew Lutsky

3. 14a Correspondence Received - Linda Sanders

4. 14a Correspondence Received - Pinky Kushner

5. 14a Correspondence Received - Dennis O'Brien

6. 14a Correspondence Received - Jared Soinila_Redacted

7. Presentation
Summary: Council will receive a presentation on the completed School Street Multimodal Transportation Corridor Study, including the final report and preferred concept.

Background: On August 31, 2023, the City of Ukiah received notice from Caltrans that it had been awarded a 2023–24 Sustainable Communities Competitive grant for the School Street Multimodal Transportation Study.

The grant included Caltrans funding, a required local cash match, and a total project cost of $258,000. On October 2, 2024, the City Council awarded a contract to GHD, Inc. to complete the study. The study was undertaken to evaluate future improvements along the School Street corridor and to prepare a final planning document to support future funding efforts and implementation.

Discussion: The purpose of this study was to evaluate existing conditions and future needs along School Street in order to make informed decisions about the corridor’s long-term direction. The study was also intended to help position the City for future grant applications and funding opportunities for design and construction of recommended improvements. Through extensive public outreach conducted with City staff, GHD, Blue Zones, business and property owners, and members of the public, the study considered a range of corridor needs, constraints, and opportunities and evaluated multiple alternatives. That process resulted in a preferred concept and a final planning document (Attachment 1) intended to guide future decision-making and implementation.

Staff requests Council receive the presentation on the completed School Street Multimodal Transportation Corridor Study, including the final report and preferred concept, and accept report.

Recommended Action: Receive the presentation on the completed School Street Multimodal Transportation Corridor Study, including the final report and preferred concept, and accept report (inclusive of any grantorrequired modifications).

BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: No
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 10024210.52100.18413: $238,999.99 PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 10024210.52100.18413: $238,999.99

FINANCING SOURCE: Sustainable Communities Grant and General Fund REVENUE: No GRANT: Yes / No
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: 2425-118
COORDINATED WITH: City Manager's Office, Director of Public Works / City Engineer STRATEGIC PLAN (SP): SP 2B - Identify and/or develop funding for essential and vital infrastructure for the long-term; SP 3A - Review and revise land use planning documents to be reflective of the long-term vision for the community; SP 4B - Develop and preserve the historic downtown as a regional center of civic and economic activity.

GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS (GP):GP-A3 - Mobility Element.

School Street
Multimodal Transportation
Corridor Study
Made possible through the Caltrans
Sustainable Transportation Planning
Grant Program
April 2026
Final Plan
Attachment 1

Table of Contents
i
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction...........................................................................................................................1

1.1 Vision Statement........................................................................................................................................................ 3

1.2 Plan Goals........................................................................................................................................................................4

1.3 Recent Planning Work and Guiding Documents .............................................................................. 5

1.4 Project Timeline.......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 2: Community Engagement ...............................................................................................8

2.1 Engagement Events................................................................................................................................................8

2.2 Summary of Feedback...........................................................................................................................................9 Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox.......................................................10

3.1 Walkability ....................................................................................................................................................................10

3.2 Sidewalk Zones...........................................................................................................................................................12

3.3 Parking.............................................................................................................................................................................13

3.4 ADA Accessibility Tools .........................................................................................................................................17

3.5 Traffic Calming and Pedestrian Enhancements ...............................................................................18

3.6 Streetscape Amenities ........................................................................................................................................ 20 Chapter 4: Existing Conditions........................................................................................................ 24

4.1 Community Context ............................................................................................................................................. 24

4.2 Existing Street Configuration......................................................................................................................... 28

4.3 Transportation Patterns ..................................................................................................................................... 28

4.4 Street Amenities and Barriers........................................................................................................................ 29

4.5 Safety ................................................................................................................................................................................35 Chapter 5: Tree Management ...........................................................................................................36

5.1 Chinese Pistache Tree ..........................................................................................................................................37

5.2 Root Pruning...............................................................................................................................................................39

5.3 Tree Replacement Program.............................................................................................................................39

5.4 Planting Specifications ........................................................................................................................................41 Chapter 6: Alternatives Considered............................................................................................... 42

6.1 Design Criteria ..........................................................................................................................................................42

Table of Contents
ii

6.2 Streetscape Amenities ........................................................................................................................................43

6.3 Design Alternatives ...............................................................................................................................................44

6.4 Alternatives Analysis .............................................................................................................................................49 Chapter 7: Preferred Concept .......................................................................................................... 50

7.1 Design Elements ......................................................................................................................................................53

7.2 Loading Zones and City Services................................................................................................................. 54

7.3 Community Priorities........................................................................................................................................... 54 Chapter 8: Implementation Plan .....................................................................................................55

8.1 Preliminary Cost Estimate.................................................................................................................................55

8.2 Funding Opportunities........................................................................................................................................55 Figure Index
Figure 1.1 – Project Timeline................................................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 3.1 – Sidewalk Zones.................................................................................................................................................12 Figure 4.1 – Study Area Map...............................................................................................................................................27 Figure 4.2 – Existing School Street Cross-Section............................................................................................. 28 Figure 4.3 – Means of Transportation to Work.................................................................................................... 28 Figure 4.4 – Existing Street Amenities........................................................................................................................31 Figure 4.5 – Existing Street Barriers ............................................................................................................................ 34 Figure 6.1 – Rendering of Alternative 1: One-way “Split” from Perkins Street ...............................45 Figure 6.2 – Alternative 1 Cross-Section....................................................................................................................45 Figure 6.3 – Alternative 2 Rendering: One-way Northbound....................................................................46 Figure 6.4 – Alternative 2 Cross-Section ..................................................................................................................46 Figure 6.5 – Rendering of Alternative 3: Two-way Street with Diagonal Parking ......................47 Figure 6.6 – Alternative 3 Cross-Section...................................................................................................................47 Figure 6.7 – Rendering of Two-way Street with Parallel Parking...........................................................48 Figure 6.8 – Alternative 4 Cross-Section..................................................................................................................48 Figure 7.1 – Preferred Concept between Perkins Street and Standley Street ................................51 Figure 7.2 – Preferred Concept between Standley Street and Smith Street..................................52 Figure 7.3 – Cross-Section of the Preferred Concept.......................................................................................53

Table of Contents
iii
Table Index
Table 3.1 – Sidewalk Zones....................................................................................................................................................12 Table 3.2 – Parking Configurations ................................................................................................................................15 Table 3.3 – ADA Accessibility Tools.................................................................................................................................17 Table 3.4 – Traffic Calming and Pedestrian Enhancements.......................................................................18 Table 3.5 – Street Amenities.............................................................................................................................................. 20 Table 6.1 – Circulation Alternatives Analysis ..........................................................................................................49 Appendices
Appendix A – Community Engagement Summary
Appendix B – Online Survey Analysis
Appendix C – Cost Estimate

Table of Contents
iv
[This page is intentionally left blank]

1 Chapter 1: Introduction
School Street is a vibrant, walkable corridor
in the heart of downtown Ukiah. Lined
with small businesses and historic
buildings, School Street attracts residents
and visitors from all over California to shop,
dine and enjoy the city. School Street is
also used for hosting community events,
such as the Ukiah Farmers Market.

People visit School Street by various
means of transportation, however, once
visitors arrive downtown, School Street’s
walkability is key for drawing people into
business, restaurants, and local events.

Through the Downtown Streetscape
Improvement Project, the City has made
efforts to improve economic vitality in
Ukiah by creating a more walkable
environment for pedestrians along routes
like State Street. Continuing these
pedestrian improvements along School
Street, while maintaining access and
safety for drivers and other transportation
modes, will continue the City’s efforts to
support the downtown economy.

School Street is lined with Chinese
Pistache, a deciduous tree, that paint the
corridor in fall colors every year. The trees
are beloved by the community and add to
Ukiah’s small-town charm. However, the
trees planted 60-years ago have outgrown
their planters and are impacting the
sidewalk, underground utilities, and the
foundations of historic buildings along the
corridor. These issues are impeding
walkability and Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) accessibility along the corridor
and compromising the health of the trees.

Chapter 1: Introduction
2 The School Street Multimodal
Transportation Corridor Study establishes
a vision for a School Street that offers a
safe environment for bicycling and
walking, provides convenient access to
transit, minimizes congestion for
commerce and commuters, and supports
a healthy, diverse local economy.

This study will identify, analyze, and
propose along the School Street between
Clay Street to Henry Street that support all
road users, including pedestrians, drivers,
and bicyclists. The roadway enhancements
proposed will also include solutions that
address root issues along the corridor and
support tree health for future generations.

All enhancements proposed to the School
Street corridor will align with the vision
and goals outlined on the following pages.

The School Street Multimodal
Transportation Corridor Study is funded by
a Sustainable Communities Grant from
Caltrans. The Study will result in a final
study that will be used to pursue funding
to implement identified improvements
along the School Street corridor.

Chapter 1: Introduction
3 1.1 Vision Statement
“The School Street corridor will offer a safe environment for bicycling and walking, provide convenient access to transit, minimize congestion for commerce and commuters, and support a healthy, diverse local economy by creating green and inviting places”.

Chapter 1: Introduction
4 1.2Plan Goals
The School Street Multimodal Corridor Plan will be crucial in further advancing safe, sustainable transportation options to access local destinations, jobs, shops, and community resources. The following six goals were developed to achieve this vision. These goals guided this Study and the proposed enhancements along the corridor.

Goal 1: Multimodal Mobility
Enhance and introduce safe, accessible,
and comfortable multimodal mobility
choices for all ages and abilities.

Goal 2: Economic Resiliency
Improve economic resiliency and
environmental sustainability through good
design.

Goal 3: Connectivity
Bridge gaps in the multimodal
infrastructure for local destinations and
connect to existing and planned facilities.

Goal 4: Support Community
Events
Support a variety of community events
and uses.

Goal 5: Placemaking
Create a stronger sense of place and
enhance the social life of School Street.

Goal 6: Accessibility
Improve accessibility in downtown Ukiah
along School Street, especially for those
with disabilities.

Chapter 1: Introduction
5 1.3Recent Planning Work
and Guiding
Documents
The following section provides a review of
recent planning efforts and improvement
projects that are relevant to the School
Street study area.

Downtown Streetscape
Improvement Project
The City of Ukiah completed a successful
downtown streetscape project in 2022,
which constructed improvements along
State Street (Ukiah’s main street). This
major project included a road diet,
improvements to traffic circulation,
sidewalks, and pedestrian crossings, as
well as adjacent secondary streets
including some that connect to School
Street.

The Downtown Streetscape Improvement
Project was completed through a robust
community outreach process, which
gained input from numerous community
workshops as well as substantial
stakeholder input. The Project began with
a planning study funded by a Caltrans
transportation planning grant many years
ago.

Building on the success of the State Street
project, the City used the same effective
formula of planning and community
engagement to support a foundation for
positive changes to School Street.

Recent planning work on State Street as part of the Downtown Streetscape Project.

Chapter 1: Introduction
6 Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan (2015)
The Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan aims to improve comfort and
convenience for pedestrians and bicyclists.

The plan assesses the city’s existing land
use and transportation network and
provides a list of prioritized improvement
projects that support walking and
bicycling.

The Master Plan does not recommend any
active transportation facilities on School
Street, but improvements adjacent to the
study area include Class IIs and Class IIIs
on Main Street and a Class II bike lane on
Clay Street. The Master Plan also provides
a variety of general placemaking, amenity
recommendations, such as shade trees,
bicycle parking, and street furnishing, as
well as education, encouragement, and
enforcement programmatic strategies.

Ukiah 2040 General Plan (2022)
Mobility Element
The Mobility Element outlines five mobility
goals relevant to the School Street
Multimodal Transportation Corridor Study:
➢ Goal 1: Provide a citywide network of
complete streets that meet the needs
of all users.
➢ Goal 2: Reduce vehicle miles traveled
(VMT).
➢ Goals 3: provide a safe transportation
system that eliminates traffic related
fatalities.
➢ Goal 4: Maintain an ongoing periodic
evaluation process to inventory
transportation and mobility needs.
➢ Goal 5: Promote a balance of
multimodal options, to be reflected in
flexible parking regulations.

The Ukiah 2040 General Plan references
the Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan (2015) and does not propose
additional active transportation
improvements.

Mendocino County Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) &
Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
(2022)
The plan outlines a series of goals,
objectives and policies relevant to the
School Street Multimodal Transportation
Corridor Study, including complete streets,
local streets and roads, active
transportation, and transit.

The RTP and ATP propose a few active
transportation projects in Ukiah but do not
propose infrastructure improvements
specifically on School Street.

Mendocino County Pedestrian
Facility Needs Inventory &
Engineered Feasibility Study
(2019)
The Mendocino County Pedestrian Needs
Assessment and Engineered Feasibility
Study was developed by Mendocino
County Council of Governments (MCOG)
and aims to improve sidewalks, paths and
crossings throughout the county. The plan
does not propose any pedestrian projects
along School Street.

Chapter 1: Introduction
7 City of Ukiah Downtown Zoning
Code
The Ukiah Downtown Zoning Code
provides standards for downtown. The
code seeks to ensure that planning and
development efforts are systematically
coordinated, reflect Ukiah’s sense of place
and the historic downtown, support local
business, and create a “healthy, safe,
diverse, compact and walkable urban
community”.

The standards outlined in the downtown
zoning code relevant to this Plan include
street dimensions and cross section,
parking dimensions, and which trees are
allowed to be planted along School Street.

1.4Project Timeline
The Plan was initiated in January 2025 and
began with an analysis of existing
transportation conditions. During this
analysis, the first public workshop and
walk audit were held to gather information
about the existing transportation
conditions and community priorities for
the corridor.

The project team began developing
design alternatives for the corridor in
spring 2025, during which a second
workshop was held, and a survey of
potential design concepts was distributed
online. Just before the third workshop,
utilities along School Street were marked
using the 811 utility marking system which
provided insight regarding conflicts
between tree roots and utilities that would
impact the final concept. A third workshop
and second walk audit were held in winter
2026.

Feedback from the workshops, walk
audits, and surveys informed the final plan
and preferred design concept for School
Street, which were published in spring
2026.

Figure 1.1 – Project Timeline

8 Chapter 2: Community Engagement
The development of the School Street
Multimodal Transportation Corridor Study
was driven by community input. The
community engagement process began in
February 2025 and continued through
December of 2025 and included a variety
of in-person and online engagement
opportunities. Throughout the
engagement process, the project team
hosted a project website with details
about the Plan, upcoming engagement
events, and online feedback collection
tools.

Community members were notified about
upcoming events and feedback
opportunities through physical flyers,
social media posts, and door-to-door
conversations with the Project Team. This
corridor-based engagement strategy was
used to meet business and property
owners where they were, facilitating oneon-one conversations and encouraging participation in the Plan.

The following section provides a brief
summary of engagement events and
community feedback. For more
information, see Appendix A and Appendix
B.

2.1 Engagement Events
Community engagement was broken into
Round 1 (winter 2025 –spring 2025), Round
2 (summer 2025) and Round 3 (fall 2025).

Round 1 of engagement focused on
introducing the project to the community
and gathering preliminary feedback about
existing transportation conditions and
community priorities. Round 1 included
three engagement opportunities:
➢ Technical Walk Audit: February 13th,
2025
➢ First Public Workshop: February 13th,
2025
➢ Interactive Map: (January 2025 – March
2025)
Round 2 focused on introducing the
public to potential transportation and

Chapter 2: Community Engagement
9 streetscape improvements for School
Street. During this round of engagement,
community members weighed in on
several preliminary design concepts for
the corridor at a second public workshop
and through an online survey.
➢ Second Public Workshop: June 24,
2025
➢ Online Survey: July 24th, 2025 – August
29th, 2025
Round 3 of engagement focused on
identifying the preferred design concept
for School Street. Community members
were invited on a walk audit and attended
a third in-person workshop to discuss
priorities, trade-offs, and come to a
conclusion about which design alternative
they preferred.
➢ Public Walk Audit: December 11th, 2025
➢ Third Public Workshop: December 11th,
2025

2.2 Summary of Feedback
Throughout the engagement process, the
community continually highlighted their
love for School Street, citing its historic
character, the trees, and community
events like the farmer’s market. The
community felt that this Plan was an
opportunity to enhance the beauty and
feel of the corridor and fix long standing
maintenance issues. It was key that
whatever improvements were proposed
along the corridor would enhance the
community’s character and the vibrancy of
School Street.

Walkability and creating a sense of place
as were identified as priorities for the
community. Pedestrian crossing
improvements, slowing driver speeds
street amenities including seating,
lighting, and bicycle parking were all
highlighted as potential corridor
improvements.

Economic resiliency was another key
priority that emerged. Many business
owners were engaged throughout the
planning process to ensure that the
proposed School Street concept would
encourage visitors to shop and dine
downtown, not discourage business.

Preservation of the Chinese Pistache trees
that line School Street was crucial to the
community. Residents recognized the
pervasive maintenance issues caused by
the tree roots, but maintaining School
Street as a tree lined corridor would be
integral to the proposed improvements,
for shade and aesthetics.

Participants at the first public workshop.

Participants at the third public workshop.

10 Chapter 3: Design Principles and
Streetscaping Toolbox
The following chapter outlines a series of
principles and tools that support the vision
and goals of the School Street Multimodal
Transportation Corridor Study. This toolbox
of strategies is meant to guide the
development of the preferred School
Street design concept. Though not all tools
are incorporated into the preferred
concept, the City may consider using these
strategies on School Street and through
downtown and other areas of Ukiah in the
future.

3.1 Walkability
The purpose of a city is to maximize
exchange, including exchange between
people and businesses, and intersections
with community members. This exchange
can be fostered by creating a more
walkable environment.

Why Walkability Matters
The benefits of walkable streets are
myriad. They create a slower speed
environment that enhances safety for all
road users and improve access for
pedestrians of all ages and abilities.

Creating walkable communities
encourages physical activity for people of
all ages. It also supports social health,
encouraging interactions between
community members and the chance to
build relationships.

Walkability also improves accessibility for
those who cannot drive or have mobility
impairments. Due largely to advances in
medicine, the average man will outlive his
ability to drive by 7 years, and the average
woman will outlive her ability to drive by 12
years (AARP). Preserving mobility for
community members who no longer drive
is a way to improve physical and social

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
11 health and provide access to community
destinations, services and other
community members.

Walkable streets can have positive
economic impacts on a community.

Walkability encourages foot traffic and
creates a more welcoming environment
for lingering, shopping and dining.

Tenets of Walkability
There are several factors that can improve
walkability.
1 ➢ Enclosure: The degree to which streets
and public spaces are visual defined by
buildings, walls, trees and more. High
enclosure streets are separated from
vehicle traffic and feel more
comfortable.
➢ Transparency: the degree of
transparency between the walkway
and inside building via windows.

Streets with high transparency feel
more secure.
➢ Security: sense of safety and belonging
in a public space. Security can be
cultivated through programmed
activities and spaces that welcome and
encourage pedestrian activity.
➢ Human Scale: proportions of street
features and amenities are human
sized, reflecting human walking speed.

These streets feel more secure and
often feature street furniture that
provide places to sit, are wellpopulated, and people are encouraged to patron adjacent businesses.
➢ Complexity: how visually engaging a
street is, based on diversity in building
types and facades, landscaping, and
more.
➢ Imageability: features that make a
street or city recognizable, such as
signage, unique artwork, and other
elements that evoke emotion.

How can walkability be achieved?
Walkability can be achieved by fully
utilizing all sidewalk zones, creating a lowspeed environment through physical infrastructure, and creating a space that is
inviting. The strategies outlined in the
following pages guide the proposed
improvements along School Street. Not all
strategies listed are included in the final
proposed School Street design, which can
be found in Chapter 6.
1 Ewing et al, “Identifying and Measuring
Urban Design Qualities Related to
Walkability,” Journal of Physical Activity
and Health 3, no. 1 (2006).
https://activelivingresearch.org/sites/active
livingresearch.org/files/JPAH_15_Ewing.pdf

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
12 3.2 Sidewalk Zones
A sidewalk is comprised of three zones: the
shy zone/frontage zone, the pedestrian
through zone, and the furnishing zone.

Utilizing the shy zone and the furniture
zone creates the sense of enclosure and
security that makes a street feel walkable.

Figure 3.1 – Sidewalk Zones
Table 3.1 – Sidewalk Zones
Zone Purpose Image
Shy Zone/
Frontage
Zone
The first two feet closest to the buildings that
line a street. Typically used for outdoor dining
seating, signage advertising for adjacent
businesses.

City of Ukiah, Ukiah, CA.

Pedestrian
Through
Zone
The sidewalk walking area where human
interaction typically takes place.

City of Ukiah, Ukiah, CA.

Furnishing
Zone
The zone between the sidewalk and the
street serves as a buffer between pedestrians
and vehicle traffic. The furniture zone
typically includes trees or landscaping, public
benches, trash receptacles, bicycle parking
and more.

City of Ukiah, Ukiah, CA

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
13 3.3Parking
Parking is a valuable tool for downtown
corridors like School Street. Parking
encourages residents and visitors to shop
at the local businesses along School Street
and bring economic value to the city. Onstreet parking also provides a barrier between the pedestrian walkway and
vehicle traffic, creating a more
comfortable environment for walking
downtown. For any type of street, parking
narrows the travel way and can help slow
vehicle speeds. Parking also provides an
opportunity for landscaping between
parking stalls and along the walkway.

Table 3.2 provides three different types of
parking configurations that could be
implemented along School Street.

The Downtown Zoning Code (§9228.6),
adopted in 2012 sets the width regulations
for parking in Downtown Ukiah. This will
affect the parking and circulation
configuration options along the corridor.

Ukiah Dowtnwon Zoning Code: Minimum Parking Space and Aaisle Dimensions

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
14 Parking Turnover and Pricing
Parking turnover is key to economic
resiliency downtown and can be achieved
by implementing parking meters. Properly
priced parking increases turnover of
premier parking spots, reducing the time
spent looking for parking and encouraging
more traffic to downtown businesses2. This
strategy prevents parking spots from
being utilized by one driver all day, which if
gone unresolved can negatively impact
business. It also allows those who would
like to stay longer than the currently
allotted 90 minutes to pay for more
parking, encouraging visitors to spend
more time shopping, eating and lingering
downtown. Metered parking spaces have
the potential to bring in up to $50,0003in
retail sales annually and are a source of
revenue for the City, which can be used for
downtown improvements.

According to Robert Gibbs, author of
Principles of Urban Retail Planning and
Development, each prime downtown
parking space should be used 12 times a
day. Parking spots may turn over every 15
2 Donald Shoup. ”Cruising for Parking”, (2008), 20.
3Brad Neumann. “A walkability paradox: Cars may
improve the pedestrian experience”. MSU Extension.

July 24, 2014.
minutes to every 2-4 hours depending on
location4. Side-street parking and near-by
lots can be managed to turn over fewer
times each day and serve as lower cost or
free longer term parking spots for
employees and customers who are willing
to walk an extra block or two.

Parking meters were first installed in
Downtown Ukiah in the 1970s but were
removed due to concerns of competition
from new big box stores. However, low
parking turnover continues to impact
downtown Ukiah. The City has
subsequently developed the Downtown
Ukiah Parking Improvements Study and
planned to re-install parking meters prior
to 2020 but was delayed due to the Covid19 pandemic. Though not included in the preferred design concept for School Street,
a paid parking system may be
implemented by the City in the future.

For more information about the history of
paid parking in Ukiah and the City’s
planned parking strategies, visit
https://cityofukiah.com/downtownparking/.
https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/a_walkability_parad
ox_cars_may_improve_the_pedestrian_experience
4 Robert Gibbs (2012), “Parking Demand,” Principles
of Urban Retail, John Wiley.

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
15 Parking Configurations
Table 3.2 – Parking Configurations
Tools Description Image
Angled
Pull-in
Parking
Diagonal angled pull-in parking is
oriented so that drivers traveling forward
can pull into their parking spot. Parking
at a 45-degree angle requires 14 feet of
space from the curb with a 10-foot
adjacent though lane (for two-way
streets). This is what currently exists
along most of the project area.

Diagonal parking at a higher angle (e.g.,
50 to 60 degrees) would require less
space from the curb, but may result in a
loss of 1 or 2 parking spaces per block
face.

Pull-in parking requires a wider travel
lane to accommodate drivers backing
out. Exit and re-entry also occur along
the travel lane.

GHD. School Street, Ukiah, CA.

Angled
Back-in
Parking
Diagonal angled back-in parking stalls
are angled to allow drivers to back in.

Similar to angled pull-in parking, it
requires 14 feet of space from the curb.

Back-in parking allows for exit and reentry to the vehicle to occur on the sidewalk side, eliminating the need to
walk into the travel lane. Loading and
unloading the vehicle directs people
away from the travel lane. Additionally,
back-in parking is safer when exiting the
parking stall as it reduces visibility
conflicts with drive aisle traffic.

Dan Burden. Sarasota, FL.

Dan Burden. Olympia, WA.

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
16 Tools Description Image
Parallel
Parking
Parallel parking requires less horizontal
space from the curb, typically seven to
nine feet, and instead requires more
longitudinal space along the curb. As a
result, parallel parking does not
constrain the adjacent travel lanes as
much as angled parking and can
provide more space for streetscaping
along the walkway.

However, the additional space along the
curb required for parallel parking
reduces the number of parking spaces
available.

GHD. State Street, Ukiah, CA.

Google Street View. School Street, Ukiah,
CA.

California’s Daylighting Law
Daylighting is a critical safety measure designed to enhance visibility at crosswalks. In California, Assembly Bill (AB) 413 went into effect on January 1, 2025, and is part of the California Vehicle Code (Section 22500(n)). The law prohibits parking within 20 feet of the approach side of a crosswalk, whether marked or unmarked. For curb extensions, the law prohibits parking within 15 feet the approach of a crosswalk. This law aims to enhance visibility for both drivers and pedestrians, significantly reducing the risk of accidents by providing a clear visual field for drivers and pedestrians to see each other. Alternatives and recommendations identified in this Plan take into consideration this law for implementation along School Street and will result in the removal of approximately two parking spaces per block.

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
17 3.4 ADA Accessibility Tools
ADA accessibility ensures that individuals with disabilities have equal access to public spaces, services, and digital content, as mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act. Pedestrian facilities that are ADA accessible are key for improving accessibility for all users.

Table 3.3 – ADA Accessibility Tools
Tool Description Image
Directional
and Nondirectional
Curb
Ramps
Directional curb ramps are aligned with
the pedestrian crossing, while nondirectional curb ramps face diagonally into the center of the intersection. Best
practice is to have directional curb
ramps, though in some cases it is not
feasible.

Non-directional curb ramp. GHD. School
Street, Ukiah, CA.

Directional curb ramps. GHD. School
Street, Ukiah, CA.

Detectable
Curb
Warning
Tiles
Detectable curb warning tiles alert
pedestrians with vision impairments of
a change in sidewalk grade and the
presence of an intersection or crossing
location.

GHD. Sacramento, CA.

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
18 3.5 Traffic Calming and Pedestrian Enhancements
Traffic calming refers to physical roadway elements designed to slow driver speeds. Slowing speeds creates a safer, more enjoyable environment for pedestrians and can encourage foot traffic.

Table 3.4 – Traffic Calming and Pedestrian Enhancements Tool Description Image
Curb
Extensions
Curb extensions extend the sidewalk
into the roadway to shorten crossing
distances for pedestrians. They narrow
the travel way and increase the turn
radii, encouraging slower driver speeds
and turn movements. The space created
by curb extensions can be used for
landscaping, street amenities, and more.

Dan Burden. Venice, FL.

Dan Burden. Palo Alto, CA.

Raised
Intersection
Raised intersections slow approaching
vehicle speeds, as well as raise crossing
pedestrians above grade, improving
visibility to drivers.

City of Cambridge. Cambridge, MA.

Chicanes
Chicanes disrupt the straight line of
vehicle travel, providing traffic calming
benefits, and a sense of place as vehicle
enter a slower roadway environment.

Dan Burden. Seattle, WA.

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
19 Tool Description Image
One-way
Streets /
Lane
Reduction
Reducing the number of lanes and/or
turning a two-way street into a one-way
street has the potential to reduce driver
speeds, creating a friendlier
environment for pedestrians.

Dan Burden. Victoria, BC
Dan Burden. Santa Cruz, CA

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
20 3.6 Streetscape Amenities
Streetscape amenities can be implemented to support multimodal travel, sustainability, and the walkable character of School Street. Amenities include, but are not limited to, trees, lighting, seating, bicycle parking, landscaping and drainage, wayfinding signage, and public art. Many of these amenities are already present along School Street and/or other parts of Ukiah but should also be considered alongside the recommend improvements discussed in Chapter 6.

Table 3.5 – Street Amenities
Tool Description Image
Trees
Trees provide shade, define space,
and create a protective buffer
between walkways and vehicle
lanes. They offer significant
environmental benefits, including
cooling through evapotranspiration,
reducing heat on paved surfaces,
blocking wind, and intercepting
heavy rainfall to ease stormwater
demands and prevent erosion. As
trees mature, their larger canopies,
denser foliage, and deeper root
systems greatly amplify these
benefits, making healthy,
established street trees especially
valuable in urban environments.

Because urban trees often have
shorter lifespans than those in
natural settings, proper long‑term
maintenance—along with
thoughtful planning for tree
succession—is essential to
sustaining these benefits over time.

City of Ukiah. State Street, Ukiah, CA.

Lighting
Lighting can be used for decorative
and functional purposes. Decorative
lighting may be used to beautify an
area and enhance community
character. Functional lighting can be
used to illuminate pedestrian
crossings, or along the walkway to
improve users’ sense of safety.

Pedestrian-scale lighting is smaller
scale lighting that can be used to
illuminate pedestrian walkways and
crossings. City of Ukiah. State Street, Ukiah, CA.

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
21 Tool Description Image
Bicycle
Parking
Bicycle racks at convenient locations
provide secure places to park and
lock bicycles on a short-term basis.

Special care should be taken to
comply with accessibility
requirements and avoid conflicts
with motor vehicles, pedestrians,
and mobility devices. The chosen
style of rack should support the
bicycle upright by its frame in two
places, prevent the wheel of the
bicycle from tipping over, enable the
frame and one or both wheels to be
secured with a U-lock.

Bicycle parking. www.pedbikeimages / Dan
Burden.

Landscaping
and
Drainage
Stormwater planters and bioswales
may be installed to capture and treat
runoff. These systems employ sandbased planting media and hydrophilic vegetation to slow water
flow and promote infiltration. Curb
cuts can be strategically placed at
low points along the street to direct
stormwater into planters, facilitating
infiltration or allowing overflow into
a drain inlet.

Small design details such as
decorative curb inlet or trench
grates can strengthen corridor
identity when used consistently.

Coordinating these grates with
adjacent elements, such as tree well
grates, creates a cohesive aesthetic
while supporting functional
drainage performance.

GHD. State Street, Ukiah. CA.

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
22 Tool Description Image
Specialty
Paving
Specialty paving can be used to
delineate a sidewalk zone and
indicate transitions, crossings, and
gateway conditions. Enhanced
paving also serves as a traffic
calming and pedestrian safety
enhancement by visually reinforcing
pedestrian priority and encouraging
slower vehicle speeds. Specialty
paving may include permeable
interlocking pavers, acid-etched
concrete, colored concrete, or
sparkle grains applied to the top of
concrete.

Permeable Pavers. EPA.

Public
Parklets
Public parklets are small, publicly
accessible spaces created by
repurposing on-street parking or
excess right-of-way to expand the
pedestrian realm. Typically
incorporating seating, planters, and
pedestrian amenities, parklets
support social interaction, can
increase foot traffic for local
businesses, while visually narrowing
the roadway and reinforcing slower
vehicle speeds.

Parklet. SDOT. Seattle, WA.

Wayfinding
Signage
Wayfinding signage is used to direct
pedestrians to nearby destinations
and can include travel time and
distance information. School Street
already features wayfinding signage,
as shown below.

GHD. School Street, Ukiah, CA.

Chapter 3: Design Principles and Streetscaping Toolbox
23 Tool Description Image
Public Art
Public art enhances imageability, or
recognizability of a community.

Public art provides a sense of place
and provides aesthetic benefits.

GHD. Church Street, Ukiah, CA.

Dan Burden. Portland, OR
Seating
Public seating creates an
environment that is inviting to
pedestrians. Seating supports all
pedestrians, especially elderly
community members or those who
may need to take frequent breaks.

Public seating is typically located in
the furniture zone, between the
walkway and vehicle traffic. Public
seating is differentiated from private
outdoor dining seating, but the two
may serve similar purposes.
www.pedbikeimages / Dan Burden.

Saugatuch, MI.
www.pedbikeimages / Dan Burden. Santa
Barbara, CA.

24 Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
The Existing Conditions is the first step to
developing a context sensitive,
performance-based multimodal corridor
plan. This section will inventory the
existing transportation network and
identify barriers to safe and accessible
active travel. In conjunction with feedback
from community engagement, findings
from the Existing Conditions report will
inform the proposed enhancements to
School Street. The Existing Conditions
report will include:
➢ Community context and travel
patterns
➢ An inventory of existing barriers and
amenities along the corridor
➢ A review of the corridor’s collision
history

4.1 Community Context
Population
According to the Ukiah 2040 General Plan,
the City’s population in 2018 was
estimated at 16,226 persons. The annual
growth rate between 1990 and 2018
averaged approximately 0.3%, and the
population of the city grew 3.7% between
2000 and 2010.

According to 2020 DEC Redistricting Data
from the Decennial Census, Ukiah has a
population 16,607 people.

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
25 Low-Income and Disadvantaged
Community Status
Disadvantaged communities are typically
characterized as having low incomes, high
rates of unemployment, disproportionate
exposure to sources of pollution, and/or
health issues, such as asthma and heart
disease. These communities historically
have inadequate pedestrian, bicycle, and
transit infrastructure, though their
populations depend on alternatives to car
travel the most. Because of this,
disadvantaged communities in the State
of California are typically more eligible for
grant funding for transportation
improvement plans and projects.

Communities in California may be defined
as disadvantaged using one of many
metrics, including Median Household
income (MHI). A community is typically
considered disadvantaged if the MHI is
below 80% of the statewide MHI of $91,905.

According to the American Community
Survey (ACS) 2024 5-year estimates, the
MHI in the City of Ukiah is, $66,160, which is
72% of the California statewide median.

One of the two census tracts in which the
study area is located has lower MHI than
the rest of the city, $41,926, which is 46% of
the statewide median. Based on these
metrics, the study area is within a
disadvantaged community.

Street System
Downtown Ukiah has a grid network of
one-way and two-way minor arterials and
collectors that intersect. School Street is a
two-way street and serves as a primary
travel route through downtown. Streets
that intersect School Street within the
study area include:
➢ Three one-way eastbound streets:

Henry Street, Standley Street, and
Church Street
➢ Two one-way westbound streets: Smith
Street and Perkins Street
➢ Two two-way streets: Stephenson
Street and Clay Street
Diagonal parking is present on both sides
of School Street between Stephenson
Street and Henry Street. Parallel parking
exists on the west side of School Street
south of Stephenson Street to Clay Street.

Diagonal parking on School Street south of Church
Street.

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
26 Land Use and Key Destinations
Figure 4.1 identifies key destinations
located along or near the School Street
corridor, including the Superior Court of
Mendocino County, and the Alex R
Thomas Plaza. The courthouse building,
which is owned by the County of
Mendocino, is being relocated to Perkins
Street in 2027. Two libraries are located
near the study area, including the
Mendocino Law Library in the Courthouse
building, and the Public Library on Perkins
Street and Main Street.

The land adjacent to School Street is
primarily comprised of Downtown Core
(DC) uses, which can include multifamily
dwellings, mixed use developments,
entertainment, lodging, restaurants, retail,
office space, central gathering spaces and
more. Other land uses near the project
area include community commercial, as
well as low- and medium-density housing.

School Street is home to a variety of local
businesses and restaurants that draw foot
traffic into Ukiah’s downtown. A portion of
the street is also frequently shut down for
the Ukiah Farmers Market and other
events.

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
27 Figure 4.1 – Study Area Map

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
28 Figure 4.2 – Existing School Street Cross-Section

4.2 Existing Street
Configuration
School Street is 80 feet wide between
buildings (the right-of-way width) north of
Stephenson Street. South of Stephenson
Street, adjacent to the Alex R. Thomas
Plaza, School Street is 75 feet wide
measured from the back of sidewalk. The
existing street geometries for the 80-foot
width is shown above. Diagonal parking
along the street is approximately at a 55-
degree angle. Sidewalk widths and tree
planter widths vary but generally make up
11-12 feet from the curb.

4.3 Transportation
Patterns
Transportation patterns in Ukiah were
derived from the Ukiah 2040 General Plan,
American Community Survey (ACS), and
the latest Replica Data (big-data platform)
from Fall 2023 for a typical weekday.

Replica uses Location Based Services (LBS)
in addition to census data and traffic count
information to determine origindestination data.

Journey to Work Data
According to the 2040 General Plan, 51% of
working employed in Ukiah live outside of
the city, 28% live in the city and are
employed outside of the city, and 21% both
live and work in the city.

Means of Transportation
According to Replica, most trips taken in
Ukiah are taken by drivers (81.6%), though
a significant portion of trips are completed
on foot. (14.7%). Ukiah is a walkable
community, and many of the destinations
along School Street are within walking
distance of adjacent residential
communities. Bicycling accounts for 0.3%
of trips taken, and no transit trips were
reported.

Figure 4.3 – Means of Transportation to Work

1.2% 0.0% 0.3%

14.7%

2.2%

81.6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
29 4.4 Street Amenities and
Barriers
Street amenities and barriers were
identified along School Street during a
walk audit held on February 13, 2025.

Existing Street Amenities
Figure 4.4 provides a map of existing
street amenities along the School Street
corridor. These amenities enhance School
Street’s walkability and create welcoming
environment for visitors.

Curb Extensions
Curb extensions are present at Smith
Street, Church Street and Clay Street.

Many informal extensions of the curb are
located throughout the corridor – they
feature planters that extend into the
roadway, but do not extend the sidewalk
or curb ramp.

Street Furniture
Benches are available between Standley
Street and Church Street on both sides of
School Street. Trash bins are present
throughout School Steet.

Public Art
Not noted on Figure 4.4, a mural is present
on Church Street adjacent to School
Street.

Outdoor dining
Al fresco dining for Patrona is located at
School Street and Standley Street.

Curb extensions across Smith Street.

Informal extension of the curb at Church Street.

Bench on School Street at Standley Street.

Mural on Church Street in Ukiah.

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
30 Bicycle Parking
Bicycle parking is available at parks,
schools, the Civic Center, and at some
businesses. Along School Street, bike
parking is available on Standley Street and
north of Clay Street. Several bike parking
locations also exists on adjacent streets.

Wayfinding
Wayfinding signage is located at Standley
Street next to the bicycle parking, and at
Stephenson Street next to Alex R Thomas
Jr. Plaza.

Parking and Curb management
Loading zones are present throughout the
corridor on each block but are not
consistent along the corridor. Some
loading zones are located at the end of the
block, while others are in the middle.

Loading zones are also present on side
streets, include Standley Street, Perkins
Street, Church Street, and Stephenson
Street.

On Church Street west of School Street, a
loading zone is located on the north side of
the street and parking is on the south side.

If a car is parked on the south side and
another vehicle is in the loading zone,
there would not be enough room for a
vehicle to pass.

ADA parking is present at School Street
and Perkins Street, and special parking
spaces are located on the east side of
School Street between Perkins Street and
Smith Street. There are also special
parking spaces on the east side of School
Street between Smith Street and Perkins
Street dedicated for the Courthouse. After
the Courthouse is relocated, those parking
spaces will likely be available and
unrestricted to the public.

Transit
Transit stops are located west of School
Street on Standley Street and Perkins
Street. Both Standley and Perkins Street
transit stops have a bench, neither stops
have a shade covering.

Bicycle parking and al fresco dining at Standley
Street.

Constrained loading zone and parking lane on
Church Street.

Wayfinding signage at School Street and Standley
Street.

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
31 Figure 4.4 – Existing Street Amenities

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
32 Existing Street Barriers
Figure 4.5 presents existing barriers along
School Street. These examples highlight
maintenance issues along the corridor and
negatively impact walkability.

Tree Root Issues
Trees along the School Street corridor have
caused cracks in the sidewalk and trip
hazards, utility conflicts, drainage issues,
and have in some cases, started to impact
building foundations. The Chinese
Pistache trees that line School Street were
planted approximately 60-years ago in
planters that were too small and on top of
existing utilities, leading to sidewalk
degradation and utility conflicts
throughout the entire project area.

After the second workshop in December
2024, during the walk audit, a utility
marking was conducted. The 811 utility
marking brought insight into the location
of the underground utilities in correlation
with the existing trees. In many cases, the
trees were planted on top of utilities and
have impacted electrical lines
underground. The expanding root system
compromises the integrity of the sidewalk,
utilities, and future construction.

For more information about the Chinese
Pistache Trees and their impacts on School
Street, see Appendix C.

Tree roots impacting utilities, drainage, and sidewalk
on School Street.

Drainage issues south of Church Street.

Utility markings in conflict with the tree.

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
33 Pedestrian Infrastructure
Standard crosswalks are present at most
intersections along School Street. Some
crosswalks are painted burgundy, but
many have faded or are cracked.

ADA accessible curb ramps are missing at
Henry Street, Standley Street, Church
Street, and Stephenson Street. Existing
curb ramps include a variety of directional
and non-directional curb ramps.

Directional curb ramps are more
accessible as they typically feature two
ramps aligned with the existing
crosswalks, while non-directional curb
ramps align with the middle of the
intersection.

During the walk audit, community
members noted that lighting
improvements are needed at Perkins
Street.

Faded crosswalk and lack of ADA curb ramps on the
west leg of Church Street.

Walk Audit taking place at School Street and Church
Street.

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
34 Figure 4.5 – Existing Street Barriers

Chapter 4: Existing Conditions
35 4.5 Safety
The collision information below was
retrieved from the Statewide Integrated
Traffic Record System (SWITRS) and
represents collisions that occurred on or
adjacent to School Street between 2019
and 2023.

Six collisions occurred during the study
period, including four collisions at School
Street and Perkins Street and two
collisions at School Street and Clay Street.

Perkins Street
Of the four collisions that occurred on
Perkins Street, three resulted in property
damage only (PDO) and involved motor
vehicles. The PCF violation categories
included an unsafe speed violation, an
improper turning violation, and a violation
reported as unknown.

The fourth collision resulted from a driver
making a left turn and hitting a pedestrian
traveling in the crosswalk. The collision
resulted in a visible injury sustained by the
pedestrian.

Clay Street
The two collisions that occurred at School
Street and Clay Street were caused by an
automobile right of way violation and a
traffic sign violation. Both collisions
involved motor vehicles and resulted in
PDO.

Summary
Turning, right-of-way, and unsafe speed
violations have all occurred on School
Street. The proposed enhancements
should help reduce these collision causes
to improve safety for all road users.

36 Chapter 5: Tree Management
Trees are a key part of the School Street
corridor, providing shade and aesthetic
benefits for the community. However, the
trees along School Street are impacting
sidewalk quality, ADA accessibility,
streetlights, drainage inlets, underground
utilities, and in some cases buildings.

Leaving trees as they are, will impact tree
health for future generations and further
degrade the surrounding infrastructure.

The following steps provide a potential
framework for addressing the current tree
issues impacting School Street. Before
establishing a framework, an ISA-certified
or Registered Consulting Arborist should
conduct a tree inventory and assessment
to evaluate the health and stability of
existing trees and determine their
tolerance to disturbance within critical
root zones. The arborist report can help
inform a preferred framework and
succession plan for the existing trees.

Chapter 5: Tree Management
37 5.1 Chinese Pistache Tree
The tree species that currently lines School
Street is the Chinese Pistache (Pistacia
chinensis). They typically grow to 40 feet
tall with a 35-foot-wide canopy. The tree
species is known for its fall colors and is
well loved by the community. The Chinese
Pistache that currently line School Street
were planted approximately 60 years ago,
in many cases on top of existing utilities.

Chinese Pistache require a minimum
planter size of 50 square feet (5’ x 10’ or 7’ x
7’), to minimize root and hardscape
conflicts. Current planter size along School
Street is typically four feet by four to five
feet, with the smallest planters measuring
three feet by three feet.

The trees were originally planted without
underground root barriers, which, coupled
with inadequate planter sizes, has caused
root impacts on sidewalks, utilities,
drainage, and in some cases buildings.

Because these trees are close to buildings
and in tight areas, they have often been
heavily pruned or limbed up to avoid
conflicts with facades. While these
interventions are often necessary in
narrow corridors, repeated structural
pruning can weaken tree form, reduce
canopy density, and accelerate long‑term
decline.

Chinese Pistache have the potential of a
long life, but current conditions will likely
reduce their lifespan and continue to
create maintenance issues along the
corridor. Reconfiguring School Street
provides an opportunity to expand the
tree planters, install root barriers, ensure
adequate tree soil volume, and give a
longer, healthier life for future trees and for
future generations.

Asymmetrical and reduced live crown of existing
Pistache trees.

Tree roots upending sidewalk.

Chapter 5: Tree Management
38 Recent Tree Management and
Sidewalk Construction
The City’s current approach for addressing
tree root issues is on an individual tree-bytree basis as urgent issues arise. Trees are removed and replaced, and localized
sidewalk repair, root pruning and utility
maintenance are conducted. These can
leave sidewalk and pavement patches that
are unsightly. To systematically address
the tree root issues, the City may opt to
conduct a full tree replacement program.

Where tree root issues have caused
significant issues, trees have been
removed, replanted and/or sidewalks have
been reconstructed, and utility laterals
needed to be cleared out or replaced.

A few trees have been recently replanted
throughout the corridor, including
between Henry Street and Standley Street,
and between Stephenson Street and
Church Street. A tree on the north end of
the corridor on the west side of School
Street was removed and has not been
replanted.

Near the northwest corner of School Street
and Smith Street, tree roots had not only
impacted the sidewalk but impacted
underground power lines, necessitating
immediate reconstruction.

Recent reconstruction of the northwest corner of the
School Street and Smith Street Intersection.

Tree roots wrapped around a water line, found at
School Street and Smith Street.

Chapter 5: Tree Management
39 5.2Root Pruning
Reconstructing the sidewalk without
mitigating the tree root issues would
result in recurring sidewalk uplift and
continued utility impacts. Implementing
proposed improvements along School
Street considered retaining the existing
trees, root pruning, installing root barriers,
and trenching for utility repairs. However,
since these trees are mature and the roots
have limited space and soil for installing
root barriers, it is highly likely that pruning
the existing roots may be detrimental to
the trees’ life. Without an arborist’s study
of the trees, the possibility of retaining the
existing trees is unknown and is likely not
feasible. There could be a significant
percentage of roots or large structural
roots that may need to be cut.
5Chinese
Pistache have an average lifespan of 50 to
100 years, and the current trees are
approximately over 60 years old6.

The risk of pruning the roots and potential
risk to the trees’ life outweighs the
potential benefit of retaining the existing
trees. Therefore, the trees must be
removed and replaced along with
installation of root barriers, biobarrier and
structural soil or silva-cells to ensure
adequate rootable soil volume and planter
space.

Additionally, planting a second row of
trees to phase out the existing trees was
considered. However, this option is not
recommended as young trees would need
5 Schalau Jeff, “Deciduous Trees,”
University of Arizona Cooperative
Extension, 23 June 2024
https://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extensi
to compete for sunlight under the canopy
of existing trees and compete for root
space underground.

5.3 Tree Replacement
Program
The below framework establishes a
phased, decision‑driven approach that
begins with detailed utility and tree root
assessments, uses those findings to
determine infrastructure priorities, and
then implements improvements
block‑by‑block where conflicts are
greatest. This approach balances
infrastructure needs with long‑term tree
health by integrating arborist oversight,
root protection strategies, and engineered
soil systems into coordinated streetscape
reconstruction.

Step 1: Utility and Root
Assessment
A Request a USA Underground Service
Alert (811) survey (completed in
December 2025) and compile all
available City utility maps and thirdparty utility maps.

B Identify known utility and tree conflicts
(e.g., root intrusion into water/sewer
lines), and root/hardscape uplifting
locations.

Step 2: Decision Framework
During demolition operations, the
contractor will work with a City
on.arizona.edu/files/barnesm/DeciduousTr
ees.pdf
6 At maturity they reach a heigh of 30-35 ft,
and width of 20-30 ft.

Chapter 5: Tree Management
40 representative to make decisions on
where utility repair/replacement is needed.

A Integrate utility information into future
construction drawings/improvement
plans (typically into the topographic
survey) for civil demolition planning
and design consideration.

B Provision in the design drawings and
specifications that the contractor
performing the work retains a certified
arborist (ISA/ASCA) to be present
during construction with authority to
stop work if need be.

Step 3: Implementation
One goal of the Plan is to improve
walkability, which may include expanding
the sidewalk, creating more room for
street furniture and store frontages.

Leaving the existing trees in place limits
the opportunity to expand the frontage
and streetscape. Replanting of the trees
and reconstruction on the planters should
be implemented in coordination with
streetscape improvements to avoid
piecemeal improvements that reduce the
function of the street, as shown on the top
right.

Initially, consideration was given to
implementing the improvements block by
block. However, this approach would
complicate utility replacement and
prolong impacts to businesses along the
corridor. Additionally, grant funding
typically would not allow for prolonged
expenditures over several construction
seasons. Rather than constructing block
by block the City favors a streamlined
reconstruction of the entire corridor
including comprehensive utility relocation
and replacing all trees at once.

To support long-term tree health, the
streetscape project would entail installing
continuous soil trenches or suspended
pavement systems that afford sufficient
soil rooting volume, and installing root
barriers to prevent future tree root
impacts.

Result of expanding sidewalks while leaving existing
trees in place, New York, USA.
811 Utilities Marking, Ukiah, CA.

Chapter 5: Tree Management
41 5.4Planting Specifications
As mentioned previously, the Ukiah
Downtown Zoning Code requires Chinese
Pistache trees in a planter that is, at
minimum, six to seven feet wide. Ideally,
each tree would have about 50 square feet
of exposed planter opening, equating to
roughly a 5-foot by 10-foot planter, or a 7-
foot by 7-foot planter. Additionally, each
tree requires a minimum of 1,000 cubic
feet of rootable soil volume, which can be
a combination of exposed planter and
below pavement structural soil.

The City may also consider using
alternative cultivars of the Pistache tree
such as ‘Keith Davey’ or ‘Red Push’ which
are hybrids and do not produce berries.

Like the Chinese Pistache variety, they are
also prized for their fall colors, but unlike
the Pistache, this tree mainly consists of a
vibrant red and not the full fall color array.

These hybrid options provide a stable, nonaggressive root system and provide shading using an umbrella-like crown.

Because the City’s Downtown Zoning
Code only permits one type of tree species
along the corridor, regular monitoring is
recommended for optimum tree health
and longevity. A monoculture of trees can
be more prone to species-specific pests or
pathogens which could lead to large scale
tree loss. Implementation of city-wide tree
diversity requirements could help mitigate
this risk.

Tree growing outside of its planter, Ukiah, CA.

Red Push Pistache Tree, Starnursery.com, Nevada,
USA.

42 Example of a downtown main street
Chapter 6: Alternatives Considered
Based on the findings during the technical
analysis and community engagement,
four design alternatives for School Street
were developed and presented to
residents. The designs were guided by the
following criteria and constraints
discussed below.

6.1Design Criteria
The following design criteria guided the
development of the alternative concepts.

Street Design Standards
The Ukiah Downtown Zoning Code
provides street standards that should be
adhered to by the proposed School Street
designs.

Drive Aisle and Parking
Under the Zoning Code, School Street is
classified as a commercial Street with
angled parking. Through lanes adjacent to
parallel parking should be 10 feet wide,
while through lanes adjacent to angled
parking should be 12 feet wide. Drive aisle
width for a one-way street is dependent on
the angle of the parking; 45-degree
parking requires a 13-foot drive aisle while
60-degree parking requires an 18-foot
drive aisle.

According to the Zoning Code, the depth
of an angled parking lane should be 17 feet
(existing angled parking lanes on School

Chapter 6: Alternatives Considered
43 Street are only 14 feet deep). Parallel
parking lanes should be at least seven feet
wide.

Sidewalk and Planter Widths
The Zoning Code states that along
commercial streets, sidewalks should be 12
feet wide, including four-foot-wide tree
planters adjacent to the street and an
eight-foot walking zone. Today, sidewalks
along School Street are approximately 10-
12 feet, with three- to five-foot planters and
a five- or six-foot walking zone. Tree
planter widths in the Zoning Code do not
align with the requirements of the Chinese
Pistache (which is the only tree species
allowed on School Street per the Zoning
Code) and require planters that are at least
five feet wide and ten feet long, or seven
feet by seven feet.

Throughout the community engagement
process, residents voiced support for
widening sidewalks to 17-feet where
possible (including the tree area). This is
similar to the newly improved sidewalks
along Perkins Street, Standley Street, and
State Street completed as a part of the
Downtown Streetscape Project. Tradeoffs
will need to be made in the final design to
accommodate community preferences,
street design standards, parking and
circulation, and tree planter requirements.

Underground Utilities
The City, utility providers, and stakeholders
along the corridor face challenges today
with existing underground utilities due to
aging infrastructure and root intrusion
from mature trees. Although utility
replacement and/or relocation is not a
differentiator between considered
alternatives, it is acknowledged that the
reconstruction of School Street will provide
an opportunity to mitigate existing
underground utility issues, lower street
maintenance needs associated with those
utilities, and improve the resiliency of the
corridor by reducing service interruptions.

6.2 Streetscape Amenities
Pedestrian enhancements that pull from
the Streetscape Toolbox in Chapter 3 are
proposed for all concepts along School
Street. Many of these amenities are already
present along School Street in some areas.

This Plan proposes to provide a consistent
streetscape along the corridor where the
below amenities are included, regardless
of the circulation alternatives considered.

Trees on School Street are one of the
primary considerations that impact the
proposed design for the corridor. As
discussed in Chapter 5, Chinese Pistache
trees require tree planters that provide at
least a 5-foot by 10-foot planter, or a 7-foot
by 7-foot planter. The final design must
provide adequate planter space to support
the Chinese Pistache. This means that
width must be repurposed from other
street elements, including parking or
travel lanes, while also maintaining
adequate width for the sidewalk.

Lighting - Decorative and functional
pedestrian-scale lighting is proposed
along School Street to illuminate walkways
and enhance community character. The
specific type of light fixture will be
determined during design. Additional
string lights across intersections and along
the tree line should be maintained.

Bicycle Parking is proposed for every
block face in the furniture zone.

Chapter 6: Alternatives Considered
44 Landscaping and Drainage will be
incorporated into the street design
including tree areas and curb extensions. A
Landscaping Plan will be determined
during the design phase. For drainage
considerations, valley gutters are also
considered an option, where the water
drains to a gutter pan located at the end of
the parking space.

Specialty paving is proposed at
crosswalks and along the sidewalk in the
furniture zone in between trees.

Wayfinding Signage exists in some
locations in the downtown area and along
School Street. This plan proposes a few
new wayfinding signs along the corridor,
consistent with current sign design.

Public Art can be incorporated into
various street elements such as
crosswalks, murals, banners on light poles,
decorative lighting, decorative curb inlets
and grates, small-scale art pieces
incorporated into landscape areas. These
types of art features will be determined in
more detail in the design phase.

Benches along the corridor are to remain
or be replaced so that each block face has
at least two benches.

Curb extensions are recommended at
every intersection in the study area to
shorten crossing distances and enhance
walkability. Improvements would include
converting the existing triangular planter
areas located on some corners throughout
the corridor into more robust curb
extensions with directional curb ramps.

Curb extensions recently constructed as a
part of the State Street improvements will
need to be reconfigured to accommodate
sidewalk widening.

The Ukiah Police Department and Ukiah
Valley Fire Authority both expressed
interest in maintaining curb extensions
but not extending them further due to
turning radii and emergency vehicle
access. These types of details will be
considered in greater detail during the
design phase. Preliminary layouts in this
plan accommodate emergency vehicles.

Raised Intersections are recommended
at the following intersections:
➢ Standley Street
➢ Perkins Street
➢ Church Street
➢ Stephenson Street

6.3Design Alternatives
The four alternatives listed below were
brought to the community for a second
round of feedback.
➢ Alternative 1: One-way “Split” from
Perkins Street
➢ Alternative 2: One-way Northbound
➢ Alternative 3: Retain Two-way Street
with Diagonal Parking
➢ Alternative 4: Two-way Street with
Parallel Parking
Each alternative includes various street
amenities from the toolbox discussed in
Chapter 3, as well as bicycle sharrow
markings that indicate bicyclists and
drivers must share the road. Parallel
parking on the west side of School Street
south of Stephenson Street would be
maintained in each alternative.

Chapter 6: Alternatives Considered
45 Alternative 1: One-way “Split” from Perkins Street
Alternative 1 proposes transforming School Street into a one-way street, northbound north of Perkins Street and southbound south of Perkins Street. Perkins Street is a primary access to School Street for many drivers, and allowing the choice to turn right or left at this point helps to maintain vehicle circulation. This alternative has an 18-foot travel lane, 16-foot diagonal parking on both sides, room for five-foot to seven-foot tree wells, and 8-foot to 10-foot sidewalk. Alternative 1 could be implemented with back-in parking, pull-in parking, or both.

By removing a travel lane, Alternative 1 allows for expanded tree planters along the entire corridor, as well as wider sidewalks. To resolve the current root issues and provide a sustainable long-term plan for future infrastructure maintenance, tree replacement is recommended along with underground utility replacement/realignment.

Figure 6.1 – Rendering of Alternative 1: One-way “Split” from Perkins Street Figure 6.2 – Alternative 1 Cross-Section

Chapter 6: Alternatives Considered
46 Alternative 2: One-way Northbound
Alternative 2 proposes turning School Street into a northbound one-way street between Henry Street and Clay Street. Unlike Alternative 1, Alternative 2 proposes School Street be northbound only, rather than southbound south of Perkins Street. This alternative has an 18- foot travel lane, 16-foot diagonal parking on both sides, room for five-foot to seven-foot tree wells, and 8-foot to 10-foot sidewalk. Alternative 2 could be implemented with back-in parking, pull-in parking, or both.

By removing a travel lane, Alternative 2 also allows for expanded tree planters along the entire corridor, as well as wider sidewalks. Like Alternative 1, tree replacement is recommended to provide a sustainable long-term plan for future infrastructure maintenance, along with underground utility replacement/realignment.

Figure 6.3 – Alternative 2 Rendering: One-way Northbound Figure 6.4 – Alternative 2 Cross-Section

Chapter 6: Alternatives Considered
47 Alternative 3: Two-way Street with Diagonal Parking
Alternative 3 maintains School Street as a two-way street with diagonal parking. The alternative maintains existing vehicle access and only expands the tree area by about two feet. Alternative 3 could be implemented with back-in parking, pull-in parking, or both.

Alternative 3 does not provide as much additional room for expanded planters like Alternatives 1 and 2, nor does it widen the existing sidewalk area. However, tree replacement is still recommended to provide a sustainable long-term plan for future infrastructure maintenance, along with underground utility replacement/realignment.

Figure 6.5 – Rendering of Alternative 3: Two-way Street with Diagonal Parking Figure 6.6 – Alternative 3 Cross-Section

Chapter 6: Alternatives Considered
48 Alternative 4: Two-way Street with Parallel Parking
Alternative 4 maintains School Street as a two-way street but recommends parallel parking.

This alternative results in the loss of approximately 3 parking spaces per block face but preserves the existing vehicle circulation and provides more room for new trees and other street amenities. This alternative has two 11-foot travel lanes, 9-foot parallel parking on both sides, room for seven-foot to 10-foot tree wells, and 10-foot to 13-foot sidewalks on both sides of the street.

By switching from diagonal parking to parallel parking, Alternative 4 allows for both expanded sidewalk and tree planters along the entire corridor. To resolve the current root issues, tree replacement is recommended to provide a sustainable long-term plan for future infrastructure maintenance, along with underground utility replacement/realignment.

Figure 6.7 – Rendering of Two-way Street with Parallel Parking Figure 6.8 – Alternative 4 Cross-Section

Chapter 6: Alternatives Considered
49 6.4 Alternatives Analysis
Table 6.1 provides an analysis of the four
alternatives considered along School
Street. All alternatives, except for
Alternative 3 expand the sidewalk. All
alternatives include various streetscape
amenities.

All Alternatives can provide adequate tree
planter width for the Chinese Pistache,
however only Alternatives 1, 2, and 4 meet
the desired sidewalk width by the
community. Alternatives 1 and 2 maintain
diagonal parking, and gain the room
required for the expanded tree planters by
converting School Street from a two-way
street to a one-way street. Alternative 4
maintains School Street as a two-way
street and provides an expanded sidewalk
and extra room for tree planters by
converting diagonal parking to parallel
parking, which results in the loss of a few
parking spaces per block face.

Alternative 3 is the only design alternative
that does not provide an improved
walking area width, due to expanding the
tree wells. While the alternative maintains
the two-way street, parking configuration
and the number of parking stalls,
Alternatives 1 and 2 both convert School
Street to a one-way street, to which the
community initially raised concerns.

Alternative 1 better preserves vehicle
access compared to Alternative 2 by
splitting the direction of traffic at Perkins
Street. While Alternative 4 maintains
existing vehicle access, community
members had concerns about the
resulting loss of parking by converting to
parallel parking.

Table 6.1 – Circulation Alternatives Analysis
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Circulation One-way One-way Two-way Two-way
Direction of
Traffic
Northbound (north
of Perkins Street)
and southbound
(south of Perkins
Street)
Northbound
only
Northbound
and
southbound
Northbound
and
southbound
Parking Style Diagonal (pull-in or
back-in)
Diagonal (pullin or back-in)Diagonal (pullin or back-in) Parallel Number of
Parking Stalls
Maintained
Yes Yes Yes No
Adequate Tree
Planter Width Yes (5-7 feet) Yes (5-7 feet) Yes (5-7 feet) Yes (7-10 feet) Sidewalk
Width
8 feet
(15 feet total)
8 feet
(15 feet total)
6 feet
(13 feet total)
13 feet
(20 feet total)
ADA
Accessibility Yes Yes Yes Yes

50 Chapter 7: Preferred Concept
The following chapter presents the
preferred design concept for School Street,
which was developed based on
community feedback, the technical
evaluation of existing constraints, and the
vision and goals established at the
beginning of the plan. It aims to enhance
walkability, economic resiliency, and
support community activities and events.

The preferred concept, shown in Figure 7.1
and Figure 7.2, proposes converting School
Street from a two-way street to a one-way
single lane street, as proposed in
Alternative 1. The one-way street will be
northbound north of Perkins Street to
Henry Street, and southbound south of
Perkins Street to Clay Street. The concept
maintains the diagonal pull-in parking
along the corridor, but at a slightly higher
angle of 50 degrees. It also expands the
width of the sidewalk to 10.5 feet (16 feet
with the trees), from the current 11-12 feet.

The proposed design strives to meet the
desire of the community to expand the
sidewalk and address the persistent tree
root issues impacting the sidewalk,
utilities, and buildings along the corridor. If
implemented, the concept will expand the
tree planters to five-feet wide and ten-feet
long, with 6 inches for the curb face.

Expanding the tree planters adequately
accommodates the Chinese Pistache,
mitigating sidewalk maintenance issues
and reduced conflicts with buildings.

Some of the existing underground utilities
are approximately 100 years old and would
need to be replaced and realigned to
ensure improved service and reduced
future conflicts. Improving the tree
planters will extend life of future trees and
preserve the tree canopy for generations
to come. Additionally, in coordination with
City staff, Stephenson Street is proposed to
be converted to one-way westbound with
implementation of this plan.

Chapter 7: Preferred Concept
51 Figure 7.1 – Preferred Concept between Perkins Street and Standley Street

Chapter 7: Preferred Concept
52 Figure 7.2 – Preferred Concept between Standley Street and Smith Street

Chapter 7: Preferred Concept
53 7.1Design Elements
ADA Accessibility and Traffic
Calming
As discussed in Chapter 6, ADA
accessibility and traffic calming will be
implemented throughout the corridor.

The City has already begun implementing
curb extensions with directional curb
ramps on School Street, including at Smith
Street, Church Street, and Clay Street.

These improvements shorten crossing
distances for pedestrians and improve
accessibility for those using mobility
devices. Providing curb extensions along
the rest of the corridor will continue the
work the City has initiated to improve
walkability along School Street.

Raised intersections are also proposed at
Smith Street, Perkins Street, Church Street
and Stephenson Street. These
intersections will be raised by about three
inches to enhance visibility for crossing
pedestrians to drivers.

Drive Aisle
The preferred concept reduces the drive
aisle from 24 feet (comprised of two 12-foot
lanes) to 18 feet wide, which adequately
accommodates drivers entering and
exiting parking stalls. The proposed drive
aisle width considers emergency vehicle
traffic and is designed to allow for a fire
engine and a private vehicle to pass one
another. At the proposed curb extensions
at each intersection, the drive aisle is 21-
feet wide to accommodate for emergency
vehicle turning radii. For a cross section of
the preferred concept, see Figure 7.3.

Figure 7.3 – Cross-Section of the Preferred Concept

Chapter 7: Preferred Concept
54 Parking
The preferred concept maintains diagonal
pull-in parking along the corridor. The
parking angle (measured perpendicular from
the curb) is reduced from 55 degrees to 50
degrees. Decreasing the parking angle
generally preserves the number of parking
stalls along the corridor in most locations
7 .

However, it also requires a deeper parking
area and a wider drive aisle to accommodate
for parking movements. The proposed drive
aisle width is adequate for the new, reduced
parking angle. The parking configuration
presented in the preferred concept is
preliminary and will require further design
for exact measurements. In the next stage of
project implementation, the City may
explore reducing the sidewalk width to nine
feet to extend parking stall length if
necessary.

7.2 Loading Zones and
City Services
Along the corridor today, there are several
diagonal parking spaces designated as
loading zones for the adjacent businesses.

The City intends to maintain these as loading
spaces with the implementation of the
preferred concept. Side street loading zones
on Standley Street and Perkins Street will
also be maintained. Due to the limited street
width, on Church Street west of School
Street, the current configuration of parking
on the south side and loading zone on the
north side presents the potential of blockage
of the travel way. To mitigate these issues,
the loading zone should be relocated to the
7 Changes to the number of parking stalls by the
preferred alternative. Some blocks along School
Street may lose or gain a parking space depending
south side of the Street, replacing a parking
space. The proposed one-way street concept
is wide enough to accommodate garbage
trucks. Because of the lack of alleys in
downtown Ukiah, businesses store their
dumpsters along School Street, or inside,
currently between Clay Street and Standley
Street, and at the School Street Standley
Street intersection. The City is in the process
of implementing a plan that will create
shared garbage areas in parking lots and
disallow dumpsters on streets.

7.3 Community Priorities
The preferred concept proposed for School
Street best meets the needs and priorities
identified by the community. Preserving the
trees along School Street is a priority for the
community; and it is crucial that Chinese
Pistache remain the tree of choice along the
corridor. Residents also advocated for
widening the sidewalk to 10-feet. Business
owners were concerned that any alternatives
that reduced the number of parking stalls
would have negative economic impacts. The
community also prioritized maintaining pullin parking rather than converting to back-in parking.

While many residents advocated for
maintaining the two-way street, this could
not be achieved while also maintaining
existing parking and providing adequate
room for the Chinese Pistache. Alternative 1
preserves the number of parking stalls,
widens the sidewalk, and expands the tree
planters, best meeting all community
priorities.
on block length. Further design is required to
establish the exact number of parking spaces
proposed.

55 Chapter 8: Implementation Plan
The preferred concept for School Street is
a transformative vision for the corridor that
aims to enhance walkability and economic
resilience, while also addressing issues
related to tree maintenance and utilities.

Two strategies were considered for
implementation of the preferred concept:
a phased block-by block approach and a
full corridor reconstruction. A block-byblock phased approach was considered to alleviate the cost burden of full
reconstruction. However, as noted in
Section 5.3, this approach would pose
constructability and funding challenges.

Additionally, a phased implementation
could pose circulation disruptions if not
sequenced thoughtfully.

It is recommended that the preferred
concept be constructed all at once to
reduce construction time, minimize
pedestrian and vehicular circulation
disruptions, facilitate utility coordination,
and improve cost effectiveness,
particularly if using discretionary grant
funds. It will also provide a uniform tree
canopy and streetscape along the corridor.

8.1Preliminary Cost
Estimate
Implementation of the preferred concept
is estimated to be $15,906,000 for a full
reconstruction of the corridor. A detailed
cost estimate can be found in Appendix C.

This estimate is preliminary, and further
design will be required to finalize costs.

Each block may have unique challenges
that may alter the presented costs.

8.2 Funding Opportunities
A variety of state-funded grant programs
are available to support the
enhancements recommended by this
study.

Measure Y
Measure Y, passed by a simple majority
(50% plus 1) of Ukiah voters in November of

Chapter 8: Implementation Plan
56 2016, is a general (unrestricted) transaction
and use tax. A general unrestricted tax is
one that can be used to fund any program,
function, service, or project at the
discretion of the City Council. Measure Y
specifically is used to fund streets and
sidewalks, storm drains, etc. Measure Y is a

0.5% transaction and use tax and
generates approximately 3 million dollars
each year.

Active Transportation Program
(ATP)
California’s Active Transportation Program
(ATP) funds projects that support walking
and bicycling, improve safety for nonmotorized road users, improve public health and meet regional greenhouse gas
emissions reduction goals.

ATP funds are administered by the
California Transportation Commission
(CTC) and are awarded through a
competitive grant process. The call for
applications occurs every two years, with
the next cycle opening in March 2026.

Eligible project types include bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure projects, noninfrastructure program activities, and planning funds may be used for
environmental, design, right-of-way and
construction phases of capital projects.

ATP does not require the applicant to have
matching funds, but the applicant’s ability
to leverage local funding improve
competitiveness of the application.

More information can be found at
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/localassistance/fed-and-state-programs/activetransportation-program Affordable Housing and
Sustainable Communities (AHSC)
Program
The Affordable Housing and Sustainable
Communities (AHSC) Program is
administered by the California
Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD). The program funds
land-use, housing transportation and land
preservation projects that prioritize infill
and compact development in an effort to
reduce GHG emissions.

Eligible projects include pedestrian
improvements, although, projects must
have an affordable housing component.

Funds are awarded annually through a
competitive program. While not required,
leveraging funds make grant applicants
more competitive. More information can
be found at
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/funding/ahsc#nof
a

Chapter 8: Implementation Plan
57 Regional Transportation
Improvement Program (RTIP)
The Regional Transportation Improvement
Program (RTIP) is a program of highway,
local road, transit and active transportation
projects that a region plans to fund with
State and Federal revenue programmed
by the California Transportation
Commission in the State Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP). This RTIP
has been developed in conformance with
State law and the adopted 2022
Mendocino County Regional
Transportation Plan. All funding proposed
will be used to either add benefits to a
project funded with other sources or to
fully fund an existing project, something
that hasn’t been possible in recent past
STIP cycles. Projects are competitively
selected using criteria approved by the
MCOG Board. It has been used towards,
Ukiah Downtown Streetscape
Improvements Phase II, providing
streetscape improvements including
sidewalk widening, curb ramps and bulb
outs, streetlights, street furniture, and tree
planting.

More information can be found at
https://www.mendocinocog.org/files/c0f04
40de/MCOG+2024+RTIPFinal+adopted%28web%29.pdf
Cal Fire Urban and Community
Forestry Program
The Cal Fire Urban and Community
Forestry Program is funded by the US
Department of Agriculture Forest Service
Urban and Community Forestry Program
as a part of the 2022 Inflation Reduction
Act. The goal of the program is to increase
equitable access to urban tree canopy,
increase community engagement in tree
planting, and invest in urban forest
resilience, all in an effort to enhance
climate resiliency and public health in
disadvantaged communities.

The program includes several grant types.

The School Street Multimodal
Transportation Corridor Study would likely
benefit most from the Urban Forest
Expansion and Improvement Grant, which
supports tree planting and maintenance.

The grant supports creating larger, more
functional planting sites for trees and
associated vegetation, such as bio-swales.

Matching funds are not required to be
eligible for grant awards. More information
can be found at
https://www.fire.ca.gov/what-wedo/grants/urban-and-community-forestrygrants.

Chapter 8: Implementation Plan
58 Urban Greening Grant Program
The Urban Greening Grant Program is
administered by the California Natural
Resources Agency. The goal of the
program is to improve climate resiliency
through nature-based solutions, including
planting trees, expanding green spaces
and green streets, and stormwater
capture. Eligible components of the School
Street Multimodal Transportation Corridor
Study may include the creation or
expansion of green streets, tree canopy
expansion, and green stormwater
infrastructure.

There will be two competitive cycles of
funding for the Urban Greening Grant
Program, the first of which will be available
in Spring 2026. Applicants that can
leverage other funding sources are
prioritized. More information about the
program can be found at
https://resources.ca.gov/grants/urbangreening.

Infrastructure State Revolving
Fund (ISRF) Program
The ISRF Program is managed by the
Infrastructure and Economic
Development bank. The program provides
loans to small and mid-sized local
governments for public infrastructure
projects, with an emphasis on
disadvantaged communities.

The ISRF funding cycle is continuous, and
eligible projects are wide ranging. More
information about the program is available
at
https://ibank.ca.gov/loans/infrastructureloans/

Appendix A
Outreach and Engagement Summary

Appendix A
A-1
A.1 Introduction
Outreach and community engagement
were central components of the School
Street Multimodal Transportation Corridor
Study. The process was designed to ensure
that residents, business owners, property
owners, agency and organization staff,
technical experts, and elected officials had
meaningful opportunities to inform the
project at multiple stages.

Engagement occurred across three
rounds and included on-street interviews,
technical and public walking audits, public
workshops, stakeholder meetings, a
project website, an interactive comment
map, an online survey, and two rounds of
door-to-door outreach along the School
Street corridor.

Corridor-based engagement enabled the
Project Team to connect directly with
business and property owners in their own
spaces, gather real-time feedback, and
encourage participation in upcoming
workshops and online tools.

The engagement strategy combined inperson events with online platforms (the project website, online mapping tool, and
Mentimeter polling) to maximize
accessibility and participation. These tools
allowed participants to provide input
during workshops, respond remotely, and
submit location-specific comments
through the interactive map. Where
residents were unable to access
technology, comments were uploaded on
their behalf by the Project Team.

Together, these efforts provided both
place-based observations and broader
community input, allowing the Project
Team to understand existing conditions,
community values, priorities, and areas of
consensus and disagreement. Feedback
gathered throughout the process directly
informed the development and
refinement of corridor concepts and
design recommendations.

This appendix summarizes each
engagement round, the methods used,
participation levels, and the key themes
that emerged.

Project Website
Complementing in-person outreach
events, a project website was developed to
share information about the plan. The
website included upcoming events, public
workshop recordings, presentation slides,
plan documents, and online engagement
opportunities. A screenshot of the project’s
website is shown in Figure A.1.

Appendix A
A-2
Figure A.1 – Project Website

Appendix A
A-3
A.2 Round One of Engagement
Round one of engagement included the
first public workshop, a walk audit and
interactive map hosted on the project
website. Activities and feedback are
described below.

Technical Walk Audit
In February 2025, the Project Team
advanced the School Street Multimodal
Transportation Corridor Study through a
series of community outreach and
engagement activities, including a
Technical Walking Audit and Public
Workshop.

The month began with the project’s
mention by Jason Benson at the February
5 City Council meeting, underscoring its
importance to local stakeholders. To
maximize public involvement, the Project
Team distributed flyers along the School
Street corridor during the week of
February 3 and attended the Ukiah
Farmers Market on February 8, engaging
vendors and the new Market Manager,
Gloria Harrison, and leaving materials to
encourage participation in the upcoming
workshop.

Between February 10 and 12, the Project
Team conducted additional corridor-based
outreach, meeting with business and
property owners to encourage attendance.

This included engagement with the
Greater Ukiah Business and Tourism
Alliance, led by Executive Director Katrina
Kessen, and Council Member Mari Rodin.

The Public Workshop was also promoted
through the Blue Zones Project
Mendocino listserv, reaching
approximately 4,000 members.

Both the Technical Walking Audit and the
Public Workshop were held at the Ukiah
Valley Conference Center, providing a
platform for technical staff, elected
officials, business and property owners,
and residents to share insights and
perspectives. The Project Team also
participated in the Ukiah Chamber of
Commerce mixer and hosted a focus
group meeting with the Greater Ukiah
Business and Tourism Alliance on February
13 from 3:00–4:00 PM.

A group of 13 staff and elected leaders participated in the technical walk audit.

Appendix A
A-4
The Technical Walking Audit took place on
February 13 from 10:00 AM to 12:30 PM and
was attended by 13 technical staff and
elected leaders. Participants shared
observations about existing conditions and
future opportunities for School Street.

Many described the corridor as charming
and a destination in its own right, while
also acknowledging the need for upgrades
to address safety concerns, accessibility
challenges, and long-term vitality.

Participants emphasized that School
Street should continue to support existing
businesses while also serving as an
incubator for new enterprises and evolving
community needs. Table A.1 provides a list
of comments collected during the walk
audit.

Table A.1 – Technical Walk Audit Comments
# Comment
1 Sidewalks and crosswalk safety are our primary concern 2 Sidewalks and crosswalk safety are our primary concern 3 It is good to hear first impressions of others
4 Noticed and appreciate the challenge of uneven sidewalks, the parts of sidewalks, and the importance of windows and building transparency. School Street is charming. 5 I own a business on School Street; I now better realize the use of street furniture and lighting. Need for 2 ramps per corner is clearer to me. Equity needs should be addressed, services for all.
6 People like the look of School Street. We could upgrade based on its current greatness, but going to the next level is good. Going to a one way would help create new space. Incubator spaces are a way to ramp up the street.
7 Pedestrian visibility, parking for bikes, and unique lighting such as in the trees is good. 8 We should explore one-way.
9 What’s wrong with School Street? The walk was enlightening. Our city should be less autocentric. Older people need to park close, but we have made parking too convenient. 10 The lights in the trees are a plus. I hope that there is the possibility of closing at least one section. I tripped on the sidewalk a couple of times.
11 Infrastructure updates on State Street has influenced what we do traffic-wise on adjacent streets
12 Closing portions of the street would create better opportunities for pop-up events. 13 School Street is a well-cared for place, many intersections are already raised, we could do uplighting into the trees.
14 Trees near Henry have been impacting utilities. Raised intersections are a plus. 15 Street art would enliven School Street

Appendix A
A-5
Summary of Feedback
 School Street is already a great street,
but we can make it better
 Focus on sidewalks, providing full ADA
access with smooth, even surfaces
 Tree uplifting is a significant issue,
sidewalks are uneven
 Keep the trees, but eliminate the
problems they create, especially with
their roots
 Eliminate tripping. “I tripped on the
sidewalk a couple of times”
 We need two ramps per corner, or to
formalize raised intersections
 Lighting is a powerful tool, and we can
further enhance lighting, but keep the
current tree lighting.
 People are requesting that we close
portions of School Street
 Can we close at least one section of
School Street?
 We need to apply a park-once
operation
 We need School Street to be an
incubator for new businesses.
 Explore School Street as a one-way,
possibly a one-way from the north and
another from the south, terminating
with a car-free block in the middle.
 Add art to School Street (on sidewalks,
buildings and the street)
Attendees at the technical walk audit.

Appendix A
A-6
First Public Workshop
Public Workshop 1 took place on February
13th from 5:30 PM to 7:00 PM, after the
walk audit earlier that day. The workshop
was focused on introducing the public to
the project and gaining preliminary input
and was attended by 38 people.

The workshop began with a presentation
from the project team describing the plan
purpose and goals, existing conditions,
project timeline, and other ways to get
involved online. Then, the project team
defined “complete streets” and possible
treatments for placemaking and
walkability that could be appropriate for
School Street, including discussion on oneway street options and various potential parking configurations.

After the presentation, attendees were
asked to join one of five tables to discuss
issues, opportunities, their desires and
values in regard to potential solutions. The
tables reported out to everyone at the end.

Their feedback was recorded and is
described by table.

Five groups of 6-8 people shared their ideas and
provided added details on what was working and
what needed to be fixed on School Street.

Table 1
 A one-way street is supported
 Parking on one side only is supported
 Back-in parking is okay
 Widen sidewalks to provide for all
zones (shy zone, furniture zone,
walk/talk zone)
 Reorient seating to look up the street
(north/south axis)
 Replace the courthouse with a plaza,
the natural place for a plaza to be
 Post office is an eyesore, repurpose
with other uses such as a deli, green
grocery
 From the north, remove (all-in-one
towing) and place a 2-3 story paid
parking garage there
 Public art (static, kinetic and touchyfeely) is needed on the street, like Cloverdale
 Utilitarian art, continue the murals
 Replace trees, they are a pain
 Use concepts of State Street on School
Street
 Plaza is in the wrong spot, convert to
other uses (housing, hotel, added
public space)

Appendix A
A-7
Table 2
 Housing is needed
 One-way street is supported to make
room for more public space
 Back-in parking is not supported
 More parking is needed, a parking
structure is not a bad idea
 More bike activity on School Street
 More coverage (trees, awnings)
 Like historic town feel
 Create more of a story, show the
history and culture
Table 3
 Big picture – A revitalized Palace Hotel
(or other hotel) would enliven the town
 What will be lost when the courthouse
is lost?
 Smith Street to be a pedestrian only
zone
 More tables for food are needed
 How to get more businesses to be
open after 5:00 PM (lighting, hotels)
 More pedestrian space is needed
 Outdoor seating is needed
 Better lighting
Each of the five tables presented their ideas to the
full group.

Appendix A
A-8
Table 4
 Lighting, light pollution, downcast, sky
friendly
 Tree width, 50 feet wide
 Expanded sidewalks, tree preservation
 Curbless parking
 Back in parking may be difficult
 Parking should be complementary to
neighborhoods
 Is assigned parking needed?
 Low vision support
 Traffic calming
 ADA accessibility to be honored
Table 5
 Many business owners at this table
 Fix the sidewalks, remove hazards
 Table does not support a one-way
 Worried about losing parking
 Parking garage is supported
 Volunteers will not work
 Table does not support a maintenance
fee
Workshop 1 presentation.

Appendix A
A-9
Interactive Map
The project website included an interactive comment map where community members could input their location-specific comments on what they loved, wished for, and wondered about regarding multimodal transportation in downtown Ukiah. The interactive comment map is shown in.

The interactive map was open from mid-January 2025 through March 2025 and gathered 110 community comments.

Figure A.2 – Interactive Comment Map

Appendix A
A-10
“I Love” Comments
The map received six “I love” comments.

Common themes included:
 Downtown character
 Existing trees and strong support for
preserving them
 Existing traffic calming, including
“bump outs” that effectively slow traffic
and improve walkability
 Routes and destinations such as the
Great Redwood Trail and the Grace
Hudson Museum
“I Wish” Comments
The map received 31 “I wish” comments.

Common themes included:
 Traffic calming: mixed sentiments
about “bump outs”. Some community
members feel that they hinder driver
navigation while others feel they
effectively calm traffic
 Traffic flow: interest in School Street as
a one-way or two-way, improving
Henry Street intersection, closing
Round Table Pizza alley to cars
 Community events: more events at
the plaza, closing street for summer
street dances
 Recreation: roller skating area, splash
pad in Arcata Plaza
 Maintenance: landscaping (including
drought tolerant plants), sidewalks
 Streetscaping and amenities: more
outdoor seating, bike racks, pedestrian
lighting, trees (preserving existing and
planting more), public art
 Pedestrian infrastructure: more
crosswalks at Scott Street, fix sidewalks
 Trails: connections to regional
recreation trails
 Parking: interest in parking, including
back in parking or diagonal parking,
and allowing parking in private lots on
weekends
 Heat exposure: Perkins Street, farmers
market
 North and south ends of School
Street: revitalization on at Mill Street
and Henry Street
“I Wonder” Comments
The map received seven “I wonder”
comments. Common themes included:
 Traffic Calming: consider a one-way or
single lane School Street to provide
more room for street amenities. Also
interest in preserving existing streets
without bulbouts to preserve traffic
flow and feel.
 Recreation: skating rink
 Existing buildings: consideration of
courthouse repurpose
 Awning replacement: utilizing grant
funds to replace awnings

Appendix A
A-11
Summary
Comments from the walk audit and public
workshop were analyzed alongside
interactive map comments, for a total of
110 comments. In general, interactive map
comments largely mirrored insights from
the walk audit and public workshop.

Figure A.3 presents the breakdown of
comments by category and Figure A.4
presents the breakdown of comments by
sentiment.

The comments are summarized into
strong, moderate, or low correlation,
support, and agreement, summarized
below.

Strong correlation, support, and agreement
 People love School Street and
understand the importance of
enhancing its beauty, its social and
economic life, its people and place
function and its need for vitality.
 People and place are the guiding
design features, not capacity, ease of
turns, and speed.
 Love the trees, shade, ambiance and
the general feel of School Street. Use
native plants. Beauty, such as planter
boxes, hanging flowers, is a value.

Better care of the trees.
 Replace the awnings, and other wornout things, they need updating.

Figure A.3 – Comment Categories
Figure A.4 – Comment Sentiment
17%
63%
20%
Comment Category
I Love I Wish I Wonder
11%
15%
48%
26%
Comment Sentiment

MIXED NEGATIVE NEUTRAL POSITIVE

Appendix A
A-12
 Supporting ADA, the older population
and youth is high.
 Universal support for more activities,
programming and events to build
higher use. Design for this.
 Strong, but not universal, support for
operating School Street as a single lane
one-way.
 Fix the sidewalks. Build wider
sidewalks, 2 ramps per corner, more
places to sit, better places to park
bicycles and other micro-mobility
devices.
 Provide more public art, including
murals, benches, ironwork, sculptures,
and performance art, everything that
pleases the heart.
 Increase the commons, possibly
refocus placemaking on a more central
area closer to Perkins.
 Provide more “eyes on the street” by
building placement window
transparency and active uses.
 Better crosswalks and other tools to
help with crossing the street.
 Curb heights are inconsistent, consider
curbless streets.
 Look into festival streets and other
types of street closures.
 Better night and low light illumination
and include tree placement of lights.
 Protect sight lines, especially at all
intersections and crossings.
 The need for gateways on the north
and south.
 Repurpose the old post office, support
Palace Hotel repurposing, consider a
key business and social function hotel.
 Bike-friendly street, more convenient
bike parking.

Moderate correlation, support and agreement
 Address loitering and incorrect uses of
the street, park and plaza.
 Build in a better, more protected and
central place for the Farmer’s market.
 Make on-street and off-street parking
more attractive.
 A splash pad, and other recreational
family focus facility.
 A new parking garage.
 Universal public Wi-Fi.

Low correlation, low support, and some
disagreement
 Back-in angled parking.
 Make it easier for cars to turn.
 Volunteerism will not work.
 Need and location of an ice-skating or
roller-skating rink.

Appendix A
A-13
A.3 Round Two of Engagement
Round two of public engagement
included a second public workshop and an
online survey. Activities and feedback are
described below.

Second Public Workshop
Prior to the second Public Workshop,
outreach included social media event
posts by Blue Zones and door-to-door
distribution of event flyers along the
School Street corridor to inform property
owners and businesses.

Held on June 24, 2025, from 5:30 PM to
7:30 PM, the second Public Workshop
focused on building upon earlier input and
further refining community ideas. About
15 people attended the workshop.

The Project Team presented an in-depth
analysis of potential multimodal
transportation and streetscape
improvements for the School Street
corridor, including additional detail on
proposed amenities and design elements.

Four potential street typical sections were
introduced to illustrate how sidewalks,
trees, traffic circulation, and parking
configurations could function within the
available right-of-way.

The workshop included introductions, an
overview of the study, a summary of
existing conditions, and a review of tools
and strategies related to placemaking,
walkability, parking, ADA access, and tree
preservation.

Following the presentation and a group
question-and-answer session, participants
broke into small groups of six to eight
people to discuss priorities and reactions
to the concepts. Each table then reported
back to the full group.

Participants at the second public workshop.

Survey flyer.

Appendix A
A-14
Online Survey
As part of this round of engagement, a
survey was conducted online to gather
additional feedback from community
members who were unable to attend inperson events. The survey expanded participation and allowed respondents to
provide more detailed input on corridor
priorities, design preferences, and
transportation considerations. The survey
was available between July 24th, 2025,
through August 29th, 2025, and received
415 responses. A full summary and
analysis of survey responses is provided in
Appendix B.

Summary
Discussion during the second Public
Workshop and survey comments
reinforced several clear priorities and areas
of refinement.
 Scope clarity was confirmed. It was
reiterated that the corridor study
extends from Clay Street to Henry
Street and includes seven
intersections, focusing the discussion
on achievable improvements within
defined limits.
 Tree preservation emerged as a
central value. Participants strongly
supported protecting the existing tree
canopy and favored a long-term,
incremental replacement strategy
rather than wholesale removal.

Maintaining shade, character, and
environmental benefits was
consistently emphasized.
 Tree succession planning was viewed
as a viable long-term strategy.

Participants supported retaining
healthy existing trees while
strategically planting new trees in
expanded planting zones.

Theoretically, this approach would
allow new trees to mature before older
trees reach the end of their lifespan,
helping preserve canopy continuity
over time.
 Concerns focused on drainage,
building impacts, and parking
retention. Attendees requested
additional technical clarity regarding
stormwater management, potential
effects on adjacent buildings, and how
proposed changes might affect
parking supply and canopy coverage.

There was broad interest in solutions
that balance infrastructure upgrades
with preservation of both parking and
trees.
 Narrowing to a single lane of oneway traffic was seen as a practical strategy to create space for wider
sidewalks, healthier tree planting
zones, and safety improvements while
maintaining vehicular access.
 Raised, near-flush intersections were
supported as a traffic-calming tool.

Participants noted that these designs
can help maintain lower vehicle speeds
while improving pedestrian visibility
and accessibility.

Overall, feedback reflected a desire to
improve safety and functionality while
protecting the defining character of
School Street.

Appendix A
A-15
A.4 Round Three of Engagement
Round three of engagement included a
public walk audit and a third and final
public workshop. Activities and feedback
are described below.
811 Utility Marking Assessment
Before the walk audit, an 811 utility
marking assessment was completed along
School Street. Paint markings identified
underground utilities, helping community
members understand utility and tree root
conflicts and shape their decision on the
Plan’s outcome.
811 Utility Markings along School Street.

Public Walk Audit
The Public Walk Audit was held on
December 11, 2025, from 3:30 to 4:30 PM
and was attended by 34 participants. The
audit invited community members to
observe and document the safety, comfort,
and accessibility of School Street for
people walking, rolling, using transit, using
mobility devices, or pushing carts and
strollers.

Walking audits are practical, on-theground engagement tools that help communities evaluate real-world
conditions and identify both barriers and
opportunities. By experiencing the corridor
together, participants were able to ground
the discussion in lived experience rather
than abstract concepts.

For School Street, key themes included the
importance of shade and canopy
preservation, the need for wider and more
even sidewalks, sidewalk maintenance and
trip hazards, parking considerations, and
opportunities to strengthen the street’s
business activity and social life. The audit
reinforced that safety, accessibility, and
vitality are interconnected and must be
addressed together.

Many of the sidewalks are noticeably
affected by the expanding root systems of
the existing Chinese Pistache trees along
School Street. Through the utility
assessment, locations of utilities in relation
to the trees and sidewalks marked. When
reconstruction existing sidewalks and
trees, utilities can pose a risk to safety and
further development.

Appendix A
A-16
Through this assessment, it was
discovered that many tree systems have
grown over the existing utilities forcing
tree replacement, utilities replacement
and impacted possible alternatives. This
gave a new perspective to the existing
conditions that were presented in the
third workshop.

Third Public Workshop
Prior to the third Public Workshop,
outreach included social media event
posts by Blue Zones and the City of Ukiah,
communications via City listservs, to
previous event attendees who had
consented via email, as well as door-todoor distribution of event flyers along the School Street corridor to inform property
owners and businesses. The third Public
Workshop was held on December 11, 2025,
from 5:30 PM to 7:00 PM and was attended
by 35 participants. The workshop included
both in-person and online options for
those wishing to participate.

The workshop included introductions, an
overview of the study, a summary of
existing conditions, and examples of tools
and design strategies related to
placemaking, walkability, parking, ADA
access, and tree preservation.

Following the presentation and a group
question-and-answer session, participants
broke into small groups to discuss their
ideas. Each table then reported back to
the larger group.

In-person participants also used specially
designed wooden blocks to physically
illustrate preferred allocations of street
space for walking, trees, and parking,
enabling hands-on exploration of tradeoffs within the corridor’s constraints.

Walk audit and public workshop flyer.

Participants at the public walk audit.

Appendix A
A-17
Participants at the public walk Audit.

Presenter at the third public workshop.

Participants at the third public workshop.

During Public Workshop #3, live polling
was conducted using Mentimeter to
gather real-time, anonymous feedback
from participants. This interactive tool
allowed attendees to respond to key
questions using their mobile devices,
enabling immediate visualization of group
preferences and helping guide discussion
during the workshop. Feedback from
Mentimeter was recorded on easel paper
and combined with feedback from those
who did not use their mobile devices and
provided their input out loud.

The polling complemented table
discussions by capturing both quantitative
preferences and general sentiment on
topics such as visitation patterns, reasons
for coming downtown, desired
improvements, parking perceptions,
historic preservation, streetscape
amenities, and preferred roadway
alternatives.

The results provided an additional layer of
insight into community priorities and
areas of convergence, helping the Project
Team understand broader agreement.

Appendix A
A-18
Frequency of Visits
Most participants reported visiting
downtown regularly. The majority
indicated they visit weekly, with a smaller
group visiting daily. Only one participant
reported visiting “almost never.” This
suggests that workshop attendees are
active users of the corridor and familiar
with existing conditions.

What Brings People Downtown
Dining emerged as the strongest draw,
followed closely by special events and
festivals, and shopping. Arts and
entertainment also ranked relatively high,
while bars and other uses were selected
less frequently. Employment (“my job”)
was a moderate contributor. Overall,
downtown is viewed primarily as a social
and commercial destination rather than
purely a work environment.
1 0
2 14
5 0 5 10 15
Almost Never
A couple times a year
Monthly
Weekly
Daily
How often do you visit
downtown?
5 5
2 11
14 16
17 0 5 10 15 20
Other
My Job
Bars
Arts and entertainment
Events
Shopping
Dining
What typically brings you to
downtown?

Appendix A
A-19
What Would Encourage More Visits
When asked what would encourage more
frequent visits, participants prioritized
more restaurant and retail options
(highest response), more shade, seating,
and public amenities, and more events
and activities. Parking and lighting
improvements were mentioned but
ranked lower.

The results indicate that participants are
seeking enhanced experience and activity,
rather than simply infrastructure changes.

Parking Perceptions
Opinions on parking adequacy were
mixed. While some participants agreed
that there is adequate parking, a slightly
larger group expressed some level of
disagreement. This suggests that parking
perception may be influenced by
convenience and location rather than
overall supply alone.
0 7
6 14
11 19
0 5 10 15 20
More for young kids
More parking
Better lighting and safety
More shade, seating, etc.

More events and…
More restaurants or…
What would encourage you to
visit downtown more often?
3 8
2 8
6 0 2 4 6 8 10
Strongly disagree
Somewhat disagree
Neither agree or disagree
Somewhat agree
Strongly agree
I believe there is adequate
parking downtown

Appendix A
A-20
Historic Preservation
Preserving historic buildings was rated as
highly important by most participants. The
majority selected “4” or “5” on a five-point
scale, indicating strong support for
maintaining the corridor’s historic
character.

Streetscape Amenities
Participants indicated a desire for more
seating and landscaping (both scoring
strongly toward “more”), followed by
improved lighting and additional bike
racks. These responses reinforce earlier
discussion themes around comfort, shade,
identity, and pedestrian experience.

Preferred Street Configuration
When ranking alternatives, the one-way
street with angled parking received the
highest preference, followed by the twoway street with angled parking. The twoway street with parallel parking ranked lowest. These results align with in-person
table discussions, which identified a oneway configuration as offering the most flexibility for expanding sidewalks and tree
space while maintaining parking.
15 5
4 0
1 0 5 10 15 20
5 (most important)
4 3
2 1 (least important)
On a scale of 1-5, how important
is preserving historic buildings?

Appendix A
A-21
Summary
Discussion during the third Public
Workshop, along with live Mentimeter
polling results, reinforced several clear
priorities. Across both table discussions
and real-time polling, participants
consistently supported design strategies
that enhance pedestrian comfort, safety,
and long-term street vitality while
maintaining practical access and parking
needs. Key areas of consensus included:
 Wider sidewalks and expanded tree
space. Participants emphasized
increasing pedestrian space and
improving planting areas to support
long-term tree health, shade, and
overall corridor character.
 Traffic calming through raised or
enhanced intersections. Raised
intersections were broadly supported
as a strategy to slow vehicle speeds.

Some participants expressed interest
in colorized or visually enhanced
crossings to improve safety and
strengthen identity.
 A single-lane, one-way configuration
as the most flexible option. Four of
the five in-person tables concluded
that a one-way traffic lane would
create the greatest opportunity to
widen sidewalks, improve tree planting
areas, and potentially increase angled
parking. While one table remained
undecided about conversion to oneway traffic, they similarly prioritized reallocating space to walkways, trees,
and parking. This aligns with polling
results through Mentimeter.
 Retention and enhancement of onstreet parking. Maintaining convenient, visible parking was viewed
as important for supporting businesses
and overall street activity.
 Improved sight lines and pedestrian
safety. Curb extensions were
supported as a tool to improve visibility
and reduce conflicts at intersections.
 Enhanced lighting. Participants
expressed interest in improved lighting
to increase safety and extend evening
use of the corridor.
 Reduced crossing distances while
accommodating emergency access.

There was broad agreement that
crossing widths should be minimized
where feasible, provided that
emergency vehicle turning
movements are preserved.

Overall, feedback reflected strong
convergence around reallocating street
space to strengthen pedestrian
experience, protect and sustain tree
canopy, and support long-term economic
and social vitality.

Appendix B
Online Survey Analysis

Appendix B
B-1
B.1 Introduction
A survey was conducted to gather input from the Ukiah community on street amenity options and improvement alternatives along the School Street corridor. The survey was distributed to the community via flyers posted along the corridor with a QR code to the survey, emails to the listserv, and a few posts on the City’s Facebook page. The survey was available from July 24th to Aug 29th, 2025, and received a total of 415 responses. This memorandum provides a summary of an in-depth analysis performed of the survey responses utilizing GHD “Unpack”. Unpack is an orchestrated, carefully designed methodology for using Large Language Models, to elevate engagement processes & outcomes. For this corridor study, GHD Unpack was used to extract subject themes and subthemes, reviewed by the GHD project team. Sentiment analysis was also performed to identify public sentiment on each response. Each response was categorized and then grouped together by sentiment and theme to obtain majority insights from the vast number of various responses. The summary tables showing the top 5 themes for each sentiment for each question are provided in Attachment 1.

Community members were asked for their input on proposed street amenities and various improvement alternatives to School Street in seven survey sections. For each section, respondents were asked what they liked and disliked about the options presented as well as their thoughts on the impact the facilities would have on themselves and their community.

Altogether there were 19 questions, 3 for each section of alternatives and one question in the last section which provided an opportunity for respondents to share any additional thoughts or comments.

Overall, respondents valued supporting the local businesses, increasing accessibility and traffic flow, retaining on-street parking, retaining the trees, and increasing visitor experience.

Overall, street amenities were well received with a large focus on enhancing lighting, additional seating areas and enhancements, and bike parking. The main concerns focused on parking and seating placements. Respondents displayed both optimism for possible enhancement with worry about the trade-offs that could occur.

Disclaimer: The survey was developed prior to identifying existing tree root conflicts with underground utilities, which were verified through an 811-utility marking assessment before the third round of engagement. These findings, along with arborist input, led to further refinement of plan alternatives and proposed implementation regarding tree and utility management after the survey was published. Since this information was not yet known, it may have influenced how respondents answered.