Agenda packet, first session — Upland City Council, October 28, 2024 (part 1 of 2)

CITY
'; "! he Cary of [=rncinu.ti l.ir,i+)g"'

EETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
!.:71fdtePteA/
Rill Velto, Mayor
James Breitling, Mayor Pro Tern- District 2 Michael Blay, City Manager Carlos A. Garcia,Councilmember-District 3 Stephen P. Deitsch,City Attorney Shannon Maust, Councilmember -District I Keri Johnson, City Clerk Rudy Zuniga,Councilmember-District 4
Monday, October 28, 2024
Open session begins at 6:00 p.m.

City Council Chamber
City Hall, 460 N. Euclid Avenue
Residents may observe the City Council meetings remotely via livestream on the City website, Spectrum Cable TV Channel 3, or Frontier Cable TV Channel 26.

City of Upland Mission Statement
The City of Upland is committed to delivering superior services that meet community needs with transparency and integrity.

City of Upland Vision Statement
Upland is a safe community with historic character where residents enjoy a high quality of life.

Pages

1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL

2. ADDITIONS-DELETIONS TO AGENDA

3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is a time for any citizen to comment on item listed on the closed session agenda only. Anyone wishing to address the legislative body is requested to submit a speaker card to the City Clerk at or prior to speaking. The speakers are requested to keep their comments to no more than three (3) minutes. The use of visual aids will be included in the time limit.

CLOSED SESSION BEGINS AT 5:30 p.m.

4. CLOSED SESSION
a. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS California Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: Approximately 761 square feet of area within Memorial Park located in the City of Upland (APN: 1046-131-03)
City Negotiators: City Manager Michael Blay, Development Services Director Robert Dalquest, and Economic Development Coordinator Melecio Picazo Negotiating Party: Verizon

Under Negotiation: Price and Terms

5. INVOCATION
Pastor Chris Rix, One & All Church, Upland

6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

7. PRESENTATIONS
2024 Legislative Update presented by Assemblymember Chris Holden, 41st Assembly District

8. CITY ATTORNEY

9. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is a time for any citizen to comment on any item listed or not listed on the agenda.

Anyone wishing to address the legislative body is requested to submit a speaker card to the City Clerk at or prior to speaking. The speakers are requested to keep their comments to no more than three (3) minutes. Speakers will be given five (5) minutes during public hearings. The use of visual aids will be included in the time limit. Public comments and questions for the purpose of hearing current matters of concern in our community and to provide citizens a method for the public to hear those concerns in an open venue is encouraged. However, under the provisions of the Brown Act, the City Council is prohibited from discussion of items not listed on the agenda, and therefore, the City Council, City Manager, or City Attorney will take communications under advisement for consideration and appropriate response or discussion at a later time.

Individuals who demonstrate disruptive conduct during City Council meetings that prevent the City Council from conducting its meeting in an orderly manner are guilty of a misdemeanor as stated in PC403, disrupting a public meeting, and are subject to removal from the chamber or arrest.

CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION DISCLOSURE: Pursuant Gov. Code § 84308, any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the Council is required to disclose on the record any contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $250 made by the party or the party's agents within the preceding 12 months to any City official. Participants and agents are requested to make this disclosure as well. The disclosure must include the name of the party, participant, or agent, and any other person making the contribution; the name of the recipient, the amount of the contribution, and the date the contribution was made.

10. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the legislative body request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.

Recommended Action:

Approve the Consent Calendar
a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6
Recommended Action:

Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of October 14, 2024. (Staff Person: Keri Johnson)

b. 2ND READING AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1992 AMENDING 12 CHAPTER 12.46 OF THE UPLAND MUNICIPAL CODE FOR CAMPING AND

STORAGE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY
CEQA: Not project.

Recommended Action:

Hold 2nd reading by title only, waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1992 amending Upland Municipal Code Section 12.46.110 G. and removing Upland Municipal Code Section 12.46.110 H. pertaining to unlawful camping and storage of personal property. (Staff Person: Marcelo Blanco) c. TREASURER'S REPORT SEPTEMBER 2024 16
CEQA: Not a Project.

Recommended Action:

Receive and file the September 2024 Treasurer's Report. (Staff Person: Stephen Parker)
d. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER WARRANT AND PAYROLL 33

REGISTERS
CEQA: Not a Project.

Recommended Action:

Approve the September warrant registers (check numbers 49748 — 50102 and direct disbursements) totaling $9,806,605.70 and payroll registers totaling $1,923,041.67 (check numbers 163980 — 163992 and electronic fund transfers 50014 — 50569). (Staff Person: Stephen Parker)
e. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT 44

WITH KEENAN AND ASSOCIATES
CEQA: Not a Project.

Recommended Action:

Approve the first amendment of the agreement with Keenan and Associates for Benefit Broker Services and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment. (Staff Person: Stephen Parker)
f. APPOINTMENT OF PROXY AT ANNUAL MEETING OF THE POMONA VALLEY 62

PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION
CEQA: Not a Project.

Recommended Action:

Appoint Nicole deMoet as proxy to vote all shares at the annual shareholder's meeting of the Pomona Valley Protective Association. (Staff Person: Chris Alanis) g. CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT FUNDS FROM 64

REGIONAL EARLY ACTION PLANNING PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE THE

EXECUTION AN AGREEMENT WITH SCAG
CEQA: Determine to be Exempt.

Recommended Action:

Adopt a Resolution accepting grant funds from the Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) Program of 2021, in the amount of $303,500, and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an agreement with Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and any amendments thereto. (Staff Person: Robert Dalquest)
h. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE REVISIONS TO THE JOB SPECIFICATIONS 70

FOR THE RESERVE POLICE OFFICER CLASSIFICATION
CEQA: Not a Project.

Recommended Action:

Approve the revisions to the job specifications for the Reserve Police Officer classification. (Staff Person: Stephen Parker)

11. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTIONS APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT 77

IMPACT FEE (DIF) NEXUS STUDY AND THE DIF AND QUIMBY FEE

SCHEDULES
CEQA: Not a Project.

Recommended Action:

The City Council will conduct a public hearing to consider approval of the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study and the City's Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Schedule and Quimby Fee Schedule update. (Staff Person: Stephen Parker)

1. Staff Presentation

2. Hold Public Hearing

3. Close Public Hearing

4. Adopt a Resolution approving a Development Impact Fee Nexus Study

5. Adopt a Resolution approving an update of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Schedule and Quimby Fee Schedule.

12. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
a. COUNCIL REPORTS ON REGIONAL COMMITTEE MEETING, TRAINING, OR

CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE
Councilmembers will provide oral reports on any meetings, trainings, or conferences they attended on behalf of the City. This item is for information only.

13. BUSINESS ITEMS
a. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE CITY 220

MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
CEQA: Not a Project.

Recommended Action:

Approve the Fourth Amendment to the City of Upland City Manager Employment Agreement with Michael Blay, extending the term of the Employment Agreement to the end of business on November 8, 2028, and increasing the vacation leave accrual rate to 160 hours per year. (Staff Person: Stephen Deitsch)

14. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS

15. CITY MANAGER

16. ADJOURNMENT
The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is Monday, November 11, 2024.

NOTE: If you challenge the public hearing(s) or the related environmental determinations in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Upland, at, or prior to, the public hearing.

All Agenda items and back-up materials are available for public review at the Upland Public Library, at 450 North Euclid Avenue, the City Clerk's Office at 460 North Euclid Avenue and the City website at www.uplandca.gov .

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office, 909-931-4120.

Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II] On October 23, 2024 a true and correct copy of this agenda was posted on the bulletin boards at 450 N. Euclid Avenue (Upland Public Library) and 460 N. Euclid Avenue (Upland City Hall), and the City website at www.uplandca.gov

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE UPLAND CITY COUNCIL October 14, 2024
6:00 p.m.

City Council Chamber
City Hall, 460 N. Euclid Avenue
Members Present: Mayor Bill Velto, Councilmember James Breitling (arrived at 4:43 p.m.), Councilmember Carlos A. Garcia, Councilmember Shannan Maust, Councilmember Rudy Zuniga
Staff Present: City Manager Michael Blay, City Attorney Stephen P. Deitsch, City Clerk Keri Johnson

1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The regular meeting of the Upland City Council was called to order by Mayor Bill Velto at 4:32 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Upland City Hall.

Moved by: Councilmember Zuniga
Seconded by: Councilmember Maust
Excuse the absence of Councilmember Breitling
Motion: Carried Unanimously

2. ADDITIONS-DELETIONS TO AGENDA
None.

3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.

CLOSED SESSION - 4:30 p.m.

4. CLOSED SESSION
At 4:33 p.m. Mayor Velto announced that the City Council would recess to Closed Session pursuant to Government Code
a. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS California Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 1.03-acre parcel located on Third Avenue, approximately 75 feet south of the Pacific Electric Trail and adjacent along the north side of the Coy D. Estes Senior Apartments, in the City of Upland (Assessor Parcel Number: 1046-411-54) City Negotiators: City Manager Michael Blay, Development Services Director Robert Dalquest, Housing Manager Diane Cotto and Housing Coordinator Lizzet Avalos
1

Page 6 of 222 ends

Negotiating Party: Steven Dukett, Upland Community Housing, Inc.

Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of payment
b. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Government Code Section 54957
Title: City Manager
c. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Government Code Section 54957.6
City Designated Representatives: Mayor Bill Velto and City Attorney Stephen Deitsch
Unrepresented Employee: City Manager
The City Council reconvened in open session at 6:05 p.m.

5. INVOCATION
Jim Thomas, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Led by Sergeant Bryce Milakovich

7. PRESENTATIONS
Presentation of Certificates of Completion to the Upland Community Emergency Response Team (CERT).

Inland Empire Utilities Agency Update.

8. CITY ATTORNEY
City Attorney Deitsch announced the City Council received reports on Closed Session Items 4a., 4b., and 4c. There was no reportable action during Closed Session.

9. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A number of individuals spoke in support of Measure N. They cited the Council's dedication and transparency, the City's fiscal responsibility, the need for a well-funded Police Department, the necessity for infrastructure repairs, and the desire for the City to have the resources needed to ensure that Upland remains a place where families and businesses can thrive. The following spoke:

Don Mowery, Upland Ray Musser, Upland
Marc Longanecker, Upland Elizabeth Alvarez, Upland Todd D'Braunstein Nancy Patterson, Upland
Ralph Cavallo, Upland
Glenn Bozar, stated the City's political sign ordinance was not being enforced and spoke in opposition of Measure N.
2

Page 7 of 222 ends

Jim Thomas, Upland, announced the upcoming Interfaith Council's 29th Annual Prayer Breakfast.

Kati Parker, Upland, stated that she is running for the Inland Empire Utilities Agency board and provided information on her background and qualifications.

10. CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Zuniga removed Consent Calendar Item 10i. for separate action.

Moved by: Councilmember Garcia
Seconded by: Councilmember Zuniga
Approve the Consent Calendar
Motion: Carried Unanimously
a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approve the Special Meeting Minutes of September 23, 2024 and the Regular Meeting Minutes of September 23, 2024.
b. CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION UPDATING THE CITY'S CONFLICT

OF INTEREST CODE
Adopt Resolution No. 6803 rescinding Resolution No. 6690 in its entirety and adopting a conflict of interest code applicable to designated positions, including members and staff of the City, Upland Public Financing Authority, Successor Agency to the Upland Housing Authority, City of Upland Parking Authority, and the City of Upland Financing Authority.
c. TREASURER'S REPORT AUGUST 2024
Receive and file the August 2024 Treasurer's Report.
d. CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 36,

THE HOMELESSNESS, DRUG ADDICTION, AND THEFT REDUCTION ACT Adopt Resolution No. 6804 in support of Proposition 36, the Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act.
e. CONSIDER ACCEPTANCE OF THE SELECTIVE TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM GRANT PT25117
Accept the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) STEP grant funds (Grant No. PT25117) and authorize the appropriation of$170,000.
f. CONSIDER ACCEPTANCE OF THE OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY
MOTORCYCLE SAFETY EDUCATION GRANT MC25008
Accept the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Ride to Live Motorcycle Education grant funds (Grant No. MC25008) and authorize the appropriation of the $20,000 in the Office of Traffic Safety fund.
g. AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BUDGET

AMENDMENT FROM BUSINESS ATTRACTION AND ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

TO COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM
2

Page 8 of 222 ends

Approve an economic development budget amendment to transfer $166,600 of American Rescue Plan Act ("ARPA") funds from the Business Attraction and Assistance Program ("BAAP") to the Commercial Rehabilitation Program ("CRP") and authorize the City Manager to execute any necessary documents to complete this transaction.
h. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE

SERVICES FOR WATER FACILITIES
Approve two maintenance services agreements with CLS Landscape Management for landscaping maintenance of City of Upland water facilities; and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreements.
j. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE

AGREEMENT FOR ON-CALL ASPHALT PAVEMENT REPAIR SERVICES WITH

HARDY AND HARPER
Approve the Second Amendment to the professional services agreement with Hardy & Harper and authorize the City Manager to execute the Amendment.

CONSIDER AN AWARD OF BID FOR ARPA ALLEY REHABILITATION PHASE II City Attorney Deitsch confirmed that Councilmember Zuniga did not have a conflict of interest on the item.

Moved by: Councilmember Zuniga
Seconded by: Councilmember Garcia
Approve the Plans and Specifications for the ARPA Alley Rehabilitation Phase II Project; award the construction contract to Onyx Paving Company in the amount of $936,000; and authorize a construction contingency in the amount of $140,000, for a total amount of$1,076,000.

Motion: Carried Unanimously

11. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER APPROVING THE

PROPOSED WATER AND SEWER RATE CPI INCREASE
Interim Public Works Director Alanis presented the staff report along with a PowerPoint presentation. Director Alanis then answered questions posed by the Council regarding pass through rates, the proposed rates, past rate increases, aged infrastructure needs and repairs, and the cost to provide water and sewer services.

Mayor Velto opened the public hearing.

John Walvoord, Upland, questioned how much funding from Measure N would be allocated to streets and sidewalks and stated that he had issues with the language in the notice and the majority protest process.

Glenn Bozar, Upland, stated that the fee that others cities charge for water and sewer services is irrelevant and spoke regarding issues with the tiered water 3

Page 9 of 222 ends

rates and stand by fixed service charge. He further stated that the increasing rates over the years are difficult for residents on a fixed income.

Mark Gutglueck, Upland, questioned the rate comparison with other cities and stated the Claremont rates were extremely high.

Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Velto closed the public hearing.

City Attorney Deitsch clarified the Proposition 218 notification and majority protest process.

City Clerk Johnson announced the number of protests received and notified Council that a majority protest did not exist.

Moved by: Councilmember Breitling
Seconded by: Councilmember Zuniga
Approve Resolution No. 6805 adopting revisions adjusting the schedule of water and recycled water service rates, effective November 1, 2024.

Motion: Carried Unanimously
Moved by: Councilmember Maust
Seconded by: Councilmember Breitling
Approve Resolution No. 6806 adopting revisions to the schedule of sewer fees, effective November 1, 2024.

Motion: Carried Unanimously

12. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
a. COUNCIL REPORTS ON REGIONAL COMMITTEE MEETING, TRAINING, OR

CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE
Councilmember Garcia reported on his attendance at the ICSC conference and Councilmember Breitling reported on his attendance at the SBCTA meeting and the Library Board meeting.
b. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING, OCTOBER 8, 2024
Committee Chairperson Breitling provided a recap of the meeting

13. BUSINESS ITEMS
a. CONSIDER ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12.46 OF THE

UPLAND MUNICIPAL CODE FOR CAMPING AND STORAGE OF PERSONAL

PROPERTY
Police Chief Blanco introduced Sergeant Milakovich who presented the staff report. Police Chief Blanco answered questions posed by the Council.

Moved by: Councilmember Garcia
Seconded by: Councilmember Maust
4

Page 10 of 222 ends

Hold the first reading by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1992 amending Upland Municipal Code Section 12.46.110 G. and removing Upland Municipal Code Section 12.46.110 H. pertaining to unlawful camping and storage of personal property.

Motion: Carried Unanimously

14. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmembers announced various activities and events throughout the community.

Councilmember Breitling suggested that staff bring back a future staff presentation regarding automatic CPI increases for water and sewer rates.

Councilmember Zuniga seconded Councilmember Garcia's request that staff bring a future agenda item with potential small businesses assistance programs.

15. CITY MANAGER
City Manager Blay announced upcoming public information meetings on Measure N.

16. ADJOURNMENT
At 8:03 p.m., Mayor Velto adjourned in recognition of Breast Cancer Awareness Month and in memory of those family members who have lost their battle with breast cancer.

The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is Monday, October 28, 2024.

Keri Johnson, City Clerk
5

Page 11 of 222 ends

Q IIPL
94, CITY
y.�
Staff
C�� "The City of Gracious Lining"
LIF0m. 8. (1�
Ord �ND READING
DATE: October 14,2024 -� 7 pare AND A N TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL I
�PE1 tern T DN
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:MARCELO A.BLANCO,POLICE CHIEF N0. d

BRYCE MILAKOVICH,POLICE SERGEANT
SUBJECT: CONSIDER ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12.46 OF THE UPLAND

MUNICIPAL CODE FOR CAMPING AND STORAGE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council hold the first reading by title only,waive further reading, and introduce an ordinance amending Upland Municipal Code Section 12.46.110 G. and removing Upland Municipal Code Section

12.46.110 H.pertaining to unlawful camping and storage of personal property.

GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal of enhancing quality of life,public health,public safety,and maintaining order.The proposed action will support safer parks and public areas throughout the city,while decreasing blight.

BACKGROUND
"Johnson v.Grants Pass"and"Martin v.Boise"were cases where the cities of Grants Pass and Boise had enforcement ordinances related to public camping.Originally,the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decided that cities could not prohibit public camping unless "reasonable" shelter was available.The appeals court also prohibited enforcement regarding overnight camping in vehicles unless shelter was available, and the court limited the ability to prohibit storage of certain personal items necessary for protection from the elements(i.e.blankets,pillows,tents,etc.).

This decision prevented the City from enforcing Upland Municipal Code Chapter 12.46 since it has no shelter to offer.

The court also stated that there must be more beds than unhoused individuals for enforcement to be possible. This made the code difficult to enforce, as Impact Officers often found shelters unable or unwilling to confirm bed availability.If an unhoused person was unlawfully camping,and did not desire assistance,officers could not conduct any enforcement. Additionally, officers faced challenges because Upland Municipal Code 12.46.110 G., established numerous requirements that officers needed to follow regarding locating reasonable shelter, as required by case law at that time.

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
On June 28, 2024, the United States Supreme Court reversed"Johnson v. Grants Pass" and thus "Martin v. Boise", which now allows cities to regulate and enforce ordinances related to public camping,vehicle camping,and personal property without the above restrictions
As a consequence of the Court's decision, Upland, along with all other cities within the Ninth Circuit's jurisdiction (which includes all of California)may again enact and enforce laws relating to public camping,vehicle camping,and storage of personal property without the prior restrictions. Cities are no longer obligated to offer shelter or homeless assistance prior to enforcement of public camping ordinances. Therefore, staff is recommending that Upland Municipal Code 12.46.110 G.be amended and Upland Municipal Code 12.46.110 H.be removed.

Despite any challenges, and in light of the recent Supreme Court decision overturning Martin v. Boise, the Police Department's Impact Team is dedicated to identifying and securing resources and support, prioritizing assistance before enforcement. Amending the Upland Municipal Code ensures the City follows current laws and allows enforcement against unlawful camping and personal property storage.The Department aims to reduce blight,maintain clear pedestrian and vehicle access,and uphold public health and safety.

Page 12 of 222 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a project subject to CEQA.The proposed action is not included within the definition of a"project" and thus is exempt.

FISCAL IMPACTS
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.

CEQA.: Not a Project.

Page 13 of 222 ends

ORDINANCE NO. 1992

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

UPLAND, AMENDING UPLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION

12.46.110 G. AND REMOVING UPLAND MUNICIPAL CODE

12.46.110 H. PERTAINING TO UNLAWFUL CAMPING AND

STORAGE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY
WHEREAS, the City of Upland ("City)" desires to maintain order and enhance public safety; and
WHEREAS, the California Constitution, article XI, section 7, authorizes the City to adopt and enforce local police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations that are not in conflict with the general laws; and
WHEREAS, the City has seen a proliferation of public nuisances related to unlawful camping and storage of personal property activities including, but not limited to increased visual blight and interference with pedestrian and vehicle traffic; and WHEREAS, it is the City's duty to keep its public rights of way clean and available for public use, and to protect public health, safety, and access by the community; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the recent Supreme court decision in City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson changed enforcement of illegal camping laws and therefore the City of Upland desires to amend its existing unlawful camping ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City now desires to amend its existing "Unlawful Camping" ordinance by amending Upland Municipal Code 12.46.110 G. and removing Upland Municipal Code 12.46.110 H.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UPLAND DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 2. Amendment of Section 12.24.110 G. Section 12.24.110 G. of Chapter 12.46 of Title 12 of the Upland Municipal Code is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
"G. No person may obstruct any public or private right-of-way either with their person, or with their personal property, in a way that creates a risk to the health and safety of passersby, or significantly impedes pedestrian traffic, or interferes with the use or enjoyment of public parks or facilities. Upon notice by an enforcement official, any such person shall immediately remove the obstruction. Failure to remove the obstruction shall be unlawful and shall constitute a public nuisance. Any personal property that is creating an obstruction as described in this subsection and is not removed following notice may be impounded as provided in this chapter."

Page 14 of 222 ends

Ordinance No. 1992

Page 2 ends

Section 3. Removal of Section 12.24.110 H. Section 12.24.110 H. of Chapter

12.46 of Title 12 is hereby removed in its entirety from the Upland Municipal Code.

Section 4. Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act. The Upland City Council ("City Council") finds that this Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 14, chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines"), sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Further, if the activity is deemed a project, the City Council finds that this Ordinance is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).

Section 5. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or application of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end of the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.

Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from its adoption.

Section 7. Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause it, or a summary of it, to be published in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published within the City, pursuant to all legal requirements.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28th day of October, 2024.

Bill Velto, Mayor
I, Keri Johnson, City Clerk of the City of Upland, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Upland held on the 14th day of October, 2024, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Upland on the 28th day of October, 2024, by the following vote.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST:

Keri Johnson, City Clerk

Page 15 of 222 ends

, trpl" CITY FUPLAND
„.;
"The City of Gracious Living"
Stafif(krcifil
C�tIFOB�S
DATE: October 28,2024
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:STEPHEN PARKER,CPA,ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

STACI SULLIVAN,FINANCE MANAGER

DARREN CHAN,ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN
SUBJECT: TREASURER'S REPORT SEPTEMBER 2024

RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the September 2024 Treasurer's Report.

GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal to manage the City's resources in a fiscally responsible manner.

BACKGROUND
Per California Government Code Section 53646(b),the City's treasurer or chief fiscal officer may render a treasurer's report to the City Council on a quarterly basis. The City has elected to provide this report to City Council monthly, but the City of Upland's Investment Policy(Approved September 25,2023)requires the Investment Officer to provide a report quarterly to the Finance Committee at regularly scheduled meetings. This report shall include the type of investment, issuer, date of maturity,par, and dollar amount invested on all securities, current market value as of the date of the report,investments and monies held by the local agency and shall additionally include a description of any of the local agency's funds,investments,or programs,that are under the management of contracted parties,including lending programs. The report shall include a statement of compliance with the investment policy and shall include a statement noting the City's ability to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months.

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
The submission of the monthly Treasurer's Report is a compliance measure.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a project subject to CEQA. The proposed action is not included within the definition of a"project" and thus is exempt.

FISCAL IMPACTS
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.

CEQA:Not a Project.

Page 16 of 222 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority For Period Ended
September 30,2024
Investment Portfolio Cost Par Value Market Value %of Portfolio State Local Agency Investment Fund 1,259,882 1,259,882 1,275,008 1.0% California Asset Management Plan 21,679,655 21,679,655 21,679,655 17.7% Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 23,928,302 23,916,000 23,963,760 19.6% Money Market Fund 1,013,801 1,013,801 1,013,801 0.8% Municipal Bonds 3,544,856 3,555,000 3,616,265 3.0% Government Agency Securities 67,336,271 67,871,937 66,296,770 54.1% US Treasury 4,593,925 4,750,000 4,654,678 3.8% Total Investments $ 123,356,692 $ 124,046,275 $ 122,499,938 100.0°/D Weighted Average Days to Maturity 624.20
Blended Yield: 3.02%
Cash Cost Market Value
Bank Accounts and Change Funds 2,544,190 2,544,190 Total Cash $ 2,544,190 $ 2,544,190
Total Cash and Investments $ 125,900,881 $ 125,044,127 PARS Investment Portfolio Cost Market Value
115 Trust-OPEB Investment 1,800,968 2,392,170
115 Trust-Pension Investment 7,457,904 8,444,947 Total Restricted Funds Held in Trust $ 9,258,872 $ 10,837,117 Benchmarks:

LAIF 4.58% _
CAMP 5.29% _
2yr U.S.Treasury 3.66% _
5yr U.S.Treasury 3.58%
Restricted Funds with Fiscal Agent Book Value Market Value Water Revenue Bonds 2022 16,516,671 16,516,671 Water System Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds 2021 608,773 608,773 Successor Agency TARBS 2013/2016-Merged Project 1 1 Colonies CFD Area#1 2022 294,865 294,865
Colonies CFD Area#2 2015 1,328,142 1,328,142
Upland 54 CFD 2004 128,003 128,003
Sycamore Hills CFD 2015-1 744,257 744,257
Harvest at Upland CFD 2016-1 Area#1 574,419 574,419 Harvest at Upland CFD 2016-1 Area#2 2,156,897 2,156,897 Enclave at Upland CFD 2022-1 4,078,287 4,078,287 Sycamore Hills CFD 2015-1-2 STB 2022A 771,560 771,560 Total Restricted Funds $ 27,201,875 $ 27,201,875

1. I hereby certify that the investments are in compliance with the investment policy adopted by the City Council in June 10,2024.

2. The City has the ability to meet its budgeted expenditures for the next six months.

3. The market values for funds held in banking institutions do not change. The amounts listed as market values for these items are the same as their book values.

4. The book value for the State Pool is the withdrawal value provided by the State Treasurer.The market value of funds held by the State Treasurer equates to the City's pro-rata share of the market value of the entire State Pool.

5. Sources for current market valuation are Account Statements and the Wall Street Journal GNMA Mortgage rates on the last trading day of the month.

6. This report meets the requirements of Government Code Section 53646. rDocuSignetl by:
9ty. 10/15/2024 1 5:24 PM PDT
ri lFircrcr919o_.

Assistant City Manager(Finance Director) Date
DocuSignetl by:
10/17/2024 1 2:19 PM PDT
City Treasurer Date PRIati6 tri'7f47P2n

Page 1 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority State Local Agency Investment Fund
For Period Ended
September 30, 2024
Account
Fund or Account Balance
City 98-36-942 1,259,882
Market
Value
Totals $ 1,259,882 $ 1,275,008
Yield for Period Ended 9/30/2024 4.58%
Prepare b D e w

Page 2 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority California Asset Management Plan
For Period Ended
September 30, 2024
Account
Fund or Account Balance
City of Upland 6113-001 21,679,655
Market
Value
Totals $ 21,679,655 $ 21,679,655
Yield for Period Ended 9/30/2024 5.29%
Prepare b D

Page 3 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority US Bank Investments
For Period Ended
September 30,2024
Par Market Stated Maturity
Investment Name CUSIP Cost Value Value Rate Date Negotiable Certificates of Deposit
A+FCU CD 00224TAN6 250,000 250,000 252,735 4.66% 02/17/2026 Alabama CU CD 01025RAF6 250,000 250,000 253,395 4.99% 12/22/2025 Ally Bank Utah CD 02007GH22 250,000 250,000 250,110 4.65% 12/22/2025 American Equity Bank CD 02568KAJ4 250,000 250,000 237,363 0.74% 05/27/2026 American Exp CD 02589AEZ1 250,000 250,000 259,470 4.48% 09/13/2028 Arsenal CU CD 04288LAA6 248,000 248,000 248,057 5.10% 01/25/2025 BMW Bank North America CD 05580AXF6 250,000 250,000 241,675 0.52% 09/25/2025 Bank Hapoalim CD 06251A6Z8 244,000 244,000 254,065 4.35% 05/21/2029 BankUnited NA CD 066519RW1 249,000 249,000 236,219 1.42% 12/08/2026 Baxter CU CD 07181JAY0 250,000 250,000 253,910 4.44% 01/25/2027 Burke Herbert Finanical Services CD 121331AT9 249,000 249,000 249,254 4.75% 02/13/2026 California CD 130162BB5 250,000 250,000 254,448 5.56% 10/27/2025 Capital One NA CD 14042RQN4 250,000 250,000 236,685 1.32% 12/08/2026 Chartway FCU CD 16141BAD3 248,000 248,000 251,313 4.99% 12/16/2025 Citibank CD 17325FBK3 513,250 500,000 511,680 4.78% 08/06/2029 City FCU Tax CD 17783PAJ0 249,000 249,000 252,665 3.93% 01/12/2029 City National Bank CD 178180GU3 250,000 250,000 251,360 4.33% 01/12/2026 Clearpath FCU CD 18507MAB7 250,000 250,000 250,223 5.10% 04/27/2026 Communitywide FCU CD 20416TAX0 250,000 250,000 252,438 4.66% 01/06/2026 Connex CU CD 208212BD1 250,000 250,000 255,408 5.30% 03/18/2026 Connexus CU CD 20825WBR0 250,000 250,000 251,633 5.12% 06/23/2025 Continental Bank CD 211163MG2 250,000 250,000 235,323 0.64% 08/24/2026 Cornerstone CD 21923MAB7 249,000 249,000 249,590 3.71% 10/01/2029 Customers Bank CD 23204HPB8 250,000 250,000 257,435 4.40% 06/14/2028 Discover Bank CD 254676AR0 250,000 250,000 260,105 4.52% 09/18/2028 Dort FCU CD 25844MBC1 250,000 250,000 254,575 4.72% 06/22/2026 Empower FCU CD 291916AE4 250,000 250,000 258,185 5.29% 10/23/2026 Enerbank USA CD 29278TMR8 250,000 250,000 247,668 1.82% 01/29/2025 Essential CU CD 29669XAP3 250,000 250,000 255,783 4.60% 06/15/2027 Fahey Banking Co CD 303117DG7 250,000 250,000 251,320 3.89% 01/12/2028 Fifth Third Bank CD 316777YV7 236,000 236,000 236,064 5.50% 10/17/2024 First Carolina Bank CD 31944MBJ3 250,000 250,000 239,758 0.52% 12/23/2025 First Foundation Bank CD 32026U5U6 244,000 244,000 254,067 4.45% 05/22/2029 FirstBank of Nebraska CD 32116PAR9 248,000 248,000 233,353 0.64% 08/27/2026 1st Security Bank of Washington CD 33625CDR7 250,000 250,000 244,450 0.31% 04/16/2025 1st Source Bank CD 33646CNW0 250,000 250,000 250,100 4.59% 01/19/2027 First Technology FCU CD 33715LEB2 249,000 249,000 247,994 3.67% 08/05/2027 Freedom Bk of Virginai CD 35633MCT7 250,000 250,000 250,085 4.80% 02/17/2026 General Electric CU CD 369674CJ3 250,000 250,000 250,335 4.99% 02/14/2025 Generations Bank C D 37149CAV9 250,000 250,000 245,675 3.16% 05/06/2027 Gesa CU CD 37424PAH7 250,000 250,000 256,298 5.13% 07/31/2026 Global FCU CD 37892MAM6 248,000 248,000 252,742 4.92% 06/16/2026 Great Midwest CD 39083PDQ2 249,000 249,000 258,385 4.37% 04/27/2029 Greenstate CU CD 39573LCC0 250,000 250,000 241,503 0.93% 11/24/2025 Gulf Cap Bank CD 40219MAY0 248,000 248,000 250,708 3.85% 09/27/2028 Ideal CU CD 45157PAY6 125,000 125,000 124,955 4.01% 08/29/2025 Industrial Commercial Bank China CD 45581ECJ8 250,000 250,000 245,075 0.46% 03/31/2025 InFirst FCU CD 45673RAA9 236,675 249,000 247,880 1.86% 11/27/2024 Pre giy pufn n

Page 4 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority US Bank Investments
For Period Ended
September 30,2024
Par Market Stated Maturity
Investment Name CUSIP Cost Value Value Rate Date Insight CU CD 45791JAC0 250,000 250,000 250,100 5.10% 02/27/2025 Iriquois Fed CD 46355PDQ8 249,000 249,000 255,300 4.59% 09/17/2027 Jeanne D Arc CD 472207AK5 249,000 249,000 256,204 4.32% 07/31/2028 JPMorgan Chase Bank CD 48128URC5 250,000 250,000 240,720 0.52% 11/10/2025 Kemba FCU CD 48836LBK7 248,000 248,000 248,709 5.39% 05/29/2029 Keypoint CU CD 49332PAC4 248,000 248,000 248,280 5.39% 12/27/2024 Liberty FED CD 53052LAU3 248,000 248,000 249,357 5.08% 06/09/2025 Live Oak Banking Company CD 538036NV2 250,000 250,000 241,895 0.57% 09/16/2025 Magnolia Bank Inc CD 559582AP6 250,000 250,000 248,345 0.35% 11/25/2024 Malaga Bank CD 56102ABK1 250,000 250,000 234,893 0.91% 11/19/2026 Manufacturers Traders Trust Co CD 564759RJ9 244,000 244,000 244,066 4.90% 12/09/2024 Medallion Bank CD 58404DGK1 250,000 250,000 246,140 1.32% 03/27/2025 Meritrust FCU MTN CD 59001PARO 225,000 225,000 223,274 3.23% 06/30/2025 Merrick Bank CD 59013KFH4 250,000 250,000 247,610 1.77% 01/31/2025 Milestone Bk CD 59934MAK4 244,000 244,000 247,231 4.35% 12/15/2026 Morgan Stanley CD 616900RE0 244,000 244,000 254,585 4.49% 05/22/2029 Morgan Stanley CD 61768E4B6 244,000 244,000 254,585 4.49% 05/22/2029 NBC Bancorp Inc CD 633398AA0 248,000 248,000 252,900 4.77% 09/14/2026 New York Community Bank CD 649447UY3 250,000 250,000 243,120 0.51% 07/01/2025 Optum Bank Draper CD 68405VAU3 244,000 244,000 250,049 4.59% 09/13/2027 Pacific Western Bank CD 69506YYX1 243,000 243,000 243,114 5.15% 11/12/2024 Partners Bank of California CD 70212YAZ5 250,000 250,000 245,690 1.02% 04/02/2025 People's Bank CD 710275AH1 250,000 250,000 251,365 4.04% 01/12/2027 Popular Bank CD 73317ABL5 250,000 250,000 250,585 4.10% 01/08/2026 Poppy Bank CD 73319FAF6 235,893 229,000 225,398 1.12% 03/18/2025 Preferred CU CD 74043RAA2 250,000 250,000 258,383 4.85% 09/15/2027 Red Crown Fed CD 756558AB8 200,000 200,000 206,260 5.25% 10/13/2026 Rogue CU CD 77535MAG8 250,000 250,000 250,275 5.20% 12/23/2027 Solarity CU CD 83418NAG6 248,000 248,000 253,015 4.96% 06/23/2026 Southeast Bank CD 84133PFC7 250,000 250,000 243,310 0.46% 06/17/2025 Southern First CD 84287PJB9 244,000 244,000 256,456 4.67% 10/17/2028 Souther States Bank CD 843879EZ6 249,000 249,000 249,045 4.45% 04/14/2025 Spokane Teachers CD 849061AC0 248,000 248,000 248,804 5.63% 01/28/2025 State Bank of India CD 856285RS2 252,625 250,000 248,883 2.06% 11/27/2024 State Employees CD 85678LAA3 249,000 249,000 255,270 4.69% 05/24/2027 Tandem Bank CD 87537YAB0 250,000 250,000 243,663 0.56% 06/23/2025 Technology CU CD 87868YAH6 248,000 248,000 248,122 5.09% 07/21/2025 Texas Exchange Bank CD 88241TMG2 249,000 249,000 235,591 1.22% 11/13/2026 Third Federal Savings&Loan CD 88413QDE5 250,000 250,000 244,370 0.82% 05/23/2025 Toyota Financial Savings Bank CD 89235MLE9 249,860 248,000 235,441 1.00% 07/29/2026 True Sky Credit CD 89786MAH7 250,000 250,000 255,355 4.42% 11/30/2027 TTCU Federal CU CD 89854LAD5 250,000 250,000 262,530 4.81% 07/26/2028 Tucson FCU CD 898812AC6 250,000 250,000 263,170 4.80% 09/08/2028 USAlliance FCU CD 90352RCD5 100,000 100,000 96,705 1.40% 01/28/2026 USAlliance FCU CD 90352RDL6 149,000 149,000 155,976 4.52% 06/28/2029 Union Bank CD 90520VAX1 250,000 250,000 238,305 0.63% 03/19/2026 Utah First CD 91739JAJ4 249,000 249,000 258,890 4.41% 04/30/2029 Vibrant CU CD 92559TAL2 248,000 248,000 253,225 5.25% 03/20/2026 WebBank Salt CD 947547NT8 248,000 248,000 245,694 1.01% 12/30/2024 Pre g ar rrar2n

Page 5 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority US Bank Investments
For Period Ended
September 30,2024
Par Market Stated Maturity
Investment Name CUSIP Cost Value Value Rate Date Negotiable Certificates of Deposit Subtotal $ 23,928,302 $ 23,916,000 $ 23,963,760 Cash and Equivalents(Money Market Fund)
First American Govt OB Fund-Y 31846V203 1,013,801 1,013,801 1,013,801 4.47% Money Market Fund Subtotal $ 1,013,801 $ 1,013,801 $ 1,013,801 Burbank Glendale, CA 120827EJ5 2,029,661 1,990,000 2,089,420 4.98% 07/01/2029 Klamath Trinity,CA-2021 B 498422JJ4 15,075 15,000 14,669 1.56% 08/01/2025 Riverside Cnty,CA 76913CBA6 950,120 1,000,000 982,730 2.92% 02/15/2026 San Bernardino,CA 796720PA2 300,000 300,000 291,846 0.86% 08/01/2025 San Bernardino,CA 796720PB0 250,000 250,000 237,600 1.16% 08/01/2026 Municipal Bond Fund Subtotal $ 3,544,856 $ 3,555,000 $ 3,616,265 Government Securities
Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AKLH7 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,455,495 0.77% 12/30/2025 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AKQX7 2,000,000 2,000,000 1,918,060 0.73% 01/28/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AKWK8 2,000,000 2,000,000 1,910,440 0.53% 02/12/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AL6A7 1,000,000 1,000,000 960,850 0.83% 02/26/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AL6L3 1,000,000 1,000,000 960,050 0.65% 02/26/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130ALN34 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,080,706 0.71% 03/24/2025 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130ALPJ7 1,000,000 1,000,000 973,690 0.84% 06/30/2025 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130ALZ80 1,300,000 1,300,000 1,272,947 0.77% 04/29/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AMBD3 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,455,105 1.03% 05/12/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AMET5 2,000,000 2,000,000 1,947,440 1.03% 05/27/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AMZPO 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,476,870 0.66% 02/28/2025 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AN3R9 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,429,095 1.19% 07/20/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130APJ55 1,600,000 1,600,000 1,519,904 1.32% 10/26/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130APU37 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,423,515 1.38% 11/24/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130APV51 2,000,000 2,000,000 1,952,520 1.28% 11/24/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AQ5D1 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,450,605 1.24% 12/22/2025 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130ARCL3 1,000,000 1,000,000 969,870 2.59% 03/30/2027 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130ARKL4 591,600 600,000 609,366 3.23% 04/21/2027 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AUS54 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,450 5.00% 02/17/2026 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AUS70 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,498,710 5.00% 08/15/2025 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AUS88 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,300 5.00% 02/16/2028 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AWBZ2 998,300 1,000,000 1,013,250 4.10% 06/11/2027 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AWTR1 1,991,760 2,000,000 2,054,700 4.31% 09/08/2028 Fed Home Ln Mort Corp#WN1356 3132XFQJO 1,481,250 1,500,000 1,511,370 4.31% 04/01/2029 Fed Home Ln Mort Corp#WN2560 3132XGZ25 994,688 1,000,000 1,008,840 4.85% 01/01/2029 Fed Home Ln Mort Corp#WN5034F 3132XKSY4 2,012,500 2,000,000 1,992,900 4.19% 07/01/2029 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 3133EMBK7 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,470,870 0.46% 04/07/2025 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 3133EMER9 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,479,435 0.48% 01/27/2025 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 3133EMTQ5 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,082,136 0.71% 03/17/2025 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 3133ENAF7 1,235,150 1,250,000 1,182,475 1.06% 10/07/2026 Pre 4 ryn n

Page 6 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority US Bank Investments
For Period Ended
September 30,2024
Par Market Stated Maturity
Investment Name CUSIP Cost Value Value Rate Date Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 3133ENHW3 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,222,150 1.20% 06/23/2025 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 3133EPN50 998,000 1,000,000 1,025,130 4.20% 12/15/2028 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 3133EPPR0 750,803 750,000 758,993 4.59% 04/10/2026 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 3134GW4C7 1,379,420 1,400,000 1,317,568 0.85% 10/27/2026 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 3134GWH82 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,453,200 0.65% 09/08/2025 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 3134GWWT9 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,450,080 0.57% 09/30/2025 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 3134GWZG4 2,000,000 2,000,000 1,935,300 0.62% 10/20/2025 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 3134GXAP9 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,448,595 0.62% 11/12/2025 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 3134GXBM5 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,444,860 0.62% 11/12/2025 Federal Home Ln MTG 3134GYEK4 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,248,975 5.15% 01/27/2026 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc 3136G4A45 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,457,445 0.73% 07/22/2025 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#AN1614 3138LDYL1 1,896,875 2,000,000 1,944,920 2.55% 06/01/2026 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#BL3660 3140HVB60 1,883,985 1,996,937 1,886,746 2.91% 08/01/2029 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#BS1416 3140LBSE4 594,825 660,000 599,735 1.21% 03/01/2028 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#BS5506 3140LGDL3 772,922 825,000 786,687 3.29% 06/01/2029 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#BS5552 3140LGE24 1,995,544 2,130,000 2,052,340 3.49% 05/01/2029 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#BS8656 3140LKTN3 659,588 660,000 669,187 4.83% 06/01/2028 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#BZ0815 3140NU3Z0 1,499,063 1,500,000 1,532,895 4.61% 04/01/2029 Government Securities Subtotal $ 67,336,271 $ 67,871,937 $ 66,296,770 US Treasury
US Treasury Note 2.625% 9128286B1 928,900 1,000,000 961,520 2.76% 02/15/2029 US Treasury Note 0.625% 912828ZE3 220,875 250,000 232,423 0.68% 03/31/2027 US Treasury Note 0.375% 91282CBC4 1,476,450 1,500,000 1,437,135 0.39% 12/31/2025 US Treasury Note 3.750% 91282CJR3 978,600 1,000,000 1,006,720 3.77% 12/31/2028 US Treasury Note 4.000% 91282CJW2 989,100 1,000,000 1,016,880 3.98% 01/31/2029 US Treasury Subtotal $ 4,593,925 $ 4,750,000 $ 4,654,678 Total Portfolio $ 100,417,155 $ 101,106,738 $ 99,545,274 Pre 4 ryn n

Page 7 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81FB-89444521DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority Investment Portfolio
For Period Ended
September 30,2024
No.of
days until Days to maturity Total by
September 30,2024 Market Value Availability maturity Weight weighted average maturity Petty Cash 32,898 9/30/2024 0 0.0% - Checking Account 2,420,171 10/1/2024 1 1.9% 0.02 Utility&Credit Cards Account 91,121 10/1/2024 1 0.1% 0.00 Total Bank Accounts 2,544,190 2,544,190 State Local Agency Investment Fund 1,275,008 10/1/2024 1 1.0% 0.01 1,275,008 California Asset Management Plan 21,679,655 9/30/2024 0 17.3% - 21,679,655 First American Govt OB Fund-Y 1,013,801 10/1/2024 1 0.8% 0.01 Money Market Accounts 1,013,801 1,013,801 Fifth Third Bank CD 236,064 10/17/2024 17 0.2% 0.03 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 236,064 236,064 $ 26,748,718 1 -30 days
InFirst FCU CD 247,880 11/27/2024 58 0.2% 0.11 Magnolia Bank Inc CD 248,345 11/25/2024 56 0.2% 0.11 Pacific Western Bank CD 243,114 11/12/2024 43 0.2% 0.08 State Bank of India CD 248,883 11/27/2024 58 0.2% 0.12 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 988,221 988,221 $ 988,221 31 -60 days
Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 1,479,435 1/27/2025 119 1.2% 1.41 Government Securities 1,479,435 1,479,435 Arsenal CU CD 248,057 1/25/2025 117 0.2% 0.23 Keypoint CU CD 248,280 12/27/2024 88 0.2% 0.17 Manufacturers Traders Trust Co CD 244,066 12/9/2024 70 0.2% 0.14 Spokane Teachers CD 248,804 1/28/2025 120 0.2% 0.24 WebBank Salt CD 245,694 12/30/2024 91 0.2% 0.18 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 1,234,900 1,234,900 $ 2,714,335 61 -120 days
Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,080,706 3/24/2025 175 0.9% 1.51 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,476,870 2/28/2025 151 1.2% 1.78 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 1,082,136 3/17/2025 168 0.9% 1.45 Government Securities 3,639,712 3,639,712 Enerbank USA CD 247,668 1/29/2025 121 0.2% 0.24 General Electric CU CD 250,335 2/14/2025 137 0.2% 0.27 Insight CU CD 250,100 2/27/2025 150 0.2% 0.30 Medallion Bank CD 246,140 3/27/2025 178 0.2% 0.35 Merrick Bank CD 247,610 1/31/2025 123 0.2% 0.24 Poppy Bank CD 225,398 3/18/2025 169 0.2% 0.30 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 1,467,250 1,467,250 $ 5,106,962 121 -180 days
Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 973,690 6/30/2025 273 0.8% 2.13 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,498,710 8/15/2025 319 1.2% 3.82 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 1,470,870 4/7/2025 189 1.2% 2.22 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 1,222,150 6/23/2025 266 1.0% 2.60 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 1,453,200 9/8/2025 343 1.2% 3.99 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 1,450,080 9/30/2025 365 1.2% 4.23 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc 1,457,445 7/22/2025 295 1.2% 3.44 Government Securities 9,526,145 9,526,145 BMW Bank North America CD 241,675 9/25/2025 360 0.2% 0.70 Connexus CU CD 251,633 6/23/2025 266 0.2% 0.54 Paged

Page 8 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81FB-89444521DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority Investment Portfolio
For Period Ended
September 30,2024
No.of
days until Days to maturity Total by
September 30,2024 Market Value Availability maturity Weight weighted average maturity 1st Security Bank of Washington CD 244,450 4/16/2025 198 0.2% 0.39 Ideal CU CD 124,955 8/29/2025 333 0.1% 0.33 Industrial Commercial Bank China CD 245,075 3/31/2025 182 0.2% 0.36 Liberty FED CD 249,357 6/9/2025 252 0.2% 0.50 Live Oak Banking Company CD 241,895 9/16/2025 351 0.2% 0.68 Meritrust FCU MTN CD 223,274 6/30/2025 273 0.2% 0.49 New York Community Bank CD 243,120 7/1/2025 274 0.2% 0.53 Partners Bank of California CD 245,690 4/2/2025 184 0.2% 0.36 Southeast Bank CD 243,310 6/17/2025 260 0.2% 0.51 Souther States Bank CD 249,045 4/14/2025 196 0.2% 0.39 Tandem Bank CD 243,663 6/23/2025 266 0.2% 0.52 Technology CU CD 248,122 7/21/2025 294 0.2% 0.58 Third Federal Savings&Loan CD 244,370 5/23/2025 235 0.2% 0.46 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 3,539,632 3,539,632 Klamath Trinity,CA-2021 B 14,669 8/1/2025 305 0.0% 0.04 San Bernardino,CA 291,846 8/1/2025 305 0.2% 0.71 Municipal Bonds 306,515 306,515
$ 13,372,292 181 -1 year
Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,455,495 12/30/2025 456 1.2% 5.31 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,918,060 1/28/2026 485 1.5% 7.44 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,910,440 2/12/2026 500 1.5% 7.64 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 960,850 2/26/2026 514 0.8% 3.95 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 960,050 2/26/2026 514 0.8% 3.95 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,272,947 4/29/2026 576 1.0% 5.86 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,455,105 5/12/2026 589 1.2% 6.85 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,947,440 5/27/2026 604 1.6% 9.41 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,429,095 7/20/2026 658 1.1% 7.52 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,450,605 12/22/2025 448 1.2% 5.20 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,500,450 2/17/2026 505 1.2% 6.06 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 758,993 4/10/2026 557 0.6% 3.38 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 1,935,300 10/20/2025 385 1.5% 5.96 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 1,448,595 11/12/2025 408 1.2% 4.73 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 1,444,860 11/12/2025 408 1.2% 4.71 Federal Home Ln MTG 1,248,975 1/27/2026 484 1.0% 4.83 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#AN1614 1,944,920 6/1/2026 609 1.6% 9.47 Government Securities 25,042,180 25,042,180 A+FCU CD 252,735 2/17/2026 505 0.2% 1.02 Alabama CU CD 253,395 12/22/2025 448 0.2% 0.91 Ally Bank Utah CD 250,110 12/22/2025 448 0.2% 0.90 American Equity Bank CD 237,363 5/27/2026 604 0.2% 1.15 Burke Herbert Finanical Services CD 249,254 2/13/2026 501 0.2% 1.00 California CD 254,448 10/27/2025 392 0.2% 0.80 Chartway FCU CD 251,313 12/16/2025 442 0.2% 0.89 City National Bank CD 251,360 1/12/2026 469 0.2% 0.94 Clearpath FCU CD 250,223 4/27/2026 574 0.2% 1.15 Communitywide FCU CD 252,438 1/6/2026 463 0.2% 0.93 Connex CU CD 255,408 3/18/2026 534 0.2% 1.09 Continental Bank CD 235,323 8/24/2026 693 0.2% 1.30 Dort FCU CD 254,575 6/22/2026 630 0.2% 1.28 First Carolina Bank CD 239,758 12/23/2025 449 0.2% 0.86 FirstBank of Nebraska CD 233,353 8/27/2026 696 0.2% 1.30 Freedom Bk of Virginai CD 250,085 2/17/2026 505 0.2% 1.01 Gesa CU CD 256,298 7/31/2026 669 0.2% 1.37 Global FCU CD 252,742 6/16/2026 624 0.2% 1.26 Greenstate CU CD 241,503 11/24/2025 420 0.2% 0.81 JPMorgan Chase Bank CD 240,720 11/10/2025 406 0.2% 0.78 NBC Bancorp Inc CD 252,900 9/14/2026 714 0.2% 1.44 Popular Bank CD 250,585 1/8/2026 465 0.2% 0.93 Solarity CU CD 253,015 6/23/2026 631 0.2% 1.28 Toyota Financial Savings Bank CD 235,441 7/29/2026 667 0.2% 1.26 USAlliance FCU CD 96,705 1/28/2026 485 0.1% 0.38 Union Bank CD 238,305 3/19/2026 535 0.2% 1.02 Paged R5Derfe222n

Page 9 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81FB-89444521DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority Investment Portfolio
For Period Ended
September 30,2024
No.of
days until Days to maturity Total by
September 30,2024 Market Value Availability maturity Weight weighted average maturity Vibrant CU CD 253,225 3/20/2026 536 0.2% 1.09 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 6,542,576 6,542,576 US Treasury Note 0.375% 1,437,135 12/31/2025 457 1.1% 5.25 US Treasury 1,437,135 1,437,135
Riverside Cnty,CA 982,730 2/15/2026 503 0.8% 3.95 San Bernardino,CA 237,600 8/1/2026 670 0.2% 1.27 Municipal Bonds 1,220,330 1,220,330
$ 34,242,221 1-2 years
Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,519,904 10/26/2026 756 1.2% 9.19 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,423,515 11/24/2026 785 1.1% 8.94 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,952,520 11/24/2026 785 1.6% 12.26 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 969,870 3/30/2027 911 0.8% 7.07 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 609,366 4/21/2027 933 0.5% 4.55 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,013,250 6/11/2027 984 0.8% 7.97 Federal Farm Credit Bks DEB 1,182,475 10/7/2026 737 0.9% 6.97 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 1,317,568 10/27/2026 757 1.1% 7.98 Government Securities 9,988,468 9,988,468 BankUnited NA CD 236,219 12/8/2026 799 0.2% 1.51 Baxter CU CD 253,910 1/25/2027 847 0.2% 1.72 Capital One NA CD 236,685 12/8/2026 799 0.2% 1.51 Empower FCU CD 258,185 10/23/2026 753 0.2% 1.55 Essential CU CD 255,783 6/15/2027 988 0.2% 2.02 1st Source Bank CD 250,100 1/19/2027 841 0.2% 1.68 First Technology FCU CD 247,994 8/5/2027 1039 0.2% 2.06 Generations Bank C D 245,675 5/6/2027 948 0.2% 1.86 Iriquois Fed CD 255,300 9/17/2027 1082 0.2% 2.21 Malaga Bank CD 234,893 11/19/2026 780 0.2% 1.47 Milestone Bk CD 247,231 12/15/2026 806 0.2% 1.59 Optum Bank Draper CD 250,049 9/13/2027 1078 0.2% 2.16 People's Bank CD 251,365 1/12/2027 834 0.2% 1.68 Preferred CU CD 258,383 9/15/2027 1080 0.2% 2.23 Red Crown Fed CD 206,260 10/13/2026 743 0.2% 1.23 State Employees CD 255,270 5/24/2027 966 0.2% 1.97 Texas Exchange Bank CD 235,591 11/13/2026 774 0.2% 1.46 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 4,178,891 4,178,891 US Treasury Note 0.625% 232,423 3/31/2027 912 0.2% 1.70 US Treasury 232,423 232,423
$ 14,399,781 2-3 years
Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 1,500,300 2/16/2028 1234 1.2% 14.81 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 2,054,700 9/8/2028 1439 1.6% 23.65 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#BS1416 599,735 3/1/2028 1248 0.5% 5.99 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#BS8656 669,187 6/1/2028 1340 0.5% 7.17 Government Securities 4,823,923 4,823,923 American Exp CD 259,470 9/13/2028 1444 0.2% 3.00 Customers Bank CD 257,435 6/14/2028 1353 0.2% 2.79 Discover Bank CD 260,105 9/18/2028 1449 0.2% 3.01 Fahey Banking Co CD 251,320 1/12/2028 1199 0.2% 2.41 Gulf Cap Bank CD 250,708 9/27/2028 1458 0.2% 2.92 Jeanne D Arc CD 256,204 7/31/2028 1400 0.2% 2.87 Rogue CU CD 250,275 12/23/2027 1179 0.2% 2.36 True Sky Credit CD 255,355 11/30/2027 1156 0.2% 2.36 TTCU Federal CU CD 262,530 7/26/2028 1395 0.2% 2.93 Tucson FCU CD 263,170 9/8/2028 1439 0.2% 3.03 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 2,566,572 2,566,572 $ 7,390,494 3-4 years
Pagedeffe2222n

Page 10 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81FB-89444521DB68

Page 11 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority CA Government Code Section 53607
For Period Ended
September 30,2024
Issue Par Market Maturity
Investment Name CUSIP ID Date Cost Value Value Date Sales&Maturities
The Bank of the Valley CD 06543PCN3 9/30/2020 250,000.00 250,000.00 249,052.50 9/30/2024 Federal Home Ln Corp MTN 3134GWUX2 9/30/2020 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 1,494,540.00 9/30/2024 Federal Home Ln Bks DEB 3130AQD59 12/30/2021 1,250,000.00 1,250,000.00 1,246,062.50 9/30/2024 Fed Natl Mortgage Assoc#BL3660 3140HVB60 8/1/2019 1,886,875.00 2,000,000.00 1,875,860.00 8/1/2029 First Farmers Bank&Trust CD 320165JK0 9/4/2019 246,681.85 235,000.00 234,884.85 9/4/2024 Pentagon FCU CD 70962LAJ1 9/1/2021 250,000.00 250,000.00 249,877.50 9/3/2024 Sales&Maturities Subtotal $ 5,383,556.85 $5,485,000.00 $5,350,277.35 Purchases
Citibank CD 17325FBK3 8/6/2024 513,250.00 500,000.00 511,680.00 8/6/2029 Cornerstone CD 21923MAB7 9/30/2024 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,590.13 10/1/2029 Fed Home Ln Mort Corp#WN5034F 3132XKSY4 9/1/2024 2,012,500.00 2,000,000.00 1,992,900.00 7/1/2029 Gulf Cap Bank CD 40219MAY0 9/27/2024 248,000.00 248,000.00 250,708.16 9/27/2028 Purchases Subtotal $ 3,022,750.00 $2,997,000.00 $3,004,878.29 Preprae�l.,�y28r n

Page 12 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority Maturities in Thousands of Dollars
For Period Ended
September 30,2024
1 day 31 days 61 days 121 days 181 days 1 year 2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years to to to to to to to to to to
Investment Portfolio 30 days 60 days 120 days 180 days 1 year 2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years 6 years State Local Agency Investment Fund 1,275 - - - - - - - - - California Asset Management Plan 21,680 - - - - - - - - - Bank Accounts and Change Funds 2,544 - - - - - - - - - Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 236 988 1,235 1,467 3,540 6,543 4,179 2,567 2,960 250 Government Securities - - 1,479 3,640 9,526 25,042 9,988 4,824 11,797 - Money Market Fund 1,014 - - - - - - - - - Municipal Bonds - - - - 307 1,220 - - 2,089 - US Treasury - - - - - 1,437 232 - 2,985 - Total Cash and Investments $26,749 $ 988 $ 2,714 $ 5,107 $ 13,373 $34,242 $ 14,399 $ 7,391 $ 19,831 $ 250 Percentage 21.39% 0.79% 2.17% 4.08% 10.70% 27.38% 11.52% 5.91% 15.86% 0.20%

INVESTMENTS BY MATURITY
2 years to 3 years

11.52%
1 year to 2 years 3 years to 4 years

27.38% 5.91%
181 days to 1 year

10.70% 4 years to 5 years

15.86%
121 days to 180 days

4.08%
5 years to 6 years
i 0.20%
61 days to 120 days

2.17%
1 day to 30 days
31 days to 21.39%
60 days 0.79%
PreRigtb29atefr n

Page 13 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority Bank Accounts and Change Funds
For Period Ended
September 30, 2024
Account Insured Collateralized Total
Name Institution Deposits Deposits Deposits
Petty Cash
City of Upland City of Upland $ - $ - $ 32,898 City of Upland
Payroll Zero Balance Account Chase - - - City of Upland
Checking Account Chase 250,000 2,170,171 2,420,171 City of Upland
Utility& Credit Cards Account Chase 91,121 - 91,121 City of Upland
Successor Agency Chase - - -
Totals $ 341,121 $ 2,170,171 $ 2,544,190
Prepare b D e �

Page 14 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81 FB-89444521 DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority State Local Agency Investment Fund
For 12 Month Period Ended
September 30, 2024
Month Yield
October-2023 3.67%
November-2023 3.84%
December-2023 3.93%
January-2024 4.01%
February-2024 4.12%
March-2024 4.23%
April-2024 4.27%
May-2024 4.33%
June-2024 4.48%
July-2024 4.52%
August-2024 4.58%
September-2024 4.58%
Average Yield On Investment Portfolio

5.00%

4.50%

4.00%

3.50%

3.00%

2.50%

2.00%

1.50%

1.00%

0.50%

0.00%
L0, L02 16 LR tiR L0, vC‘ tiA LDS LD LR
J 51, Jc c t cJ r �� e � ye e e . a� p p b � J s a�o � e� o t ao o PO` ,� G ,a �e C1oOe
Prepare bv D r e �

Page 15 of 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: FE8AACFD-2F51-4D42-81FB-89444521DB68

TREASURER'S REPORT
City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority Investment Summary
September 30,2024
October-2023 November-2023 December-2023 January-2024 February-2024 March-2024 April-2024 May-2024 June-2024 July-2024 August-2024 September-2024 Investment Portfolio
State Local Agency Investment Fund(LAIF) 1,115,944 1,118,938 6,112,217 6,140,634 10,179,928 8,165,694 5,738,513 1,228,815 1,218,471 1,270,702 1,273,693 1,275,008 California Asset Management Plan(CAMP) 30,655,126 30,795,733 30,940,951 31,086,004 31,221,545 31,366,454 35,511,736 35,667,423 37,319,358 25,471,211 23,583,738 21,679,655 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 24,947,630 25,067,720 24,049,279 26,489,593 25,738,967 25,434,176 25,146,286 24,598,093 24,096,892 23,891,458 23,589,222 23,963,760 Money Market Fund 373,395 1,534,652 1,160,163 292,728 1,264,033 3,100,698 3,537,396 994,116 2,266,289 177,239 365,257 1,013,801 Municipal Bonds 1,497,169 1,510,198 1,524,299 1,534,972 1,529,703 1,533,303 1,527,597 1,531,768 1,533,372 3,587,504 3,573,166 3,616,265 Government Agency Securities 58,443,604 58,080,656 60,417,271 59,328,194 59,106,065 59,868,893 59,663,646 63,208,309 64,382,476 65,588,408 66,664,536 66,296,770 Corporate Bonds - - - - - - - - - - - - US Treasury 1,576,070 1,595,435 1,614,818 1,619,928 1,610,845 4,512,223 4,446,395 4,485,273 4,513,773 4,582,538 4,621,215 4,654,678 Total Investments $ 118,608,939 $ 119,703,332 $ 125,818,997 $ 126,492,053 $ 130,651,085 $133,981,439 $135,571,569 $131,713,797 $135,330,631 $124,569,059 $123,670,828 $ 122,499,938 Weighted Average Days to Maturity 559.72 559.72 506.90 491.11 459.24 483.70 461.83 471.80 499.32 572.63 593.57 624.20 Blended Yield: 3.02% 3.02% 3.08% 3.05% 2.94% 3.14% 3.08% 3.02% 3.15% 3.07% 2.98% 3.02% Cash
Bank Accounts and Change of Funds 4,719,830 7,043,740 7,158,488 8,280,241 7,286,941 5,023,019 5,167,174 13,970,016 8,130,947 7,113,239 3,277,829 2,544,190 Total Cash $ 4,719,830 $ 7,043,740 $ 7,158,488 $ 8,280,241 $ 7,286,941 $ 5,023,019 $ 5,167,174 $ 13,970,016 $ 8,130,947 $ 7,113,239 $ 3,277,829 $ 2,544,190 Total Cash and Investments $ 123,328,768 $ 126,747,072 $ 132,977,485 $ 134,772,294 $ 137,938,026 $139,004,459 $140,738,742 $145,683,813 $143,461,577 $131,682,298 $126,948,657 $ 125,044,127 PARS Investment Portfolio
115 Trust-OPEB Investment 1,722,469 1,722,469 1,872,738 1,877,569 1,898,632 1,936,964 2,184,493 2,247,348 2,272,555 2,321,327 2,360,733 2,392,170 115 Trust-Pension Investment 4,432,144 4,432,144 4,729,333 4,746,692 4,775,020 4,855,290 7,104,472 7,289,805 7,376,442 7,533,336 8,330,830 8,444,947 Total Restricted Funds Held in Trust $ 6,154,613 $ 6,154,613 $ 6,602,071 $ 6,624,260 $ 6,673,652 $ 6,792,254 $ 9,288,965 $ 9,537,153 $ 9,648,997 $ 9,854,664 $ 10,691,564 $ 10,837,117 Benchmarks:

LAIF 3.67% 3.67% 3.93% 4.01% 4.12% 4.23% 4.27% 4.33% 4.48% 4.52% 4.58% 4.58% CAMP 5.56% 5.29% 5.55% 5.54% 5.50% 5.50% 5.45% 5.43% 5.44% 5.44% 5.42% 5.29% 2yr U.S.Treasury 4.95% 4.73% 4.23% 4.27% 4.64% 4.59% 5.04% 4.82% 4.71% 4.29% 3.91% 3.66% 5yr U.S.Treasury 4.67% 4.31% 3.84% 3.91% 4.26% 4.21% 4.72% 4.42% 4.33% 3.97% 3.71% 3.58% Restricted Funds with Fiscal Agent
Wtr Sys Lease Rev Ref Bonds 2011
Wtr Revenue Bonds 2022 15,501,173 15,501,239 15,501,303 15,501,369 15,501,435 15,636,280 15,501,562 15,501,626 15,501,692 15,501,755 15,501,821 16,516,671 Wtr Sys Lease Rev Ref Bonds 2021 25 25 25 25 25 48,773 0 - - - - 608,773 Successor Agency TAN 2013/TAN 2016-Me 10 10 10 10 223,344 0 0 - - - 2,618,344 1 Colonies CFD Area#1 2012 - - - - - - - - - - - - Colonies CFD Area#1 2022 585,588 585,591 585,593 585,595 1,311,297 1,122,204 1,122,209 1,122,212 1,122,216 1,122,219 1,497,100 294,865 Colonies CFD Area#2 2015 1,526,956 1,526,958 1,526,969 1,526,975 2,236,488 2,010,387 2,010,393 2,010,404 2,010,413 2,010,421 2,429,242 1,328,142 Upland 54 CFD 2004 166,187 166,188 166,188 166,188 231,819 203,448 203,449 203,449 203,449 203,450 226,002 128,003 Sycamore Hills CFD 2015-1 737,756 737,759 737,762 737,762 1,006,794 824,056 824,059 824,060 824,061 824,062 1,115,102 744,257 Harvest at Upland CFD 2016-1 Area#1 574,056 576,398 578,670 581,045 912,960 743,629 746,634 749,547 752,572 755,509 914,107 574,419 Harvest at Upland CFD 2016-1 Area#2 2,289,318 2,289,328 2,289,337 2,289,347 2,583,777 2,435,366 2,435,376 2,435,384 2,435,392 2,435,400 2,568,647 2,156,897 4,007,837 4,023,801 4,039,244 4,055,265 4,145,681 4,062,915 4,078,970 4,094,517 4,110,632 4,126,259 4,160,128 4,078,287 Sycamore Hills CFD 2015-1-2 765,830 765,833 765,836 765,840 1,049,013 848,106 848,109 848,111 848,101 848,113 1,135,802 771,560 Total Restricted Funds $ 26,154,735 $ 26,173,129 $ 26,190,936 $ 26,209,421 $ 29,202,632 $ 27,935,164 $ 27,770,761 $ 27,789,310 $ 27,808,528 $ 27,827,188 $ 32,166,295 $ 27,201,875 Pre d bv Dasr99 Chan

Page 16 of 16 ends

, trpl" CITY FUPLAND
"The City of Gracious Living"
Stafif(krcifil
C�tIFOB�S
DATE: October 28,2024
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:STEPHEN PARKER,ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

STACI SULLIVAN,FINANCE MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER WARRANT AND PAYROLL REGISTERS RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council approve the September warrant registers(check numbers 49748—50102 and direct disbursements)totaling $9,806,605.70 and payroll registers totaling$1,923,041.67 (check numbers 163980— 163992 and electronic fund transfers 50014—50569).

GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal of managing the City's resources in a fiscally responsible and transparent manner.

BACKGROUND
The City Council is presented with the financial disbursements for the purchase of materials,supplies,services,capital projects,and payroll warrants issued in the prior month. This process provides the City Council with the opportunity to review the monthly expenses of the city.

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
In accordance with Government Code 37208,the Finance Manager hereby certifies that the attached warrant registers, direct disbursements and payroll registers have been found to conform to the approved budget and have been paid.

These demands are submitted to the City Council for review and approval.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a project subject to CEQA. The proposed action is not included within the definition of a"project" and thus is exempt.

FISCAL IMPACTS
Funds are available for the payment of the warrant registers,direct disbursements and payroll registers in accordance with the Fiscal Year 2024-25 operating budget.

ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.

CEQA:Not a Project.

Page 33 of 222 ends

.,
��of °pz9 City of Upland
04,,,s� Accounts Payable Check Reconciliation Register � ' r 09/01/2024-09/30/2024
L0,084
CHECK# CHECK DATE CHECK TYPE VENDOR# VENDOR NAME CHECK AMOUNT 49748 09/04/2024 PRINTED 36721 ALHAMBRA REPROGRAPHICS INC 814.71 49749 09/04/2024 PRINTED 207 ADLERHORST INTERNATIONAL LLC 70.00 49750 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1380 ADVANTEC CONSULTING ENGINEERS,INC 12,450.00 49751 09/04/2024 PRINTED 3 AIRGAS USA LLC 320.11 49752 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1956 MELINDA ALVAREZ 169.45 49753 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1729 ANTHESIS SERVICES 7,500.00 49754 09/04/2024 PRINTED 715 BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICE INSPECTIONS,INC 206.74 49755 09/04/2024 PRINTED 119661 BEST BEST&KRIEGER LLP 38,385.51 49756 09/04/2024 PRINTED 120021 BRIGHTVIEW 64,192.67 49757 09/04/2024 PRINTED 5944 BURRTEC WASTE INDUSTRIES 1,280,450.45 49758 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1698 CABLE AIRPORT INC 13,773.00 49759 09/04/2024 PRINTED 195 CALIFORNIA NEWSPAPERS PARTNERSHIP 4,135.44 49760 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1117 CARAHSOFT TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION 9,085.00 49761 09/04/2024 PRINTED 82791 CHEM PRO LLC 333.00 49762 09/04/2024 PRINTED 448 CINTAS CORPORATION 4,838.05 49763 09/04/2024 PRINTED 15814 CRIME SCENE STERI-CLEAN,LLC 300.00 49764 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1500 THE CUSTOM GRAPHICS 118.53 49765 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1735 ONTARIO PRO SOCCER,LLC 25,000.00 49766 09/04/2024 PRINTED 21131 ESRI INC 4,200.00 49767 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1562 EVCO CLEANING SUPPLIES LLC 21.47 49768 09/04/2024 PRINTED 4456 FEDERAL EXPRESS 80.06 49769 09/04/2024 PRINTED 19161 FERREIRA,NORBERTO 284.00 49770 09/04/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 134.08 49771 09/04/2024 PRINTED 58311 G H A TECHNOLOGIES 3,186.08 49772 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1644 GARCIA,TANYA 2,497.91 49773 09/04/2024 PRINTED 16829 GOURMET GOURMET CATERING 545.22 49774 09/04/2024 PRINTED 28871 GRAFFITI PROTECTIVE COATINGS 7,176.65 49775 09/04/2024 PRINTED 56561 HLP INC 3,840.00 49776 09/04/2024 PRINTED 16340 INFOSEND INC 8,429.51 49777 09/04/2024 PRINTED 153 INLAND EMPIRE UTILITIES AGENCY 986.40 49778 09/04/2024 PRINTED 373 LA POLICE GEAR,INC. 730.50 49779 09/04/2024 PRINTED 91491 LIBRARY SYSTEMS&SERVICES LLC 12,538.64 49780 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1818 LIGHTHOUSE HEALTH AND WELLNESS,PBC 7,500.00 49781 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1123 HYATT LEGAL PLANS,INC 672.00 49782 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1406 HOUALLA ENTERPRISES,LTD 19,024.21 49783 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1857 MOTIVE ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS,INC. 1,375.00 49784 09/04/2024 PRINTED 909 PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTING ASSOCIATES INC 520.00 49785 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1841 PURSUIT 360 STRATEGIES LLC 6,000.00 49786 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1864 REAL GONE PEST CONTROL 520.00 49787 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1954 ERICA RODRIGUEZ 241.98 49788 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1649 ROSALES,HECTOR 80.00 49789 09/04/2024 PRINTED 2225 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FIRE 509.00 49790 09/04/2024 PRINTED 20171 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFF 3,400.00 49791 09/04/2024 PRINTED 98677 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 131,463.00 49792 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1955 PATRICIA SANDOVAL 26.94 49793 09/04/2024 PRINTED 43011 SMITH-EMERY LABORATORIES 2,507.01 49794 09/04/2024 PRINTED 18062 SOFFA ELECTRIC INC 1,210.00 49795 09/04/2024 PRINTED 69231 STEP SAVER CA LLC 988.68 49796 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1505 STEWART TITLE OF CALIFORNIA INC 1,400.00 49797 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1432 RYAN HOOVER 1,620.87 49798 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1656 TRANSMAP CORPORATION 14,369.85 Prepared By: Erin Myers Page 1 of 8 PagB l 42ot'Q22

CHECK# CHECK DATE CHECK TYPE VENDOR# VENDOR NAME CHECK AMOUNT 49799 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1775 TRIPEPI,SMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC 7,965.00 49800 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1792 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA,INC 6,141.23 49801 09/04/2024 PRINTED 1725 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 20,846.00 49802 09/04/2024 PRINTED 999999 NICK ASHWILL 10,000.00 49803 09/11/2024 PRINTED 358 ADVANCED AUTO,SMOG CHECK CENTER 40.00 49804 09/11/2024 PRINTED 851 ADVANTAGE SEALING SYSTEMS,INC 363.37 49805 09/11/2024 PRINTED 88211 AIR-EX 1,793.52 49806 09/11/2024 PRINTED 3 AIRGAS USA LLC 215.35 49807 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1243 AMERICAN GLOBAL SECURITY, INC 12,426.82 49808 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1678 JOHN P ANDREWS 200.00 49809 09/11/2024 PRINTED 131971 ANNEALTA GROUP 10,500.00 49810 09/11/2024 PRINTED 699 APPLIED CONCEPTS 542.50 49811 09/11/2024 PRINTED 289 ARROW TRAILER SUPPLIES INC 205.37 49812 09/11/2024 PRINTED 308 ASPINALL,ROBIN JEAN 200.00 49813 09/11/2024 PRINTED 6683 ATMAA INC 1,040.00 49814 09/11/2024 PRINTED 715 BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICE INSPECTIONS,INC 993.64 49815 09/11/2024 PRINTED 862 BADGER METER INC 4,519.04 49816 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1734 BATTERY WORX INC 425.78 49817 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1374 BAY ALARM COMPANY 56.00 49818 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1519 BIG 0 FLOORING 42,663.56 49819 09/11/2024 PRINTED 120021 BRIGHTVIEW 5,280.00 49820 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1007 CALDWELL,CHRISTINE 200.00 49821 09/11/2024 PRINTED 195 CALIFORNIA NEWSPAPERS PARTNERSHIP 565.68 49822 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1951 CANTEEN REFRESHMENTS 607.28 49823 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1372 ALEXANDERCARRASCOJR 9,975.00 49824 09/11/2024 PRINTED 177 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS,INC 1,774.80 49825 09/11/2024 PRINTED 82791 CHEM PRO LLC 951.00 49826 09/11/2024 PRINTED 663 CHEMSCAN,INC. 6,575.00 49827 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1877 FRANCISCO MONRREAL 404.06 49828 09/11/2024 PRINTED 363 CHINO MOWER AND EQUIPMENT 532.29 49829 09/11/2024 PRINTED 3613 CITY OF CLAREMONT 9,528.12 49830 09/11/2024 PRINTED 475 CITY OF MONTCLAIR 4,462.62 49831 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1306 COMPLETE PAPERLESS SOLUTIONS 44,542.57 49832 09/11/2024 PRINTED 45421 COSTAR REALTY INFORMATION GROUP INC 98.34 49833 09/11/2024 PRINTED 98828 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 1,741.05 49834 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1811 BLAKE CROSMER 125.00 49835 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1863 DAVID L BORGER 200.00 49836 09/11/2024 PRINTED 124 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1,116.00 49837 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1002 DUNN-EDWARDS 185.94 49838 09/11/2024 PRINTED 82651 ECONOLITE SYSTEMS,INC 26,202.30 49839 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1579 ELITE BOILERS 1,906.43 49840 09/11/2024 PRINTED 2435 EVERSOFT 1,542.09 49841 09/11/2024 PRINTED 10485 EXPERIAN 75.00 49842 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1587 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY&DISTRIBUTORS INC 424.53 49843 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1953 FIESTA FANTASTIC ENTERTAINMENT,LLC 200.00 49844 09/11/2024 PRINTED 96251 FORD OF UPLAND 47.68 49845 09/11/2024 PRINTED 99418 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 40.00 49846 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1621 FULL TRAFFIC MAINTENANCE,INC 89.07 49847 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1192 GATEWAY PACIFIC CONTRACTORS,INC 2,764.74 49848 09/11/2024 PRINTED 290 GRAINGER 354.13 49849 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1819 GREEN GIANT LANDSCAPE,INC 463,865.76 49850 09/11/2024 PRINTED 72691 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO 204.00 49851 09/11/2024 PRINTED 131101 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS 254.95 49852 09/11/2024 PRINTED 329 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 1,170.18 49853 09/11/2024 PRINTED 15090 HOLLIDAY TRUCKING INC 5,363.49 49854 09/11/2024 PRINTED 629 HONEYCOTT,INC 320.00 Prepared By: Erin Myers Page 2 of 8 PageowaOtQ22

CHECK# CHECK DATE CHECK TYPE VENDOR# VENDOR NAME CHECK AMOUNT 49855 09/11/2024 PRINTED 16340 INFOSEND INC 125.66 49856 09/11/2024 PRINTED 153 INLAND EMPIRE UTILITIES AGENCY 17,777.43 49857 09/11/2024 PRINTED 4137 INLAND FAIR HOUSING MEDIATION BOARD/FHMB 1,758.28 49858 09/11/2024 PRINTED 106951 INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY 5,853.10 49859 09/11/2024 PRINTED 4719 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 516.55 49860 09/11/2024 PRINTED 63221 J C I JONES CHEMICALS INC 5,189.70 49861 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1357 JACKS KEY SERVICE 365.00 49862 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1269 JOHNSON,JEFFREY 200.00 49863 09/11/2024 PRINTED 841 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY OF UPLAND 282.47 49864 09/11/2024 PRINTED 80561 KEENAN&ASSOCIATES 5,957.25 49865 09/11/2024 PRINTED 53451 KENGRAPHICS PRINTING& 204.73 49866 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1850 KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS,INC 5,465.00 49867 09/11/2024 PRINTED 373 LA POLICE GEAR,INC. 3,316.53 49868 09/11/2024 PRINTED 3020 LAW ENFORCEMENT MEDICAL SVCS 2,690.00 49869 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1708 LEADSONLINE PARENT LLC 5,402.00 49870 09/11/2024 PRINTED 102 LIGHTING INSTYLE 43.49 49871 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1935 MACIAS REFRIGERATION INC. 1,647.66 49872 09/11/2024 PRINTED 16385 MAIN STREET SIGNS 498.08 49873 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1692 MONICA MARROQUIN 200.00 49874 09/11/2024 PRINTED 21341 MATT CHLOR INC 6,015.84 49875 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1655 MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL INC 4,842.50 49876 09/11/2024 PRINTED 441 MIDAMERICAADMIN&RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS,LLC 4,683.00 49877 09/11/2024 PRINTED 472 MODERN IRRIGATION 7.18 49878 09/11/2024 PRINTED 16877 NEXTDAY DELIVERY SERVICE,LLC 1,149.72 49879 09/11/2024 PRINTED 83491 NOBEL SYSTEMS 86,680.00 49880 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1844 NORTHWOODS APARTMENTS 3,411.00 49881 09/11/2024 PRINTED 30971 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS 246.00 49882 09/11/2024 PRINTED 6625 P F SERVICES INC 722.50 49883 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1950 PHIL MAY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 2,900.00 49884 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1563 PROFESSIONAL POLYGRAPH SERVICES 250.00 49885 09/11/2024 PRINTED 869 PPS ENTERPRISES,INC 1,038.19 49886 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1838 R&T LIFT GATE SERVICE,INC. 4,840.25 49887 09/11/2024 PRINTED 349 RAIN MASTER IRRIGATION SYSTEMS 298.90 49888 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1851 ROAD SOUP OF CALIFORNIA 1,263.82 49889 09/11/2024 PRINTED 785 ROSEMOUNT INC 12,555.95 49890 09/11/2024 PRINTED 67381 ROUTE 66 CAR WASH INC 1,889.00 49891 09/11/2024 PRINTED 133921 SAFE USA 2,412.40 49892 09/11/2024 PRINTED 969 HECTOR SALCIDO 193.94 49893 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1824 SALES AND DISTRIBUTION SERVICES,INC. 938.94 49894 09/11/2024 PRINTED 2225 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FIRE 8,147.00 49895 09/11/2024 PRINTED 11581 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 187.00 49896 09/11/2024 PRINTED 11671 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 14,211.90 49897 09/11/2024 PRINTED 793 SHARPLINE SOLUTIONS,INC 5,194.85 49898 09/11/2024 PRINTED 131121 SHRED-IT USAJV LLC 590.94 49899 09/11/2024 PRINTED 507 SERVIAM BY WRIGHT LLP 4,332.10 49900 09/11/2024 PRINTED 16607 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE 3,132.79 49901 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1439 STATON,BRIAN 100.00 49902 09/11/2024 PRINTED 69231 STEP SAVER CA LLC 968.08 49903 09/11/2024 PRINTED 626 TMP ENTERPRISES,LLC 200.00 49904 09/11/2024 PRINTED 62321 U.S.TELEPACIFIC CORP 1,334.51 49905 09/11/2024 PRINTED 11484 U S BANK 2,000.00 49906 09/11/2024 PRINTED 3557 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 785.44 49907 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1792 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA,INC 441.63 49908 09/11/2024 PRINTED 776 VISTA PAINT CORP 1,213.01 49909 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1653 MARIA E WALWORTH 250.00 49910 09/11/2024 PRINTED 392 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 5,826.66 Prepared By: Erin Myers Page 3 of 8 PagBi 2Ot'Q22

CHECK# CHECK DATE CHECK TYPE VENDOR# VENDOR NAME CHECK AMOUNT 49911 09/11/2024 PRINTED 104521 WESCO DISTRIBUTION,INC 1,444.93 49912 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1725 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 83,932.00 49913 09/11/2024 PRINTED 1345 YOUR PROPERTY SOLUTIONS 6,077.50 49914 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 APACALIFORNIACONFERENCE 2,770.00 49915 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 ERIC HAYNES 100.00 49916 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 ERIC SERRANO 1,186.44 49917 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 FRANK REYES CONSTRUCTION 380.00 49918 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 HAZARD CM ENGR LLC 846.30 49919 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 JW FOWLER CO 1,000.00 49920 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 JW FOWLER CO 980.00 49921 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 RC HOMES 1,000.00 49922 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 STEVEN LOUIE 66.91 49923 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 T&G ROOFING 221.60 49924 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 THE HOME DEPOT AT HOME 285.60 49925 09/11/2024 PRINTED 999999 TIM GATES 232.05 49926 09/18/2024 PRINTED 207 ADLERHORST INTERNATIONAL LLC 80.81 49927 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1403 ALLEN JR.,JOHN DAVID 300.30 49928 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1396 ALVAREZ,MARIA ELENA 855.00 49929 09/18/2024 PRINTED 3987 BALDY VIEW GYMNASTICS 1,348.90 49930 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1348 BAST,KAY 139.65 49931 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1722 RAQUEL VEISAGA 269.85 49932 09/18/2024 PRINTED 84141 CARTY,DIANE 923.40 49933 09/18/2024 PRINTED 12511 CALIFORNIA COMPUTER SCHOOLS 125.00 49934 09/18/2024 PRINTED 363 CHINO MOWER AND EQUIPMENT 395.57 49935 09/18/2024 PRINTED 521 COUPLAND,DONNA 325.80 49936 09/18/2024 PRINTED 126471 DELL SOFTWARE INC 19,498.87 49937 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1531 FELICITY USA MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC 1,981.35 49938 09/18/2024 PRINTED 96251 FORD OF UPLAND 2,170.30 49939 09/18/2024 PRINTED 128 FORTIER,NURIA 966.00 49940 09/18/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 716.28 49941 09/18/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 43.23 49942 09/18/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 1,238.80 49943 09/18/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 357.00 49944 09/18/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 591.67 49945 09/18/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 93.47 49946 09/18/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 119.91 49947 09/18/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 82.40 49948 09/18/2024 PRINTED 129521 GRAFIX SYSTEMS 2,794.50 49949 09/18/2024 PRINTED 290 GRAINGER 535.76 49950 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1787 VANESSA ANN HIDALGO 51.30 49951 09/18/2024 PRINTED 329 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 2,319.77 49952 09/18/2024 PRINTED 846 KLAUS&SONS PLUMBING 1,441.00 49953 09/18/2024 PRINTED 80 LEFTA SYSTEMS 9,139.52 49954 09/18/2024 PRINTED 122601 LOWE'S 13,658.38 49955 09/18/2024 PRINTED 203 MV CHENG&ASSOCIATE 15,267.50 49956 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1834 DEBORAH NAKATANI 820.80 49957 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14483 ONTARIO ICE SKATING CENTER 960.23 49958 09/18/2024 PRINTED 33021 PELLITTERI,CHRISTOPHER 232.05 49959 09/18/2024 PRINTED 16823 PRE PAID LEGAL SVC,INC 260.10 49960 09/18/2024 PRINTED 992 PRISTINE UNIFORMS,LLC 2,989.60 49961 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1864 REAL GONE PEST CONTROL 560.00 49962 09/18/2024 PRINTED 90591 S&1 SUPPLY CO INC 1,138.49 49963 09/18/2024 PRINTED 210 SALDANA DIAZ,NURYS E. 461.66 49964 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1237 VANESSA SEE 2,496.00 49965 09/18/2024 PRINTED 131121 SHRED-IT USAJV LLC 173.34 49966 09/18/2024 PRINTED 407 SINGLETON,DENICE 296.40 Prepared By: Erin Myers Page 4 of 8 PagB t 720f4222

CHECK# CHECK DATE CHECK TYPE VENDOR# VENDOR NAME CHECK AMOUNT 49967 09/18/2024 PRINTED 21671 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS,LLC 134.98 49968 09/18/2024 PRINTED 21671 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS,LLC 149.98 49969 09/18/2024 PRINTED 21671 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS,LLC 669.00 49970 09/18/2024 PRINTED 21671 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS,LLC 219.11 49971 09/18/2024 PRINTED 21671 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS,LLC 144.98 49972 09/18/2024 PRINTED 21671 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS,LLC 1,046.23 49973 09/18/2024 PRINTED 21671 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS,LLC 142.67 49974 09/18/2024 PRINTED 21671 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS,LLC 668.85 49975 09/18/2024 PRINTED 16607 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE 755.83 49976 09/18/2024 PRINTED 59821 TERRYBERRY COMPANY LLC 1,058.83 49977 09/18/2024 PRINTED 4463 NANCY K BOHL INC 2,000.00 49978 09/18/2024 PRINTED 11583 THOMPSON PLUMBING SUPPLY 3,053.61 49979 09/18/2024 PRINTED 1347 TINKERSPACE,INC 148.20 49980 09/18/2024 PRINTED 16541 ANDREW TODD 63.35 49981 09/18/2024 PRINTED 62321 U.S.TELEPACIFIC CORP 2,568.17 49982 09/18/2024 PRINTED 62321 U.S.TELEPACIFIC CORP 1,353.74 49983 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 163.08 49984 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 40.01 49985 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 280.07 49986 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 247.43 49987 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 40.01 49988 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 523.50 49989 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 2,354.04 49990 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 164.60 49991 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 80.02 49992 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 11,437.89 49993 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 1,000.51 49994 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 653.30 49995 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 120.03 49996 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14735 VERIZON WIRELESS 849.33 49997 09/18/2024 PRINTED 857 WATERLINE TECHNOLOGIES,INC 2,843.96 49998 09/18/2024 PRINTED 14050 WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES 1,202.00 49999 09/18/2024 PRINTED 55711 WP COMMERCIAL FUELING 678.83 50000 09/18/2024 PRINTED 5193 ZAILO,ROBERT 474.30 50001 09/18/2024 PRINTED 83021 ZEP SALES&SERVICE 936.63 50002 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1681 10-8 RETROFIT INC 21,561.83 50003 09/25/2024 PRINTED 15750 AFLAC PREMIUM HOLDING 636.20 50004 09/25/2024 PRINTED 39171 ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT 1,157,141.48 50005 09/25/2024 PRINTED 6109 AMERICAN HERITAGE LIFE INS CO 93.09 50006 09/25/2024 PRINTED 55 BABCOCK&SONS,INC 797.62 50007 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1734 BATTERY WORX INC 414.63 50008 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1769 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES 2,576.00 50009 09/25/2024 PRINTED 819 BRINKS,INC 1,030.80 50010 09/25/2024 PRINTED 195 CALIFORNIA NEWSPAPERS PARTNERSHIP 5,768.15 50011 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1951 CANTEEN REFRESHMENTS 2,218.30 50012 09/25/2024 PRINTED 177 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS,INC 781.59 50013 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1479 MAP COMMUNICATIONS INC 246.99 50014 09/25/2024 PRINTED 82791 CHEM PRO LLC 333.00 50015 09/25/2024 PRINTED 363 CHINO MOWER AND EQUIPMENT 5,637.32 50016 09/25/2024 PRINTED 448 CINTAS CORPORATION 4,617.52 50017 09/25/2024 PRINTED 475 CITY OF MONTCLAIR 267.23 50018 09/25/2024 PRINTED 509 CITY OF ONTARIO 115,795.23 50019 09/25/2024 PRINTED 530 CITY RENTALS INC 1,477.85 50020 09/25/2024 PRINTED 163 CLINICAL LABORATORY OF SAN BERNARDINO,INC 315.00 50021 09/25/2024 PRINTED 45421 COSTAR REALTY INFORMATION GROUP INC 662.74 50022 09/25/2024 PRINTED 4696 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRIC 141.40 Prepared By: Erin Myers Page 5 of 8 PagBi 2Ot'Q22

CHECK# CHECK DATE CHECK TYPE VENDOR# VENDOR NAME CHECK AMOUNT 50023 09/25/2024 PRINTED 599 DOOLEY ENTERPRISES,INC 45,605.83 50024 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1786 DRAGONFLY PUBLIC AFFAIRS 7,000.00 50025 09/25/2024 PRINTED 10485 EXPERIAN 78.20 50026 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1587 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY&DISTRIBUTORS INC 494.49 50027 09/25/2024 PRINTED 4456 FEDERAL EXPRESS 7.71 50028 09/25/2024 PRINTED 99418 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 40.00 50029 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1965 ALAN FRENCH 182.43 50030 09/25/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 164.44 50031 09/25/2024 PRINTED 78 FRONTIER 1,891.99 50032 09/25/2024 PRINTED 255 DENNIS SILLETTO&ASSOCIATES 2,610.18 50033 09/25/2024 PRINTED 16829 GOURMET GOURMET CATERING 545.22 50034 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1714 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY 18.04 50035 09/25/2024 PRINTED 28871 GRAFFITI PROTECTIVE COATINGS 7,176.65 50036 09/25/2024 PRINTED 290 GRAINGER 372.30 50037 09/25/2024 PRINTED 775 GRANICUS,LLC 15,985.80 50038 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1938 GUARANTEED JANITORIAL SERVICE,INC. 7,779.36 50039 09/25/2024 PRINTED 5206 H D L COREN&CONE 4,840.36 50040 09/25/2024 PRINTED 3231 HINDERLITER,DE LLAMAS&ASSOCIATES 2,384.60 50041 09/25/2024 PRINTED 329 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 1,170.18 50042 09/25/2024 PRINTED 629 HONEYCOTT,INC 335.00 50043 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1723 HUNTINGTON HARDWARE CO.INC 31.20 50044 09/25/2024 PRINTED 36271 INLAND EMPIRE PRINTING 245.14 50045 09/25/2024 PRINTED 153 INLAND EMPIRE UTILITIES AGENCY 39,579.66 50046 09/25/2024 PRINTED 841 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY OF UPLAND 311.11 50047 09/25/2024 PRINTED 80561 KEENAN&ASSOCIATES 5,957.25 50048 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1732 GREGORY KILEY 3,900.00 50049 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1441 KNIGHT CLAREMONT INC 550.79 50050 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1817 LANGUAGE NETWORK,INC 130.00 50051 09/25/2024 PRINTED 56971 LMWS INC 4,398.44 50052 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1533 MELVIN ZARAGOZA 300.00 50053 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1123 HYATT LEGAL PLANS,INC 651.00 50054 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1151 OLVERA,GREGORIO 435.00 50055 09/25/2024 PRINTED 849 MITCHELL REPAIR INFO CO LLC 1,788.00 50056 09/25/2024 PRINTED 476 NATIONAL AUTO FLEET GROUP 154,691.73 50057 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1724 VETERINARY PET INSURANCE COMPANY 478.11 50058 09/25/2024 PRINTED 16877 NEXTDAY DELIVERY SERVICE,LLC 533.62 50059 09/25/2024 PRINTED 117121 NUCKLES OIL COMPANY INC 29,853.59 50060 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1740 O-REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISES,LLC 433.27 50061 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1581 OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT GROUP 17,500.00 50062 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1964 JACKELINE OSEGUERA 90.51 50063 09/25/2024 PRINTED 6625 P F SERVICES INC 170.00 50064 09/25/2024 PRINTED 4509 PARKHOUSE TIRE INC 254.69 50065 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1625 PARTIES UNLIMITED 616.00 50066 09/25/2024 PRINTED 16760 POLY-CORR INDUSTRIES INC 245.42 50067 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1563 PROFESSIONAL POLYGRAPH SERVICES 250.00 50068 09/25/2024 PRINTED 612 RIDE ON POWERSPORTS,INC 1,944.58 50069 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1528 RISE INTERPRETING,INC 940.00 50070 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1963 JENNIFER RODRIGUEZ 35.85 50071 09/25/2024 PRINTED 67381 ROUTE 66 CAR WASH INC 1,390.00 50072 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1628 RS CONSTRUCTION&DEVELOPMENT,INC 4,125.00 50073 09/25/2024 PRINTED 90591 S&J SUPPLY COINC 672.36 50074 09/25/2024 PRINTED 601 SAN ANTONIO WATER CO 425,055.41 50075 09/25/2024 PRINTED 2225 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FIRE 28,463.47 50076 09/25/2024 PRINTED 20171 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFF 200.00 50077 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1976 ELIZABETH SANCHEZ 729.67 50078 09/25/2024 PRINTED 131121 SHRED-IT USAJV LLC 86.67 Prepared By: Erin Myers Page 6 of 8 Page 2Ot'Q22

CHECK# CHECK DATE CHECK TYPE VENDOR# VENDOR NAME CHECK AMOUNT 50079 09/25/2024 PRINTED 637 SMART&FINAL IRIS CO 640.93 50080 09/25/2024 PRINTED 21671 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS,LLC 1,421.74 50081 09/25/2024 PRINTED 9325 ST JOSEPH CHURCH 6,494.68 50082 09/25/2024 PRINTED 16607 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE 1,694.38 50083 09/25/2024 PRINTED 10218 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DMV 1,070.00 50084 09/25/2024 PRINTED 69231 STEP SAVER CA LLC 1,060.77 50085 09/25/2024 PRINTED 417 E&S TOWING ENTERPRISES,INC 3,150.00 50086 09/25/2024 PRINTED 988 T.E.ROBERTS,INC 15,261.54 50087 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1777 TELEGRAPH AVENUE ADVISORS,LLC 5,000.00 50088 09/25/2024 PRINTED 11583 THOMPSON PLUMBING SUPPLY 154.00 50089 09/25/2024 PRINTED 946 TIP TOP 3M HOME RENEW CO. 1,854.50 50090 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1148 TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT,INC 7,650.00 50091 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1656 TRANSMAP CORPORATION 4,500.00 50092 09/25/2024 PRINTED 617 VAN LANT&FANKLHANEL,LLP 13,500.00 50093 09/25/2024 PRINTED 776 VISTA PAINT CORP 423.24 50094 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1653 MARIA E WALWORTH 425.00 50095 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1697 WATERWORKFORCE,INC 16,807.50 50096 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1725 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 5,278.00 50097 09/25/2024 PRINTED 1261 WEX HEALTH INC 232.65 50098 09/25/2024 PRINTED 14050 WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES 17,900.59 50099 09/25/2024 PRINTED 999999 FREEDOM FOREVER LLC 616.00 50100 09/25/2024 PRINTED 999999 JANE GALLAGHER 110.05 50101 09/25/2024 PRINTED 999999 JOSE A ARAIZA 45.97 50102 09/25/2024 PRINTED 999999 JOSE A ARAIZA 7.20 PRINTED CHECKS(355 COUNT) $ 5,138,339.36
90424000 09/04/2024 MANUAL 43651 U S BANK NATIONAL ASSN 50,214.79 90424001 09/04/2024 MANUAL 32091 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON CO 58,256.91 90424002 09/04/2024 MANUAL 543 SOUTHERN CALIF GAS COMPANY 1,081.95 90624000 09/06/2024 MANUAL 1499 EMPOWER TRUST COMPANY,LLC 65,494.16 90624001 09/06/2024 MANUAL 1589 LIVELY INC 3,286.02 90624002 09/06/2024 MANUAL 441 MIDAMERICAADMIN&RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS,LLC 1,295.16 90624003 09/06/2024 MANUAL 621 KAREN LONG 187.50 90624004 09/06/2024 MANUAL 622 UPLAND CITY EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION 1,060.00 90624005 09/06/2024 MANUAL 125761 CITY EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATES 336.00 90624006 09/06/2024 MANUAL 736 UPLAND POLICE MANAGEMENT ASSN 1,072.00 90624007 09/06/2024 MANUAL 737 UPLAND POLICE OFFICERS ASSN 4,923.00 90624008 09/06/2024 MANUAL 1597 TRUSTMARK VOLUNTARY BENEFIT ADMINISTRATOR 2,635.85 90624009 09/06/2024 MANUAL 1594 COBRA PROFESSIONALS,INC 1,948.70 90624010 09/06/2024 MANUAL 618 ICMA-RC 1,637.50 90624011 09/06/2024 MANUAL 624 DEPT OF THE TREASURY 100.00 90624012 09/06/2024 MANUAL 1337 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 2,834.99 90924000 09/09/2024 MANUAL 65181 CALPERS 1,400.00 91124000 09/11/2024 MANUAL 65181 CALPERS 222,585.75 91224000 09/12/2024 MANUAL 83401 CARL WARREN&CO 87,475.60 91324000 09/13/2024 MANUAL 32091 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON CO 302,109.48 91324001 09/13/2024 MANUAL 116231 NEOPOST USA INC 5,000.00 91924000 09/19/2024 MANUAL 754 PUBLIC AGENCY COALITION ENTERPRISE 113,982.48 91924001 09/19/2024 MANUAL 960 MUNICIPAL DENTAL POOL 25,766.37 91924002 09/19/2024 MANUAL 114711 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE CO 1,817.80 91924003 09/19/2024 MANUAL 83401 CARL WARREN&CO 105,000.00 91924004 09/19/2024 MANUAL 153 INLAND EMPIRE UTILITIES AGENCY 701,647.73 91924005 09/19/2024 MANUAL 1845 LWP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS INC 79,445.03 91924006 09/19/2024 MANUAL 441 MIDAMERICAADMIN&RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS,LLC 33,024.96 91924007 09/19/2024 MANUAL 441 MIDAMERICAADMIN&RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS,LLC 1,026.27 91924008 09/19/2024 MANUAL 621 KAREN LONG 187.50 Prepared By: Erin Myers Page 7 of 8 PagaE002OtQ22

CHECK# CHECK DATE CHECK TYPE VENDOR# VENDOR NAME CHECK AMOUNT 91924009 09/19/2024 MANUAL 622 UPLAND CITY EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION 1,050.00 91924010 09/19/2024 MANUAL 125761 CITY EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATES 336.00 91924011 09/19/2024 MANUAL 736 UPLAND POLICE MANAGEMENT ASSN 1,072.00 91924012 09/19/2024 MANUAL 737 UPLAND POLICE OFFICERS ASSN 5,202.00 91924013 09/19/2024 MANUAL 126761 THE LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INS 7,166.19 91924014 09/19/2024 MANUAL 1594 COBRA PROFESSIONALS,INC 1,998.70 91924015 09/19/2024 MANUAL 618 ICMA-RC 1,637.50 91924016 09/19/2024 MANUAL 624 DEPT OF THE TREASURY 100.00 92024000 09/20/2024 MANUAL 1499 EMPOWER TRUST COMPANY,LLC 65,651.50 92024001 09/20/2024 MANUAL 1589 LIVELY INC 3,286.02 92524000 09/25/2024 MANUAL 529 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN 147,483.78 92524001 09/25/2024 MANUAL 529 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN 25,657.21 92524002 09/25/2024 MANUAL 529 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN 17,319.14 92524003 09/25/2024 MANUAL 11484 U S BANK 1,623,556.50 92524004 09/25/2024 MANUAL 91491 LIBRARY SYSTEMS&SERVICES LLC 121,301.00 92524005 09/25/2024 MANUAL 760 WATER FACILITIES AUTHORITY 459,913.59 92624000 09/26/2024 MANUAL 1282 WESTERN ALLIANCE BUSINESS TRUST 85,812.15 92724000 09/27/2024 MANUAL 65181 CALPERS 223,175.16 MANUAL CHECKS(48 COUNT) $4,668,551.94
49655 08/21/2024 VOID 999999 THE HOME DEPOT AT THE HOME (285.60) VOID CHECKS(1 COUNT) $ (285.60)
PRINTED CHECKS(355 COUNT) $ 5,138,339.36
MANUAL CHECKS(48 COUNT) $ 4,668,551.94
VOID CHECKS(1 COUNT) $ (285.60)
PRINTED&MANUAL CHECK TOTALS $ 9,806,605.70
Prepared By: Erin Myers Page 8 of 8 PagB 4312of4222

ofU41
4 ' - +d CITY OF UPLAND
Payroll Costs
4,.
v. moollimr,<S,
Payroll
9/01/2024 Through 9/14/2024 Check Date: 9/19/2024
Checks $12,381.91
Manual Checks
Void Checks
Direct Deposit $739,495.35
Manual Direct Deposit
Void Direct Deposit
$751,877.26 I
Taxes
9/01/2024 Through 9/14/2024 Check Date: 9/19/2024
Federal 148,621.10
State 47,322.01
195,943.11 1
Prepared by: Yesica Montoya
$947,820.37
M:IPAYROLLIForms\Payroll Costs & Register Cover Page 1

Page 42 of 222 ends

°ir LT 3
=�Att, id CITY OF UPLAND
•r l" ' sI Payroll Costs
' 1io
Payroll
9/15/2024 Through 9/28/2024 Check Date: 10/03/2024
Checks $11,287.48
Manual Checks
Void Checks
Direct Deposit $765,216.73
Manual Direct Deposit
Void Direct Deposit
$776,504.21 1
Taxes
9/15/2024 Through 9/28/2024 Check Date: 10/03/2024
Federal 150,708.98
State 48,008.11
198,717.09 1
Prepared by: Yesica Montoya
$975,221.30
M:IPAYROLL\Forms\Payroll Costs & Register Cover Page 1

Page 43 of 222 ends

, trpl" CITY FUPLAND
i6 "The City of Gracious Living"
Staff(krcifil
C�tIFOB�S
DATE: October 28,2024
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:STEPHEN PARKER,ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

TERRY DOYLE,DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES/RISK MANAGEMENT SUBJECT: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH

KEENAN AND ASSOCIATES
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council approve the first amendment of the agreement with Keenan and Associates for Benefit Broker Services and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment.

GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal of being fiscally responsible in providing fair and equitable benefits to its employees.

BACKGROUND
The City maintains an agreement with a Third-Party Administrator (TPA) for Benefit Broker services. Keenan & Associates has served in this role since 2016. The current agreement expires on December 31,2024,and includes two (2),one(1)year term extensions with a three percent(3%)increase for each year.

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
Keenan&Associates negotiates on behalf of the City,with benefit providers for health care benefits provided to City employees. These services include,but are not limited to, assisting City in administering all group insurance plans; responding to questions from and providing information to staff; researching and advising the City of any new developments in the law and employee benefits programs on an ongoing basis; reviewing claims experience, claim service and claim administration to ensure maximum benefit to the City;and representing the City in all negotiations with providers on all issues including those related to premiums, benefits levels,plan design and special terms and conditions.

The term of the extension will be for January 1, 2025 —December 31, 2025, with an increase cost of three percent (3%)for a total amount of seventy-three thousand,six hundred and thirty-one dollars and sixty-one cents($73,631.61)

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a project subject to CEQA. The proposed action is not included within the definition of a"project" and thus is exempt.

FISCAL IMPACTS
The funding for this agreement has been included in the current operating budget. No additional appropriation is necessary at this time.

ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.

CEQA:Not a Project.

Page 44 of 222 ends

AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT FOR

PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES

BENEFIT BROKER
This Amendment No. 1 is made and effective as of January 1,2025 ("Effective Date"), by and between the City of Upland, a municipal corporation ("City") and Keenan&Associates ("Consultant").

City and Consultant are sometimes referred to herein individually as a "Party" and collectively as "Parties".

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City and Consultant have entered into a certain Agreement for Professional Consultant Services Benefit Broker Agreement dated January 1,2024 ("Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the current term of the Agreement shall expire on December 31,2024; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to continue their relationship and extend the term of the Agreement, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein and in the Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:

1. The Agreement is hereby renewed for an additional one (1) year term beginning on January 1, 2025 and ending on December 31, 2025 ("Renewal Term").

2. The Agreement is amended by deleting Subsection 4.a., and by substituting the following therefor:
a. City agrees to pay Keenan twelve monthly installments of six thousand, one hundred thirty-five dollars and ninety-seven cents ($6,135.97) commencing January 1, 2025, for services rendered under this Agreement with a not to exceed amount of seventy-three thousand, six hundred thirty-one dollars and sixty-one cents ($73,631.61). Rather than have an ever-changing contracted commission amount based on fluctuating Kaiser premiums, this dollar amount will be fixed for the length of the contract and employee premium rates will be net of commissions.

3. All the remaining terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect and shall govern the conduct of the Parties during the Renewal Term.

4. Each person signing this Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement on behalf of a Party represents and warrants that he or she has the necessary authority to bind such Party and that this Amendment is binding on and enforceable against such Party.

5. A manually signed copy of this Amendment No. 1 which is transmitted by facsimile, email or other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original executed copy of this Amendment No. 1 for all purposes.

6. This Amendment No. 1 may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.
[SIGNATURES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE]

Page 45 of 222 ends

SIGNATURE PAGE FOR
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT FOR

PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES

BENEFIT BROKER

WITH KEENAN&ASSOCIATES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Consultant have approved this First Amendment to the Agreement effective the day and year first above written.

CITY: CONSULTANT:

City of Upland Keenan and Associates
460 N. Euclid Ave 2355 Crenshaw Blvd., Suite 200
Upland CA 91786 Torrance CA 90501
By: By:

Michael Blay Laurie LoFranco,
City Manager Senior Vice President
ATTEST:

By:

Keri Johnson
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Stephen Deitsch
City Attorney

Page 46 of 222 ends

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913

AGREEMENT

FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES

BENEFIT BROKER
THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of January 1, 2024, between the City of Upland, a municipal corporation ("City") and Keenan & Associates ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2024, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed,but in no event later than December 31, 2024, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. The City may,upon mutual agreement, extend this term for two (2) additional one (1) year terms.

2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A.

3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein.

Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement.

4. PAYMENT.
a. The City agrees to pay Consultant, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B,Payment Rates and Schedule,attached hereto, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks.Any services provided to Client that are outside of or in addition to those described in Exhibit A shall be subject to additional fees. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the scope of work to be performed, payment rates and schedule of payment, are null and void.
b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein,unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services.

The City Manager may approve additional work up to ten percent (10%) of the amount of this Agreement or fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00). In no event shall the total, all- inclusive annual sum payable under this Agreement (basic Agreement amount and additional 1 Page 47 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913 work) exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00). Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the City Council.
c. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed.

Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty(30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of Consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within thirty(30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice.

5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
WITHOUT CAUSE.
a. The City may at any time, for any reason,with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days' prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement,such suspension or termination shall not affect or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement.
b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed complies with this Agreement. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section,the Consultant will submit a final invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4.

6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT.
a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and the City may, at its option, terminate this Agreement pursuant to Section 6.b, or immediately by written notice to the Consultant when City deems the default to be material and substantial in nature. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. Subject to the provisions of Section 6.a, if the City Manager or her delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, the City shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this 2 Page 48 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913 Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement.

7. REQUIRED RECORDS. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services.All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts there from as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents,proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment.

8. OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT.
a. Unless otherwise agreed upon in writing, all reports, documents, or other written material,including any images,photographs,video files,websites,object and source codes,digital files, and/or any things, objects, ideas, and/or concepts, regardless of form, created or developed for the City by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement (collectively, "Work Product") shall be and remain the property of City without restriction or limitation upon its use or dissemination by City.All Work Product shall be considered to be "works made for hire", and all Work Product and any and all intellectual property rights arising from their creation, including, but not limited to, all copyrights and other proprietary rights, shall be and remain the property of City without restriction or limitation upon their use, duplication or dissemination by City.

Consultant shall not obtain or attempt to obtain copyright protection as to any of the Work Product. b. Consultant hereby assigns to City all ownership and any and all intellectual property rights to the Work Product that are not otherwise vested in the City pursuant to subsection (a), above.

C. Consultant warrants and represents that it has secured all necessary licenses, consents or approvals to use any instrumentality, thing or component as to which any intellectual property right exists, including computer software, used in the rendering of the required services and the production of all Work Product produced under this Agreement, and that City has full legal title to and the right to reproduce the Work Product. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold City, and its elected officials, officers, employees, servants,attorneys,designated volunteers,and agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials, harmless from any loss, claim or liability in any way related to a claim that City's use of any of the Work Product violates any federal, state or local laws, or any contractual provisions, or any laws relating to trade names, licenses, franchises, copyrights, patents or other means of protecting intellectual property rights 3 Page 49 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913 and/or interests in products or inventions. Consultant shall bear all costs arising from the use of patented, copyrighted, trade secret or trademarked documents, materials, equipment, devices or processes in connection with its provision of the required services and Work Product produced under this Agreement. In the event the use of any of the Work Product or other deliverables hereunder by City is held to constitute an infringement and/or the use of any of the same is enjoined, Consultant, at its expense, shall: (a) secure for City the right to continue using the Work Product and other deliverables by suspension of any injunction, or by procuring a license or licenses for City; or(b) modify the Work Product and other deliverables so that they become non- infringing while remaining in compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. This covenant shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

9. INDEMNIFICATION.
a. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, elected officials, employees and volunteers ("Indemnitees") from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, and/or liability of any kind or nature which any of the Indemnitees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them,for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property, arising out of Consultant's acts, omissions or willful misconduct, and/or negligent acts or omissions in the performance of professional services, in connection with the performance or non-performance of, this Agreement, except to the extent arising out of the negligence of any Indemnitee.
b. In the event any claim or action is brought against any of the Indemnitees relating to Consultant's performance or services rendered under this Agreement, Consultant shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require.

10. INSURANCE REOUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement the insurance described below, protecting against claims and liabilities which may arise out of or in connection with the performance of the services hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. To the extent such claims and liabilities may be indemnifiable and insurable, coverage shall be at least as broad as:
(1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No.

CG 00 01 11 85 or 88.
(2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code I (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. 4 Page 50 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913 (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees.
(4) Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) insurance providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. (5) Cyber Liability providing protection against claims and liabilities arising from: (i) errors and omissions in connection with maintaining security of City data and personal information; (ii) data breach including theft, destruction, and/or unauthorized use of City data and/or personal information; (iii) identity theft including bank charges assessed; and(iv)violation of privacy rights due to a breach of City data and/or personal information.
b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the City'Manager, Consultant shall maintain the required insurance with limits no less than:
(1) Commercial General Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: One million dollars($1,000,000)per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
(3) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000)per accident for bodily injury or disease.
(4) Professional Liability coverage: Two million($2,000,000)per claim and in aggregate.
(5) Cyber Liability: Two million($2,000,000)per occurrence. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure 5 Page 51 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913 a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
(1) The City,its officers,elected officials,employees and volunteers are to be covered as 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, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
(2) For any claims related to the services herein, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self insured maintained by the City,its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
(3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) 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.
(5) 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.
(6) The policies shall be endorsed to waive the right of subrogation.The Consultant waives the right of subrogation.
e. Claims-Made Policies. If the professional liability policy is a"claims-made" policy, then it shall be endorsed to provide an extended reporting period of at least three (3)years. f Accertabilitc of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A: VIII and+ 6 Page 52 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913 g• permitted and licensed to do business in the State of California, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self-insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements.
h. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications.

11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner.
b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries,wages,or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. c. PERS Eligibility Indemnification: In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement claims or is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System ("PERS") to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of the City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.

Notwithstanding any other agency,state or federal policy,rule,regulation,law or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing service under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contribution and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits. 7 Page 53 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913

12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant is responsible for compliance with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (2010), and City shall not be obligated to provide any health care coverage to Consultant. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section.

13. RELEASE OF INFORMATION.
a. All information gained by, or otherwise made accessible to, Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released or disclosed by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not, without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, or required by law, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed there under or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response.

14. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by(i)personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to,Federal Express,that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice.Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. 8 Page 54 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913 To City: City of Upland
460 North Euclid Avenue
Upland, California 91786
Attention: City Manager
To Consultant: Keenan&Associates
2355 Crenshaw Blvd, Suite 200
Torrance, CA 90501
Attn: Legal Department

15. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING. The Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, or subcontract any required performance, without prior written consent of the City. Any purported assignment or subcontract in violation of this Section shall be void for all purposes.

16. LICENSES.At all times during the term of this Agreement,Consultant shall possess, in full force and effect, all licenses required by law for the performance of the services herein.

17. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Upland.

18. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No officer, or of the City shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Consultant, or Consultant's subcontractors for this project, during his/her tenure or for one (1) year thereafter.

The Consultant hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Consultant or Consultant's subcontractors on this project. Consultant further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement.

19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, together with Exhibits hereto, each of which is incorporated by reference herein, contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements,understandings,representations, and statements, oral or written,are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. The provisions of this Agreement shall govern in the event of any conflict or inconsistency with the provisions of any Exhibit hereto.

20. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she 9 Page 55 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913 has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder.

21. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable in any circumstance, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the value of this Agreement, based upon the substantial benefit of the bargain for any party, is materially impaired, which determination made by the presiding court or arbitrator of competent jurisdiction shall be binding, then both parties agree to substitute such provision(s) through good faith negotiations.

22. WAIVER. The delay or failure of either party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other of any of its obligations or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any occurrence or event shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver.

23. CONSTRUCTION. The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement,this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden of proof favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement.

24. RESPONSIBILITY FOR ERRORS. Consultant shall bevsponsiblefor its work and results under this Agreement. Consultant, when requested, shall furnish clarification and/or explanation as maybe required by the City's representative,regarding any services rendered under this Agreement at no additional cost to City.In the event that an error or omission attributable to Consultant occurs, then Consultant shall, at no cost to City, provide all professional and nonprofessional services necessary to rectify and correct the matter to the sole satisfaction of City, and to participate in any meeting required with regard to the correction.

25. ATTORNEYS' FEES. In the event that litigation is brought by any party in connection with this Agreement,the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by the prevailing party, as determined by the Court.
10 Page 56 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.

CITY OF UPLAND CONSULTANT
DocuSigned by: DocuSigned by:
hickati, )66,1 Fatorit, tefratm,e
CD20F9DCC3Cc40A... —18AE7C5003E74FB...

Michael Blay, City Manager By: Laurie LoFranco, SVP Keenan&Associates
Attested by:

EDocuSigned by:
.ien,i,3
F421A8F85BE347A...

Ken Johnson, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
rS
DocuSigned by:

R Sat
0326570F6DB618E...

Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
Best Best& Krieger LLP
I I Page 57 of 222

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913

EXHIBIT A

TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
The specific elements (scope of work) of this service include but are not limited to.

1. Assisting the City in administering all group employee benefit insurance plans including:
medical, dental, vision, disability, and voluntary plans (including vetting any vendors).

2. Responding to questions from and providing information to staff and providing other consulting services during the course of the plan year.

3. Researching and advising the City of any new developments in the law and employee benefit programs on an ongoing basis.

4. Reviewing claims experience,claim service, and claim administration to ensure maximum benefit of the City.

5. Determining and recommending the most economical funding methods for the benefit programs.

6. Representing the City in all negotiations with providers on all issues including those related to premiums,benefit levels,plan design and special terms and conditions.

7. Meeting with and providing reports to various City representatives including City Council, City Manager, Human Resources staff and the Benefits Committee.

8. Assisting the City with the implementation and communication of new programs or changes to existing programs which will include attending and presenting information at Open Enrollment meetings.

9. As requested by the City, preparing bid specifications, and soliciting proposals from insurance markets which specialize in group insurance plans as requested. Evaluate bids, and bidders, including administration claim payment procedures, customer service, network, reserve establishment policies, financial soundness, and identify the most cost- beneficial package from among the various bidders. To the extent that soliciting proposals from insurance markets may be requested, City agrees to appoint Keenan as its Broker of Record as may be required by the carriers and/or vendors.

10. Provide COBRA Administration for the City during the length of the contract.

11. Provide an Online Benefits Open Enrollment System for employees.

12. Interface with insurance carriers as needed to assist the City in the resolution of problems associated with the benefits programs.
io

Page 58 of 222 ends

DocuSign Envelope ID:306F1989-DB51-490E-AAC9-3D193AA63913

EXHIBIT B

PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE
For January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2024:

Solely with regard to the services described in Exhibit A as they pertain to Kaiser Permanente medical plan ("Kaiser"), City agrees to pay Consultant twelve (12) monthly installments of five thousand nine hundred fifty-seven dollars and twenty-five cents ($5,957.25) commencing January 1, 2024, for a total amount of seventy-one thousand four hundred and eighty seven dollars ($71,487.00) annually ("Kaiser Consulting Fee"). Consultant shall present City with an invoice pursuant to Sections 4 and 5 of this Agreement.

With regard to any other services described in Exhibit A as they pertain to any other plans, coverages, and/or vendors, Consultant shall receive commissions from all insurance carriers and/or other vendors for the placement of insurance coverage. City shall have no responsibility for the payment of any such commission to Consultant. City acknowledges that commissions paid by insurers to Consultant that are directly related to the insurance coverage purchased by City as part of the Plans may impact the pricing that Consultant is able to obtain for City for such coverage.

The City will not be charged for the Online Benefit system,Benefit Bridge, as a member of PACE.

Two (2) Optional One (1)Year Extensions: January 1,2025 through December 31. 2025, and January 1, 2026, through December 31. 2026:

If City chooses to elect the one (1) or two (2) of the one (1)year extensions, a three percent(3%) increase will be automatically added to each extension year as follows:
• Commencing on January 1, 2025, the annual fee will increase to seventy-three thousand, six hundred and thirty-one dollars and sixty-one cents ($73,631.61) and will be billed as six thousand one hundred thirty-five dollars and ninety-seven cents ($6,135.97) monthly; and
• Commencing on January 1, 2026, the annual fee will increase to seventy-five thousand, eight hundred forty dollars and fifty-six cents ($75,840.56) and will be billed as six thousand, three hundred twenty dollars and five cents ($6,320.05)monthly.

All other pricing terms and conditions shall remain the same. 11

Page 59 of 222 ends

4 Or UN
,C.:9 -ft.:;
`tCALIFORNIA LEVINE ACT DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Ogt�� 4Q"
California Government Code Section 84308, commonly referred to as the "Levine Act," prohibits City Officers from participating in any action concerning a license, permit,other entitlement for use,franchise, or contract(collectively"license, permit,or contract") if they receive political contribution(s)from a party, or its agent(s), totaling more than $250 within the twelve (12) months before the proceeding, while a proceeding is pending, and for twelve (12) months following the date of a final decision in a proceeding.

The Levine Act also requires a member of the Upland City Council who has received such a contribution to disclose the contribution on the record of the proceeding and recuse themselves before the proceeding unless the violation has been properly cured.

Current Upland City Council Members are listed at:
https://www.uplandca.gov/city-council-treasurer
Parties and their Agents are responsible for accessing the link to review the names and disclosing their applicable contributions to City Officers on the record of a proceeding.

As a party to a proceeding,you are also required to provide information below about contributions made by you, your agents on behalf of you or your organization, your organization subject to the proceeding with the City, and any organization you direct or control pursuant to the aggregation rules at FPPC Reg. § 18438.5, except for uncompensated officers of a nonprofit organization. This form is to be submitted to the City of Upland and is a public record. If you have any questions about this form, please contact your City representative for assistance.

1. Have you or your company,or any agent/board member on behalf of you or your company/entity, made any political contributions of more than $250 to any Upland City Council Member in the 12 months preceding the date of the submission of your proposal or application,or the anticipated date of any Council action?
YES If yes, please identify the Council Member(s): _ ZNO

2. Do you or your company/entity, or any agency on behalf of you or your company/entity, anticipate or plan to make any political contribution of more than $250 to any Upland City Council Member in the 12 months following any Council action related to your proposal or application? YES If yes, please identify the Council Member(s):
✓ NO
Answering yes to either of the two questions above does not preclude the Upland City Council from awarding a contract or approving an application or any subsequent action. It does, however, preclude the identified Council Member(s)from participating in any actions related to your proposal or application. 10/09/2024 4,tt,62.(
Date Signature of authorized individual
Keenan/ Laurie LoFranco
Company/Applicant Name
(Levine Act definitions on reverse side)

Page 60 of 222 ends

LEVINE ACT DISCLOSURE STATEMENT DEFINITIONS
Term Definition Law
A proceeding to grant, deny, revoke, restrict, or modify a license, permit or other entitlement for use, that
does not solely involve purely ministerial decisions
and is:

Covered (1)Applied for by the party; FPPC Reg 18438.2(a) "proceedings" (2) Formally or informally requested by the party; or (3)A contract between the agency and the party or a
franchisee granted by the agency to the party, other
than a contract that is competitively bid, a labor
contract, or a personal employment contract.

Any person who files an application for, or is the
Party subject of, a proceeding involving a license, permit, or Gov. Code 84308(a)(1) other entitlement for use.

Any person who is not a party but who actively
supports or opposes a particular decision in a
proceeding involving a license, permit, or other
entitlement for use and who has a financial interest in Gov. Code 84308(a)(2) Participant the decision.A person actively supports or opposes a FPPC Reg 18438.4 particular decision in a proceeding if that person
lobbies in person the officers or employees of the
agency, testifies in person before the agency, or
otherwise acts to influence officers of the agency.

A person who represents a party or participant for
compensation and appears before or otherwise
Agent communicates with the governmental agency for the FPPC Reg 18438.3 purpose of influencing the pending proceeding. See
FPPC Reg 18438.3 for exceptions for certain
consultants.

A contract required by law to be awarded to the lowest
responsible bidder with a responsive bid, or, if the FPPC Reg Competitively Bid successful bidder refuses or fails to execute the 18438.2(a)(3)(A) contract, to the next lowest bidder with a responsive
bid.

A contract or agreement reached through collective
bargaining or with a representative group regarding
Labor Contract the salary, benefits, or terms and conditions under an FPPC Reg employment or retirement policy for employees or 18438.2(a)(3)(B) retirees, including a project labor agreement entered
under Public Contract Code Section 2500.

Personal A contract for employment, including the terms and Employment conditions of employment, between the agency and FPPC Reg Contract an agency employee.A contract with an independent 18438.2(a)(3)(C)-(D) contractor is NOT a personal employment contract.

Page 61 of 222 ends

4��a �p19� CITY UPLAND
�5, _�� "The City of Gracious Living"
C,,tIFOB,S
'• Stafif(krctilt
_,
DATE: October 28,2024
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:CHRIS ALANIS,INTERIM PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

NICOLE DEMOET,ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS MANAGER SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF PROXY AT ANNUAL MEETING OF THE POMONA VALLEY

PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council appoint Nicole deMoet as proxy to vote all shares at the annual shareholder's meeting of the Pomona Valley Protective Association.

GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal to maintain reasonable water rates that allow for recovery of costs by implementing management and financial controls.

BACKGROUND
The Pomona Valley Protective Association(PVPA)is a private non-profit company dedicated to water conservation that was incorporated in 1910 to protect the rights of the water producers in the Claremont,Pomona,Upland,and La Verne areas. PVPA owns and operates spreading facilities on approximately 800 acres of association land located along the San Anotnio and Thompson Creeks for the purpose of recharging groundwater basins.

PVPA spreading facilities receive runoff from several canyons in the San Gabriel Mountains,including San Antonio, Thompson, and Live Oak Canyons,in addition to a number of smaller canyons. Captured runoff percolates into the ground and replenishes the Six Basins groundwater aquifer. PVPA is identified in the Six Basins judgement as the party responsible for spreading and recharge operations to replenish the Six Basins groundwater basin. In the fall of 1998,the parties and PVPA entered into a stipulated judgment. Since the implementation of the judgment,PVPA has recharged over 71,422 Acre Feet of water in the Six Basins for use as a local water supply. The City of Upland owns 939.47 shares (1.6% of all shares) of PVPA and the PVPA has a nine-member Board of Directors that governs the Association.

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
Each year the Association holds an annual shareholder's meeting in Nobember to elect the Board of Directors for the upcoming year and conduct other annual business. The City must authorize a person to carry the City's proxy and to vote at the annual meeting.

Staff recommends the City Council appoint Nicole deMoet as proxy to vote all shares at the annual shareholder's meeting of the Pomona Valley Protective Association.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
This action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (The activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3)(the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378)of the State CEQA Guidelines,California Cod of Regulations,Title 14,Chapter 3,because it has not potential for resulting in physical change,directly or indirectly.

FISCAL IMPACTS
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.

Page 62 of 222 ends

CEQA:Not a Project.

Page 63 of 222 ends

4,c trpl CITY
UPLAND
„.;
"The City of Gracious Living"
Stafif(krctilt
C�tIFOB�S
DATE: October 28,2024
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:ROBERT D.DALQUEST,DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT FUNDS FROM REGIONAL

EARLY ACTION PLANNING PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION AN

AGREEMENT WITH SCAG
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt a Resolution accepting grant funds from the Regional Early Action Planning(REAP)Program of 2021, in the amount of$303,500, and authorize the City Manager, or his designee,to execute an agreement with Southern California Association of Governments(SCAG)and any amendments thereto.

GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal of providing a diverse supply of housing and a suitable living environment,including for lower-and moderate-income residents and households with special needs.

BACKGROUND
The Regional Early Action Planning Grant Program of 2021 ("REAP 2.0") was established by the California state legislature as part of the 2021 California Comeback Plan under Assembly Bill 140. This legislation was intended to confront the statewide housing affordability crisis by building and expanding on the success of the REAP 2019 Program by integrating housing and climate goals and allowing for broader planning and implementation investments to facilitate housing supply,choice,and affordability.

In 2023,Southern California Association of Governments("SCAG")announced that they have allocated$35 Million from their $246 Million REAP 2.0 Program funding to the Regional Utilities Supporting Housing Pilot Program ("RUSH"). The RUSH Pilot Program was focused on funding significant utility infrastructure projects that include utility infrastructure planning and capital improvements that are designed to support a jurisdiction's efforts to meet their housing production goals,as defined in the 6th cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation(RHNA)and Housing Elements,and which are consistent with REAP 2.0 Program goals and objectives.

SCAG's investment in the RUSH Pilot Program for infrastructure planning and capacity improvements was intended to help jurisdictions plan for the 1.3 million units of housing required across the SCAG region under the 6th cycle RHNA. The RUSH grant affords jurisdictions the opportunity to proactively upgrade infrastructure in areas of anticipated infill growth, allowing them to better serve their communities' sewer, water, stormwater, and dry utility needs. The RUSH grant contains$5 million dedicated to infrastructure planning projects,and$30 million dedicated to capital projects. Projects are required to provide a clear nexus to the production of housing in areas meeting the definition of"infill"under the State grant's guidelines.

Blais Associates was hired by San Bernardino County Transportation Authority(SBCTA)to assist member cities in developing and preparing the RUSH Pilot Program application. The project staff submitted was associated with the WPH Holdings land development applications filed with the City to construct 174 affordable housing units on two vacant parcels on Stowell Street,between Euclid Avenue and Sultana Avenue,and adjacent to the Upland Metrolink Station in Historic Downtown Upland. The City requested$303,500 in RUSH funding for an Infrastructure Planning Project named the"City of Upland Affordable Housing Utilities Planning Project". The project will accelerate infill affordable housing by developing design and engineering plans for two required utilities projects: 1)undergrounding Southern California Edison(SCE)power poles along the north side of Stowell Street; and 2)expansion of a 36-inch storm drain along 3rd Avenue,between Stowell Street and 8th Street.

Page 64 of 222 ends

The application for the City of Upland Affordable Housing Utilities Planning Project was submitted on November 3, 2023,and staff was notified on December 21,2023,that the City's application for the RUSH Pilot Program was being recommended for award pending SCAG Regional Council approval. On January 25,2024,staff received a letter from Kome Ajise,Executive Director of SCAG,that the State Budget submitted by Governor Newsom introduced budget cuts which severely affected the REAP 2.0 program funds received by SCAG, and they were suspending its REAP

2.0 Programs during the uncertainty of the State Budget process.

On July 30,2024,staff received notice that SCAG's total REAP 2.0 budget was only cut by$15 million and it expected to fully fund all competitive and formula-based grant awards that were approved.

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
The City of Upland was awarded $303,500 from the RUSH Pilot Program grant to assist the WPA Holdings infill project located on the two vacant parcels along Stowell Street. WPH Holdings is proposing to construct 81 muti- family units affordable to seniors and a 1,500 square foot retail building on the parcel between Euclid Avenue and Second Avenue (Euclid Villas), and 93 multi-family units for low- and moderate-income households on the parcel between Second Avenue and Sultana Avenue(Magnolia Villas). The grant provides funding to develop design and engineering plans for the two required utility improvements for this infill housing project: 1)undergrounding Southern California Edison power poles along the north side of Stowell Street;and 2)expansion of a 36-inch stormwater drain along 3rd Avenue,between Stowell Street and 8th Street.

Upon approval of the City Council Resolution, staff will forward the Resolution to SCAG. Currently, SCAG is preparing to issue agreements for each of their REAP 2.0 programs. Once agreements are finalized with SCAG and SBCTA (Subregional Partner), SBCTA will be reaching out to jurisdictions who received funding through the program.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The RUSH Pilot Program grant is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3)because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Project may have a significant effect on the environment.The Project is further exempt pursuant to Section 15162(a)of the CEQA Guidelines for projects located within the scope of a certified Environmental Impact Report(EIR).Further,the project is categorically exempt under 15301(b)related to existing facilities of both investor and publicly owned utilities used to provide electric power,natural gas,sewage,or other public utility services.

FISCAL IMPACTS
There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund associated with this action. With the acceptance of these RUSH Pilot Program grant funds,the revenue and corresponding expense will be budgeted in Fund 217. The grant will provide funding for the costs associated with developing, design, and engineering plans for undergrounding Southern California Edison power poles along the north side of Stowell Street, and expansion of a 36-inch stormwater drain along 3rd Avenue,between Stowell Street and 8th Street.

ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.

CEQA: Determine to be Exempt.

Page 65 of 222 ends

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UPLAND,

CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING GRANT FUNDS FROM THE REGIONAL
EARLY ACTION PLANNING (REAP) PROGRAM OF 2021, AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO

EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG) AND ANY

AMENDMENTS THERETO
WHEREAS, the Regional Early Action Planning Grant Program of 2021 ("REAP

2.0") was established by the California state legislature as part of the 2021 California Comeback Plan under AB 140 to confront the statewide housing affordability crisis by building and expanding on the success of the REAP 2019 program by integrating housing and climate goals and allowing for broader planning and implementation investments to facilitate housing supply, choice, and affordability; and WHEREAS, REAP 2.0 funded activities must meet the program objectives, which are to accelerate infill development that facilitates housing supply, choice and affordability; affirmatively further fair housing; and reduce vehicle miles traveled.

Further, all residential development must be in areas meeting the definition for "In Fill" provided in the REAP 2.0 state guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Southern California Association of Governments ("SCAG") has allocated $35 Million from the REAP 2.0 Program to the Regional Utilities Supporting Housing (RUSH) Pilot Program which focuses on utility infrastructure planning and capital improvements that will support a jurisdiction meeting the housing production goals in the 6th cycle RHNA and Housing Element and that meet REAP 2.0 Program Goals and Objectives; and
WHEREAS, SCAG has awarded $303,500 to the City of Upland to complete and deliver the City of Upland Affordable Housing Utilities Planning Project in Historic Downtown Upland; and
WHEREAS, WPH Holdings, Inc. has filed land use applications and designed 174 affordable housing units to be constructed on two vacant parcels on Stowell Street, adjacent to the Upland Metrolink Station in Historic Downtown Upland; and WHEREAS, the City of Upland applied and has been granted $303,500 in RUSH funding for the City of Upland Affordable Housing Utilities Planning Project that will accelerate affordable housing by developing design and engineering plans for two required utilities projects: 1). undergrounding Southern California Edison (SCE) poles along Stowell Street; and 2). expansion of a storm drain along 3rd Avenue, between Stowell Street and 8th Street.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Upland hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows:

Section 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

Page 66 of 222 ends

Resolution No.

Page 2 ends

Section 2. The City of Upland hereby authorizes and directs such actions as are necessary and appropriate to accept the grant award of REAP 2.0 funds in the amount of $303,500 from SCAG.

Section 3. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized and directed to:

A. Execute an agreement with SCAG and any amendments thereto; and B. Take all reasonably necessary and appropriate actions to complete the City of Upland Affordable Housing Utilities Planning Project and fulfill all obligations required, in a manner consistent and in compliance with the REAP 2.0 guidelines and objectives and all applicable state and federal statutes, rules, regulations, and laws.

Section 4. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Project is exempt from the CEQA Guidelines 14 Cal. Code. Regs Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Project is further exempt pursuant to 14 Cal. Code. Regs Section 15162(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. Further, the project is categorically exempt under 15301(b) existing facilities of both investor and publicly- owned utilities used to provide electric power, natural gas, sewage, or other public utility services.

Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, or clause or phrase in this Resolution or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, invalid, or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this Resolution or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted each section irrespective of the fact that any one or more subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, or phrases are declared unconstitutional, invalid, or ineffective.

Section 7. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of October, 2024.

Bill Velto, Mayor

Page 67 of 222 ends

Resolution No.

Page 2 ends

I Keri Johnson, City Clerk of the City of Upland, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 28th day of October, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST:

Keri Johnson, City Clerk

Page 68 of 222 ends

of u4.L
Y:3 City of Upland Affordable Housing Utilities Planning

PRIORITY GROWTH AREA
-q<tr aat`v
"ISI Prior ty Growth Arees
.'N
■ 33
L* Project Area
CT 6071000826
Upland Metrolink
Station
Burlingtctt Morthetn Santa
r Euclid Villas * Magnolia Villas
m
c il_ _IMENEIRRINK,I1 ET Stowell St. e a
n.
w
a
D
C
LEGEND:

Affordable Housing W BC
Electrical
Storm Drain — -
REAP 2.0 indicator Mapping Tool
Priority Growth Areas(PGAs): PGAs include High Quality Transit Areas,Transit Priority Areas,Job Centers, livable Corridors,Neighborhood Mobility Areas, and Spheres of Influence(outside of constrained areas).The project lies entirely within the Upland PGA.

Page 69 of 222 ends

4��a �p19� CITY UPLAND
�5, _�� "The City of Gracious Living"
C,,tIFOB,S
'• Stanfrkrctill
DATE: October 28,2024
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:STEPHEN PARKER,ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE REVISIONS TO THE JOB SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE

RESERVE POLICE OFFICER CLASSIFICATION
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council approve the revisions to the job specifications for the Reserve Police Officer classification.

GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal to address staff recruitment and retention efforts by correctly describing job duties performed for each classification.

BACKGROUND
The City of Upland's Merit System Rules and Regulations establish the personnel system for the City of Upland and provide for an equitable and uniform procedure for dealing with personnel matters through a department of personnel and provide for employment within the City of Upland on a merit basis, so the best qualified person shall be brought into the service of the City.

In addition to establishing an equitable and uniform procedure for dealing with personnel matters, the Merit System Rules and Regulations establishes a classification plan for personnel. This classification plan provides a group of jobs by commonality of duties,responsibilities,and functions for each job specification within the plan.

From time-to-time, as may be deemed necessary to carry out the intent and purposes of the City, the Council may revise the classification plan covering all positions in the competitive service.

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
The revisions to the job specifications for the Reserve Police Officer are needed to accurately reflect the volunteer nature of the position and that employees in the classification may be professionals in another career field, but are intended to utilize their skills to assist the Upland Police Department. The attached document shows a redline version of all proposed changes to the specifications for the job classification of Reserve Police Officer.

By updating the required certifications of the Reserve Police Officer to allow completion of the POST Regular Basic Course, as specified in the POST Reserve Officer Minimum Standards to be the Level I requirements, this should increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the Police Dept lauent.

This classification is not a part of any union as it is part-time.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a project subject to CEQA. The proposed action is not included within the definition of a"project" and thus is exempt.

FISCAL IMPACTS
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.

Page 70 of 222 ends

CEQA:Not a Project.

Page 71 of 222 ends

of a
_ d November 2022October 2024
.. FLSA:Non-Exempt
c1/4sos c

RESERVE POLICE OFFICER

DEFINITION
Under general supervision,supplements full time Police Officers in a variety of duties throughout the Police Department;patrols an assigned area in the prevention of crime and enforcement of law and order;carries out special assignments related to departmental operations or law enforcement in general;prepares various police reports and discusses problems,complaints,and violations with citizens;enforces state vehicle and traffic laws;makes presentations related to public safety;and performs related work as required.

SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED
Receives general supervision from assigned supervisory or management personnel. Exercises no direct supervision over staff.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
Incumbents perform a full range of duties with only occasional instruction or assistance.Employees receive general instructions regarding the scope of and approach to assignments,but procedures and techniques are often left to the discretion of the employee. Work is normally reviewed only upon completion and for overall results;performance is measured by completion of work accurately and adherence to policies.

A Reserve Officer must work a minimum of 40 hours per month during the field training program.Once they have completed the field training program,they work a minimum of 16 voluntary hours on patrol and must attend a 4-hour training meeting each month.Level I Reserve Officers may be certified to work alone or with another Reserve Officer after successfully passing the department's field training program. Some Reserves may utilize skills and expertise in various trades or professions to assist the Upland Police Department with various programs/assignments.Employees within this classification may be professionals in their chosen career fields.

EXAMPLES OF TYPICAL JOB FUNCTIONS(Illustrative Only)
Management reserves the right to add, modify, change, or rescind the work assignments of different positions and to make reasonable accommodations so qualified employees can perform the essential functions of the job.
> Patrols an assigned area either by vehicle or by foot during an assigned shift and looks for indicators of possible criminal activity or threats to life and property. > Answers calls for police services; enforces City, county, and state laws; makes field contacts and completes forms.
> Conducts both preliminary and follow-up investigations of disturbances,prowlers,burglaries,thefts, robberies,vehicle accidents, suspected homicides, and other criminal incidents,as assigned; makes arrests,as necessary.
> Serves warrants and subpoenas;interviews victims,complainants,and witnesses;interrogates suspects; gathers and preserves evidence;receives, searches, and books prisoners; fingerprints and transports prisoners.
> Testifies and presents evidence in court;contacts and cooperates with other law enforcement agencies in matters relating to the investigation of crimes and the apprehension of offenders. > Authors reports and field notes.

Page 72 of 222 ends

Reserve Police Officer

Page 2 of 5 ends

➢ Participates in staff development;attends briefings and training sessions. ➢ Performs routine maintenance on firearms and other equipment. ➢ Makes traffic stops and issues warnings,citations,or makes arrests as necessary;checks vehicles and observes vehicle occupants;investigates vehicle accident scenes. ➢ Provides emergency medical care as necessary;administers first aid and responds to calls for medical assistance; arranges for clearing of roadways; directs traffic at fires, special events, and other emergency or congested situations.
➢ Interviews drivers and witnesses and prepares reports. ➢ Assists the public and answers questions;establishes and maintains good relationships with the general public.
➢ Observes and complies with all City and mandated safety rules,regulations,and protocols. ➢ Performs other duties as assigned.

QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
➢ Operations and services of a comprehensive municipal law enforcement department. ➢ Principles, practices, methods, and techniques of modern law enforcement including patrol, investigations,interrogation,crime prevention,and special operations functions. ➢ Criminal law and criminal procedure with particular reference to the apprehension and arrest of suspects committing misdemeanors and felonies.
➢ Operational characteristics of vehicles and equipment used in law enforcement. ➢ Criminal court system processes and regulations.
➢ Methods and techniques of interviewing and eliciting information from victims and witnesses. ➢ Traffic control,enforcement,and education methods.
➢ Police records,communications,property,jails,and custody system operations. ➢ Use of police records and identification methods and their applications. ➢ Laws and constitutional guarantees governing the custody of persons,search,seizure,and evidence. ➢ Laws and procedures relating to juvenile welfare,traffic control,and safety. ➢ Laws and policies concerning police authority.
➢ Procedures in handling warrants,filing complaints,court appearances,and testifying. ➢ Investigation and identification techniques and equipment. ➢ Applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulatory codes, ordinances, and procedures relevant to assigned area of responsibility.
➢ Safety practices and equipment related to the work,including the safe use and proper care of firearms, chemical agents,and impact weapons.
➢ Methods and techniques of preparing police reports and related documentation. ➢ Self-defense tactics.
➢ Techniques of first aid and CPR.
➢ Principles and procedures of recordkeeping
➢ City and mandated safety rules,regulations,and protocols ➢ Techniques for providing a high level of customer service by effectively dealing with the public, vendors,contractors,and City staff.
➢ The structure and content of the English language,including the meaning and spelling of words,rules of composition,and grammar.
➢ Modern equipment and communication tools used for business functions and program,project,and task coordination,including computers and software programs relevant to work performed.

Page 73 of 222 ends

Reserve Police Officer

Page 3 of 5 ends

Ability to: t Formatted:Left
➢ Perform law enforcement duties within an assigned program area to ensure the protection and safety of citizens and property.
➢ Observe accurately;recall faces,names,descriptive characteristics,and facts of incidents and places; remember accounts given by witnesses.
➢ Identify crime suspects; interpret and apply the law to field situations; observe while conducting surveillance;and problem solve crime situations.
➢ Effectively use and care for firearms.
➢ Learn standard broadcasting procedures of a police radio system. ➢ Learn, understand, interpret, apply, and explain complex laws, codes, regulations, departmental policies,and ordinances.
➢ Analyze situations and adopt a quick,effective,and responsible course of action. ➢ Conduct effective interviews with victims and witnesses; interrogate suspects; summarize and document interviews and interrogations.
➢ Pursue,apprehend,and subdue suspects in accordance with mandated procedures. ➢ Process crime scenes and maintain chain of custody of evidence. ➢ Make sound,independent decisions in emergency situations. ➢ Explain a variety of parking and traffic regulations when required. ➢ Draft reports clearly and accurately.
➢ Follow oral and written instructions.
➢ Use written and oral communication skills.
➢ Read and interpret data,information,and documents.
➢ Use math and mathematical reasoning.
➢ Observe and interpret situations.
➢ Learn and apply new information or new skills.
➢ Operate the equipment and vehicles of the department in a safe and responsible manner. ➢ Understand,interpret, and apply all pertinent laws,codes,regulations,policies and procedures,and standards relevant to work performed.
➢ Use tact,initiative,prudence,and independent judgment within general policy,procedural,and legal guidelines.
➢ Independently organize work,set priorities,meet critical deadlines,and follow-up on assignments. ➢ Effectively use computer systems, software applications relevant to work performed, and modern business equipment to perform a variety of work tasks.
➢ Communicate clearly and concisely,both orally and in writing,using appropriate English grammar and syntax.
➢ Establish,maintain,and foster positive and effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of work.

Education and Experience:

Any combination of training and experience that would provide the required knowledge,skills,and abilities is qualifying.A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:

Education:
➢ Equivalent to completion of the twelfth(12th)grade.

Experience:
➢ None.
�— .- Formatted:Indent:Left: 0.25", No bullets or numbering Formatted:Underline

Page 74 of 222 ends

Reserve Police Officer

Page 4 of 5 ends

D Candidate must be at least 21 years of age.. - Formatted:Font:Times New Roman,No underline [Formatted:Font:Times New Roman
Licenses and Certifications: I Formatted:List Paragraph,Indent:Left: 0.25" D Possession of a valid California Driver's License,to be maintained throughout employment.Depending upon assignment,the applicant may be required to maintain professional licenses and/or certifications necessary for the position or required by law. In addition, candidates must meet the following requirements:
o evel III: Successful completion of the Commission on Peace, Officer Standards and Formatted:Font:Times New Roman,Font color:Black Training(POST)-certified Module III, as specified in the POST Reserve Officer Minimum Formatted:Font:Times New Roman,Font color:Black 1 Standards or appointment within three years of the date of last service as a Level I or II Reserve Peace Officer.Subsequent completion of Level II and Level I Reserve Academies is strongly encouraged.
o Level II:Successful completion of the POST-certified Module III and II,as specified in the —[Formatted:Font:Times New Roman POST Reserve Officer Minimum Standards or appointment within three years of the date of last service as a Level I or II Reserve Peace Officer.Subsequent completion of Level I Reserve Academy is strongly encouraged.

D—Level I: Successful completion of the POST Regular Basic Course, as specified in the POSTE [Formatted:List Paragraph Reserve Officer Minimum Standards.

D- possession of a valid Basic Certificate issued by the California State Commission on Peace Officer Formatted:Highlight Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.) within the last three (3) years, to be maintained throughout employment.

PHYSICAL DEMANDS
Must possess mobility to work primarily in a patrol and field environment and to maintain P.O.S.T.physical standards, including mobility, physical strength, and stamina to respond to emergency situations and apprehend suspects; vision to operate vehicles in all conditions, frequently at a high rate of speed, to maintain firearms qualification and to read printed materials and a computer screen;and hearing and speech to communicate in person,before groups,and over the telephone or radio.

The job involves fieldwork requiring frequent walking,running,or standing on uneven terrain and climbing and descending structures to access crime scenes and to identify problems or hazards;vision and manual dexterity to operate an emergency response vehicle at high rates of speed in emergency situations.Finger and manual dexterity is needed to operate police services equipment and firearms,and to access,enter,and retrieve data using a computer keyboard.Positions in this classification frequently bend,stoop,kneel,reach, and climb to perform work.Employees must possess the ability to apprehend,lift,carry,push,and pull victims,suspects,and equipment as determined within P.O.S.T physical standards,which may include the use of proper equipment.

Positions also work in a secondary office or station environment, and use standard office equipment, including a computer.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Employees work in outdoor conditions,and are exposed to loud noise levels,cold and hot temperatures, inclement weather conditions,moving vehicles,and hazardous physical substances and fumes.Employees

Page 75 of 222 ends

Reserve Police Officer

Page 5 of 5 ends

also work in an office or station environment with moderate noise levels,controlled temperature conditions, and no direct exposure to hazardous physical substances.Employees may interact with upset staff and/or public and private representatives in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures.

The principal duties of this class are performed in a field or police station environment with exposure to criminal offenders,mentally ill individuals,and persons potentially infected with communicable diseases.

WORKING CONDITIONS
May be required to be on-call and to work various shifts or emergencies on evenings, weekends, and holidays.

Department/Division:Police
Reports To: Police Lieutenant/Police Sergeant
Provides Direction To: N/A
Exemption Status: Non-exempt
Employment Grouping: Not applicable
Date Prepared: November 2022
Date Updated:January 23,2023S&c tcmbcr 17October 28,2024

Page 76 of 222 ends

� �p1
�� 9� CITY UPLAND
'., _i 6 "The City of Gracious Living" C,,tIFOB,S
'• Stafif(krctill
DATE: October 28,2024
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:STEPHEN PARKER,ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

STACI SULLIVAN,FINANCE MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTIONS APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (DIF)NEXUS STUDY AND THE DIF AND QUIMBY FEE SCHEDULES
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council: 1)conduct a Public Hearing to consider approving the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study and to update the City's Development Impact Fee schedule; 2) adopt a Resolution approving a Development Impact Fee Nexus Study; and 3) adopt a Resolution approving an update of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Schedule and Quimby Fee Schedule.

GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal of being fiscally conservative and utilizing city assets in the best possible way.

BACKGROUND
A Development Impact Fee(DIF)is a monetary exaction charged by a local government to a developer in connection with the implementation of an approved development project. DIF's can vary widely between jurisdictions because of differing facility needs. With the passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 1600, known as the 1987 Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 660000 and following), the State recognized the burden on local governments from the rising costs associated with needed infrastructure and population increases associated with new development. The Mitigation Fee Act secured a system for identifying and collecting specific fees,dedications,reservations,and other exactions that local jurisdictions could regularly impose when properties are developed.

On December 7, 1987,using the authority of the Mitigation Fee Act,the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1414 which provided for park acquisition and development,street and traffic facilities development and storm drain DIF to be established to mitigate impacts of development on the community and its infrastructure.

On September 25, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5792 which established impact fees based on a Public Facilities Fee Study which calculated fees that represented future development's share of public facilities and capital improvements. In addition to the then three existing DIF (Park, Traffic and Storm Drain), fees for General, Fire,Police,Water and Sewer were established. These fees took effect January 1,2007.

On December 13, 2021, the City Council approved a Professional Services Agreement with DTA to conduct a Comprehensive DIF Study.

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
DIFs are imposed one-time on new residential and non-residential development only. According to the Mitigation Fee Act,local governments must prepare and consider a study documenting the following when adopting impact fees:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee;

2. Identify the use of fee revenues;

3. Determine a reasonable relationship between the need for the fee and the type of development paying the fee; and

4. Determine a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the facility attributable to the development paying the fee.

Page 77 of 222 ends

Effective January 1,2022,the State passed AB 602, amending Government Code Sections 65940.1 and 66019, and adding Section 66016.5. This measure requires local governments to complete a nexus impact fee study a minimum of every eight years and imposes new requirements for specific jurisdictions on how fees are calculated. AB 602 also requires a square footage-based fee for residential development,instead of the current per-unit charge.

Nexus Study Methodology
The purpose of the 2024 Nexus Study is to establish a nexus between the anticipated development and public facilities needs for the City through 2040. The previous fee justification study was completed in September 2006 with the current fees based on that study.

Table 1: Current DIF Schedule
Land Use Residential per Dwelling Unit Non-Residential per 1,000 Square Foot Single Family Multi-Family Commercial Office Industrial General Facilities $993 $853 $161 I $262 $161 Fire* $504 $432 $235 $381 $235 Police $902 $774 $147 $239 $147 Parks and Recreation $8,893 $7,633 N/A N/A N/A Transportation $1,904 $1,169 $5,109 $2,809 $1,622 Water $3,768 $2,900 $1,559 $1,530 $890 Sewer $1,305 $918 $793 $556 $667 Storm Drain $2,856 $2,315 $4,029 $2,968 $3,570 *Fire DIF is no longer collected given the services provider contract with San Bernardino County Fire The 2024 Nexus Study used the following approaches to calculate facility standards and allocate the costs of planned facilities to accommodate growth in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act requirements for each fee category:

1. General Facilities,Police and Parks and Recreation facilities are based on"standards",where costs are based on the existing level of service.

2. Transportation, Water, Sewer and Storm Drain fees are based on a "plan", such as the Master Plan of Facilities,Capital Improvement Plan or General Plan,which identifies a finite set of facilities needed by the local government and are developed according to assessments of facility needs and adopted by the City Council.

Table 2:Fee Methodology
Fee Category Methodology Basis of Methodology
General Facilities Existing Standard
Police Standards-Based Existing Standard
Parks and Recreation Adopted Standard
Transportation Needs List
Water Plan-Based Needs List
Sewer Needs List
Storm Drain Needs List
AB 602 requires that a Nexus Study identify the existing level of services for each public facility,identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary. For standards-based fee categories,the total future facility cost was divided by the projected Equivalent Dwelling Unit(EDU). For plan- based fee categories, the costs of these facilities have been allocated between existing development and new development based on their percentage of build-out Equivalent Benefit Unit(EBU).

Table 3:Basis ofAllocation
ee Category Basis of Allocation of Benefit M. EDU/EBU General Facilities Persons Served EDU
Police Persons Served EDU
Parks Recreation Hours per Week per Person EDU Transportation PM Peak Hour Trips EBU
Water Water Usage Rates(gallons per day) EBU Sewer Sewer Generation Rates(gallons per day) EBU Storm Drain Stormwater Runoff Coefficients(per development acre) EBU

Page 78 of 222 ends

Nexus Study Findings
The Final Nexus Study and proposed impact fees are attached as completed by DTA in accordance with AB 1600 and AB 602. The recommended fees continue to ensure that new development pays its fair share of the new facilities and infrastructure necessary to accommodate impacts resulting from that new development through 2040.

Table 4:Proposed DIF Schedule -
Land Use Residential per Square Foot Non-Residential per 1,000 Square Foot Single Family Multi-Family Commercial Office Industrial General Facilities $0.78 $0.78 $1,305 $2,022 $669 Police $0.43 $0.43 $721 $1,118 $370 Parks $4.80 $4.80 N/A N/A N/A
Transportation $0.07 $0.07 $494 $296 $89 Water $0.87 $0.87 $436 $611 $349
Sewer $0.05 $0.05 $27 $27 $27
Storm Drain $0.90 $0.90 $1,059 $1,003 $947 The DIF schedule includes a 2%administrative fee to fund the City's costs of implementing and collecting the DIF, including but not limited to calculation and collection of the fees,revenue and cost accounting of the fees collected, fee justification analysis,and preparation of any mandated reports.

Additionally,the fee schedule includes an annual escalator based on the California Construction Cost Index(CCCI) to account for inflation in acquisition and construction costs. The change in the cost index will be imposed each January based on the index's change from September-to-September.

Quimby In-Lieu Fee Program
California Government Code Section 66477 allows the City to require the dedication of land or the payment of in-lieu fees,or a combination of both,for park or recreational purposes as a condition of subdivision map approval. The City has established a parkland-to-population requirement of 3.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 persons.

Table 5: Current Quimby Fees
Residential In-Lieu Fee
Single Family $10,700
Multi-Family $9,182
Quimby Program Methodology
The calculation of fees is based on persons per household(PPI)under the most recent census,the target acres(3 acres per 1,000 residents), and land valuation. The following table shows the proposed fee to be paid in-lieu of land dedication.

Table 6:Proposed Quimby Fees
Land Use PPI Acres per 1,000 Cost per Acre In-Lieu Fee Residents
Single Family Residence 2.91 3.0 $1,097,267 $9,580 Multi-Family Residence 2.72 3.0 $1,097,267 $8,946 Residential development is not charged both the Parks DIF and Quimby In-Lieu Fee. If a development qualifies under the Quimby Act,the Quimby Fee is charged. If a development does not qualify under the Quimby Act,the Parks DIF is charged.

Effective Date
If approved, the proposed fees would go into effect as of January 1, 2025, 60 days after adoption of the fees in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a project subject to CEQA. The proposed action is not included within the definition of a"project" and thus is exempt.

Page 79 of 222 ends

FISCAL IMPACTS
The proposed fees are based on the 2024 studies completed by DTA which includes the City's current build-out at 95%. As a result,the DIF Schedule and Quimby Fees will generate less revenue from development. The lower fees equate to a 47% average reduction for residential development and a 57% average reduction for commercial development.

ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.

CEQA:Not a Project.

Page 80 of 222 ends

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

UPLAND, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT

IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY IN ACCORDANCE WITH
ASSEMBLY BILL 1600 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 AND

MAKING FINDINGS REQUIRED BY THE MITIGATION FEE
ACT
WHEREAS, on September 26, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5792 establishing a schedule of fees and charges for Development Impact Fees (DIF) to be collected at the time of permit issuance; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the DIF is to ensure that new development pays its fair share of the new facilities and infrastructure necessary to accommodate impacts resulting from that new development through 2040; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill (AB) 602, signed into law in 2021, amended the Mitigation Fee Act; and
WHEREAS, AB 602 requires that a DIF Nexus Study be adopted at a public hearing prior to approval of any new or increased DIF; and WHEREAS, AB 602 requires in part that the DIF Nexus Study identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify new levels of service, include an explanation of why the new levels of service are more appropriate, and include information to support the required findings for adoption of new or increased DIF; and
WHEREAS, the City's last DIF Nexus Study was completed in 2006, and since that time, multiple Capital Improvement Plan budgets have been approved, along with significant development activity throughout the city; and WHEREAS, the City retained the professional services of DTA to prepare the City of Upland's 2024 DIF Nexus Study Update; and
WHEREAS, the DIF Nexus Study provides a quantified basis for support of each DIF and the legal support for the required findings that must be made to justify the amount of each DIF, based on existing deficiencies of certain public facilities and the project burdens on those facilities caused by prospective development in the City; and
WHEREAS, the 2024 DIF Nexus Study Update is incorporated herein by this reference and provides the requisite findings related to the City's DIF; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was duly noticed for the City Council meeting of October 28, 2024, by publishing the notice in an adjudicated newspaper of general circulation, on the City's website, and mailing to interested parties on September 27, 2024.

Page 81 of 222 ends

Resolution No.

Page 2 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Upland hereby finds, determines and resolves, as follows:

Section 1. All of the above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 2. The attached 2024 DIF Nexus Study is adopted and shall replace the 2006 DIF Nexus Study adopted by the City Council on September 26, 2006.

Pursuant to the Nexus Study, the City Council hereby finds as follows:
a) The purpose of the DIF has been identified;
b) The use of the DIF have been identified;
c) There is a reasonable relationship between the use and the type of project on which it is imposed; and
d) There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public improvement and the type of project on which it is imposed.

Section 3. Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council finds that this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.

Further, if the activity is deemed a project this City Council finds that this Resolution is exempt pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines.

Section 4. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, or clause or phrase in this Resolution or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, invalid or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this Resolution or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted each section irrespective of the fact that any one or more subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, or phrases are declared unconstitutional, invalid, or ineffective.

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of October, 2024.

Bill Velto, Mayor

Page 82 of 222 ends

Resolution No.

Page 3 ends

I, Keri Johnson, City Clerk of the City of Upland, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 28th day of October, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST:

Keri Johnson, City Clerk

Page 83 of 222 ends

www.Finance DTA.cor n

DRAFT DEVELOPMENT

IMPACT FEE JUSTIFICATION
STUDY

CITY OF UPLAND
Report Date: September 13, 2024
Public Finance
Public-Private Partnerships
Development Economics
Clean Energy Bonds
Irvine I San Jose I San Francisco I Riverside
Dallas I Houston I Raleigh I Tampa

Page 84 of 222 ends

dtct /
18201 Von Karman Avenue,Suite 220
www.FinanceDTA.com Irvine,CA 92612

CITY OF UPLAND
4 Or :r
q 9

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY UPDATE
Prepared for:

City of Upland
460 N Euclid Avenue
Upland, CA 91786
Attention: Stephen Parker

Page 85 of 222 ends

TABLE

OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
A Organization of the Fee Study 1
B Development Impact Fee Summary 2
II INTRODUCTION 4

III LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES 6
IV DEMOGRAPHICS 12
A Existing Residential Land Uses 13
B Existing Non-Residential Land Uses 14
C Future Residential Land Uses (2040) 15
D Future Non-Residential Land Uses (2040) 16 V METHODOLOGY USED TO CALCULATE FEES 17
A Standards-Based Fee Methodology 17
B Plan-Based Fee Methodology 17
C Capacity-Based Fee Methodology 17
D Summary of Fee Methodology 18
E Allocation of Benefit 19
VI CALCULATION OF FEES 23
A General Facilities 23
B Police 30
C Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fees 37 D Transportation 46
E Water Fees 53
F Sewer Facilities 61
G Storm Drain Fees 69
VII IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE SCHEDULE 77
A The Collection of DIFs 77
B The Assignment and Expenditure of Fee Revenue 78

Page 86 of 222 ends

C Exemptions, Reductions and Waivers. 79
D Developer Improvement Credits 79
E Existing Development Credit 79
F Annual Reporting and Accounting of Fees. 79 G Refunding Policy 80
H Annual Update of the CIP 82
I Administration Costs of Fee Implementation 82
J Indexing of Impact Fee Rates 82
K Updating the Impact Fee Study 83
L Administering an Impact Fee Program. 83
VIII SUMMARY OF FEES 84

APPENDIX A FEE DERIVATION WORKSHEETS

APPENDIX B INVENTORY AND FACILITIES NEEDS
LIST

APPENDIX C PROPERTY INVENTORY FOR LAND

ACQUISITION COSTS

Page 87 of 222 ends

SECTION I
tctEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
www.FinanceDTA.com

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In order to adequately plan for new development and identify the public facilities and costs associated with mitigating the direct and cumulative impacts of new development, DTA was retained by the City of Upland, CA (the "City") to update the existing impact fee program by preparing a new Assembly Bill ("AB") 1600 fee justification study (the "Fee Study"). The previous fee justification study was completed in September of 2006 with the current fees based on the findings of that study. The categories of development impact fee ("DIFs" or"Fees") to be determined by this Fee Study include General Facilities, Police, Parks and Recreation, Transportation, Water, Sewer, and Storm Drains at levels identified by the various City departments as being necessary to meet the needs of new development. The purpose of this Fee Study will be to establish a nexus between the anticipated development and public facilities needs for the City through 2040. It is important to note that the City is approximately 95% built-out and much of new development will be infill development.This Fee Study is intended to comply with Section 66000 et seq. of the Government Code, which was enacted by the State of California in 1987, by identifying additional public facilities required by new development ("Future Facilities") and determining the level of fees that may be imposed to pay the costs of the Future Facilities. The Future Facilities and associated construction costs are identified in the Facilities Inventory and Needs List, which is included in the appendix section of the Fee Study. A description of the methodology used to calculate the fees is included in Section V. The purpose of this Fee Study is to ensure that all new development is required to pay its "fair share" of the cost of new infrastructure through the development fee program.

A Organization of the Fee Study
This Fee Study will be presented in the following seven sections:

Section I contains an Executive Summary and provides a brief introduction to the Fee Study and includes an overview of the proposed DIFs.

Section II is an Introduction that includes a brief description of City surroundings and background information on development impact fee funding.

Section III provides an overview of the legal requirements for implementing and imposing the development impact fee amounts identified in the Fee Study and satisfies the nexus requirements for each facility included as part of this Fee Study.

Included is a discussion of the findings and requirements necessary to be satisfied when establishing, increasing, or imposing a fee as a condition of new development.

Section IV includes a discussion of land use characteristics and demand variables of projected new development such as the number of housing units and the number of non-residential building square feet, assuming current growth trends in residential and non-residential development projected through 2040.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study 1 age 88 of 222

SECTION I
tctEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
www.FinanceDTA.com
Section V contains a description of the methodology used to determine the Fees for Future Facilities and presents the fees for each of the land use types.

Section VI presents the calculation of the Fees for each land use.

Section VII presents a summary of the Fees.

This Fee Study also includes an appendix section presenting the calculations and other relevant material used to determine the findings presented in this Fee Study, as noted below:

Appendix A includes the calculations used to determine the various Fee levels.

Appendix B includes the Facilities Inventory and Needs List used to determine the various Fee levels.

Appendix C includes the Inventory List for the purpose of estimating the land acquisition costs.

B Development Impact Fee Summary
Per the results of this Fee Study, the total fee amounts required to finance new development's share of Future Facilities are identified in Table ES-1 below. Fees presented in this Fee Study represent the maximum DIFs that may be imposed by the City under the statutory requirements of Government Code Section 66000 et. seq. Residential fees are listed on a per-square-foot basis. Residential fees are listed on a per-square-foot basis and non-residential fees are listed on a per-1,000-square-feet basis. Based on the findings in this Fee Study, the following recommendations are presented.

Table ES-1: DIF Summary (Includes 2.0% Administrations Cost) Residential Non-Residential 2
(per Square Foot) (per 1,000 Square Feet)
Single-Family 1 Multi-Family 1 Commercial Office Industria General Facilities $0.78 $0.78 $1,305 $2,022 $669 Police $0.43 $0.42 $721 $1,118 $370 Parks and Recreation $4.80 $4.80 1111
Transportation $0.07 $0.07 $494 $296 $89 Water $0.87 $0.87 $436 $611 $349 Sewer $0.05 $0.05 $27 $27 $27
Storm Drain $0.90 $0.90 $1,059 $1,003 $947 Notes:

1. Residential fees are per square foot to comply with California AB 602.

2. Non-Residential fees are per 1,000 square feet.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study 2 age 89 of 222

SECTION I
tctEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
www.FinanceDTA.com
There is also an Administrative portion of the DIF which is an administrative fee that funds the City's costs of implementing and collecting the DIFs, including but not limited to calculation and collection of the fees, revenue and cost accounting of the fees collected, fee justification analysis, and preparation of any mandated reports. Per the City's request, the administrative component of the DIF is calculated at 2% of the total impact fees collected in addition to the fees charged to new development, which is a customary industry standard.

The cost estimates for facilities used in this Fee Study are in 2024 dollars. Therefore, DTA further recommends that, after adoption, the above impact fees be reviewed each year and include a provision for an annual inflationary adjustment based upon the California Construction Cost Index ("CCCI"). This construction cost index is based upon the Building Cost Index ("BCI") cost indices average for Los Angeles as produced by Engineering News-Record ("ENR").

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
age 90 of 222

SECTION II
tctINTRODUCTION
www.FinanceDTA.com

INTRODUCTION
Incorporated in 1906, the City of Upland ("the City") is located at the western edge of San Bernardino County, and just east of Los Angeles County. The City is located at the foot of the highest part of the San Gabriel Mountains and covers approximately 15.8 square miles and is home to a population of over 78,000 people. The City is part of the Inland Empire, and it is bordered by the communities of Rancho Cucamonga to the east, Ontario, and Montclair to the south, and Claremont to the west. The City of Upland sits at the region's transportation hub, intersected by two major interstate freeways and the Metrolink commuter rail system with a station in the City's historic downtown.

In order to adequately plan for new development and identify the public facilities and costs associated with mitigating the direct and cumulative impacts of new development, DTA was retained by the City to update the existing impact fee program by preparing a new Assembly Bill ("AB") 1600 fee justification study (the "Fee Study"). The previous justification study was completed in September of 2006 with the currently imposed fees based on the findings of that study. It is important to note that the City is approximately 95%built-out and much of new development will be infill development.The fee amounts to be determined by this Fee Study ("DIFs" or "Fees") are for the following types of facilities: General Facilities, Police, Parks and Recreation, Transportation, Water, Sewer, and Storm Drains at levels identified by the various City departments as being necessary to meet the needs of new development through 2040.

This Fee Study is intended to comply with Section 66000 et seq. of the Government Code, which was enacted by the State of California in 1987, by identifying additional public facilities required by new development ("Future Facilities") and determining the level of fees that may be imposed to pay the costs of the Future Facilities. The Future Facilities and associated construction costs are identified in the Facilities Inventory and Needs List, which is included in the Appendix section of the Fee Study. A description of the methodology used to calculate the fees is included in Section V.

The purpose of this Fee Study is to ensure that all new development is required to pay its "fair share" of the cost of new infrastructure through the development impact fee program. The Fees generated in this Fee Study are one-time fees typically paid prior to the issuance of a building permit and imposed on development projects by local agencies responsible for regulating land use. These Fee amounts to be determined will be at levels identified as being necessary to meet the needs of new development through 2040.

Fees are calculated to fund the cost of facilities needed to meet the needs of new development. The steps followed in the Fee Study include:

1. Demographic Assumptions: Identify future growth that represents the increased demand for Future Facilities;
City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study 4 age 91 of 222

SECTION II
tctINTRODUCTION
www.FinanceDTA.com

2. Facility Needs and Costs: Identify current facilities inventory to determine Level of Services ("LOS") requirements and determine the Future Facilities required to support new development and the costs of such facilities;

3. Cost Allocation: Allocate costs of Future Facilities on a per-equivalent-dwelling- unit or equivalent-benefit-unit basis; and

4. Fee Schedule: Calculate the Fee amount per square foot for residential development, and the Fee amounts per thousand square feet for non-residential development.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
age 92 of 222

SECTION III

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY
tct DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com

III LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES The City has identified the need to levy DIFs to pay for General Facilities, Police, Parks and Recreation, Transportation, Water, Sewer and Storm Drain. The Fees will finance facilities on the Needs Lists at levels identified by the City as appropriate for new development. Upon the adoption of the Fee Study and required legal documents by the City Council, all new development will be required to pay its "fair share" of the cost of facilities on the Needs Lists through these Fees. The Fees are established pursuant to AB 1600, as described below.

Prior to World War II, development in California was held responsible for very little of the cost of public infrastructure. Public improvements were financed primarily through jurisdictional General Funds and utility charges. It was not uncommon during this period for speculators to subdivide tracts of land without providing any public improvements, expecting the closest city to eventually annex a project and provide public improvements and services.

However, starting in the late 1940s, the use of impact fees grew with the increased planning and regulation of new development. During the 1960s and 1970s, the California Courts broadened the right of local government to impose fees on developers for public improvements that were not located on project sites. More recently, with the passage of Proposition 13, the limits on general revenues for new infrastructure have resulted in new development being held responsible for a greater share of public improvements, and both the use and levels of impact fees have grown substantially. Higher fee levels were undoubtedly driven in part by a need to offset the decline in funds for infrastructure development from other sources.

The levy of impact fees is one authorized method of financing the public facilities necessary to mitigate the impacts of new development,as the levy of such fees provides funding to maintain an agency's existing LOS for an increased service population. A fee is "a monetary exaction, other than a tax or special assessment, which is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project..." (California Government Code, Section 66000). A fee may be levied for each type of capital improvement required for new development,with the payment of the fee occurring prior to the beginning of construction of a dwelling unit or non-residential building (or prior to the expansion of existing buildings of these types). Fees are often levied at final map recordation, issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, or more commonly, at building permit issuance.

AB 1600, which created Section 66000 et. seq. of the Government Code, was enacted by the State of California in 1987. This Fee Study is intended to meet the nexus or benefit requirements of AB 1600, which mandates that there is a nexus between fees imposed, use of the fees, and development projects on which the fees are imposed.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study G age 93 of 222

SECTION III

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY
tct DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
A Government Code Section 66001
In 2006, Government Code Section 66001 was amended to clarify that a fee cannot include costs attributable to existing deficiencies but can fund costs used to maintain the existing LOS or meet an adopted LOS that is consistent with the General Plan. Section 66000 et seq. of the Government Code requires all public agencies to satisfy the following requirements when establishing, increasing, or imposing a fee as a condition of new development:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee [Government Code Section 66001(a)(1)];

2. Identify the use to which the fee will be put [Government Code Section 66001(a)(2)];

3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and type of development on which the fee is to be imposed[Government Code Section 66001(a)(3)];

4. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and type of development project on which the fee is to be imposed[Government Code Section 66001(a)(4)]; and

5. Discuss how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

The sections below present each of the five requirements listed above as they relate to the imposition of the proposed fees.

A.1 Purpose of the Fee [Government Code Section 66001(A)(1)] New residential and non-residential development within the City will generate additional residents and employees who will require additional public facilities. Land for these facilities will have to be acquired and public facilities and equipment will have to be expanded, constructed, or purchased to meet this increased demand.

This Fee Study has been prepared in response to the projected direct and cumulated effect of future development. Each new development will contribute to the need for new public facilities. Without future development, many of the new public facilities on the Needs Lists would not be necessary as the existing facilities are adequate for the City's present population. In instances where facilities would be built regardless of new development, the costs of such facilities have been allocated to new and existing development based on their respective level of benefit.

The proposed impact fee will be charged to all future development, irrespective of location, in the City. Even future "infill" development projects contribute to impacts on public facilities because they are an interactive component of a much greater network of development located throughout the City. First, the property owners and/or the tenants associated with any new development in the City can be expected to place additional demands on City facilities funded by the fee. Second, these property owners and tenants are dependent on and, in fact, may not have chosen to City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study 7 age 94 of 222

SECTION III

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY
tct DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
utilize their development, except for residential,retail, employment, and recreational opportunities located nearby on other existing and future development. Third, the availability of residents, employees, and customers throughout the City has a growth-inducing impact without which some of the "infill" development would not occur. As a result, all development projects in the City contribute to the cumulative impacts of development.

The impact fees will be used for the acquisition, installation, and construction of public facilities identified on the Needs Lists and appropriate administrative costs to mitigate the direct and cumulative impacts of new development in the City.

A.2 The Use to Which the Fee is to be Put [Government Code Section 66001(A)(2)]
The fee will be used for the acquisition, installation, and construction of the public facilities identified on the Needs Lists, included in Section IV of the Fee Study, and other appropriate costs to mitigate the direct and cumulative impacts of new development in the City. The fee will provide a source of revenue to the City to allow for the acquisition, installation, and construction of public facilities, which in turn will maintain the current standard of service, preserve the quality of life in City, and protect the health, safety, and welfare of the existing and future residents, visitors, and employees.

A.3 Determine That There is a Reasonable Relationship Between the Fee's Use and the Type of Development Project Upon Which the Fee is Imposed (Benefit Relationship) [Government Code Section 66001(A)(3)] It is the projected direct and cumulative effect of future development that has prompted the preparation of the Fee Study. Each development will contribute to the need for new public facilities. Without future development, the City would have no need to construct many of the public facilities on the Needs Lists. For all other facilities, the costs have been allocated to both existing and new development based on their level of benefit. Even future "infill" development projects, which may be adjacent to existing facilities, further burden existing public facilities. Consequently, all new development within the City, irrespective of location, contributes to the direct and cumulative impacts of development on public facilities and creates the need for new facilities to accommodate growth.

The fees will be expended for the acquisition, installation, and construction of the public facilities identified on the Needs Lists and other authorized uses, as that is the purpose for which the Fee is collected. As previously stated, all new development creates either a direct impact on public facilities or contributes to the cumulative impact on public facilities. Moreover, this impact is generally equalized among all types of development because increased demands for public facilities created by the future residents and employees create the impact upon existing facilities.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
age 95o f 222

SECTION III

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY
tct DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
For the foregoing reasons, new development benefits from the acquisition, construction, and installation of the facilities on the Needs Lists.

A.4 Determine How There is a Reasonable Relationship Between the Need for the Public Facility and the Type of Development Project Upon Which the Fee is Imposed (Impact Relationship) [Government Code Section 66001(A)(4)]
As previously stated, all new development within the City, irrespective of location, contributes to the direct and cumulative impacts of development on public facilities and creates the need for new facilities to accommodate growth. Without future development, many of the facilities on the Needs Lists would not be necessary. For certain other facilities, the costs have been allocated to both existing and new development based on their level of benefit.

For the reasons presented herein, there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities included on the Needs List and all new development within the City.

A.5 The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Public Facilities Attributable to the Development Upon Which the Fee is Imposed ("Rough Proportionality" Relationship) [Government Code Section 66001(A)]
As set forth above, all new development in the City impacts public facilities.

Moreover,each individual development project and its related increase in population and/or employment, along with the cumulative impacts of all development in the City, will adversely impact existing facilities. Thus, imposition of the Fee to finance the facilities on the Needs Lists is an efficient, practical, and equitable method of permitting development to proceed in a responsible manner.

New development impacts facilities directly and cumulatively. In fact, without any future development, the acquisition, construction, and/or installation of many of the facilities on the Needs Lists would not be necessary as existing City facilities are adequate. Even new development located adjacent to existing facilities will utilize and benefit from facilities on the Needs List.

The proposed fee amounts are roughly proportional to the impacts resulting from new development based on the analysis in Section IV. Thus, there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the Fee and the cost of the facilities.

Identifying these items will enable an impact fee to meet the nexus and rough proportionality requirements established by previous court cases. These findings are discussed in the nexus test for each proposed Fee element as presented in Section IV.

Current State financing and fee assessment requirements only allow new development to pay for its fair share of new facilities' costs. Any current deficiencies resulting from the needs of existing development must be funded through other City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study 9 age 96 of 222

SECTION III

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY
tct DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
sources. Therefore, a key element to establish legal impact fees is to determine what share of the benefit or cost of a particular improvement can be equitably assigned to existing development, even if that improvement has not yet been constructed. By removing this factor, the true impact of new development can be assessed, and equitable fees can be assigned.

B Assembly Bill AB 602
The impact fees included herein were circumscribed by the requirements of AB 602, which was approved by the California State Legislature and signed by Governor Newsom in 2021.

Among the significant impacts of AB 602 are the following:

On or after January 1, 2022, fee justification studies must identify the existing LOS for each public facility, identify the proposed new LOS, and (if the proposed new LOS is greater than existing LOS) include an explanation of why the new LOS is necessary.

For housing development projects, Nexus Studies adopted after July 1, 2022, must calculate the amount of fees based on the square footage of proposed units of the development, unless the local agency demonstrates that another metric is more appropriate. The bill would require that a "local agency that calculated fees proportionally to the square footage of the proposed units be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by development." This would also apply to multi-family residences.

The bill also requires the Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD"), on or before January 1, 2024, to create an impact fee Nexus Study template that may be used by local jurisdictions to calculate their fees. The bill requires that the template include a method of calculating the feasibility of housing being built with a given fee level. The template must be completed by 2024. Local jurisdictions will have the option (it will not be required) to use the HCD template.

The bill authorizes any member of the public, including an applicant for a development project, to submit evidence that the city, county, or other local agency had failed to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act. The bill requires the legislative body of the city, county, or other local agency to consider any timely submitted evidence and authorize the legislative body to change or adjust the proposed fee or fee increase, as specified.

If a Nexus Study supports the increase of an existing fee,the local agency shall review the assumption of the Nexus Study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of the fees collected under the original fee.

Large jurisdictions (county population greater than 250,000) and cities within those counties must adopt a Capital Improvement Plan ("CIP") as part of the Nexus Study.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study age 9/19222

SECTION III

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY
dta DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
• Nexus Studies shall be updated at least every 8 years from the period beginning January 1, 2023.

Importantly,AB 602 does not apply to (i) water and sewer connection and capacity charges, (ii) school fees, and (iii) Mello-Roos or other taxes. These other fees, taxes, and charges are subject to their own statutory accountability measures.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
age 98101-222

SECTION IV
tctDEMOGRAPHICS
www.FinanceDTA.com

IV DEMOGRAPHICS
To determine the facilities needed to serve new development and establish fee amounts to fund such facilities, DTA has researched and reviewed material containing information of future land use development within the City through 2040. For the purpose of this Fee Study, DTA categorized developable residential land uses as single-family and multi-family residences. Developable non-residential land uses within the City's commercial and industrial zones are categorized commercial, office, and industrial and are summarized in detail in the following section.

Elements from the City's 2015 General Plan (the "General Plan") demographics, numbers from the California Department of Finance, US Census, and total square footage generated by the CoStar Real Estate Software Platform ("CoStar") were used as estimates for the number of housing units and non-residential building square feet to be built within the City.

The City's land use decisions will also affect properties within its sphere of influence ("SOI").

California law requires that a General Plan "cover the territory within the boundaries of an adopted City, as well as any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agencies judgement bears relation to its planning."
In addition, information from the General Plan and estimates produced by DTA were used to project the additional land uses resulting from new development. It's important to note that the City is approximately 95% built-out and much of the new development will be infill development. Notably, DTA attempted to utilize metrics (e.g., average household size, square footage, etc.) that standardized existing demographics with the projections found in the General Plan.

Future residents and employees will create additional demand for facilities that existing public facilities cannot adequately service. In order to accommodate new development in an orderly manner, while maintaining the current quality of life in the City, the facilities on the Inventory and Facility Needs List (presented throughout Section VI and in the Appendix), as reviewed and approved by the City staff, will need to be constructed.

For those facilities that are needed to mitigate demand from new development,facility costs have been allocated to new development only. In those instances when it has been determined that the new facilities will serve both existing and new development, facility costs have been allocated based on proportionate benefit [see the Equivalent Dwelling Unit ("EDU") and Equivalent Benefit Unit ("EBU") discussion in Section V].

In addition, DTA has determined that utilizing a Persons Served population, comprised of all residents and 50% of employees is common practice in quantifying the impact of a new development in a given service area and this metric will be used in both residential and non- residential employee population and calculations throughout this Fee Study.

Table 1 presented provides a summary of the land uses covered in this Fee Study. As previously indicated, the Fee Study will determine Fees for four (4) specific land use categories; residential, commercial, office, and industrial. Notably, the table shown below City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study age 991 o?222

SECTION IV
tctDEMOGRAPHICS
www.FinanceDTA.com
is meant to provide an example of typical land uses found in each category and is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all the City's potential land uses.

A Existing Residential Land Uses
Demographic data provided by the Nielsen Company (a leading information, measurement, and data analytics company), the California Department of Finance, and the US Census Bureau, were used to estimate the existing number of housing units and population in the City. Notably, DTA attempted to utilize metrics (e.g., average household size, square footage, etc.) that standardized existing demographics with DTA's projections.

Table 1: Summary of Land Use Categories
Land Use Classification Fee Definition
Study
Includes single-family detached homes and single-family attached homes.

Also includes buildings with attached residential units including apartments, town homes, condominiums, mobile homes, and all other residential units Residential not classified as Single-Family. For purposes of determining the impact fees due, any "second unit" or "accessory dwelling unit" (as determined pursuant to Section 65852.2 of the Government Code) shall be considered a separate residential unit and shall be subject to this fee.

Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
• Retail and commercial lodging;
• Service-oriented business activities,wineries/vineyards,and car washes; • Department stores, discount stores, furniture/appliance outlets, home improvement centers;
Commercial • Shopping Centers;
• Entertainment centers;
• Assisted Living,houses of worship;
• Subregional and regional shopping centers;
• Hotel.Motels, spas and resorts; and
• Grocery stores,storage facilities.

Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
• Business/professional offices;
Office • Medical/dental offices;
• Office park,research park,business park; and
• General office buildings.

Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
• Light manufacturing,warehouse/distribution,and logistics wholesaling; Industrial • Wholesale and warehouse retail;
• Food processing;
• Industrial park; and
• Industrial/light industrial.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
age 100102222

SECTION IV
tctDEMOGRAPHICS
www.FinanceDTA.com
According to the information provided by the California Department of Finance, the US Census Bureau, and the Nielsen Company, there are currently 78,285 existing residents residing in 29,248 residential single-family, multi-family, and mobile home housing units in the City. The residential persons-per-unit figure of 2.68 was also derived from 2024 data published by the California Department of Finance. Notably, the 2.68 residents per unit estimate for the City included units in the City that are currently vacant. As a result, this figure is lower than the California Department of Finance 2.72 residents per unit figure, which includes only occupied housing units. Table 2 presented below summarizes the existing demographics for the City's residential land uses.

Table 2: Estimated Existing Residential Development 1
Residential Land Use xistin Existing Housing Unit Residents per esiden Unit
Residential 78,285 29,248 2.68
Total 78,285 29,248 2.68
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

B Existing Non-Residential Land Uses
The existing non-residential square footage was compiled and estimated using the CoStar Real Estate Software Platform. In addition, the employees per square foot for non- residential land uses was based on information published in Nielsen Company Employment Profiles by NAICS Codes 2024. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is the standard used by Federal statistical agencies in classifying business establishments for the purpose of collecting, analyzing, and publishing statistical data related to the U.S. business economy. The number of non-residential building square footage presented below in Table 3 is considered "existing non-residential development".

As reflected in Table 3 below, the City has approximately 14,596,622 total square feet of existing non-residential development; including approximately 7,112,985 square feet of commercial development, 2,614,538 square feet of office space and 4,869,099 square feet of industrial development.

Per the Nielsen Company's Employment Profiles (2024), the City has 29,584 employees in these non-residential sectors, specifically 15,403 commercial, 8,772 office employees and 5,409 industrial employees. These numbers were based on existing employee data and existing square footage data, generating employees-per-thousand-square-foot factors ("EPSFs") of 2.17 for commercial, 3.36 for the office sector and 1.11 for the industrial sector.

These EPSF numbers are presented in detail in Appendix A.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study � �I I age 1011of 222

SECTION IV
tctDEMOGRAPHICS
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 3: Estimated Existing Non-Residential Development Non Residential Land Us: Existing Persons Existing Building mployees Served Square Footage
Commercial 15,403 7,702 7,112,985
Office 8,772 4,386 2,614,538
Industrial 5,409 2,705 4,869,099
Total 29,584 14,792 14,596,622
C Future Residential Land Uses (2040)
Using population projections from the Southern California Association of Governments ("SCAG"), Demographics and Growth Forecasts technical Report dated September 2020.

DTA determined that the City is expected to grow by 7,594 residential units by the end of the 2040 build-out period in this Study. The projected residential growth rates by SCAG were used over the build-out period to generate the number of future housing units shown below. As indicated in Table 4, given the assumed projected growth rates, DTA determined that the City is expected to grow by 2,837 residential units by the end of the 2040 build-out period.

Table 4: Future Residential Development 1
•esidential Land Use Future Future Housing Units Residents per Residents Unit
Residential 7,594 2,837 2.68
Total 7,594 2,837 2.68
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

To comply with AB 602, DTA worked with the City staff to determine the average square footage for both single-family and multi-family residences. Using building permit information from 2017 to 2022, DTA calculated that the combined average residential square foot unit was 2,059 square feet across single-family and multi-family residences.

Based on the total anticipated future residential development of 2,837, this results in a total of 5,842,858 sq. ft. of future residential development, as shown in the table below.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
age 1002222

SECTION IV
tctDEMOGRAPHICS
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 5: Future Residential Development Sq. Ft.

Category Total
Total Residential Units 2,837
Average Sq. Ft. per Unit 2,059
Total Residential Sq. Ft. 5,842,858
D Future Non-Residential Land Uses (2040)
Using employment projections from the SCAG Study cited earlier, DTA determined that the City's non-residential is assumed to grow at an average annualized growth rate of 0.5%.

This growth rate was discussed with City staff and acknowledged that any future growth will be infill development. Based on the EPSF derived above, this translates to the development of approximately 1,212,558 square feet of non-residential development over the build-out period. This includes approximately 590,884 square feet of commercial, 217,193 feet of office, and 404,482 square feet of industrial development.

Table 6: Future Non-Residential Development
- '" • Future Building
Non-Residential Land Use Employees Served Square Feet Commercial 1,280 640 590,884
Office 729 364 217,193
Industrial 449 225 404,482
Total 2,458 1,229 1,212,558
City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study 16 age 108222

SECTION V

METHODOLOGY USED TO
dta CALCULATE FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com

V METHODOLOGY USED TO CALCULATE FEES
There are many methods used in calculating fees, but they are all based on determining the cost of needed improvements and assigning those costs equitably to various types of development. In determining a reasonable nexus for each specific type of public facility, DTA utilized the methodologies described below, depending upon the data and information available from the City and its current infrastructure policies.

A Standards-Based Fee Methodology
The methodology used to establish the Development Impact Fees outlined in this Study for General Facilities,Police, and Parks and Recreation facilities are based on"standards,"where costs are based on existing Level of Service (LOS). This Standards-Based Methodology establishes a generic unit cost for capacity which is then applied to each land use per the existing LOS. The LOS is based on the existing number of applicable units, such as square feet of building space or acres of land or per resident for each facility. This standard is not based on cost but rather on a standard of service. The Standards-Based Methodology ensures that City facilities are appropriately developed and sized so that future residents and employees do not cause a reduced LOS by unduly burdening the infrastructure system, thus leading to decay and deterioration. This methodology provides several advantages, including not needing to know the cost of a specific facility, how much capacity or service is provided by the current system, or having to commit to a specific size of the facility.

B Plan-Based Fee Methodology
The methodology used to establish the Development Impact Fees outlined in this Study for Transportation, Water, Sewer and Storm Drain is based on a "plan," such as a Master Plan of Facilities, Capital Improvement Plan, or General Plan, which identifies a finite set of improvements to be implemented. These Facility Plans generally identify a finite set of facilities needed by the public agency and are developed according to assessments of facilities needs prepared by staff and/or outside consultants and adopted by the public agency's legislative body. Using this plan-based approach, specific costs can be projected and assigned to all land uses planned, often with a specific time period in mind that reflects new development projections. By using population, units, and residential and non- residential square footage numbers, it is possible to assign a cost allocation percentage for both new and existing development. In preparing an impact fee analysis, facilities costs attributed to future development can then be allocated to each land use class in proportion to the demand caused by each type of development.

C Capacity-Based Fee Methodology
Another method of fee assessment used is based on the "capacity" of a service or system, such as a water tank, a sewer plant, or a storm drain. This kind of fee is not dependent on a particular land use plan (i.e., amount or intensity) but rather it is based on a rate or cost per unit of capacity that can be applied to any type of development, as long as the system has adequate capacity. This fee is useful when the costs of the facility or system are unknown at the outset. However, it requires that the capacity used by a particular land use City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study 7 age 104 of 222

SECTION V

METHODOLOGY USED TO
dta CALCULATE FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
type be measurable or estimable and the information to be available. Capacity-based impact fees are assessed based on the demand rate per unit. Although this methodology is not used to calculate any of the fees generated in this Study, the description is provided so that the City understands the various methodologies available for calculating fees.

D Summary of Fee Methodology
In this Fee Study, the Standards-based LOS methodology is used to generate fees for Police, General Facilities, and Parks and Recreation and a Plan-based methodology is used to generate the Transportation, Sewer, Water, and Storm Drain Fees. This is summarized in Table 7 below.

Table 7: Fee Methodology (by Fee Category Type)
Fee Catego Methodolo• :asis of Methodology
General Facilities Existing Standard
Police Standards Existing Standard
Based
Parks and Recreation Adopted Standard
Transportation Needs List
Water Needs List
Plan-Based
Sewer Needs List
Storm Drain Needs List
For Fee calculations using the Plan-Based approach, the City has provided DTA with the list of Future Facilities to be included in the Fee Study (the "Needs List"). For the purposes of the City's DIF program, the Needs List is intended to be the official public document identifying the facilities eligible to be financed, in whole or in part, through the imposition of a DIF on new development within the City. The Needs List is organized by facility element (or type) and includes cost information, as outlined in Table 8 below.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study 18 age 105 of 222

SECTION V

METHODOLOGY USED TO
dta CALCULATE FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 8: Description of Needs List Cost Sections
Column Title Contents Source
The total estimated facility cost, including engineering, Total Cost for Facility design, construction, land acquisition, and equipment (as City applicable).

Offsetting Revenues Share of total offsetting revenues allocated to new and to New and Existing existing development. City Development
Net Cost to City The difference between the total cost and the offsetting Calculated by revenues (column 1 plus column 2). DTA
Percent of Cost Net cost allocated to new development based on new Calculated by Allocated to New development's share of facilities. DTA and the City Development
Net Cost Allocated to The net cost to the City multiplied by the percentage cost Calculated by New Development allocated to new development. DTA Policy Background or Identifies the policy source or rationale for facility need. City General Plan, Objective CIP, City Staff
The facilities included on the Needs List for each Fee (presented in Appendix B)are provided by the City and reflect either the City's goals of maintaining and improving a specific area, or they are part of a more formal policy document, such as a General Plan, Master Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, or other official policy or document etc. Specific estimated facility costs are provided by the City and used as a basis for determining the allocation of revenues between new and existing development. DTA surveyed City staff and comparable development on the required facilities needed to serve new development as a starting point for its fee calculations.

E Allocation of Benefit
E.1 Equivalent Dwelling Units ("EDUs) and Equivalent Benefit Units ("EBUs") The methodologies employed in this Fee Study use EDUs and EBUs as the method of identifying and quantifying benefits of certain facilities and ensuring that an equitable portion of the total facilities costs are allocated to future growth, based on the proportion of need generated by that growth. Specifically, EDUs are generated in the demographic portion of this Fee Study and are used to generate the land use calculations. EDUs are a means of quantifying different land uses in terms of their equivalence to a residential dwelling unit, where equivalence is measured in terms of potential infrastructure use or benefit for each type of public facility. In this Study, EDUs are used as a basis of allocation for General Facilities and Police. In contrast, for Parks and Recreation, Transportation, Water, Sewer, and Storm Drain, EBUs are used to allocate costs to future growth and generate fees. This is explained further in this section and in detail in Appendix A.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
age 106102222

SECTION V

METHODOLOGY USED TO
dta CALCULATE FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 9: Basis of Allocation (by Fee Category Type)
Ira Basis of Allocation of Benefit (EBU Factor) General Facilities Persons Served
Police Persons Served
Parks and Recreation Recreation Hours per Week per Person Transportation PM Peak Hour Trips
Water Water Usage Rates (Gallons per Day)
Sewer Sewer Generation Rates (Gallons per Day)
Storm Drain Stormwater Runoff Coefficients
E.2 Persons Served
For many of the facilities considered in this Fee Study,service population (or Persons Served) will be used to allocate benefits among fee categories. For the purposes of this Fee Study, the Persons Served calculations are based on the number of residents per dwelling unit (i.e., persons per household) and number of employees per 1,000 sq. ft. generated by each land use class. Based on years of performing a variety of fiscal and economic impact studies and with experience in a variety of both public and private sectors, DTA has determined that utilizing a service population, or Persons Served population, comprised of all residents and 50% of employees is common fiscal practice in quantifying the impact of a new development in each service area. This number suggests that a resident generally has twice the fiscal impact of an employee.

E.3 Recreation Hours per Week per Person
This analysis assumes that each employed person living in the City has 3 hours of potential park usage during weekdays (i.e., 1 hour before work, 1 hour during lunch, and one hour after work), and 12 hours per day on weekends. This potential usage amounts to 39 hours per week. In addition, it is also assumed that each non-working person living in the City has 12 hours per day of potential park usage, 7 days a week, or 84 hours per week.

E.4 PM Peak Hour Trips
Transportation Impact Fees were calculated for each of the four (4) land use categories based on the number of PM Peak Hour Trips ("PHTs") generated by each land use. Peak Hour Trips are published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers ("ITE") Publication Trips Generation, 10th Edition. These PM Peak hour Trips define daily trip generation per dwelling unit (for residential units) and daily trip generation per 1,000 building square feet of each category of non-residential development. Per the ITE, a trip or trip end is a single or one-direction person or vehicle movement with either the origin or the destination existing or entering) inside a Study Site. In technical terms, a trip has an origin and a destination at its respective ends (known as trip ends). Each trip end is part of a trip. For trip site generation, the focus is the City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study age 1000222

SECTION V

METHODOLOGY USED TO
dta CALCULATE FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
trips entering and existing a single site. Specifically Peak hour trips are total vehicular trips entering and leaving a development project during the period between 4:00 pm and 6:00 pm which experiences the highest sum of traffic volumes entering or leaving the development. The PM peak hour measurement was used over other measurements such as average trip rates or weekend trips rates because transportation analyses are based on congestion, which is largely a result of more people trying to use the transportation system during the busiest hours, and it is usually the period for which road improvements were designed.

E.5 Water Usage Rate
The water demand factors were calculated for each of the four (4) land use categories based on flow generation rates (i.e., gallon per day per acre) published in the City's Water System Master Plan. Applying the density factors in the General Plan, of 5 dwelling units per acre for single-family (representing the mid-point of the densities published in the General Plan), 20 units per acre for multi-family, and 21,780 sq. ft. per acre (floor area ratio of 0.5), DTA generated gallon per day per unit for residential, and gallon per day per 1,000 sq. ft. for non-residential.

E.6 Sewer Flow Rate
Similar to the water demand factors, sewer generation rates were calculated for each of the four (4) land use categories based on flow generation rates (i.e., gallon per day per acre) published in the City's latest Sewer Master Plan. Again, applying the density factors in the General Plan, of 5 dwelling units per acre for single-family (representing the mid-point of the densities published in the General Plan), 20 units per acre for multi-family, and 21,780 sq. ft. per acre (floor area ratio of 0.5), DTA generated gallon per day per unit for residential, and gallon per day per 1,000 sq. ft. for non-residential.

E.7 Stormwater Runoff Coefficients
The methodology used to allocate drainage costs to future development is relative runoff contribution. The Rational Method for computing runoff rates was used in the form of Q = C x I x A where "Q" is equal to runoff volume, "C" is the ratio of impervious area to total area studied, "I" is rainfall intensity, and "A" is Area, in acres of the City. A runoff factor, "C" of 1.00, indicates a totally impervious site, where every drop of rain would find its way to the public streets as run-off. Only the relative contribution of runoff between land uses needs to be considered. Thus, the "unit runoff", or runoff per storm intensity (Q/I) can be computed using only the runoff factor and acreage data. To estimate the acreage for purposes of applying the runoff factor, again density factors in the General Plan, of 5 dwelling units per acre for single-family (representing the mid-point of the densities published in the General Plan), 20 units per acre for multi-family, and 21,780 sq. ft. per acre (floor area ratio of

0.5), DTA generated gallon per day per unit for residential, and gallon per day per 1,000 sq. ft. for non-residential.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study 21 age 108 o 222

SECTION V

METHODOLOGY USED TO
tct CALCULATE FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
The table below summarizes the EBUs and associated EDUs for each Fee category.

Table 10: EDUs
Land Use EBU/EDU Factor Residential Commercial Office Industrial Persons Served per Res 2.68 1.08 1.68 0.56
General Facilities Unit/per 1,000 Non-Res Sq. Ft.

0.40 Persons Served per Res 2.68 1.08 1.68 0.56 Police Unit/per 1,000 Non-Res Sq. Ft.

EDU 1.00 0.40 nii 0 22ll
Recreation Hours per Week 145 -
Parks and Recreation per Person per Res Unit
EDU 1.00
Transportation PM Peak Hour Trips per Res 0.99 2.85 1.71 0.52 Unit/per 1,000 Non-Res Sq.Ft
Water Gallons per Day per Res 474 115 161 92 Unit/per 1,000 Non-Res Sq.Ft
Sewer Gallons per Day per Res 241 68.9 68.9 68.9 Unit/per 1,000 Non-Res Sq.Ft
Storm Drain Runoff Coefficient per 0.52 0.95 0.90 0.85 Developed Acre
Finally,a summary of the EDUs/EBUs applied in the Fee Study is presented in the table below.

Table 11: EBUs
Facility Type EBU/EDU EBU/EDU Existing Projected Total General Facilities Persons Served EDU 40,301 3,755 44,056 Police Persons Served EDU 40,301 3,755 44,056 Parks and Rec. Recreation Hours per Week EDU - - - Transportation PM Peak Hour Trips EBU 50,581 4,526 55,081 Water Water Usage Rate (GPD) EBU 15,208,348 1,823,595 17,031,942 Sewer Sewer Generation Rate (GPD) EBU 7,732,514 1,088,787 8,821,301 Storm Drain Total Unit Runoff EBU 2,839 267 3,106 The following sections present the reasonable relationship of benefit, impact, and proportionality tests for each fee element (i.e., General facilities, Police facilities, Parks and Recreation facilities, Transportation facilities, Sewer and Water facilities, and Storm Drain facilities,as well as the analysis undertaken to apportion costs for each type of facility. More detailed fee calculation worksheets for each type of facility are included in Appendix A.

City of Upland September 13,2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study age 10?og22

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com

VI CALCULATION OF FEES
A General Facilities
A.1 General Facilities (Nexus Requirement AB 1600) The General Facilities element includes the facilities necessary to provide basic governmental services and public facilities maintenance services, exclusive of public safety, throughout the City. Notably, all furniture,fixtures, and equipment have been consolidated into an integrated unit that includes all department equipment, such as furniture modules, computer hardware and other equipment, to simplify the representation of the data. The proposed DIF discussed in this section, if adopted, would be imposed, collected, and spent on the acquisition of land, construction of new public buildings, and expansion of existing City facilities to accommodate new growth.

Table 12 below illustrates how the General Facilities Fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of the fee, type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and proportionality requirements.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 23
age 110 of222

SECTION VI
dtctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 12: General Facilities Element
AB 1600 Code Description Justification
Section
Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee. construct general facilities that will mitigate the impacts of new residential and non-residential
development to the City's general facilities.

Construction and replacement of new city hall
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the Fee buildings, supporting general facilities,public works is to be put. office,libraries, garage facilities,vehicles, equipment and parking facilities.

New residential and non-residential development in
Demonstrate how there is a the City will generate additional residents and reasonable relationship between employees, thus increasing the need for general 66001(a)(3) the Fee's use and type of facilities and services. The equipment,vehicles, development project on which buildings and parking used to provide these services the Fee is imposed. will have to be expanded, constructed, or purchased to meet this increased demand and maintain the
current level of service to the City.

The additional residents and employees from the new
development will impact demand for general
Demonstrate how there is a administration facilities. New city hall buildings, reasonable relationship between supporting government administration facilities, 66001(a)(4) the need for the public facilities public works office,libraries, garage facilities,vehicles, and type of development project equipment and parking facilities are needed to on which the Fee is imposed. mitigate the impacts of the additional residents and employees. If additional general facilities are not
constructed,then overall general services provided to
the residents and employees in the City will suffer.

The general facilities fee is based on the cost to
Demonstrate how there is a provide new city hall buildings,supporting reasonable relationship between government administration facilities,public works 66001(b) the amount of the Fee and cost of office,libraries, garage facilities, equipment,vehicles, the public facility. field operations buildings, and parking facilities. The fee is based on the cost to provide new materials at
the same levels as provided to existing residents.

Table 13 below identifies the current inventory for General Facilities. Notably, all furniture, fixtures, and equipment have been consolidated into one (1) integrated unit that includes all department equipment, such as furniture modules and other equipment, to simplify the representation of the data.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study age 11 Ai22

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 13: General Facilities Inventory as of 2024
Buildings (Square Feet) 74,836
Land (Acres) 17.1
Vehicles (Number of Vehicles) 14.0
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (Integrated Unit) 1.0 A.2 Calculation Methodology
The General Facilities Fee was calculated using the Standards-Based Methodology discussed in Section V. For future development to receive the same LOS as exists today, the City will need to acquire or construct additional public building facilities, vehicles, and equipment. Assuming the City's growth through 2040, the City will need to acquire or construct additional infrastructure in order to continue to maintain the existing LOS.

A.3 Level of Service
As stated earlier in Section III,in September of 2021 the Governor of California signed AB 602 which provides new statewide requirements for local jurisdictions seeking to impose development impact fees on development projects. Among these new requirements is that when applicable, a nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary. The level of service used to calculate the General Facilities Impact fees in this section is the existing level of service as defined as the relationship between the replacement cost of General Facilities (as described in this section) and the City's existing persons served population as discussed in Section IV. The current LOS is calculated by dividing the total inventory of a facility type, as noted above, by the existing number of Persons Served within the City. As indicated below, the existing level of service for every 1,000 persons served is 804 square feet of building space. The same LOS methodology applies to land, vehicles and integrated equipment and is presented below in Table 14.

Table 14: General Facilities Current LOS as of 2024
Facility Type Facility Units per
II 1,000 Persons Served
Buildings (Square Feet) 804
Land (Acres) 0.183
Vehicles (Number of Vehicles) 0.150
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (Integrated Unit) 0.011 City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study
age 11?oJ222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
The facility units generated in the table above are used to determine future Public Buildings Facility Units funded by new development in 2040 and are presented below in Table 15. The mathematics behind these calculations are presented in detail in Appendix A.

Table 15: Future General Facilities in 2040
Number of Facility
Facility Type Units Funded by
New Development
Buildings (Square Feet) 7,094
Land (Acres) 1.617
Vehicles (Number of Vehicles) 1.327
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (Integrated Unit) 0.095 Notably, it's important to note that construction costs and acquisition costs are dependent on the real estate market at the time of development. Location, demand for land, encumbrances, comparable acquisitions, and construction costs are a few of the many variables that play into appraisals and negotiations. Each facility will have its own location and improvement requirements. However, DTA was able to determine general cost estimates, on a per square foot basis, for General facilities, based on historical and current data available and input from the City. These cost estimates were then applied to the future facility units.

Table 16: General Facilities Total Costs in 2040 1
acility Units
� st Pe "-
Facility Cost
Facility Type Funded by New Unit for Future
ril
Development Developmen
Buildings (Square Feet) 7,094 $554 $3,933,133 Land (Acres) 1.62 $1,097,268 $1,774,379
Vehicles (Number) 1.33 $33,475 $44,422 Equipment (Integrated Unit) 0.09 $7,483,600 $709,358 Offsetting Revenue $523,365
Total Facilities Cost $5,937,927
Total Future EDUs) 3,755
Cost per EDU $1,581
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study ?fi222 age 11

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
A.4 Offsetting Revenues
According to the City Staff there are offsetting revenues that need to be considered in the General Facilities calculation total. As of the end of June 2024, the City had $523,365 in its current General Facilities account that needed to be subtracted from the facilities cost total as indicated in Table 16 above.

A.5 General Facilities Fee Calculations
Once the total future facility cost has been determined, the maximum calculated fee for each land use category can be generated. This is done by dividing the total future facility cost by the projected General Facilities EDUs to generate a per EDU rate, which equals $1,581 per EDU as shown above. As discussed in Section III, per the directive of AB 602, for housing development projects, nexus studies adopted after July 1, 2022, will no longer be on a per unit basis, but will be calculated based on square footage of proposed units of the development, unless the local agency demonstrates that another metric is more appropriate.

The Fee per sq. ft. was determined by first multiplying the cost per EDU of $1,581 by the total number of residential EDUs (2,837), resulting in the total amount funded from residential property of $4,486,098. This result was then divided by the total anticipated residential square feet of 5,842,858 to generate the Fee per square foot of $0.77. Details of this calculation are shown in the table below.

Table 17: Residential General Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1
Land Use Typ EDUs per Unit Humber of Calculation Total EDUs Projected Units
Residential 1.00 2,837 2,837
[a] 2,837
Total Cost per EDU (b] $1,581
Total Fees [c] = [a] x [b] $4,486,098
Total Residential Sq. Ft. Ed] 5,842,858
Total Cost per Residential Sq. Ft. [e] = [c]/[d] $0.77 Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

Similarly, the Fee per 1,000 sq. ft. was determined by multiplying the cost per EDU of $1,581 by the total number of non-residential EDUs applicable with each land use type.The table below summarizes the Fee amounts per 1,000 sq. ft. and the total cost financed by Fees imposed on non-residential land uses.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study
age 11?07222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 18: Non-Residential General Facilities Costs Financed by Fee Summary per Land Use Category 1
Land Use Type EDUs per 1,000 Number of
1 Fee per 1,000 projected Costs Financed by Non-Res. Sq. Ft. Non-Res. SF. Non-Res. SF Fees
[a] [b] = [a] x EDU [c] [d] = [c] x [b]
Commercial 0.81 $1,279 590,884 $755,899 Office 1.25 $1,982 217,193 $430,484
Industrial 0.42 $656 404,482 $265,446 Total $1,451,829
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

A.6 Proposed fees
A summary of the proposed General Facilities Fee is presented in the table below.

Table 19: General Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 'esidential Fe- Number o
Land Use per Sq. Ft./per Projected Res Costs Financed by Type 1,000 Non-Res. Sq. Ft. and Non- Fees
Sq. Ft. Res. Sq. Ft
Residential $0.77 5,842,858 $4,486,098
Commercial $1,279 590,884 $755,899
Office $1,982 217,193 $430,484
Industrial $656 404,482 $265,446
Total $5,937,927
A.7 Administrative Fee
There is also an Administrative portion of the DIF which is an administrative fee that funds the City's costs of implementing and collecting the DIFs, including but not limited to calculation and collection of the fees, revenue and cost accounting of the fees collected, fee justification analysis, and preparation of any mandated reports.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 2 g
age 115 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 20a: General Facilities Fee Summary with 2.0%Administrative Fee Land Use Calculated Fees
Single-Family (Per Sq. ft.) $0.78
Multi-Family (Per Sq. ft.) $0.78
Commercial (Per 1,000 SF) $1,305
Office (Per 1,000 SF) $2,022
Industrial (Per 1,000) $669
A.8 DIF Annual Cost Escalation Recommendations
The fees recommended within this Fee Study reflect the maximum justifiable fee level that may be imposed on new development under the statutory requirements of Government Code Section 66000 et. seq. As the DIFs proposed in this Fee Study are based on Facilities costs in 2024 dollars, it is appropriate for the City to apply an annual escalator to these fee levels to account for inflation in acquisition and construction costs. DTA further recommends that, after adoption, the above impact fees be reviewed each year and include a provision for an annual adjustment based on the current CCCI. This construction cost index is based upon the BCI cost indices average for Los Angeles as produced by ENR.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 2
age 116 0222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
B Police
B.1 Police Facilities (Nexus Requirement AB 1600)
The Police Facilities element includes those facilities used by the City Police Department to maintain police services. The fees collected from the new development will be used exclusively for Police Department purposes. All new development within the City contributes to the direct and cumulative impacts of development on Police Department facilities and creates the need for new facilities to accommodate growth. The facilities, equipment, and vehicles used to provide these services will have to be purchased or replaced to meet this increased demand.

Thus, a reasonable relationship exists between the need for Police Facilities and impact of residential and non-residential development.

Table 20 below illustrates how the police fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of the fee, type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and proportionality requirements.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study A2222 age 11

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 21: Police Facilities Element
AB 1600 Code
Section Description stification
Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
acquire vehicles,property and equipment, and
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee. additional facilities that will mitigate the impacts of new residential and non-residential development to
the City's Police facilities.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the Fee Acquisition of additional police headquarters,animal is to be put. shelter,police vehicles,property and equipment.

New residential and non-residential development in
Demonstrate how there is a the City will generate additional residents and reasonable relationship between employees in the City, thus increasing the need for 66001(a)(3) the Fee's use and type of trained police personnel. Buildings,vehicles, development project on which property and equipment used to provide these the Fee is imposed. services will have to be purchased to meet this increased demand and maintain the same level of
service to the City.

The additional residents and employees from new
Demonstrate how there is a development will impact the demand for police reasonable relationship between vehicles,property and equipment. New Police 66001(a)(4) the need for the public facilities headquarters, animal shelter,vehicles and equipment and type of development project are needed to mitigate the impacts of the additional on which the Fee is imposed. residents and employees. If additional buildings, vehicles and equipment are not acquired,then
overall public safety in the City will suffer.

Demonstrate how there is a The police fee is based on the cost to provide new reasonable relationship between buildings,vehicles,property and equipment, and 66001(b) additional facilities.The fee is based on the cost to the amount of the Fee and cost provide new materials at the same levels as provided of the public facility. to existing residents.

The table below identifies the current inventory for Police facilities. Notably, all furniture, fixtures, and equipment have been consolidated into one integrated unit that includes all department equipment, such as furniture modules and other equipment, to simplify the representation of the data.

Table 22: Police Facilities Inventory as of 2024
Facility Quantity
Buildings (Square Feet) 41,964
Land (Acres) 6
Vehicles (Number of Vehicles) 83
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (One Integrated Unit) 1 City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study �Z
age 118 0i222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
B.2 Calculation Methodology
The Police Facilities fee was calculated using the Standards-Based Methodology discussed in Section V. For future development to receive the same LOS as exists today, the City will need to acquire or construct additional Police facilities, vehicles and equipment. Assuming the City's growth generally over the next 16 years, the City will need to acquire or construct additional infrastructure in order to continue to maintain the existing LOS.

B.3 Level of Service
As stated earlier in Section III,in September of 2021 the Governor of California signed AB 602 which provides new statewide requirements for local jurisdictions seeking to impose development impact fees on development projects. Among these new requirements is that when applicable, a nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary. The level of service used to calculate the Police Facilities Impact fees in this section is the existing level of service as defined as the relationship between the replacement cost of Police Facilities (as described in this section) and the City's existing persons served population as discussed in Section IV. The current LOS is calculated by dividing the total inventory of a facility type, as noted above, by the existing number of Persons Served within the City. As indicated below, the existing level of service for every 1,000 persons served is 451 square feet of building space. The same LOS methodology applies to land, vehicles and integrated equipment and is presented below in Table 22.

Table 23: Police Facilities Current LOS as of 2024
Facility Units per
cility Type ,000 Persons
Served
Buildings (Square Feet) 451
Land (Acres) 0.062
Vehicles (Number of Vehicles) 0.892
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (Integrated Unit) 0.011 The facility units generated in the table above are used to determine future Police Facility Units (buildings, land,vehicles, and equipment) funded by new development in 2040. This is presented below in Table 23. The mathematics behind these calculations are presented in detail in Appendix A.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study �Z 2 age 119 0i222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 24: Police Future Facilities in 2040
Number of Facility
Facility Type Units Funded by
New Development
Buildings (Square Feet) 3,978
Land (Acres) 0.55
Vehicles (Number of Vehicles) 7.87
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (Integrated Unit) 0.09 Notably,it's important to note that construction and acquisition costs are dependent on the real estate market at the time of development. Location, demand for land, encumbrances, comparable acquisitions, and construction costs are a few of the many variables that play into appraisals and negotiations. Each facility will have its own location and improvement requirements. However, DTA determined general cost estimates, on a per square foot basis, for Police Facilities,based on historical and current data available. It's also important to note that building costs for public safety facilities are somewhat higher than conventional structures as they must be built to a higher standard and assume a higher level of use (24-hour use). These cost estimates were then applied to the future facility units. Please see Table 24 below for additional detail regarding the costs for Police facilities.

Table 25: Police Total Facilities Costs in 2040 1
Facility Units ost P Total Facility Cost
Facility ' Funded by New Unit for Future Develo•ment Develo•ment
Buildings (Square Feet) 3,978 $593 $2,360,339 Land (Acres) 0.550 $1,097,268 $603,247 Vehicles (Number) 7.867 $45,292 $356,331
Equipment (Integrated Unit) 0.095 $9,788,004 $927,788 Offsetting Revenue $964,698
Total Facilities Cost $3,283,007
Total Future EDUs 3,755
Cost per EDU $874
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

B.4 Offsetting Revenues
According to the City Staff there are offsetting revenues that need to be considered in the Police Facilities calculation total. As of the end of June 2024, the City had $964,698 in its current Police Facilities account that needed to be subtracted from the facilities cost total as indicated in Table 24 above.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study �Z 3 age 120 of 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
B.5 Police Facilities Fee Calculation
Once the total future facility cost has been determined, the maximum calculated fee for each land use category can be generated. This is done by dividing the total future facility cost by the projected Police Facilities EDUs to generate a per EDU rate, which equals $878 per EDU as shown above. As discussed in Section II, per the directive of AB 602, for housing development projects, nexus studies adopted after July 1, 2022, will no longer be on a per unit basis, but will be calculated based on the square footage of proposed units of the development,unless the local agency demonstrates that another metric is more appropriate.

Again, the Fee per Sq. Ft. was determined by first multiplying the cost per EDU of $874 by the total number of residential EDUs (2,837), resulting in the total amount funded from residential property of $2,480,308 million. This result was then divided by the total anticipated residential 5,842,858 square feet to generate the Fee per square foot of $0.42. Details of this calculation are shown in the table below.

Table 26: Residential Police Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1 Land Use Type it EDUs per Unit Number of 1 Calculation Total EDUs Projected Units
Residential 1.00 2,837 2,837
[a] 2,837
Total Cost per EDU fib] $874
Total Fees [c] = [a] x [b] $2,480,308
Total Residential Sq. Ft. [d] 5,842,858
Total Cost per Residential Sq. Ft. I [e] = [c]/[d] $0.42 Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

Similarly, the Fee per 1,000 sq. ft. was determined by multiplying the cost per EDU of $874 by the total number of non-residential EDUs applicable with each land use type.

The table below summarizes the Fee amounts per 1,000 sq. ft. and the total cost financed by Fees imposed on non-residential land uses.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 4 Z
age 121 of 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 27: Non-Residential Police Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1
AN-
EDUs per Number o
Land Use Type Non-Res. Number of Projected Costs Finance Non-Res. SF -- by Fees
1Proj:cted
on-Res.s. Sq. Ft
[a] [b]= [a] x EDU [c] [e] = [c] x [b]
Commercial 0.81 $707 590,884 $417,927 Office 1.25 $1,096 217,193 $238,009
Industrial 0.42 $363 404,482 $146,762
Total $802,698
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

B.6 Proposed fees
A summary of the proposed Police fees is presented in Table 27 below.

Table 28: Police Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category Residential Fee Number of
Land Use per Sq. Ft./per Projected Res Costs Financed Type 1,000 Non-Res. Sq. Ft./Non-Res. Fees
Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft
Residential $0.42 5,842,858 $2,480,308
Commercial $707 590,884 $417,927
Office $1,096 217,193 $238,009
Industrial $363 404,482 $146,762
Total $3,283,007
B.7 Administrative Fee
There is also an Administrative portion of the DIF which is an administrative fee that funds the City's costs of implementing and collecting the DIFs, including but not limited to calculation and collection of the fees, revenue and cost accounting of the fees collected, fee justification analysis, and preparation of any mandated reports.

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 27a: Police Fee Summary with 2.0% Administrative Fee se Calculated e
Single Family (Per Sq. ft.) $0.43
Multi Family (Per Sq. ft.) $0.43
Commercial (Per 1,000 SF) $721
Office (Per 1,000 SF) $1,118
Industrial (Per 1,000) $370
B.8 DIF Annual Cost Escalation Recommendations
The fees recommended within this Fee Study reflect the maximum justifiable fee level that may be imposed on new development under the statutory requirements of Government Code Section 66000 et. seq. As the DIFs proposed in this Fee Study are based on Facilities costs in 2024 dollars, it is appropriate for the City to apply an annual escalator to these fee levels to account for inflation in acquisition and construction costs. DTA further recommends that, after adoption, the above impact fees be reviewed each year and include a provision for an annual adjustment based on the current CCCI. This construction cost index is based upon the BCI cost indices average for Los Angeles as produced by ENR.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study Z 6 age 123 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
C Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fees
C.1 Parks and Recreation Development Facilities Fees (Nexus Requirement AB 1600)
The Parks and Recreation Development Facilities element will serve the residents of Upland by providing facilities for recreation while enhancing the community's appeal and quality of life. The type of facilities described in this section include Neighborhood Parks and Community Parks. The Fee Study includes a component for the development of new park and recreation facilities to serve new residential development for the City through 2040. Covered in this fee section are park improvements, land acquisition, and parks and recreation renovation. In contrast to the fees covered earlier in this Study, non-residential development will be excluded from the fee calculation.

According to the City's General Plan, in addition to improving the overall quality of life for residents, excellent park and recreation programs are important for the well- being of a city's business community. Not only do parks make the community more attractive to residents (providing a stronger market base for local businesses), but they can also directly influence a city's ability to enhance its fiscal base by attracting commercial and industrial businesses.

Table 28 below illustrates how the Parks and Recreation Fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of the Fee, type of development funded or partially funded by the Fee revenue, reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and proportionality requirements.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study
7 age 124 oi 222

SECTION VI
dtct / CALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 29: Parks and Recreation Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
acquire land and construct parks and recreation
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee. facilities,senior centers,trail facilities,vehicles and equipment that will mitigate the impacts of new
residential development to the City's Parks and
recreation facilities.

Identify the use to which the Fee Acquisition of land and development of parks and 66001(a)(2) is to be put. recreation facilities, the construction of senior centers and vehicles and equipment.

New residential development in the City will generate
Demonstrate how there is a additional residents,thereby increasing the need for reasonable relationship between parks and recreational facilities. Park and recreational 66001(a)(3) the Fee's use and type of facilities and community centers, along with vehicles development project on which and equipment used to provide these services will the Fee is imposed. have to be expanded or constructed to meet this increased demand and maintain the same level of
service to the City.

The additional residents from new development will
Demonstrate how there is a impact demand for parks and recreational facilities. reasonable relationship between New parks and recreational facilities and senior 66001(a)(4) the need for the public facilities centers are needed to mitigate the impacts of the and type of development project additional residents. If additional park and on which the Fee is imposed. recreational facilities are not constructed,then the level of service will decline and the overall quality of life for residents in the City will suffer.

Demonstrate how there is a The parks and recreation facilities fee is based on the reasonable relationship between cost to provide park and recreational facilities,land, 66001(b) the amount of the Fee and cost vehicles and equipment and community centers.The of the public facility. fee is based on the cost to provide new materials at the same levels as provided to existing residents.

C.2 Calculation Methodology
Park development impact fees in this study have been calculated utilizing the "Standards-Based" methodology introduced in section V. According to the General Plan Update, Final Program Environmental Impact Report, Planning Documents Project dated September 2015 page 5.20-4, the City has established a parkland-to- population requirement of 3.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 Persons. The City currently has 135.46 acres of parkland as shown in the table below.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 8 age 125-of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 30: Upland Parks Land Inventory
Park Facility Acres
Baldy View Dog Park 4.91
Cabrillo Park 19.69
Citrus Park 5.88
Fern Reservoir Park 0.9
Greenbelt Park 14.91
Magnolia Park 1.97
McCarthy Park 5.22
Memorial Park 46.96
Olivedale Park 6.37
San Antonio Park 14.4
Sierra Vista Park 6.85
8th Street Reservoir Park 5.2
13th Street Reservoir Park 2.2
Total 135.46
Source: City of Upland.

The methodology of this Fee Study involves calculating the park facilities demand generated by each residential unit. Specifically, this demand is expressed in terms of potential hours of parks and open space usage associated with the new residents created by future development.

Using the City's Park Standard of 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents and employing the concept of an "Equivalent Benefit Unit" ("EBU"), DTA links the demand for park facilities (per residential dwelling unit for each land use type) to the acreage of park land needed to be developed and improved to satisfy this level of demand. By adding the specified acreage of parks and open space facilities based on the demand resulting from new development, the City can meet the requirements of its Future Park Standard.

DTA calculated the estimated costs of parkland construction and improvements, net of park grants/funding the City has already received. Costs to improve parkland may include construction and installation costs for park improvements or equipment, as well as design, engineering, and project management costs.

To determine a fair and accurate land acquisition cost, DTA utilized the CoStar Real Estate Software Platform and created a comparable land inventory of 18 undeveloped properties ranging from 1.0 acres to 15.0 acres in and around the City.

Each of the properties in the inventory were sold between 2015 and 2022 and an average of their sales price was determined. Based on this inventory, DTA used the average of$1,097,268 per acre as an estimated cost of land acquisition. An inventory listing the subject properties is presented in Appendix B.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study
age 126 of 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
DTA calculated the estimated costs of parks and recreation construction and improvements, net of park grants/funding the City has already received. Costs to improve parks and recreation may include construction and installation costs for improvements or equipment, as well as design, engineering, and project management costs. In working with City staff, DTA determined that the cost for Parks and Recreation Development was $140,822 per acre. Combined, the cost per acre, including land and development, is $1,238,090 per acre as shown below.

Table 31: Parks and Recreation Total Costs by Acres
Category I = Cost per Acre
Land Acquisition $1,097,268
Park Development $140,822
Total Cost per Acre $1,238,090
Once the costs were calculated, DTA then proceeded to allocate the costs among the various land use types according to the total demand generated by each category of new development. Total Park facilities demand for each land use type is given by the EBUs associated with the land use type, multiplied by the projected number of dwelling units or thousand square feet of new development through 2040 for the category.

In this Fee Study, demand for park and recreation facilities is quantified in terms of hours per week of potential park facilities usage. The hours per week of potential benefit are calculated per individual (working/non-working resident) and, by extension, per unit of development (i.e., residential dwelling unit). Detailed calculations of potential park facilities usage hours, and the conversion of hours to equivalent Benefit Units ("EBUs") for each land use class.

C.3 Level of Service (LOS)
As stated earlier in Section III,in September of 2021 the Governor of California signed AB 602 which provides new statewide requirements for local jurisdictions seeking to impose development impact fees on development projects. Among these new requirements is that when applicable, a nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary. As indicated in the section above, per the General Plan the City has established a parkland-to- population requirement of 3.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 Persons. This is the level of service to be maintained in compliance with AB 602. Therefore, it is proposed that there will be no increase in the level of service.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 40
age 127 or 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
C.4 Calculations and Assumptions
Impact fee calculation methods are based on determining the cost of needed improvements and assigning those costs equitably to various types of development.

Accordingly, each of the fee calculations in this Fee Study employs the concept of an EBU, discussed in Section V, to quantify benefit for each land use (i.e., single-family, and multi-family residential).

For purposes of the Fee, EBUs are calculated based on the potential recreation hours generated by each land use class. This analysis assumes that each employed person living in the City has 3 hours of potential park usage during weekdays (i.e., 1 hour before work, one hour during lunch, and one hour after work), and 12 hours per day on weekends: This potential usage amounts to 39 hours per week. In addition, it is assumed that each non-working person living in the City has 12 hours per day of potential park usage, 7 days a week, or 84 hours per week.

The rationale behind the calculation of residential demand per dwelling unit is as follows. According to the latest U.S. Census Bureau, approximately 66.3% of the population of the City is in the civilian labor force. Next, the park facilities demand (i.e., the EBUs) are converted to EDUs in order to quantify the level of benefit in proportion to a single-family residential dwelling unit, such that the ratio of EDUs per single-family unit is 1.0. Therefore, since on a weekly basis there are 145 hours of park demand per residential unit, one EDU is equal to 145 hours. The calculations for this are presented in detail in Appendix A at the end of this Study.

Table 32: Parks and Recreation Facilities Demand per Unit and Use Ave. Household Weekly Hours
ategories Size per Unit Demand per Unit DUs per Unit (EBUs)
Residential 2.68 145 1.0
A summary of park and recreation facilities demand metrics is provided in Table 31 above. In this table, the EDUs per unit used throughout the rest of this analysis are highlighted in gray.

Multiplying the EDUs per dwelling unit by the number of units of new development projected over the build-out period yields the total number of EDUs generated by new development, as presented in Table 32 below.

Table 33: Total Parks and Recreation Facilities Created by New Development and Use EDUs per Unit New Developme ,tal EDUs
Categories per Unit
Residential ■ 2,837 [ 2,837
Total 2,837
City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 41,
age 128 or 22

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Per the City's General Plan, the City established a standard of 3.00 acres per 1,000 residents, i.e., 0.003 acres per resident, which the City intends to use as its park standard for future development ("Future Park Standard") to satisfy the demand created by new development. Based on the population growth projections, new development will generate an additional 7,594 residents.Therefore,the City requires a total of 22.28 acres (7,594 residents multiplied by 0.003 acres per resident) to maintain the current level of service
Table 34: Total Acres to Meet Future Park Standard
Land Use Park Acres per 1,000 Projected Population Total Acres Categories Residents 1 Growth Required 2 Residential 0.003 7,594 22.78
Total 7,594 22.78
Notes:

1. Acres are calculated out and rounded to 3 decimal places.

2. Totals are subject to rounding error.

C.5 Fee Calculation
After determining that the City requires a total of 22.78 acres of new park and recreation facilities to meet the Future Park Standard and satisfy the demand created by new development, DTA proceeded to calculate the amount of funding needed to pay for the required acreage of new facilities. Table 34, below, presents the total costs of new parks and recreation facilities (i.e., development and construction costs which equal$27,513,799 million in projected facility expenditures necessary to meet the Future Park Standard for new development).

Notably, 100% of the park and recreation facilities costs will be allocated to new development as such facilities would satisfy the Future Park Standard and do not reflect any unmet needs or deficiencies pertaining to existing development.

Table 35: Frinancing Required to Meet Future Parks and Recreation Standards 1 Facility Type umber of Acr; ost per Acre acilities Cost Required
Parks Development Facilities 22.78 $1,238,090 $28,205,494 Less: Offsetting Revenues $691,695
Net Cost of Facilities $27,513,799
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 422
age 129or z22

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
C.6 Offsetting Revenues
According to the City Staff there are offsetting revenues that need to be considered in the Park Facilities calculation total. As of the end of June 2024, the City had $691,695 in its current Park Facilities account that needed to be subtracted from the facilities cost total as indicated in Table 34 above.

C.7 Park Facilities Fee Calculations
Based on data presented in Table 35 below the total number of EDUs resulting from new development is 2,837. Dividing the net cost of facilities (i.e., the revenues to be generated by the park fee program) over the 2,837 EDUs yields an allocation cost of $9,698 per EDU, as shown below.

Table 36: Cost Allocation per EBU 1
-ercentage Allocated to Total Cost Allocate
ew Development to New Developm= Cost per EDUs
$27,513,799 2,837 $9,698
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

As discussed in Section III, per the directive of AB 602, for housing development projects, nexus studies adopted after July 1, 2022, will no longer be on a per unit basis, but will be calculated based on square footage of proposed units of the development, unless the local agency demonstrates that another metric is more appropriate.

To determine the Fee per sq. ft., the cost allocated to new development $27,513,799 was divided by the total anticipated residential square feet (5,842,858) and resulted in a Fee for Park facilities of $4.71 per square foot. Details of this calculation are shown in the tables below.

Table 37: Parks and Recreation Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1 nd Use Type EDUs per Unit Number of Calculatio Total EDUs Projected Units
Residential 1.00 2,837 2,837
Total Residential 2,837 [a] 2,837
Total Cost per EDU fb] $9,698
Total Fees [c] = [a] x [b] $27,513,799
Total Residential Sq. Ft. [d] 5,842,858
Total Cost per Residential Sq. Ft. [el = [c]/[d] $4.71 Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 43
age 130 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
C.8 Proposed Fees
The proposed Park Fee amounts are summarized in Table 37 below.

Table 38: Cost Allocation by Land Use Type 1
Land Use EBU's per Unit Cost Allocation New Development in ' Cost Financed % Cos Categories per Sq. Ft. Units inanced
II Residential 1.00 $4.71 2,837 $27,513,799 100.0% Total $27,513,799 100.0%
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

C.9 Administrative Fee
There is also an Administrative portion of the DIF which is an administrative fee that funds the City's costs of implementing and collecting the DIFs, including but not limited to calculation and collection of the fees, revenue and cost accounting of the fees collected, fee justification analysis, and preparation of any mandated reports.

Per the City's request, the administrative component of the DIF is calculated at 2% of the total impact fees collected in addition to the fees charged to new development, which is a customary industry standard
Table 37a: Parks Fee Summary with 2.0% Administrative Fee Single Family (Per Sq. ft.) $4.80
Multi-Family (Per Sq. ft.) $4.80
C.10 DIF Annual Cost Escalation Recommendations
The fees recommended within this Fee Study reflect the maximum justifiable fee level that may be imposed on new development under the statutory requirements of Government Code Section 66000 et. seq. As the DIFs proposed in this Fee Study are based on Facilities costs in 2024 dollars, it is appropriate for the City to apply an annual escalator to these fee levels to account for inflation in acquisition and construction costs. DTA further recommends that, after adoption, the above impact fees be reviewed each year and include a provision for an annual adjustment based on the current CCCI. This construction cost index is based upon the BCI cost indices average for Los Angeles as produced by ENR.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 44
age 131 of 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
As the DIFs proposed in this Fee Study are based on Facilities costs in 2024 dollars, it is appropriate for the City to apply an annual escalator to these fee levels to account for inflation in acquisition and construction costs. DTA further recommends that, after adoption, the above impact fees be reviewed each year and include a provision for an annual adjustment based on the current CCCI. This construction cost index is based upon the BCI cost indices average for Los Angeles as produced by ENR.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 45
age 132 or 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
D Transportation
D.1 Transportation Facilities (Nexus Requirement AB 1600) The City's goal is to improve the streets on a prioritized list over the build-out horizon. Improvements for each street will focus on interchange improvements, widening lanes and ramps, traffic signal replacement, and Uninterruptible Power Supplies (UPS)installation. This additional infrastructure support is necessary to provide safe and efficient vehicular access throughout the City. The proposed DIF is to help meet the transportation demand of new development through 2040. The City identified the need for the transportation infrastructure and equipment, as shown described in Table 38 below.

The DIF will provide a source of revenue to the City to allow for the acquisition, installation, and construction of needed transportation facilities, which in turn will both preserve the quality of life in the City and protect the health, safety, and welfare of the existing and future residents and employees.

The table below illustrates how the transportation fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of fees, type of development funded or partially funded by the Fee revenue, reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and proportionality requirements
City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study �I 6 age 133 or 222

SECTION VI
dtctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 39: Transportation Facilities Nexus Requirement
AB 1600 Code
Section Description stification
Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
construct various transportation projects including
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee. interchange improvements,on/off ramps,traffic signals, and other infrastructure that will mitigate the impacts of new development on the City's
transportation system.

Identify the use to which the Fee Fund or partially fund the construction of interchange 66001(a)(2) improvements,on/off ramps,traffic signals, and other is to be put. infrastructure projects within the City limits.

New residential and non-residential development will
generate additional traffic on City streets. The Fee
Demonstrate how there is a revenue will be used to construct new transportation reasonable relationship between projects upon which new residents and employees 66001(a)(3) the e's use and type of will travel. A Fee imposed on new residential and development project on which non-residential development is a reasonable method the fee is imposed. for mitigating the impacts of such new development and any resulting increase in LOS above and beyond
the current LOS that is required to meet the plan
approved by the City.

The additional traffic volumes generated by new
development will impact current levels of congestion.

Demonstrate how there is a New interchange improvements, on/off ramps, traffic reasonable relationship between signals, and other infrastructure are needed to 66001(a)(4) the need for the public facilities mitigate the impacts of the increased traffic volumes. and type of development project If the proposed projects are not constructed in on which the Fee is imposed. concert with new development,the City's transportation system will experience higher traffic
volumes and increase the level of congestion to a
condition well below City standards.

Project costs are allocated to new development based
Demonstrate how there is a on the percentage of traffic volume generated by new 66001(b) reasonable relationship between development to the total traffic volume at build-out. the amount of the Fee and cost of The specific fee imposed on the various land uses are the public facility. based on the relative trip generation rate as compared to a residential unit (baseline rate or EDU factor).

Identification of the facilities to be financed is a critical component of any development impact fee program. In the broadest sense, the purpose of impact fees is to protect public health, safety, and general welfare by providing adequate public facilities. Notably, for Transportation Facilities,the City provided DTA with the list of Future Facilities to be included in the Fee Study (the "Needs List"). Please refer to Section V for details on the Needs List.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 4
age 134 or 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 39 below provides a summary of the Needs List. The facility costs presented below are based on estimates provided by the City.

Table 40: Transportation Facilities Costs
'Transportation Services Facilities Facility Cost
In Montclair on I-10 at Monte Vista- Interchange $2,107,922 In Ontario on I-10 at 4th St/Grove Ave-Interchange $505,321 In Ontario on I-10 at Euclid-Widen EB and WB Ramps $936,886 Widen Arrow from County Line to Central- 2 to 4 Lanes $2,258,000 Traffic Signal Equipment Replacement and UPS Installation $4,000,000 Transportation Facilities Subtotal $9,808,129
Offsetting Revenue $448,794
Total $9,359,335
D.2 Offsetting Revenues
According to the City Staff there are offsetting revenues that need to be considered in the Transportation Facilities calculation total. As of the end of June 2024, the City had $448,794 in its current Transportation Facilities account that needed to be subtracted from the facilities cost total as indicated in Table 39 above.

D.3 Level of Service
As stated earlier in Section III,in September of 2021 the Governor of California signed AB 602 which provides new statewide requirements for local jurisdictions seeking to impose development impact fees on development projects. Among these new requirements is that when applicable, a nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary.

Level of service for streets and intersections is commonly defined in terms of level of service (LOS) categories A through F as defined in the Highway Capacity Manual published by the Transportation Research Board. The Circulation Element portion of the City's General plan states "The roadway system should be designed to provide the necessary capacity to accommodate the traffic generated from the future build-out of the Land Use Plan while maintaining Level of Service standards." The Level of Service for the City's Transportation System is outlined in Policy CIR-1.1:

Roadway system - Require the City's roadways to:
a. Provide accommodation for transit, bicyclists, and pedestrians within the public right-of-way.
b. Comply with Federal, State, San Bernardino County, and local standards for
c. roadway design, maintenance, and operation.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 418
age 135 or 222

SECTION VI
dtctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
d. Strive to maintain LOS D at all intersections outside of the Downtown Specific Plan area and the Transit Priority Roadways except where such improvements are physically infeasible or would negatively impact bicyclists, pedestrians, or transit patrons.
e. Strive to maintain LOS E at all intersections within the Downtown Specific Plan area and intersections along the Transit Priority Roadways.
f. Provide future capacity as envisioned with the Future Roadway System map.

The City's Transportation facilities that have been built to date are consistent with the existing level of service required by the City to serve needs of the population.

According to the City, most of the intersections operate at E or better. The list of projects to be built by the City (and presented in detail in the Appendix to this Study) details the planned facilities necessary to provide required services to the City, and it also outlines the criteria used to design a system needed to serve both existing and future development. The portion of the fee associated with existing transportation facilities represents the current level of service which would be applied to new development. Notably, the future facilities have been identified by the City (on their Capital Improvement Plan) as facilities required to serve both new and existing development, and therefore any increase in level of service above and beyond the current level of service would be an increase required to meet the plan approved by the City.

D.4 Calculation Methodology
Transportation Fees were calculated for each of the four (4) land use categories based on the number of PM Peak Hour Trips (PHTs), i.e., the EBU factor (see Section V) generated by each land use. Total PHTs were calculated by applying these trips rates to the various dwelling unit counts and non-residential square feet identified in the demographics section of this Fee Study. As discussed in Section V, the Institute of Transportation Engineers ("ITE") uses PM peak hours to define daily trip generation per dwelling unit (for residential units) and daily trip generation per 1,000 building square feet of each category of non-residential development.

All proposed Transportation facilities were sized to meet the needs of both existing and future residents and employees. Therefore, the costs of these facilities have been allocated between existing development and new development based on their percentage of build-out EBUs. As illustrated below in Table 40, 91.79% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 8.21% of the costs will be allocated to new development. Based on this allocation between new and existing development, $768,766 of the $9,359,335 in Transportation facilities costs would be funded by the Fee imposed on new development. The remaining $8,590,569 must be funded through other sources to be determined by the City.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 49
age 136 of 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 41: Transportation Facilities Cost Allocation Summary Development Type Peak Hour Percentage Allocated Facility Cost Allocation rips (EBUs)
Existing Development 50,581 91.79% $8,590,569 New Development 4,526 8.21% $768,766 Total 55,108 100.00% $9,359,335
To calculate the Fees, DTA determined the number of PHTs expected through 2040 based on the expected residential and non-residential growth in the City. The analysis estimates that a maximum of 4,526 additional PHTs would be generated by the land use growth, as detailed in Table 41 below.

Table 42: Number of Trip Calculations
Projected Projected PHT Generation Total PHTs
Land Use Type Development Development 1 2 (Units) (Sq. Ft.) Rate (EBUs)
Residential 2,837 0.80 2,261
Commercial 590,884 2.85 1,686
Office 217,193 1.71 371
Industrial 404,482 0.52 208
Total 4,526
Notes:

1. Projected PHTs per unit for residential and per 1,000 Square Feet for non-residential.

2. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

Table 42 presented below summarizes the cost per PHT, which is generated by dividing the cost to new development of $768,766 by the number of PHTs that will be generated by new development (4,526). When accounting for the 4,526 planned PHTs in the City, the cost per PHT totals $170 as shown in the table below. The cost per PHT ($170) was then applied to the various land uses and their respective PHT trip generation rates to determine the proposed Fee.

Table 43: Cost per EBU 1
Proposed Facilities Cost Total
Cost Allocated to New Development $768,766
Total PHTs Added by New Development 4,526
DIF Cost Per PHT $170
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study
0 age 13Tof222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
D.5 Transportation Facilities Fee Calculation
As discussed in Section III, per the directive of AB 602, for housing development projects, nexus studies adopted after July 1, 2022, will no longer be on a per unit basis, but will be calculated based on square footage of proposed units of the development, unless the local agency demonstrates that another metric is more appropriate.

The Fee per sq. ft. was determined by first multiplying the cost per EDU of $170 by the total number of residential EBUs (2,261), resulting in the total amount funded from residential property of $383,924. This result was then divided by the total anticipated residential square feet 5,842,858, to generate the fee per square foot of $0.07. Details of this calculation are shown in the table below.

Table 44: Residential Transportation Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1 Land Use Type PHTs per Unit Number of Calculation Total EDUs Projected Units
Residential 0.80 2,837 2,261
Total Residential 2,837 [a] 2,261
Total Cost per EDU (b] $170
Total Fees [c] = [a] x [b] $383,924
Total Residential Sq. Ft. [d] 5,842,858
Total Cost per Residential Sq. Ft. [e] = [c]/[d] $0.07 Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

Similarly, the Fee per 1,000 sq. ft. was determined by multiplying the cost per EBU of $170 by the total number of non-residential EBUs applicable with each land use type.

The table below summarizes the Fee amounts per 1,000 sq. ft. and the total cost financed by Fees imposed on non-residential land uses.

Table 45: Non-Residential Transportation Facilities Costs Financed by Fee Summary per Land Use Category 1
AlBUs per Non-Residential Number of Costs Financed
Land Use Type -Res. Sq. Ft." Fee/per 1,000 SF. Projected by Fees Non-Res. SF
[a] [b] = [a] x EBU [c] [e] = [c] x [b]
Commercial 2.85 $485 590,884 $286,386
Office 1.71 $290 217,193 $63,078
Industrial 0.52 $87 404,482 $35,379 Total $384,842
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study C 1
age 138 0�222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
D.6 Proposed Fees
The proposed Transportation Fee amounts are summarized in Table 45 below.

Table 46: Transportation Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category Residential Fee Number of
Land Use Type Per Sq. Ft./per Projected Costs Financed 1,000 Non-Res. Sq. Res Sq. Ft./ by Fees
Ft. Non-Res. Sq.
•
Residential $0.07 5,842,858 $383,924
Commercial $485 590,884 $286,386
Office $290 217,193 $63,078
Industrial $87 404,482 $35,379
Total $768,766
D.7 Administrative Fee
There is also an Administrative portion of the DIF which is an administrative fee that funds the City's costs of implementing and collecting the DIFs, including but not limited to calculation and collection of the fees, revenue and cost accounting of the fees collected, fee justification analysis, and preparation of any mandated reports.

Table 45a: Transportation Fee Summary with 2.0% Administrative Fee 521 ME_
Single Family (Per Sq. ft.) _ $0.07
Multi - Family (Per Sq. ft.) $0.07
Commercial (Per 1,000 SF) $494
Office (Per 1,000 SF) $296
Industrial (Per 1,000) $89
D.8 DIF Annual Cost Escalation Recommendations
The fees recommended within this Fee Study reflect the maximum justifiable fee level that may be imposed on new development under the statutory requirements of Government Code Section 66000 et. seq. As the DIFs proposed in this Fee Study are based on Facilities costs in 2024 dollars, it is appropriate for the City to apply an annual escalator to these fee levels to account for inflation in acquisition and construction costs. DTA further recommends that, after adoption, the above impact fees be reviewed each year and include a provision for an annual adjustment based on the current CCCI. This construction cost index is based upon the BCI cost indices average for Los Angeles as produced by ENR.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study C 2
age 139 0i222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
E Water Fees
E.1 Water Facilities (Nexus Requirement AB 1600)
DTA's estimates of new development and increased water demand by the City has provided the basis for calculating the water facilities fee. The need for water facilities improvements is based on the water demand placed on the system by development.

In this Study, DTA has determined that a reasonable measure of demand is the flow generation rate, expressed as the number of gallons per day generated by a specific type of land use, both residential and non-residential. Flow generation rates are assumed to be a reasonable measure of demand on the City's system of water improvements because they represent the average rate of demand that will be placed on the system per land use designation. The Water facilities category includes those facilities used by the City to provide basic water supply and distribution services to residents and employees within the City.

Table 46 below illustrates how the water facilities fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of Fees, type of development funded or partially funded by the Fee revenue, reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and proportionality requirements.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study C 3
age 140 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 47: Water Facilities Element
AB 1600 Code Description Justificatio
Section
Provide a revenue source to pay for construction of water projects including capacity improvements,reservoir
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee. infrastructure, treatment projects,pipeline projects and equipment that will mitigate the impacts of new
development on the City's Water facilities.

Fund or partially fund the construction of water projects 66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the Fee is such as capacity improvements,reservoir infrastructure, to be put. treatment projects,pipeline projects, and other equipment within the City limits
New residential and non-residential development in the
City's Water Service Area will generate additional
residents and employees who will increase the demand
for water facilities. Water fees collected from new
Demonstrate how there is a development will be used exclusively for construction- reasonable relationship between related costs associated with these projects. New water 66001(a)(3) the Fee's use and type of infrastructure is needed to deliver water to new residents development project on which the and employees. Fees imposed on new residential and Fee is imposed. non-residential development is a reasonable method for mitigating the impacts of such new development and any
resulting increase in LOS above and beyond the current
LOS that is required to meet the plan approved by the
City.

Demonstrate how there is a Residential and non-residential growth within the City's reasonable relationship between Water Service Area will increase the demand for potable 66001(a)(4) the need for the public facilities and water. In order to meet this demand, the City will need to type of development project on expand their water system to mitigate the impacts of new which the Fee is imposed. development in the Water Service Area.

The cost of the proposed potable water facilities is based on increased demand for potable water from new
Demonstrate how there is a development. Project costs are allocated to new 66001(b) reasonable relationship between development based on the percentage of relative water the amount of the Fee and cost of demand from new development as compared to total the public facility. service area demand. The Fees for each land use is based on the relative potable water demands among the various land uses for new development.

Notably, for Water Facilities, the City has provided DTA with the list of Future Facilities to be included in the Fee Study (the "Needs List"). Please refer to Section V for details on the Needs List. Table 47 below provides a summary of the Needs List.

The facility costs presented below are based on estimates provided by the City.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study C 4
age 141 of z22

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 48: Summary Water Facilities Costs
- Facilities
9th Street Water Improvements (Benson Ave. to Mountain Ave.) $500,000 14th Street Water Improvements (Campus to Grove) $500,000 17th Street Water Main (San Antonio Ave. to Euclid Ave.) $500,000 19th Street Water Improvements (Mountain Ave. to Euclid Ave.) $800,000 Alpine/Vernon/Palm Ave.Water Mains $1,600,000
Arrow Highway Water Improvements $800,000
Campus Avenue Water Main $1,400,000
Foothill Blvd.Water Main (Mountain to San Antonio) $750,000 Generator at Plant 2 (24th St.) $260,000
Generator at Plant 6 (15th St.) $787,890
Grove Avenue Water Main (Foothill Blvd. to 15th St.) $1,200,000 Huntington Drive Water Main (Benson Ave. to West End) $1,200,000 Mulberry Ave. Water Main (Foothill Blvd. to 13th St.) $450,000 Reservoir 16 Improvements $5,000,000
Other Reservoir Improvements $20,000,000
Generators for back-up power supply $2,500,000
Water Main Improvements $10,000,000
Reservoir Projects $400,000
Reservoir Projects $450,000
Reservoir Projects $275,000
Reservoir Projects $100,000
Reservoir Projects $400,000
Reservoir Projects $475,000
Reservoir Projects $475,000
Reservoir Projects $400,000
Reservoir Projects $3,500,000
Treatment Plan Projects $2,925,000
Treatment Plan Projects $700,000
Treatment Plan Projects $200,000
Treatment Plan Projects $600,000
Treatment Plan Projects $550,000
Treatment Plan Projects $400,000
Treatment Plan Projects $450,000
Treatment Plan Projects $200,000
Pipeline Projects $500,000
Pipeline Projects $2,500,000
Water Facilities Subtotal $63,747,890
Offsetting Revenues $272,083
Total $63,475,807
City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study Cj
age 142 of222

SECTION VI
dtctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
E.2 Offsetting Revenues
According to the City Staff there are offsetting revenues that need to be considered in the Water Facilities calculation total. As of the end of June 2024, the City had $272,083 in its current Water Facilities account that needed to be subtracted from the facilities cost total as indicated in Table 47 above.

E.3 Level of Service
As stated earlier in Section III,in September of 2021 the Governor of California signed AB 602 which provides new statewide requirements for local jurisdictions seeking to impose development impact fees on development projects. Among these new requirements is that when applicable, a nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary. This section looks at the Level of Service for water facilities, a system that involves several considerations related to water supply, gallons per day, water quality, storage capacity, water pressure and citywide reliability.

The City's 2010 Water Master Plan update identifies and itemizes all existing and planned facilities necessary to provide required service to the City and it also outlines the criteria used to design a system needed to serve both existing and future development. The list of projects to be built by the City (and presented in detail in the Appendix to this Study) details the planned facilities necessary to provide required services to the City, and it also outlines the criteria used to design a system needed to serve both existing and future development. The portion of the fee associated with existing transportation facilities represents the current level of service which would be applied to new development. Notably, the future facilities have been identified by the City (on their Capital Improvement Plan) as facilities required to serve both new and existing development, and therefore any increase in level of service above and beyond the current level of service would be an increase required to meet the plan approved by the City.

E.4 Calculation Methodology
Water Fees were calculated for each of the four (4) land use categories based on the water usage, measured in terms number of gallons per day ("GDP"), (i.e., the EBU factor - see Section V) generated by each land use. Total GPDs were calculated by applying these water usage rates to the various dwelling unit counts and non-residential square feet identified in the demographics section of this Fee Study.

As discussed in Section V, flow generation rates (i.e., gallon per day per acre) per for residential units and non-residential development, are published in the City's Water System Master Plan.

All proposed Water facilities were sized to meet the needs of both existing and future residents and employees. Therefore, the costs of these facilities have been allocated City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study C 6
age 143 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
between existing development and new development based on their percentage of build-out EBUs. As illustrated in Table 48 below, 91.28% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 8.72%of the costs will be allocated to new development.

Based on this allocation between new and existing development, $5,533,150 of the $63,475,807 in Water Facilities costs would be funded by the Fee imposed on new development. The remaining$57,942,658 must be funded through other sources to be determined by the City.

Table 49: Water Facilities Cost Allocation Summary 1
Development Type 'ercentage Allocated Facility Cost Allocated Existing Development 91.28% $57,942,658
New Development 8.72% $5,533,150
Total 100.00% $63,475,807
Note:

1. Some figures may not sum due to rounding.

To determine the Water Fees, DTA calculated the number of GPDs expected through 2040 based on the expected residential and non-residential growth in the City. As shown in Table 49 below, the analysis estimates that a maximum of 1,484,665 additional GPDs would be generated by the land use growth.

Table 50: Water Usage by Land Use
•rojected Total GPDs
Land Use Type Development Water Usage Rate
(Units/Sq. Ft.) (EBUs)
Residential 2,837 474 1,344,796
Commercial 590,884 115 67,824
Office 217,193 161 34,902
Industrial 404,482 92 37,142
Total 1,484,665
Notes:

1. Projected GPDs per unit for residential and per 1,000 Square Feet for non-residential.

2. May not sum due to rounding.

Table 50 presented below summarizes the cost per 1,000 GPD (note, per 1,000 GPDs is used to avoid rounding significant figures),which is generated by dividing the cost to new development of$5,533,150 by the number of GPDs that will be generated by new development (1,484,665) and multiplying by 1,000. When accounting for the 1,484,665 planned GPDs in the City, the cost per GPD totals $3,730 as shown in the table below. This cost was then applied to the various land uses and their respective GPD generation rates to determine the proposed Fee.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study C
age 144.i222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 51: Cost per EBU 1
Proposed Facilities Costs Calculation Total
Cost Allocated to New Development [a] $5,533,150 Total GPDs Added by New Development [b] 1,484,665 Multiplier [c] 1,000
DIF Cost Per 1,000 GPDs ([a]/[b]) x [c] $3,730
Cost per EBU [c]/1,000 $3.73
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

E.5 Water Facilities Fee Calculation
As discussed in Section III, per the directive of AB 602, for housing development projects, nexus studies adopted after July 1, 2022, will no longer be on a per unit basis, but will be calculated based on square footage of proposed units of the development, unless the local agency demonstrates that another metric is more appropriate.

The Water Fee per sq. ft.was determined by first multiplying the cost per EBU of$3.73 by the total number of residential EBUs (1,344,796), resulting in the total amount funded from residential property of $5,011,876. This result was then divided by the total anticipated residential square feet (5,842,858) to generate the residential Fee per square foot of $0.86. Details of this calculation are shown in the table below.

Table 52: Residential Water Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category Land Use Type GPDs per Unit Number of Calculation Total GPDs Projected Units
Residential 474 2,837 1,344,796
Total Residential [a] 1,344,796
Total Cost per EBU lb] $3.73
Total Fees [c] = [a] x [b] $5,011,876
Total Residential Sq. Ft. [d] 5,842,858
Total Cost per Residential Sq. Ft. [e] = [c]/[d] $0.86 Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

Similarly, the Fee per 1,000 sq. ft. was determined by multiplying the cost per EBU of $3.73 by the total number of non-residential EBUs applicable with each land use type.

The table below summarizes the Fee amounts per 1,000 sq. ft. and the total cost financed by Fees imposed on non-residential land uses.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study
g
age 145-of222

SECTION VI
dtctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 53: Non-Residential Water Facilities Costs Financed by Fee Summary per Land Use Category 1
EBUs per Number of
Land Use Type 1,000 Non-Res. Fee per 1,000 Projected Costs Financed Sq Ft Non-Res. SF j Non-Res. SF by Fees
[a] [b] = [a] x EBU [c] [e] = [c] x [b]
Commercial 115 $428 590,884 $252,772
Office 161 $599 217,193 $130,077
Industrial 92 $342 404,482 $138,425 Total $521,753
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

E.6 Proposed Fees
The proposed Water Fee amounts are summarized in Table 53 below.

Table 54: Water Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1 Residential Fee 47 Number of Projected
ill
Land Use Type Sq. Ft./per 1,000 Res Sq. Ft. Non-Res. osts Financed by Non-Res. Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft Fees
Residential $0.86 5,842,858 $5,011,876 Commercial $428 590,884 $252,772
Office $599 217,193 $130,077
Industrial $343 404,482 $138,425
Total $5,533,150
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

E.7 Administrative Fee
There is also an Administrative portion of the DIF which is an administrative fee that funds the City's costs of implementing and collecting the DIFs, including but not limited to calculation and collection of the fees, revenue and cost accounting of the fees collected, fee justification analysis, and preparation of any mandated reports.

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 53a: Water Fee Summary with 2.0% Administrative Fee Single Family (Per Sq. ft.) $0.87
Multi-Family (Per Sq. ft.) $0.87
Commercial (Per 1,000 SF) $436
Office (Per 1,000 SF) $611
Industrial (Per 1,000) $349
E.8 DIF Annual Cost Escalation Recommendations
The fees recommended within this Fee Study reflect the maximum justifiable fee level that may be imposed on new development under the statutory requirements of Government Code Section 66000 et. seq. As the DIFs proposed in this Fee Study are based on Facilities costs in 2024 dollars, it is appropriate for the City to apply an annual escalator to these fee levels to account for inflation in acquisition and construction costs. DTA further recommends that, after adoption, the above impact fees be reviewed each year and include a provision for an annual adjustment based on the current CCCI. This construction cost index is based upon the BCI cost indices average for Los Angeles as produced by ENR.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 610
age 147 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
F Sewer Facilities
F.1 Sewer Facilities (Nexus Requirement AB 1600)
The Sewer Facilities category includes those facilities used by the City to provide basic sanitary sewer services to residents and employees within the City. These elements consist of downstream collectors conveying wastewater from local drainage areas such as residential tracts and business parks to county trunk sewer lines and treatment facilities. These proposed facilities have Citywide benefit by ensuring that there will be sufficient system-wide capacity to collect wastewater from new and existing development to year 2040. This section of the study takes into consideration existing and future needs to accommodate City staff at build-out and addresses the need for expansion of City sewer facilities.

In order to serve future development through General Plan build-out, the City has identified the need for landfill flare modifications, trunk main upgrades, manhole projects, and numerous Sewer rehab projects.

Table 54 below illustrates how the Sewer Facilities Fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to the use of the Fee, type of development funded or partially funded by the Fee revenue, reasonable relationship to the need for the facilities, and proportionality requirements.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study G 1
age 148 0i222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 55: Sewer Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
Provide a revenue source to pay for construction of
sewer facilities such as landfill flare modifications,
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee. trunk mains, sewer rehabilitation,manholes, and equipment that will mitigate the impacts of new
development on the City's Sewer facilities.

Revenue from this fee will be used to construct and
Identify the use to which the Fee expand new sewer facilities such landfill flare 66001(a)(2) is to be put. modifications, trunk mains, sewer rehabilitation, manholes and equipment that will be used to provide
general sewer collection and treatment services.

New residential and non-residential development will
generate additional residents and employees that will
increase the demand for Sewer facilities. Sewer Fees
Demonstrate how there is a collected from new development will be used reasonable relationship between exclusively for construction-related costs associated 66001(a)(3) the Fee's use and type of with these projects. Fees imposed on new residential development project on which and non-residential development is a reasonable the Fee is imposed. method for mitigating the impacts of new development and any resulting increase in LOS above and beyond
the current LOS that is required to meet the plan
approved by the City.

New residential and non-residential development City's
Sewer Service Area will generate additional residents
Demonstrate how there is a and employees that will increase the need to collect reasonable relationship between and treat sewage generated by such new development. 66001(a)(4) the need for the public facilities New sewer infrastructure such manholes,landfill flare and type of development project modifications, trunk mains, sewer rehabilitation,and on which the Fee is imposed. equipment are needed to collect and treat sewer generated from new development in the City's Sewer
Service Area.

Demonstrate how there is a The cost of the proposed facilities is based on reasonable relationship between projected sewer generation from the various land uses. 66001(b) the amount of the Fee and cost of The amount of the fee for each land use is calculated the public facility. based on the relative contribution of Citywide sewer flow from each land use.

Notably, for Sewer Facilities, the City has provided DTA with the list of Future Facilities to be included in the Fee Study (the "Needs List"). Please refer to Section V for details on the Needs List. Table 55 below provides a summary of the Needs List.

The facility costs presented below are based on estimates provided by the City.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study G2
age 149 0l`222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 56: Sewer Facilities Needs List
er Facilities Facility Cost
Landfill Flare Modifications $445,000
Richland Street Trunk Main Upgrades $75,000 Manhole Adjustments to Grade for City/County Shared Roadway Project $150,000 Citywide Sewer Rehab 2021/2022 $400,000
Citywide Sewer Rehab 2022/2023 $500,000
Citywide Sewer Rehab 2023/2024 $300,000
Citywide Sewer Rehab 2024/2025 $300,000
Citywide Sewer Rehab 2025/2026 $300,000
Citywide Sewer Rehab 2026/2027 $300,000
Citywide Sewer Rehab 2027/2028 $300,000
Citywide Sewer Rehab 2028/2029 $300,000
Citywide Sewer Rehab 2029/2030 $300,000
Citywide Sewer Rehab 2030/2031 $300,000
Subtotal $3,970,000
Offsetting Revenues
Sewer Facilities Total $3,408,714
The reasonable relationship used to allocate sewer costs between existing and future development is relative to wastewater generation. Wastewater generation used in sewer facilities is directly related to water demand. Interior water usage (excluding landscape irrigation since it is considered a component of water demand) generally constitutes half (and often times more) of the total water demand for a residential unit.

F.2 Offsetting Revenues
According to the City Staff there are offsetting revenues that need to be considered in the Sewer Facilities calculation total. As of the end of June 2024, the City had $561,286 in its current Sewer Facilities account that needed to be subtracted from the facilities cost total as indicated in Table 55 above.

F.3 Level of Service
As stated earlier in Section III,in September of 2021 the Governor of California signed AB 602 which provides new statewide requirements for local jurisdictions seeking to impose development impact fees on development projects. Among these new requirements is that when applicable, a nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary. This section looks at the Level of Service for sewer facilities to ensure that there will be sufficient system-wide capacity to collect wastewater from new and existing development by the year 2040. The City's 2006 Plan identifies and itemizes all existing and planned facilities necessary to provide required service to the City and it also outlines the City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 63
age 150 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
criteria used to design a system needed to serve both existing and future development.

In the City's Wastewater/Sewer section of the current General Plan, it states "Ensure that all wastewater collection and conveyance facilities are constructed to serve the ultimate build-out of all developments." As stated, the City's 2006 Sewer Master Plan update identifies and itemizes all existing and planned facilities necessary to provide required service to the City and it also outlines the criteria used to design a system needed to serve both existing and future development. The list of projects to be built by the City (and presented in detail in the Appendix to this Study) details the planned facilities necessary to provide required services to the City, and it also outlines the criteria used to design a system needed to serve both existing and future development. The portion of the fee associated with existing transportation facilities represents the current level of service which would be applied to new development.

Notably, the future facilities have been identified by the City (on their Capital Improvement Plan) as facilities required to serve both new and existing development, and therefore any increase in level of service above and beyond the current level of service would be an increase required to meet the plan approved by the City.

F.4 Calculation Methodology
Sewer Fees were calculated for each of the four (4) land use categories based on the wastewater generation, measured in terms number of gallons per day ("GDP"), (i.e., the EBU factor - see Section V) generated by each land use. Total GPDs were calculated by applying these wastewater generation rates to the various dwelling unit counts and non-residential square feet identified in the demographics section of this Fee Study. As discussed in Section V,flow generation rates (i.e., gallon per day per acre) per for residential units and non-residential development, are published in the City's Sewer System Master Plan.

All proposed sewer facilities were sized to meet the needs of both existing and future residents and employees. Therefore, the costs of these facilities have been allocated between existing development and new development based on their percentage of build-out EBUs. As illustrated Table 56 below, 91.30% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 8.70% of the costs will be allocated to new development. Based on this allocation between new and existing development, $296,482 of the $3,408,714 in sewer facilities costs would be funded by the Fee imposed on new development. The remaining $3,112,232 must be funded through other sources to be determined by the City.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 64
age 151 of 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 57: Sewer Facilities Cost Allocation Summary
evelopment Type Percentage Allocated to New Facility Cost Allocation Development
Existing Development 91.30% $3,112,232
New Development 8.70% $296,482
Total 100.00% $3,408,714
Sewer generation is directly related to water demand. Interior water usage (excluding landscape irrigation since it is considered a component of water demand) generally constitutes half (and often times more) of the total water demand for a residential unit. To determine the Sewer Fees, DTA calculated the number of GPDs expected through 2040 based on the expected residential and non-residential growth in the City. As shown in Table 57 below, the analysis estimates that a maximum of 767,256 additional GPDs would be generated by the land use growth.

This is explained in detail in Appendix A.

Table 58: Sewer Generation by Land Use 1
Projected Wastewater Total GPDs
Land Use Type Development i
i (Units/Sq. Ft.) Generation Rate (EBUs)
Residential 2,837 241 683,746
Commercial 590,884 69 40,694
Office 217,193 69 14,958
Industrial 404,482 69 27,857
Total 767,256
Notes:

1. Projected GPDs per unit for residential and per 1,000 Square Feet for non-residential.

2. Total may not sum due to rounding
Table 58 presented below summarizes the cost per 1,000 GPD (note, per 1,000 GPDs is used to avoid rounding significant figures),which is generated by dividing the cost to new development of $296,482 by the number of GPDs that will be generated by new development (767,256) and multiplying by 1,000. When accounting for the 767,256 planned GPDs in the City, the cost per GPD totals $386 as shown in the table below. This cost was then applied to the various land uses and their respective GPD generation rates to determine the proposed Fee.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study Gj
age 152 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 59: Cost per EBU 1
Proposed Facilities Costs Calculation Total
Cost Allocated to New Development [a] $296,482 Total GPDs Added by New Development [b] 767,256 Multiplier [c] 1,000
DIF Cost Per 1,000 GPDs ([a]/[b]) x [c] $386
Cost per EBU [c]/1,000 $0.39
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

F.5 Sewer Fee Calculation
As discussed in Section III, per the directive of AB 602, for housing development projects, nexus studies adopted after July 1, 2022, will no longer be on a per unit basis, but will be calculated based on square footage of proposed units of the development, unless the local agency demonstrates that another metric is more appropriate.

The Fee per sq. ft. was determined by first multiplying the cost per EBU of $0.39 by the total number of residential EBUs (683,746), resulting in the total amount funded from residential property of $264,212. This result was then divided by the total anticipated residential square feet (5,842,858) to generate the Fee per square foot of $0.05. Details of this calculation are shown in the table below.

Table 60: Residential Sewer Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1 Land Use Typ PDs per Unit `um.er o Calculation Total GPDs 'rojected Units
Residential 241 2,837 683,746
Total Residential [a] 683,746
_ Total Cost per EBU (b] $0.39
Total Fees [c] = [a] x [b] $264,212
Total Residential Sq. Ft. [d] 5,842,858
Total Cost per Residential Sq. Ft. [e] = [c]/[d] $0.05 Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study G 6
age 153 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Similarly, the Fee per 1,000 sq. ft. was determined by multiplying the cost per EBU of $0.05 by the total number of non-residential EBUs applicable with each land use type.The table below summarizes the Fee amounts per 1,000 sq. ft. and the total cost financed by Fees imposed on non-residential land uses.

Table 61: Non-Residential Sewer Facilities Costs Financed by Fee Summary per Land Use Category 1
EBUs per 1,000 Fee per 1,000 Number of Costs Financed Land Use Type Non-Res. Sq. Ft.1 Non-Res. SF. Projected by Fees Non-Res. SF
[a] [b] = [a] x EBU [c] [e] = [c] x [b]
Commercial 69 $27.00 590,884 $15,725
Office 69 $27.00 217,193 $5,780
Industrial 69 $27.00 404,482 $10,764 Total $32,270
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

F.6 Proposed Fees
The proposed Sewer Fee amounts are summarized in Table 61 below.

Table 62: Sewer Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1 Residential Fee Number of
Land Use Type per Sq. Ft./per Projected osts Financed 1,000 Non-Res. Res Sq. Ft./ by Fees
• t. Non-Res. S•. Ft
Single-Family $0.05 5,842,858 $264,212 Commercial $27 590,884 $15,725
Office $27 217,193 $5,780
Industrial $27 404,482 $10,764
Total $296,482
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

F.7 Administrative Fee
There is also an Administrative portion of the DIF which is an administrative fee that funds the City's costs of implementing and collecting the DIFs, including but not limited to calculation and collection of the fees, revenue and cost accounting of the fees collected, fee justification analysis, and preparation of any mandated reports.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study G
age 154 of 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 61a: Sewer Fee Summary with 2.0% Administrative Fee Land U Fee Schedule
Single-Family (per DF) $0.05
Multi-Family (per SF) $0.05
Commercial (per 1,000 SF) $27
Office (per 1,000 SF) $27
Industrial (per 1,000) $27
F.8 DIF Annual Cost Escalation Recommendations
The fees recommended within this Fee Study reflect the maximum justifiable fee level that may be imposed on new development under the statutory requirements of Government Code Section 66000 et. seq. As the DIFs proposed in this Fee Study are based on Facilities costs in 2024 dollars, it is appropriate for the City to apply an annual escalator to these fee levels to account for inflation in acquisition and construction costs. DTA further recommends that, after adoption, the above impact fees be reviewed each year and include a provision for an annual adjustment based on the current CCCI. This construction cost index is based upon the BCI cost indices average for Los Angeles as produced by ENR.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 618
age 155 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
G Storm Drain Fees
G.1 Storm Drain Facilities (Nexus Requirement AB 1600) The Storm Drain Facilities element will serve the residents of City by providing facilities that ensure proper water drainage in those areas susceptible to storm water runoff. Storm Drain Facilities include those used by the City to provide storm drainage services to both residents and employees within the City. The Storm Drain Fee will include facilities and improvements necessary to handle the storm drain runoff created by new development through build-out by the year 2040. The City identified the need for facilities and improvements as shown below in Table 62.

Table 62 below illustrates how the Storm Drain Facilities Fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to the use of the Fee, type of development funded or partially funded by the Fee revenue, reasonable relationship to the need for the facilities, and proportionality requirements.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study G
age 156 0i222

SECTION VI
dtctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 63: Storm Drain Facilities Nexus Requirement
AB 1600 Code Description Justification MEP Section
Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee. construct and expand storm drain improvements that will mitigate the impacts of new development on the
City's storm drain system.

Identify the use to which the Fee is Fund or partially fund the construction and expansion of 66001(a)(2) to be put. storm basins,laterals,tributary drains, and related projects within the City limits.

New residential and non-residential development will
generate additional traffic on City streets. The Fee
revenue will be used to construct and expand storm
Demonstrate how there is a drain basins,laterals,tributary drains and related reasonable relationship between improvements. Storm drain fees collected from new 66001(a)(3) the Fee's use and type of development will be used exclusively for construction- development project on which the related costs associated with these projects. Fees fee is imposed. imposed on new residential and non-residential development is a reasonable method for mitigating the
impacts of such new development and any resulting
increase in LOS above and beyond the current LOS that
is required to meet the plan approved by the City.

Storm Drain Fee revenue will go towards new facilities
Demonstrate how there is a and improvements necessary to handle the storm drain reasonable relationship between runoff created by new development. The construction 66001(a)(4) the need for the public facilities and expansion storm drain basins,laterals, tributary and type of development project drains and related improvements is needed to ensure on which the Fee is imposed. proper drainage of storm water runoff to protect from flooding.

Demonstrate how there is a Project costs are allocated to new development based on reasonable relationship between the storm water runoff generated by new development. 66001(b) the amount of the Fee and cost of The specific Fee imposed on the various land uses are the public facility. based on stormwater runoff coefficients as compared to a residential unit(baseline rate or EDU factor).

For Storm Drain Facilities, the City has provided DTA with the list of Future Facilities to be included in the Fee Study (the "Needs List"). Please refer to Section V for details on the Needs List. Table 63 below provides a summary of the Needs List. The facility costs presented below are based on estimates provided by the City.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 7D
age 157 of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 64: Storm Drain Facilities Costs
Storm Drain Facilities Facility Cost
MN 1-5+B22:H62B22:G62 (Storm Drain Project) $1,184,374 WS A-02: Campus Ave (Arrow to Foothill) $2,089,097 WS A-02: Foothill Blvd.segment (Campus to Euclid) $5,833,139 WS A-02: Euclid Ave segment(Foothill to 18th St) $4,202,889 WS A-02: 11 laterals $7,565,043
WS A-03:Euclid Ave(SRPP to Foothill Blvd) $2,613,482 WS A-03:San Antonio Ave (13th St to 18th St) $2,863,728 WS A-03: 11 laterals $5,761,705
WS A-04: Foothill Blvd. (San Antonio to Mountain) $4,851,987 WS A-04: 12 laterals $3,310,146
WS A-04:Mountain Ave (Foothill to 18th St.) $4,613,345 WS B: West Cucamonga Tributary drains $13,194,479 WU A2: 1th Street,from Benson to Cabrillo Park $1,166,985 WU A3:Greenbelt Park Aviation corridor drain $2,283,403 WU A3-1: 14th Street alignment City Yard drain $390,615 WU B-1: Foothill Blvd. (Benson Ave.west) $605,981 WU B-2: Foothill Blvd. (Benson Ave. east) $452,939 WU B-3: 13th Street (Benson Ave.west) $488,524
WU B-4: 13th Street (Benson Ave. east) $745,684 WU D:Benson Ave(9th St.to 7th St.) connecting to Montclair System $2,403,005 WU D-1:7th Street(Benson Ave east) $1,429,813
WU D-2:8th Street(Benson Ave east) $821,795
WU D-3: ATSF RR(Benson Ave east) $937,039
WU H: 16th Street (Wilson Ave to Benson to Holliday Pit) $2,530,813 WU H-1: Northerly lateral along Benson Avenue (16th St north) $1,199,127 WU H-2: Easterly lateral along 16th St (Benson Ave east) $524,655 Arrow Hwy Storm Drain(Benson to Fairwood) $1,500,000 Storm Drain Facilities Subtotal $75,563,793
Offsetting Revenues $1,639,563
Storm Drain Facilities Total $73,924,230
According to the City, it has been determined that these facilities are needed to serve new development. Currently, these facilities are generally operating at an appropriate and acceptable LOS. Therefore, the costs of facilities have been allocated to new development and existing development based on their expected usage at build-out.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 7
age 158 o 222

SECTION VI
dtctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
G.2 Offsetting Revenues
According to the City Staff there are offsetting revenues that need to be considered in the Storm Drain Facilities calculation total. As of the end of June 2024, the City had $1,328,830 in its current General Facilities account that needed to be subtracted from the facilities cost total as indicated in Table 63 above.

G.3 Level of Service
As stated earlier in Section III,in September of 2021 the Governor of California signed AB 602 which provides new statewide requirements for local jurisdictions seeking to impose development impact fees on development projects. Among these new requirements is that when applicable, a nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary. This section looks at the Level of Service for Storm Drain facilities to ensure that there will be sufficient system-wide capacity to direct storm drain runoff at storm recurrence intervals as dictated by City policy from new and existing development.

The list of projects to be built by the City (and presented in detail in the Appendix to this Study) details the planned facilities necessary to provide required services to the City, and it also outlines the criteria used to design a system needed to serve both existing and future development. The portion of the fee associated with existing transportation facilities represents the current level of service which would be applied to new development. Notably, the future facilities have been identified by the City (on their Capital Improvement Plan) as facilities required to serve both new and existing development, and therefore any increase in level of service above and beyond the current level of service would be an increase required to meet the plan approved by the City.

G.4 Calculation Methodology
Storm Drain Fees were calculated for each of the five (5) land use categories based on the runoff rates, measured in terms relative contribution of runoff, (i.e., the EBU factor - see Section V) generated by each land use. Specifically, the reasonable relationship used to allocate storm drain costs between existing, converted use and future development is relative runoff contribution. A rational method of computing runoff rates was used in the form of Q = C x I x A,where "Q"is equal to runoff volume, "C" is the ratio of impervious area to total area studied, "I" is rainfall intensity, and "A" is Area, in acres of the study area. A runoff factor, "C" of 1.00, indicates a totally impervious site, where every drop of rain would find its way to the public streets as runoff. However, it can be shown that only the relative contribution of runoff needs to be considered if a unit of runoff is computed (Q/I), where only the runoff factor and acreage are considered. This is the assumption used in this calculation.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 7
age 159 0?222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Total Runoff was calculated by applying these runoff factors to the estimated acreage attributable to the various dwelling unit counts and non-residential square feet identified in the demographics section of this Fee Study. As discussed in Section V, runoff factors per acre for residential units and non-residential development, are based on numbers provided by the City Staff and from the 2020 Cal Trans Design Highway Design Manual Chapter 810 Hydrology.

All proposed Storm Drain facilities were sized to meet the needs of both existing and future residents and employees. Therefore, the costs of these facilities have been allocated between existing development and new development based on their percentage of build-out EBUs. As illustrated in Table 64 below, 91.41% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 8.59% of the costs will be allocated to new development. Based on this allocation between new and existing development, $6,352,897 of the $74,924,230 in Storm Drain facilities costs would be funded by the Fee imposed on new development. The remaining $67,571,333 must be funded through other sources to be determined by the City.

Table 65: Storm Drain Facilities Cost Allocation Summary Development Type Percentage Allocated Facility Cost Allocated Existing Development 91.41% I $67,571,333
New Development 8.59% I $6,352,897
Total 100.00% $73,924,230
Notes:

1. Some figures may not sum due to rounding.

To determine the Storm Drain Fees, DTA calculated the total runoff expected through 2040 based on the anticipated residential and non-residential growth in the City. As shown in Table 65 below,the analysis estimates that new development will generate a total runoff of approximately 267 EBUs.

Table 66: Storm Drain Usage by Land Use
Projected Runoff Rate
Land Use Type evelopment Developed Coefficient "C„ Total Ru 1 off (Units/S Ft.) Acreage (per Acre) (EBUs)
Residential 2,837 416 0.52 216
Commercial 590,884 27 0.95 26
Office 217,193 10 0.90 9
Industrial 404,482 19 0.85 16
Total 471 267
Notes:

1. There are 267 total acres susceptible to runoff.

2. Totals may not sum due to rounding.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 73
age 160 of 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table 66 presented below summarizes the cost per unit runoff which is generated by dividing the cost to new development of $6,379,601 by the unit runoff that will be generated by new development (267). When accounting for the anticipated unit runoff from new development, the cost per unit runoff totals $23,898 as shown in the table below. This cost was then applied to the various land uses and their respective total runoff rates to determine the proposed Fee.

Table 67: Cost per EBU 1
Proposed Facilities Costs Calculation V Total Cost Allocated to New Development [a] $6,352,897 Total Runoff Added by New Development [b] 267
DIF Cost Per Unit Runoff [a]/[b] $23,798
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

G.5 Storm Drain Facilities Fee Calculation
As discussed in Section III, per the directive of AB 602, for housing development projects, nexus studies adopted after July 1, 2022, will no longer be on a per unit basis, but will be calculated based on square footage of proposed units of the development, unless the local agency demonstrates that another metric is more appropriate.

The Storm Drain Fee per sq. ft. was determined by first multiplying the cost per EBU of $23.798 by the total number of residential EBUs (216), resulting in total amount funded from residential property of $5,150,316. This result was then divided by the total anticipated residential square feet (5,842,858) to generate the residential Fee per square foot of $0.88. Details of this calculation are shown in the table below.

Table 68: Storm Drain Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1 and Use Typ nit Run. Number of alculatio Total Runoff Per Acre •eveloped Acre
Residential 0.52 416 216
Total Residential N/A 562 [a] 216
Total Cost per EBU fib] $23,798
Total Fees [c] = [a] x [b] $5,150,316
Total Residential Sq. Ft. [d] 5,842,858
Total Cost per Residential Sq. Ft. [el = [c]/[d] $0.88 Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 7�I
age 16'f of 222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
Similarly, the Fee per 1,000 sq. ft. was determined by multiplying the cost per EBU of $23,798 by the total number of non-residential EBUs applicable with each land use type. The table below summarizes the Fee amounts per 1,000 sq. ft. and the total cost financed by Fees imposed on non-residential land uses.

Table 69: Storm Drain Facilities Costs Financed by Fee Summary per Land Use Category Number of
Land Use EBUs per 1 Costs Financed by T e Acre Fee per Acre Fee per 1,000 Non-Res. SF. Projected Fees yp Non-Res.SF
[a] [b] _ [a] EBU [c] = ([b]/43,560/0.5 x [d] [e] = [c] x 1,000) [d]/1,000
Commercial 0.95 $22,608 $1,038 590,884 $613,341 Office 0.90 $21,418 $983 217,193 $213,582 Industrial 0.85 $20,228 $929 404,482 $375,659 Total $1,207,581
Notes:

1. Based on the assumed Floor Area Ratio of 0.5,and 43,560 sq.ft.per acre.

2. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

G.6 Proposed fees
The proposed Storm Drain Fee amounts are summarized in Table 69 below.

Table 70: Storm Drain Facilities Costs Financed by Fees Summary per Land Use Category 1 Residential Fee umber of
Land Use Type per Sq. Ft./per Projected Costs Financed by 1,000 Non-Res. Res Sq. Ft./Non-Res. Fees
Sq. Ft. Ft
Residential $0.88 5,842,858 $5,150,316
Commercial $1,038 590,884 $613,341
Office $983 217,193 $213,582
Industrial $929 404,482 $375,659
Total $6,352,897
Note:

1. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

G.7 Administrative Fee
There is also an Administrative portion of the DIF which is an administrative fee that funds the City's costs of implementing and collecting the DIFs, including but not limited to calculation and collection of the fees, revenue and cost accounting of the fees collected, fee justification analysis, and preparation of any mandated reports.

Per the City's request, the administrative component of the DIF is calculated at 2%of City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 7j
age 16Z of222

SECTION VI
tctCALCULATION OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com
the total impact fees collected in addition to the fees charged to new development, which is a customary industry standard
Table 69a: Storm Drain Fee Summary with 2.0% Administrative Fee Land Use Fee Schedule
Single-Family (per DF) $0..88
Multi-Family (per SF) $0.88
Commercial ( per 1,000 SF) $1,059
Office (per 1,000 SF) $1,003
Industrial (per 1,000) $947
G.8 DIF Annual Cost Escalation Recommendations
The fees recommended within this Fee Study reflect the maximum justifiable fee level that may be imposed on new development under the statutory requirements of Government Code Section 66000 et. seq. As the DIFs proposed in this Fee Study are based on Facilities costs in 2024 dollars, it is appropriate for the City to apply an annual escalator to these fee levels to account for inflation in acquisition and construction costs. DTA further recommends that, after adoption, the above impact fees be reviewed each year and include a provision for an annual adjustment based on the current CCCI. This construction cost index is based upon the BCI cost indices average for Los Angeles as produced by ENR.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 76
age 163 of222

SECTION VII

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE
dta SCHEDULE
www.FinanceDTA.com

VII IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE SCHEDULE
In addition to the legal requirements covered in Section III, there are a number of recommendations for the adoption and administration of the DIFs presented in this report.

All recommendations presented in this section are based on the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code .1166000 et seq.), also referred to as the "Act," which provides specific requirements for establishing and administering DIF programs. The Act also mandates procedures for administering impact fee programs, such as the collection and accounting of impact fees, refunds, mandatory updates, and reporting requirements.

At the time the City imposes an impact fee, Government Code 66020 requires a written statement of the amount of the fee and a written notice of a 90-day period during which the imposition of the fee can be protested. Prior to the enactment of Section 66020, a developer could not challenge the validity of fees imposed on a residential development without refusing to pay them. Under these circumstances, developers were required to pay disputed fees before they could be challenged. Section 66020 was drafted to correct that problem.

The various subparts of Section 66020 allow for a procedure that permits a developer to pay the fees under protest, obtain the relevant building permit, and then proceed with the project while pursuing an action to challenge the fees. If the action is successful, the fees will be refunded with interest. However, failure to protest imposition of the fee during the allowed period may deprive the fee payer of the right to any subsequent legal challenges.

Any challenges to be filed must be submitted within 90 days of enactment. The subsequent sections provide specific guidelines in implementing DIFs.

A The Collection of DIFs
According to Government Code Section 66007, any local agency that imposes any fees or charges on a residential development for the construction of public improvements or facilities shall not require the payment of those fees or charges, notwithstanding any other provision of law, until the date of the final inspection, or the date the Certificate of Occupancy is issued, whichever occurs first.

However, utility service fees may be collected at the time an application for utility service is received. If the residential development contains more than one dwelling, the local agency may determine whether the fees or charges shall be paid on a pro rata basis for each dwelling when (i) it receives its final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy, (ii) on a pro rata basis when a certain percentage of the dwellings have received their final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy, or (iii) on a lump sum basis when the first dwelling in the development receives its final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever of the three occur first.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 7
age 164 0�222

SECTION VII

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE
dta SCHEDULE
www.FinanceDTA.com
An exception allows DIFs to be collected at an earlier time if they will be used to reimburse the agency for expenditures previously made or for public improvements or facilities for which money has already been appropriated. If any fee or charge specified is not fully paid prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction, the local agency issuing the building permit may require the property owner, or lessee if the lessee's interest appears of record, as a condition of issuance of the building permit, to execute a contract to pay the fee or charge, or applicable portion.

Statutory restrictions in place for residential development at the time at which fees may be collected do not apply to non-residential development. In cases where the fees are not collected upon the issuance of building permits, Sections 6607(c)(1) and (2) provide that the City may require the property owner of a non-residential development to execute a contract to pay the fee, and subsequently record that contract as a lien against the property owner.

In addition, pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.2(f), ADUs are exempt from incurring impact fees from local agencies, special districts, and water corporations if such unit is less than 750 square feet. If an ADU is 750 square feet or larger, impact fees shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the ADU to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. Furthermore, the water capital improvement fee, water supply fee, and sewer capital improvement fee shall not be applicable to any ADU created within the existing space of a single family residence or accessory structure, including, but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure. Please note that for purposes of this Fee Study,future ADUs are included in the buildout projections, but some of these units may not be required to pay an impact fee. As a result, the City may not collect the full amount of costs as shown in the Needs Lists included herein.

B The Assignment and Expenditure of Fee Revenue
According to Section 66006, if a local agency requires the payment of a fee specified in connection with the approval of a development project, the local agency receiving the fee shall deposit it with the other fees for the improvement to be funded in a separate capital facilities account or fund in a manner to avoid any commingling of the fees with other revenues and funds of the local agency, except for temporary investments, and expend those fees solely for the purpose for which the fee was collected.

Any interest income earned in the capital facilities account or fund shall also be deposited in that account or fund and shall be expended only for the purpose for which the fee was originally collected.

Common practice is to maintain separate funds or accounts for impact fee revenues by facility category (i.e., streets, park improvements, but not for individual projects). DTA recommends the continuation of that approach.

Development Impact fee revenue should not be spent on any infrastructure, property or equipment needed to mitigate an existing deficiency.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 78
age 165 of222

SECTION VII

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE
dta SCHEDULE
www.FinanceDTA.com
C Exemptions, Reductions and Waivers.

If a project has characteristics that indicate its impact on a particular public facility or infrastructure system will be significantly and permanently smaller than the average impact used to calculate impact fees in this study, the fees should be reduced accordingly. The City may decide to voluntarily waive or reduce the fees that would otherwise apply to a project to promote goals such as affordable housing or economic development. However, the implementation of this policy may not result in increased costs for other development projects and is allowed only if such costs are offset from other revenue sources.

D Developer Improvement Credits
If the City maintains a policy that requires a developer, as a condition of project approval, to construct facilities for which impact fees have been or will be charged, the impact fee imposed on that development project for that type of facility must be adjusted to reflect a credit for such dedication or construction. Furthermore, the impact fee imposed on that development project for that type of facility must be adjusted to reflect a credit for the cost of the facilities or improvements constructed by the developer. If circumstances allow a developer to dedicate land,buildings,or other valuable considerations in lieu of paying fees, the City maintains the discretion to accept or reject such offers and may negotiate the terms under which an offer would be accepted.

E Existing Development Credit
If a project involves the replacement, redevelopment, or intensification of previously existing development,impact fees should be applied only to the portion of the project which represents a net increase in demand for relevant facilities, applying the measure of demand used in this study to calculate that particular fee. Since residential service demand is normally estimated on the basis of demand per dwelling unit, an addition to a single-family dwelling unit typically would not be subject to an impact fee if it does not increase the number of dwelling units in the structure. In any project that results in a net increase in the number of dwelling units, the added units would normally be subjected to impact fees. A similar analysis can be applied to non-residential development using a measure of demand on which impact fees are based.

F Annual Reporting and Accounting of Fees.

AB 1600 requires that both general law and charter cities account for every fee that they collect under its terms. Funds collected for each capital facility or service shall be deposited in separate accounts and not commingled with any other funds for other impact fees. While funds are accruing for individual capital facilities, the City must keep track of each fund and provide an annual report. Section 66006 requires that for each separate account or fund established, the local agency shall, within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year, make available to the public the following information for the fiscal year:

1. A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund; City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study age 1667 2222

SECTION VII

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE
dta SCHEDULE
www.FinanceDTA.com

2. The amount of the fee;

3. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund;

4. The amount of the fees collected, and the interest earned;

5. An identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees;

6. An identification of an approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, as identified in Paragraph (2) of Subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete;

7. A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan; and

8. The amount of refunds made pursuant To Subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocations pursuant to Subdivision (f) of Section 66001.

The City must review the information made available at the next regularly scheduled public meeting not less than 15 days after this information is made available to the public. Notice of the time and place of the meeting, including the address where this information may be reviewed, shall be mailed at least 15 days prior to the meeting to any interested party who files a written request with the local agency for mailed notice of the meeting.

G Refunding Policy
Under the Mitigation Fee Act, Govt. Code i66000 et seq., each DIF must be deposited in a separate capital facilities account and may be expended only for the purposes for which it was collected. For all unexpended fees, the agency must make findings every 5 years that:

1. Identify the purpose to which the fee will be put;

2. Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the unexpended balance and the purpose for which the fee was charged;

3. Ascertain the sources and funding for any as-yet-incomplete public improvements; and

4. Designate the approximate date the agency expects the funding for uncompleted improvements to be deposited in the account [566001(d)(1)]. The Act provides that "if the findings are not made as required by [the Act], the local agency shall refund the moneys in the account" to the current owners of the properties for which the fees were paid [g66001(d)(2)].

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 8 0
age 167-of222

SECTION VII

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE
dta SCHEDULE
www.FinanceDTA.com
Failure to make the findings specified in Mitigation Fee Act requires a refund of all unexpended DIFs. When sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing of the public improvements contained in the CIP, the public agency shall identify "an approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will be commenced" within 180 days of collection of the required funds (Gov. Code .5i66001(e)]. Failure to comply with this requirement also mandates the return of the collected funds, as stated above.

In addition, pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.2(f), ADUs are exempt from incurring impact fees from local agencies, special districts, and water corporations if such unit is less than 750 square feet. If an ADU is 750 square feet or larger, impact fees shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the ADU to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, the water capital improvement fee, water supply fee, and sewer fee shall not be applicable to any accessory dwelling unit created within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure, including, but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure.

This report does not address, nor has DTA been asked to determine, whether any current or proposed development impact fees are valid under the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment Takings Clause. In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado (2024) ___U.S.___, the U.S.

Supreme Court held that its decisions in Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n (1987) 483 U.S. 825 and Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994) 512 U.S. 374 apply to legislatively imposed conditions on land-use permits. But the Supreme Court left it to the California appellate court on remand to address the validity of the traffic impact fee at issue in the case and determine how to apply Nollan/Dolan in this context. DTA cannot predict how courts will resolve such issues in the future and is providing no services or guarantees of any kind concerning the validity of any impact fees under the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment Takings Clause.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study p 1
age 168 0i222

SECTION VII

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE
dta SCHEDULE
www.FinanceDTA.com
N Annual Update of the CIP
It is common for jurisdictions to prepare a CIP in conjunction with a fee program. In fact, AB 1600 encourages the use of a CIP to assist in scheduling and implementing the services and improvements funded through impact fees (Gov. Code 566002). A good CIP establishes a schedule of improvements necessary to accommodate the projected growth. The CIP must indicate the approximate size, location, time of availability, and estimated costs of all improvements to be financed through fees [Gov. Code 566002(a)). In order to create a usable CIP, a municipality must have an accurate understanding of its current service baseline and its projected growth. This requires an understanding of when,where, and how growth may occur within the area. The more information collected about future growth, the more comprehensive and accurate the CIP will be. A CIP can also help a municipality determine when new public improvements or the expansion of existing public improvements is needed in relation to the timing of new development.

If the public agency adopts a CIP, it must be updated annually [Gov. Code i66002(b)]. 10 days' published notice is provided pursuant to Government Code 565090 and is also provided to any city or county that may be significantly affected by the CIP. If a CIP is adopted and is used as a basis for identifying the use of impact fees,the CIP must be adopted and updated annually by a resolution of the governing body at a public hearing. In the absence of a CIP,an alternative is to identify improvements in other public documents, such as General Plans, land studies, and other documents.

I Administration Costs of Fee Implementation
The cost of implementing the DIFs is not included in the fees themselves and must be determined by the City. To recover the periodic costs of updating the fees studies, implementing the program, ongoing staff costs, managing the updates, and preparing annual and five-year updates required by the Mitigation Fee Act, an administration fee may be added to the impact fees calculated in this Fee Study. DTA recommends that these fee expenses are handled administratively and pass the costs on to user fees charged to applicants for processing fee applications. The calculation of the administrative cost for each fee in this study is presented in each respective fee section and in the Executive Summary.

J Indexing of Impact Fee Rates.

The DIFs presented in this report are based on current facility costs provided by the City and should be adjusted annually to account for inflation. The purpose of the adjustment is to account for future escalation in costs for land, equipment, vehicles, and construction.

DTA recommends that after adoption, the fee should be reviewed each year and adjusted by a reliable index such as the ENR BCI generally used as the primary basis for indexing construction costs. Ordinarily,land costs make up a significant portion of the costs covered by the fees and do not lend themselves to traditional cost indexes. As such, land costs should be adjusted to changes in local land prices.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 2 age 169 .i222

SECTION VII

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE
dta SCHEDULE
www.FinanceDTA.com
K Updating the Impact Fee Study
As stated in Section III, AB 602 was signed into law in September of 2021 by the Governor of California, and it provides new Statewide requirements for local jurisdictions seeking to impose DIFs on development projects. Among these requirements are that Nexus Studies shall be updated at least every 8 years as of January 1, 2023. However, DTA concurs with the generally accepted policy that 5 years is a good rule-of-thumb time period for impact fee updates, particularly because the required 5-Year Findings (see above) can be approved at that same time. In some instances, fees may remain valid for a longer period of time if the City's land use and facility plans do not change. A case in point is a municipality at or near full build-out capacity. However, a dynamic, growing municipality facing significant changes in land use would do itself a disservice if it maintained the current fee structure for too long without a fee study to update the current rates.

L Administering an Impact Fee Program.

Creating and administering an impact fee program can be a labor-intensive process requiring considerable preparation and training that should not be undertaken more often than necessary. A well-planned fee program can generate sufficient funds to allow the City to adequately mitigate impacts created by future development. Conversely, a poorly planned fee can result in either collecting too little money and being forced to pay for public facilities required as a result of future development through its General Fund or collecting too much money based on an unsupported fee program, thus exposing the City to a fee challenge or a requirement to refund unexpected proceeds.

All personnel involved in the process, including accounting, capital budgeting, and project management of any other area, must be made fully aware of the difference between impact fees and other fees, such as user fees, and of the guidelines and restrictions placed on the expenditure of impact fee revenues. The building impact fees generated in this report are tied to specific facility improvements and cost estimates provided by the City. The fees must be expended accordingly and must be able to withstand any challenges and show that the funds have been properly directed in accordance with proper AB 1600 guidelines.

City of Upland,CA September 13,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 83
age 170 of222

SECTION VIII
dtct SUMMARY OF FEES
www.FinanceDTA.com

VITT SUMMARY OF FEES
The total proposed fee amounts to finance new development's share of the costs of new facilities are summarized below.

Table 71: Proposed Development Impact Fee Summary (Includes 2.0% Administration cost) Residential per Square Foot on-Residential per 1,000 Square Feet La
Single-Family Multi-Family Commercial Office Industri.

General Facilities $0.78 $0.78 $1,305 $2,022 $669 Police $0.43 $0.43 $721 $1,118 $370 Parks $4.80 $4.80
Transportation $0.07 $0.07 $494 $296 $89 Water $0.87 $0.87 $436 $611 $349 Sewer $0.05 $0.05 $27 $27 $27
Storm Drain $0.90 $0.90 $1,059 $1,003 $947 City of Upland,CA August 5,2024
Development Impact Justification Study 4
age 1710 f 222

APPENDIX A
City of Upland
Development Impact Fee Justification Study

FEE DERIVATION

WORKSHEETS

Page 172 of 222 ends

Upland City CouncilOctober 28, 2024

Upland City Council
October 28, 2024