Resolution No.
• No new information showing ability to reduce significant effects identified in the EIR: There are no new significant impacts requiring identification of new or additional alternatives to the Project, or consideration of new or additional more significant effects identified in the EIR.
Amendment No. 8 to the CASASP approved in 2025 allows billboards as a permitted use and allows two digital billboards to be constructed in place of two secondary freeway pylon signs with LED electric message center displays.
Amendment No. 8 was determined not to create a significant change and was consistent with the findings relative to Section 15162 and Section 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines.
The net difference in Amendment 8 than what was previously approved under Amendment No. 7 would result in the proposed two digital Billboards decreasing total sign area by 413 square feet, and an increase of 10 feet in height above the adjacent freeway roadway than the two secondary freeway pylon signs being replaced. Both digital billboards will be designed as a pylon sign, and the colors and design will be consistent with the four existing Primary Freeway Pylon signs.
In addition, the Relocation Agreement and the two digital billboards permitted would also be independently Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines (Class 3 New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), in that the project involves the installation of two off-premises advertising billboards with electronic displays. None of the exceptions to the Class 3 exemption apply, as the project would not impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern. There are no cumulative impacts, as the two billboards would replace two secondary freeway pylon signs which total sign area is more than the two digital billboards. There are no unusual circumstances surrounding the project sites and the project would not damage resources within a state scenic highway, is not located on a hazardous waste site, and would not impact the significance of a historical resource as the sites are currently within an urbanized commercial corridor along a major highway.
Section 4. Approve Relocation Agreement. The City Council hereby approves the Relocation Agreement in substantially final form as attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager, with the concurrence of the City Attorney, to make any non-financially substantive changes determined to be appropriate and in the City's interest and execute said Agreement. City Manager is hereby authorized to take any additional steps necessary to facilitate the intent of this action.
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 No.
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 23RD day of March, 2026.
Bill Velto, Mayor
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 23rd day of March, 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
ATTEST:
Keri Johnson, City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
RELOCATION AGREEMENT
[Attached behind this cover page]
BILLBOARD RELOCATION AGREEMENT
THIS BILLBOARD RELOCATION AGREEMENT ("the Agreement") is made and entered into as of this 23rd day of March, 2026 (the "Effective Date"), by and between the CITY OF UPLAND, a California municipal corporation ("the City"), and LAMAR CENTRAL OUTDOOR,LLC, a Delaware limited liability company("the Company"). Hereafter the City and the Company are sometimes referred to as "Party" or collectively as the "Parties."
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Company owns and operates eight (8) legal non-conforming billboard advertising structures within the city limits of City (each a "Billboard" and collectively the "Billboards");
WHEREAS,the Company had previously owned and operated a total of thirteen(13)legal non-conforming billboard (the "Original Billboards"), however as part of previous "good faith" negations, the Company voluntarily decided to not renew the leases of five (5) billboards and removed them and are seeking credit as part of this Agreement, pursuant to Section 7.7 (Sign Standards) of the Colonies at San Antonio Specific Plan, for the two (2) new billboards.
WHEREAS, Upland Municipal Code, Section 17.15 (Signs), and the California Outdoor Advertising Act, Business and Professions Code, Section 5200, et. seq. (in particular Bus. &Prof.
Code Section 5412), allow local entities and display owners to enter into relocation agreements which allow local entities to continue development in a planned manner without expenditure of public funds while allowing the continued maintenance of private investment and a medium of public communications;
WHEREAS, the California Outdoor Advertising Act (in particular Bus. & Prof. Code Section 5412) specifically empowers, and encourages, local agencies to enter into relocation agreements on whatever terms are agreeable to the City and display owners and to adopt ordinances and resolutions providing for relocation of displays; WHEREAS,on September 22,2025 and October 27,2025,the City Council approved first and second reading of the ordinance accordingly to amend Section 7.7 (Sign Standards) of the Colonies at San Antonio Specific Plan to allow billboards as a permitted use subject to specific regulations and development standard;
WHEREAS, Section 7.7 (Sign Standards) of the Colonies at San Antonio Specific Plan, permits a billboard company to remove a minimum of two (2) existing "static"billboards located anywhere within the City per each new high resolution digital billboard installed within the Colonies at San Antonio Specific Plan on private property, subject to approval of a Relocation Agreement approved by the City;
WHEREAS, the Company wishes to credit the previous removal of four (4) Billboards as identified in Exhibit"A"(Listed as Nos. 1 through 4)to this Agreement(the"Original Billboards") in exchange for the right to construct and erect two (2) new digital Billboards within the Colonies 1 Page 243 of 654
at San Antonio Specific Plan area in compliance with Section 7.7 (Sign Standards) of the Specific Plan, on the properties identified in Exhibit`B"to this Agreement("Relocated Billboards"); WHEREAS,the Company proposes to provide an enhanced benefit to the City by replacing the outdated reader board sign located at City Hall with a larger, higher resolution digital display.
WHEREAS, the City and the Company now wish to enter into an Agreement to memorialize the terms and conditions upon which the Company will be credited with the removal of four (4) Original Billboards and construct the Relocated Billboards on property owned by the Colonies Crossroads, LLC.
OPERATIVE PROVISIONS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing true and correct Recitals, which Recitals are incorporated herein by reference, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
1. Findings. The City Council finds, determines, and declares as follows:
A. This Agreement is consistent with the goals, objectives,purposes and provisions of the Upland General Plan, Colonies at San Antonio Specific Plan and the Upland Municipal Code.
B. The proposed locations for the Relocated Billboards are compatible with the uses and structures on the sites and in the surrounding areas.
C. This Agreement contributes to the reduction of visual clutter in the City by resulting in a net decrease in existing off-premises advertising displays, resulting in a reduction in advertising square footage of 1,344 square feet within the City.
D. This Agreement promotes activities of City-wide benefit and interest; E. This Agreement provides enhanced benefit to the City by providing an upgraded digital sign at City Hall and by providing for the City's use to post public information announcements on the Relocated Billboards.
F. The Relocated Billboards will not create traffic or safety hazards with regard to onsite access circulation or visibility.
G. The Relocated Billboards will not interfere with onsite parking or landscaping required by City ordinance or permit.
H. The Relocated Billboards will not otherwise result in a threat to the general health, safety, and welfare of City residents.
2. Term of Agreement. Unless earlier terminated as provided for herein,this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue in full force and effect until the Termination of the Lease Agreement between the Colonies and the Company. 2 Page 244 of 654
3. Relocated Billboards. In exchange for the ability to develop the Relocated Billboards identified in Exhibit `B," Company shall provide evidence of the removal of those Original Billboards identified in Exhibit"A."
A. Within sixty(60) days of the approval of this Agreement, the Company shall, at its sole cost and expense, submit a sign permit plan(s),with accompanying fees, to the City Building & Safety Department for the development of the Relocated Billboards.
B. The Parties acknowledge that the Relocated Billboards will be placed on privately- owned property subject to the Agreement between the City and the Company. If the Relocated Billboards are not constructed, the obligations of the Parties under this Agreement shall terminate and the Agreement shall be of no further force or effect.
4. Conditions of Relocation.
A, Removal of Existing "Static" Billboards. Prior to building permit issuance, the billboard company must obtain approval of a Relocation Agreement which credits the previous removal of(4) existing "static" billboards, as identified in Exhibit A, for the two (2) new high resolution digital billboard installed within the Colonies at San Antonio Specific Plan.
B. Maximum Height and Display Area. The maximum height of the billboard shall not exceed 65 feet above the freeway grade, and the display area shall not exceed 672 square feet with dimensions not exceeding 48 feet in width and 14 feet in height.
C. Sign Face Overhang. The Relocated Billboards shall not overhang on to any State Highway, or other public rights-of-way or property lines.
D. Timing of Message Changes. The timing of message changes on any Relocated Billboard shall change no more frequently than once every six seconds; and that blinking and/or moving characters shall be prohibited, except when necessary to change the message.
E. No Traffic Hazards. The Relocated Billboards shall not create a traffic hazard by distracting drivers or any obstructing traffic visibility, and shall be screened, tinted, shielded or otherwise modified, as necessary, to eliminate excessive glare, as deemed sufficient by the Development Services Director.
F. Automatic Dimmers. Each Relocated Billboard shall contain automatic dimmers that maintain brightness at a level of 0.3 foot candles over ambient light at 250 feet. Each Relocated Billboard shall be equipped with a mechanism to monitor its brightness.
G. Applicable Laws and Rules. The Relocated Billboard shall comply with all applicable requirements of state, federal, and local law, including, but not limited to, the Outdoor Advertising Act, the Colonies at San Antonio Specific Plan and the Upland Municipal Code. In the event of any inconsistencies, the most stringent requirements shall apply.
H. Other Sign Modifications. This Agreement applies only to the Relocated Billboards contemplated by this Agreement. Any additional changes, alterations, or modifications of any kind may warrant a modification to this Agreement.
3 Page 245 of 654
I. Maintenance. The Relocated Billboard shall be properly maintained so that inoperative or improperly lighted bulbs do not impair the appearance and legibility of the sign.
5. Relocated Billboards. Upon verification of the removal of the Original Billboards, Company shall be entitled to construct the Relocated Billboards upon the properties identified in Exhibit `B," in accordance with the Site Plans for each Relocated Billboard attached hereto as Exhibits`B-1"and"B-2."Company shall be entitled to construct each of the Relocated Billboards with a two-sided changeable message digital display.
6. Substitute Locations.
A. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parties acknowledge that, irrespective of City Council approval of this Agreement, Company may still need to acquire property interests and permit approvals from other governmental agencies (i.e. Caltrans) to develop the Relocated Billboards on the properties identified in Exhibit"B."
B. Should any of the relocation sites be disapproved or be determined to be infeasible for any reason, Company shall be entitled to develop Relocated Billboards on substitute site(s), subject to City Council approval, in its sole and absolute discretion, and consistent with the terms of this Agreement and applicable City regulations. Company hereby expressly agrees that the City shall not be bound by any implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in connection with the approval or disapproval of any substitute site(s).
C. Approval of substitute relocation site(s) shall be accomplished through an amendment to this Agreement. The need for identification and approval of one or more substitute relocation sites shall not affect Company's ability to develop a Relocated Billboard on a site otherwise approved in this Agreement.
7. Public Service Messages. As further consideration for the City's Agreement to allow the Company to develop the Relocated Billboards, City shall be entitled to place public service announcements and/or display messages and other matters of public interest on any such Relocated Billboard on an "as available"basis; provided, however, that messages placed by City on the Relocated Billboards must be limited to non-profit, public service messages (hereinafter "Public Service Messages"). The term Public Service Message shall expressly exclude any message advertising any business, company or event where such message would have a direct and tangible economic benefit to a private, for-profit company. For all Public Service Messages, City shall be responsible for providing Company with the advertising copy. Company shall not be responsible for producing or substantially modifying any advertising copy for a Public Service Message and shall have 48 hours after receipt and approval of advertising copy to display the Public Service Message.
8. Replacement of City Hall Digital Sign. Prior to constructing the Replacement Billboards, Company shall replace the existing Upland City Hall digital sign with a larger, higher resolution digital display ("Upgraded Sign"). The Upgraded Sign shall have a minimum resolution pitch of 17mm or better and a display face not exceeding 48 square feet and shall contain automatic dimmers that maintain brightness at a level of 0.3 foot candles over ambient light at 250 feet.
Rendering images of existing City Hall digital sign and Upgraded Sign are attached hereto as 4 Page 246 of 654
Exhibit"C." After City has inspected the Upgraded Sign and determined,in its sole and reasonable discretion, that it meets the requirements of this section, Company shall have no duty to maintain, service, replace, repair, or otherwise care for the Upgraded Sign and cannot guaranty against any hardware or electrical malfunctions. City is solely responsible for the maintenance, service, replacement, repair and ultimate care of the Upgraded Sign.
9. Indemnity. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Company, as a material part of the consideration to be rendered to City under this Agreement, shall indemnify City, its officials, officers,agents,employees,and any successors or assigns to the City's rights under this Agreement (collectively"City Parties")and shall hold and save them and each of them harmless from any and all actions, suits, claims, damages to persons or property, losses, costs, penalties, obligations, errors, omissions or liabilities, (hereinafter "Indemnified Claims and Liabilities") that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm or entity arising out of or in connection with the use, construction, and maintenance of the Relocated Billboard by Company, its officers, agents, contractors, subcontractors, and employees (collectively "Company Parties"), and in connection with the foregoing indemnity:
A. Company shall defend any action or actions filed in connection with any of said Indemnified Claims and Liabilities with counsel of City's choosing, and will pay all costs and expenses, including legal costs and attorneys' fees incurred in connection therewith; B. Company shall promptly pay any judgment rendered against the City and the City Parties for any such Indemnified Claims and Liabilities; and Company shall save and hold City and City Parties harmless therefrom; and
C. In the event City Parties are made a party to any action or proceeding filed or prosecuted against Company Parties for such Indemnified Claims and Liabilities, Company shall pay to City any and all costs and expenses incurred by City Parties in such action or proceeding, including but not limited to, legal costs and attorneys' fees.
D. Company and City further acknowledge that Company shall not indemnify City Parties for any Indemnified Claims and Liabilities caused by or arising out of the gross negligence or willful misconduct of City Parties.
E. This Section 9 shall survive termination or completion of this Agreement.
10. City Authority to Pursue Its Own Billboards or Advertising Displays. The Company hereby acknowledges and agrees that the City is a separate legal entity with the authority to engage in various municipal activities, including but not limited to, the placement, construction, operation,and maintenance of its own City-owned signs or billboards for public,non-commercial, or commercial purposes at locations other than the New Billboard Sites described herein. The Company expressly waives and releases any and all claims, demands,actions,or causes of action, at law or in equity, that it may now have or may have in the future against the City(or its elected officials, officers, employees, or agents) which are related to, or connected with, the City's independent decision to pursue or operate its own billboard or advertising displays in the future, provided such City activities do not violate the express terms of this specific Relocation Agreement or applicable law.
5 Page 247 of 654
11. Company's Advertising Policy/Sign Content. The Parties acknowledge that public advertising is an important form of public communication. City desires to preserve this type of communication while preserving the character of the community and prevent exposure of its residents to advertising which City's residents might find offensive.Accordingly,Company agrees and covenants for itself and its successors and assigns, that any advertising or display on the Relocated Billboards shall comply with the following:
A. Advertising for adult entertainment, including, but not limited to, topless bars, nightclubs, or establishments that feature nude dancing, or mud wrestling; advertisement for any adult business featuring sales of adult novelty items,books,magazines,videos or tapes,advertising with any materials, image, or content that could reasonably be considered sexually explicit or pornographic shall be prohibited.
B. Advertising that advertises any Adult Oriented Business, displays "Specified Anatomical Areas," or displays "Specified Sexual Activities," as those terms are defined in the City's Adult Business Ordinance shall be prohibited.
C. Advertising that contains references to,or pictures of,tobacco products or cannabis products shall be prohibited.
D. Advertising that Caltrans determines is likely to interfere with, mislead or distract traffic or conflict with any traffic control system or traffic circulation shall be prohibited.
E. Advertising that contains false or misleading information shall be prohibited.
F. Advertising that depicts violence, anti-social behavior except when encouraged by a government, or illegal behavior shall be prohibited.
G. Advertising that holds up an individual or groups of people to public ridicule, derision, or defames any individual or group or advocates discrimination against any individual or group shall be prohibited.
H. Advertising that is obscene, profane or vulgar shall be prohibited (advertising described in subparagraphs A though H shall collectively or individually be referred to as "Objectionable Advertising").
I. Company shall operate in compliance with the requirements of the Outdoor Advertising Act and the Outdoor Advertising Association of America's Code of Industry Principles.
J. Company shall include in its advertising lease agreements and any other agreements related to the Relocated Billboard, provisions that require compliance with the terms of the approved Relocation Agreement and prohibiting Objectionable Advertising. Such provisions will allow Company to cancel such agreements and allow Company to immediately remove illegal or Objectionable Advertising upon receipt of notice from the City. Without waiving or limiting any right Company may have to enforce the terms of this Agreement, and in consideration of the rights and privileges afforded to Company under this Agreement, Company on behalf of itself, and its 6 Page 248 of 654
successors, heirs and assigns, desires to release,waive and discharge any claim, demand, cause of action, objection, or protest related to the City's enforcement of the terms in the approved Relocation Agreement.
12. Preference for Local Businesses. The billboards are intended to support local businesses in Upland, as well as advertising regional or national businesses. In order to promote local businesses in Upland and grow the Upland Chamber of Commerce's membership, the Company shall establish an advertising program that provides a twenty percent(20%)discount on advertising for businesses located in Upland. members of the Upland Chamber of Commerce and the Upland Chamber of Commerce itself
13. General Provisions.
A. Assignment. The Company may only assign or otherwise transfer this Agreement to any other person, firm, or entity upon presentation to the City of an assignment and assumption agreement in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney and upon receipt of the City's written approval of such assignment or transfer by the City Manager. Any and all assignments must be approved by the City,prior to taking effect. After a transfer or assignment as permitted by this Section, the City shall look solely to such assignee or transferee for compliance with the provisions of this Agreement which have been assigned or transferred.
B. Waiver. The waiver by any Party of any breach of any term, covenant or condition herein contained shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant or condition, or of any subsequent breach of the same term, covenant or condition.
C. Notices. All notices and other communications required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be sent by: (a)certified or registered mail,postage pre-paid, return receipt requested, or(b) a recognized overnight carrier that provides proof of delivery, and shall be addressed as follows:
If to the Company: If to the City:
Lamar Central Outdoor, LLC City of Upland
449 East Parkcenter Circle Attn: Development Services Director San Bernardino, CA 92408 460 N. Euclid Avenue
Attention: Brian Smith Upland, CA 91786
With a Copy to: With a Copy to:
Stream Kim Hicks Wrage &Alfaro, PC City of Upland
Attn: Theodore Stream, Esq. Attn: City Manager
3403 Tenth Street, Suite 700 460 N. Euclid Avenue
Riverside, CA 92501 Upland, CA 91786
Best Best&Krieger LLP
Attn: City Attorney
7 Page 249 of 654
2855 East Guasti Road, Suite 400
Ontario, CA 91761
D. Notices shall be deemed effective upon receipt or rejection only.
E. Authority to Enter Agreement. All Parties have the requisite power and authority to execute, deliver and perform the Agreement. All Parties warrant that the individuals who have signed the Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority to make this Agreement and bind each respective Party.
F. Amendment/Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by all Parties.
G. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of litigation between the Parties arising out of this Agreement,the prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys' fees and other costs and expenses incurred, including attorneys' fees on appeal, and all other reasonable costs and expenses for investigation of such action, including the conducting of discovery, in addition to whatever other relief to which it may be entitled.
H. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence of each and every provision of this Agreement.
I. Miscellaneous. This Agreement embodies the entire Agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior or contemporaneous understandings between the Parties related to the Agreement. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid,the balance shall remain binding upon the Parties. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with its plain meaning, and not in favor of or against either Party. This Agreement shall be construed according to the laws of the State of California.
J. Jurisdiction and Venue; Governing Law. Any action at law or in equity arising under this Agreement or brought by a party hereto for the purpose of enforcing, construing or determining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and tried in the federal court with jurisdiction over San Bernardino County and the state courts located in San Bernardino County, California. This Agreement shall be governed by California law.
K. Exhibits. Exhibits A through C identified as follows, are attached to this Agreement and are incorporated herein as though set forth in full:
Exhibit A ORIGINAL BILLBOARDS
Exhibit B SITES SELECTED FOR RELOCATED BILLBOARDS Exhibit B-1 SOUTH SIDE OF 210 FREEWAY
Exhibit B-2 NORTH SIDE OF 210 FREEWAY
Exhibit C CITY HALL DIGITAL SIGN
L. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original but together shall constitute one Agreement. 8 Page 250 of 654
M. Electronic Signatures. The Parties hereto hereby agree that electronic signatures are acceptable and shall have the same force and effect as original wet signatures. [Signature page follows]
9 Page 251 of 654
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date set forth below.
"The Company"
CITY OF UPLAND
A California municipal corporation
LAMAR CENTRAL OUTDOOR, LLC
By:
By: By:
Michael Blay, Its:
City Manager
ATTEST:
By:
Keri Johnson,
City Clerk By:
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Best Best and Krieger, City Attorney
10 Page 252 of 654
Exhibit "A"
ORIGINAL BILLBOARDS
Location Lease No. Size (sq/ft) Type Faces
1. FOOTHILL BLVD. S/L 0.2 MI 259-00657-01 576 Static 2 W/O CENTRAL AVE.
REMOVED IN JUNE 2020
2. FOOTHILL BLVD. S/L 0.1 MI 259-00658-01 576 Static 2 W/O CENTRAL AVE.
REMOVED IN MAY 2020
3. FOOTHILL BLVD.N/L W/O 259-07417-01 400 Static 2 BENSON AVE.
REMOVED IN JUNE 2020
4. BENSON AVE.W/L 0.1 MI 259-7960-01 144 Static 2 S/O 9TH ST.
REMOVED IN MAY 2020
5 FOOTHILL BLVD N/L, 1795' 259-00289-01 576 Static 2
W/O CENTRAL AVE
6 CENTRAL AVE.W/L 195' 259 596 O1 400 Static 2
N/O ARROW RTE
BENSON AVE W/L 626'N/O 7 259-00881-01 576 Static 2 11TH STREET
8 FOOTHILL BLVD.N/L 0.3 MI 259 03183 O 1 478 Static 2 W/O CENTRAL AVE.,
UPLAND
9 FOOTHILL BLVD SL 0.3 MI 259-07414-01 478 Static 2 E/O CENTRAL AVE.
10. CENTRAL AVE WL 200' S/O 259-07416-01 576 Static 2 FOOTHILL BLVD.
11. MOUNTAIN AVE WL S/O 259-07434-01 192 Static 2
ARROW ROUTE
REMOVED
2 CENTRAL AVE.WL 160' S/O 259-07462-01 478 Static 2 11TH ST
l 3 FOOTHILL BLVD. S/L 175' 259-07468-01 576 Static 2
E/O CENTRAL AVE
11
Exhibit "B"
SITES FOR RELOCATED BILLBOARDS
Site Location Size (H x W) Type Faces
1 South side of the 210 Freeway, west 14'x 48' Electronic 2 of the Campus Avenue Eastbound
Off-Ramp
2 North side of the 210 Freeway, east 14'x 48' Electronic 2 of the Campus Avenue Westbound
Off-Ramp
12
EXHIBIT B-1
SOUTH SIDE OF 210 FREEWAY,
WEST OF THE CAMPUS AVENUE / EASTBOUND OFF—RAMP
Y
�y . � t
^:
•
•
--• \ - .. .
-4 .,Ar ''A\s:. --'54. \‘\ '-). ' ' "- ,-- 1. / 41,- 145 �-.� e :c.
i - Ss = `• ii__.. r / r
difir
- \\\:--'.-\A"itt''.
It
::,:,,,:- __ :i :.,- \ ..$ .., .A0.\,.-A-';,:, \''% . . :.„ _... . - s, r
\\, = ,r. /
''.A:'r - 4... 'Or Y r V f �. -..L.P.a 45„.
13
EXHIBIT B-2
NORTH SIDE OF THE 210 FREEWAY,
EAST OF THE CAMPUS AVENUE / WESTBOUND OFF-RAMP
.,.".0-)11,._' --..::I— }. 1,r r' — r:1 ;ice -... _-—...-7.-,,..4.._4 ht _i~i.' 4
1 d./
t'
---iTii i rti,i-l.i.,..-_
.:,.P...,-.O:-...._-:W-...
-r,..-:
'11it.7,..;:-._.•.
-_-.__:.!4 'I•N-:41L1.-:1%1.-.11 4101.71-4--i;v-..i..i 8'' ,. --Y...1.P."s:--A-7'-..‘..
,.,. .,. ...,.....,.. , ,,
_ ___
,,..,, •
.,,,,,, „,„._ k,
k. iglu tp. - ....
T, --, 7, i . ,,..q.... ir. R
11. „- L.. . 4',.• ..:. .
I. • '1" .-, '-'tk. ii i et:kr v — . -• F/f -Immo- -. k r : -.. - 1 • ..._._,, , .. _ - r F. a Ao .....
�. �Il
- -- - - ,. . .ergs
16 47
14
Exhibit"C"
City Hall Display Sign
Existin
i joifirer.;,-
c.
d , .
..
o , .
is_
..1 ... L iv
•;.0.1mit.
,.. :,.
__
D RK 'ois. +
FRONT rm;.teiGE
ram- L - - .;�i'lk .. 4 %
_ _-__...�.- _. 7.
�- - ----��� . ..o.
_-- - _ -LAC —
w.
New
,..*
i ,, _ ,*.r•
/-• z
:, v R
i .He
i.
-
-gin
Ililliir
15
I48ft
14f t
4.„,,* mom j_3ft
COLONIES
CROSSROADS
SPECIFICATIONS:
-PYLON DESIGN AND LED ILLUMINATION
TO BE IDENTICAL ON BOTH SIDES
65 ft ABOVE FREEWAY GRADE
-PYLON COLORS TO CONFORM TO
EXISTING COLONIES CROSSROADS
FREEWAY PYLON SIGNS
-NON MESSAGE CENTER TEXT
TO BE LED-ILLUMINATED
-ALUMINUM COLUMN COVER TO BE
TEXCOTE FINISH
CITY OF UPLAND NORTH
FREEWAY GRADE pQr 058 of 654
I48ft I
14ft
3ft
COLONIES
CROSSROADS
65 ft ABOVE FREEWAY GRADE
SPECIFICATIONS:
-PYLON DESIGN AND LED ILLUMINATION
TO BE IDENTICAL ON BOTH SIDES
-PYLON COLORS TO CONFORM TO
EXISTING COLONIES CROSSROADS
FREEWAY PYLON SIGNS
FREEWAY GRADE -NON MESSAGE CENTER TEXT
TO BE LED-ILLUMINATED
-ALUMINUM COLUMN COVER TO BE
TEXCOTE FINISH
35ft
CITY OF UPLAND SOUTH
59 of 654
4 Ov DA
ti����
� . _ -� � , CALIFORNIA LEVINE ACT DISCLOSURE STATEMENT oa .®; tip
41,00
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 $500 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 $500 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):
LO
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 $500 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 proposalor appli9 R, 31/ OD.01
Date Sig atur of authorized individual
Company/Applicant Name
(Levine Act definitions on reverse side)
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 Req 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 Gov. Code 84308(a)(2) entitlement for use and who has a financial interest in 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 Req 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 Req 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 Req 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 Req Contract an agency employee.A contract with an independent 18438.2(a)(3)(C)-(D) contractor is NOT a personal employment contract.
4c, °v °p`q� CITFUP LAND
�" - -
.�, �` "The City of Gracious Living"
c�lrFOR�i�
DATE: March 23,2026
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:DAMIEN R.ARRULA,ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
RICHARD GONZALES,DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS -UTILITIES
NICOLE DEMOET,ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS MANAGER MICHELLE MADRIZ,MANAGEMENT ANALYST II—UTILITIES DIVISION LIZ RODRIGUEZ,MANAGEMENT ANALYST I—UTILITIES DIVISION
SUBJECT: SET A PUBLIC HEARING AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE AND MAIL A PROP 218
NOTIFICATION FOR WATER,RECYCLED WATER,AND SEWER RATE ADJUSTMENTS RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is recommended that the City Council: 1) set a public hearing tentatively for June, 8, 2026, to consider proposed water and recycled water service rate adjustments to become effective July 1,2026,and sewer service rate adjustments to become effective July 1,2026; 2)direct staff to prepare and mail a Proposition 218 notice; 3)receive and file the Water, Recycled Water, and Wastewater Rate Study; and 4) consider the rate schedules and related adjustments as recommended by staff for inclusion in the Proposition 218 notice and subsequent City Council action.
GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal of ensuring customer rates are cost-effective,equitable,and generate the necessary revenue to cover operational,debt service,capital investments,and reserves to meet program requirements.
BACKGROUND
In 2025,the City of Upland engaged Raftelis Financial Consultants,Inc.to prepare a comprehensive Water,Recycled Water,and Wastewater Rate Study. The Study was conducted to evaluate the long-term financial needs of the City's utility enterprise funds, perform cost-of-service analyses, and develop equitable and defensible five-year rate schedules in compliance with the requirements of Proposition 218.
The City provides potable water,recycled water,and wastewater collection services to residents and businesses within the City of Upland and portions of its sphere of influence.These enterprise funds are supported primarily through user rates and charges,which must be sufficient to fund ongoing operations and maintenance,address capital replacement and rehabilitation of aging infrastructure,meet debt service obligations,and maintain prudent reserve levels to support emergency preparedness,cash flow stability,and regulatory compliance.
Raftelis' analysis incorporated the City's recently completed Water,Recycled Water and Wastewater Master Plans.
In addition,Raftelis'rate studies evaluated financial data,operational costs,capital improvement program needs,debt obligations, and customer usage information. The studies evaluated the adequacy of existing rates and assessed the long-term financial condition of each utility,under both current rate structures and proposed revenue scenarios,with the objective of ensuring long-term fiscal sustainability while maintaining service levels and compliance with regulatory requirements.
• This action does not approve new rates.Rather,it initiates the Proposition 218 public noticing process by setting a public hearing date tentatively for June 8, 2026, provided staff may adjust the date if needed to ensure compliance with Proposition 218 and other applicable law,and directing staff to prepare and mail the required notices. Following the public hearing,and provided no majority protest exists,the City Council may consider the adoption of updated water,recycled water,and wastewater rates and the approval of a Resolution adopting Water,Recycled Water,and Wastewater(Sewer)Service Fee Adjustments,including Wholesale Pass-Through Charges.
Pursuant to Proposition 218 (California Constitution, Article XIII D, Section 6), the City is required to conduct a public hearing and consider all written protests against the proposed changes and increases to the water, sewer, and recycled water rates. If at the conclusion of the public hearing the written protests against the proposed changes do
not constitute a majority of the City's affected parcels, the City Council may consider and adopt the proposed Resolution amending the water,sewer,and recycled water service charges and fees.
Pursuant to Proposition 218 (California Constitution,Article XIII D, Section 6),the City is required to comply with the following procedures prior to increasing water,sewer,and recycled water service fees and charges:
Proposition 218 Procedure:
1. Parcels upon which the increased fee or charge is proposed to be imposed have been identified and Proposition 218 Notice"Notice"will be mailed to(a)the record owner(as defined in California Government Code Section 53750(j) (the "Owner") of each identified parcel (as defined in California Government Code Section 53750(g),and(b)any customer of record who,at the time the notice is mailed,has a billing account with the City and is directly liable to pay the fee("Customer")for an identified parcel.
2. The Notice will contain (a) the amount of the fee or charge; (b) the basis on which it was calculated; (c) reason for the increase,and(d)the date,time,and location the City Council will conduct a public hearing on the proposed increase.
3. A public hearing, upon approval by City Council, will be scheduled (at least 45 days after the Notice is mailed) to consider all written protests against the proposed increased fees. If, at the conclusion of the hearing,written protests against the proposed increased fee are presented by a majority of Owners/Customers of parcels to be charged,the City may not increase the fee.
AB 2257
AB 2257 was codified into Government Code Section 53759.1 and 53759.2 and provides an administrative remedy for ratepayers that wish to address a legal issue with the proposed rate increase.AB 2257 provides the ratepayers with a procedure for alleging noncompliance with the provisions of Article XIII D of the California Constitution for any new, increased, or extended water or sewer fee or assessment via a timely submitted written objection to that fee or assessment that specifies the grounds for alleging noncompliance.
By implementing this procedure, the City is able to address any potential legal issues prior to adoption of the rates.
Failure of a ratepayer to submit a timely valid legal objection prohibits them from any future judicial action or proceeding to review,invalidate,challenge,set aside,rescind,void,or annul the fee or assessment for failure to comply with Proposition 218.This procedure also provides a framework for the administrative record that will be used in such a proceeding.
The City shall comply with the requirements of AB 2257 to establish an administrative remedy for ratepayers. The Proposition 218 Notice will include all necessary information regarding this procedure including instructions on how to submit a formal written and legal objection. Ratepayers will have an opportunity to submit an objection regarding a proposed property-related water fee or charge,or any special assessment,to the City(local public agency governing body's)attention prior to the deadline established by the City as part of the rate or assessment consideration process (4:00 PM on May 18,2026).A copy of the prepared Proposition 218 Notice is included as an attachment to this staff report.
The current and proposed rates will be set forth in a resolution or resolutions relating to services and fees for water, recycled water,and sewer.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
Proposed Rates
Utility services for water,sewer,and recycled water are operated as separate Enterprise Funds and are not commingled with the City's General Fund. Utility services are funded by fees and charges (rates), and the budgets are set bi- annually with mid-year and annual check-ins. Rates and services are reviewed periodically to ensure that the established service rates are:
• Adequate to recover costs reasonably borne in providing the services. • Equitable to all customer classes.
• In compliance with all State and Federal regulations. • Easily explained to customers.
The basis and reasons for the proposed changes and rate increases are to enable the City to recover operating expenses, and to maintain the operational and financial stability of the utilities, while maintaining our commitment to provide the highest quality services at the lowest possible rates for our customers. The proposed rates are based upon multi- year financial plans. The multi-year financial plans assess the City's revenue requirements for both operations and capital facilities for water, recycled water, and sewer, including information from the most recent master plans. The proposed water and recycled water rate adjustments would be implemented on July 1, 2026, and on each January 1 thereafter,through and including January 1,2030.The City's proposed sewer rate adjustments would be implemented on July 1, 2026, and each January 1 thereafter, through and including January 1, 2030. Additionally, the City is proposing to pass-through wholesale rate increases as they are adopted by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency(IEUA) for local implementation(typically July 1'of each fiscal year)through the end of 2030.
The Rate Studies prepared by Raftelis recommend five-year schedules of rate adjustments for water,recycled water, and wastewater services designed to ensure revenues align with the cost of providing service,maintain required reserve levels,and fund needed capital investments.The proposed adjustments are phased to moderate customer impacts while addressing long-term fiscal sustainability.
Importantly, the proposed rates do not exceed the cost of service attributable to each parcel and comply with all substantive and procedural requirements of Proposition 218.
The tables below summarize the recommended percentage-based revenue adjustments relative to current City of Upland rates. These adjustments are applied uniformly within each utility enterprise and translated into specific rate schedules through the cost-of-service analysis prepared by Raftelis.
Water and Recycled Water
Raftelis evaluated the Water Fund under a"status quo" scenario in which no rate increases are implemented. Under that scenario,the Water Fund is projected to fall below minimum reserve targets beginning in Fiscal Year 2028 and would be unable to meet debt service coverage requirements by Fiscal Year 2029. Key cost drivers include rising purchased water costs, inflationary pressures on operations and maintenance, and the need to fund regular capital replacement and refurbishment projects as well as those associated with new Federal and State regulations.
To address these projected shortfalls,Raftelis recommends an industry-wide best practice five-year schedule of water and recycled water revenue adjustments beginning in Fiscal Year 2026.The proposed adjustments are summarized in the tables below.
Summary of Proposed Five-Year Rate Adjustments
The tables below summarize the recommended percentage-based revenue adjustments relative to current City of Upland rates. These adjustments are applied uniformly within each utility enterprise and translated into specific rate schedules through the cost-of-service analysis prepared by Raftelis.
During the comprehensive rate study review process, the City evaluated the proportional cost of service for each customer classification, including the application of peaking factors used to allocate system capacity and demand- related costs. The analysis determined that based upon current user characteristics, certain user categories need rate adjustments to reflect updated costs of service.
With respect to the government customer classification, the City has elected to maintain this category at a comparatively higher rate level. The City is the only customer in this class, and this policy is intended to offset cost increases for other customers.
CITY WATER COMMODITY RATES(BI-MONTHLY)
Table 1: Proposed Schedule Rate Adjustments of Bi-Monthly Water Volumetric Rates Sin.le Famil Residential Rates
Current Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Usage Tiers Unit Rate Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective 7/1/26 1/1/27 1/1/28 1/1/29 1/1/30
0-20 per hcf* II $2.33 $2.40 $2.52 $2.65 $2.79 $2.93 21-50 per hcf* $3.08 $3.21 $3.38 $3.55 $3.73 $3.92 51+ per hcf* $3.68 $3.73 $3.92 $4.12 $4.33 $4.55
Customer Current Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Class Unit Rate Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective 7/1/26 1/1/27 1/1/28 1/1/29 1/1/30
Multi-Family per hcf* $2.87 $3.17 $3.33 $3.50 $3.68 $3.87 Rates for Other Classes
Customer Current Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Class Unit Rate Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective 7/1/26 1/1/27 1/1/28 1/1/29 1/1/30
Landscape m per hcf* $3.17 $3.34 $3.51 $3.69 $3.88 $4.08 Commercial per hcf* $2.76 $3.16 $3.32 $3.49 $3.67 $3.86 School per hcf* $3.38 $3.29 $3.46 $3.64 $3.83 $4.03 Government per hef* $3.47 $3.47 $3.65 $3.84 $4.04 $4.25 City Rates for Recycled Water
Customer Current Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Proposed Rate Class Unit Rate Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective 7/1/26 1/1/27 1 1/1/28 1/1/29 1/1/30 Recycled per hcf* $2.54 $2.64 $2.78 $2.92 $3.07 $3.23 (1) Fire Hydrant Meter Rate
*hcf=hundred cubic feet=1 billing unit=748 gallons
Table 2: Proposed 5-Year Schedule of Bi-Monthly Fixed Meter Rate Proposed 5-Year Schedule of Bi- 1 1 1 '.ed Meter Rat.
SERVICE
CHARGES Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed CURRENT 7/1/2026 1/1/2027** 1/1/2028** 1/1/2029** 1/1/2030** (Bi-Monthly)
5/8" $65.26 $67.36 $70.73 $74.27 $77.99 $81.89 3/4" $82.68 $84.92 $89.17 $93.63 $98.32 $103.24 1" $117.52 $120.03 $126.04 $132.35 $138.97 $145.92 1 1/2" $204.72 $207.82 $218.22 $229.14 $240.60 $252.63 2" $309.35 $313.16 $328.82 $345.27 $362.54 $380.67 3,, $588.33 $646.74 $679.08 $713.04 $748.70 $786.14 4" $902.15 $1,138.32 $1,195.24 $1,255.01 $1,317.77 $1,383.66 6" $1,773.93 $2,314.63 $2,430.37 $2,551.89 $2,679.49 $2,813.47 8" $2,820.12 $4,948.14 $5,195.55 $5,455.33 $5,728.10 $6,014.51 Drought Rates
In times of drought or emergency water shortage, the City Council may declare mandatory water use restrictions.
During times of mandatory water use restrictions, an additional charge will be added to the volumetric rates based upon the amount of restriction required. For example,when a 10%water use reduction is required,volumetric rates will increase by 3%. See all proposed drought rates as detailed in Table 3 below:
Table 3: Proposed Drought Rates Per Drought Stage
Proposed Drought Rates Per Drought Stage
Drought Surcharge Up to 10%Water Up to 20%Water Up to 30%Water Up to 40%Water Up to 50%Water Use Reduction Use Reduction Use Reduction Use Reduction Use Reduction Volumetric Rate 3% 10% 22% 36% 54/o°
Surcharge Increase
In the event of a declared mandatory water use restriction that triggers imposition of drought rates,the actual drought rate shall be imposed in addition to the volumetric rate,and shall be equal to the lesser of the volumetric rate imposed at that time multiplied by the percentages in the table above,or the rates set forth in the table below.
Table 4: Proposed Drought Rates Surcharge
Customer Class Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed 7/1/2026 1/1/2027 1/1/2028 1/1/2029 1/1/2030 Maximum Drought Surcharge(40-50%Reduction)$/hcf
Single Family
Tier 1 $1.31 $1.38 $1.44 $1.52 $1.59
Tier 2 $1.75 $1.84 $1.93 $2.03 $2.13 Tier 3 $2.04 $2.14 $2.25 $2.36 $2.48 Multi Family $1.73 $1.82 $1.91 $2.00 $2.10
Landscape $1.82 $1.91 $2.01 $2.11 $2.21
Commercial $1.73 $1.82 $1.91 $2.00 $2.10
Schools $1.80 $1.89 $1.98 $2.08 $2.19 Government $1.89 $1.98 $2.08 $2.19 $2.30
Revenue Adjustments - 5% 5% 5% 5%
*These maximum amounts do not include the IEUA pass-through,which may be implemented by the City should IEUA increase its imported water rates in an amount greater than what was proposed within the Rate Study;however,only within the pass-through authorization approved by the City Council.
These adjustments are designed to:
• Fully fund annual operations and maintenance costs; • Fund the City's water and recycled water capital improvement program using a combination of rate revenue and reserves;
• Maintain minimum and target reserve levels throughout the rate-setting period; • Avoid larger,more abrupt rate increases in the future; • Sustain long-term wastewater system operations;and • Preserve long-term fiscal sustainability of the Water Fund.
The proposed rate design maintains the City's existing structure,consisting of a fixed bi- monthly service charge and volumetric usage charges. Single-family residential customers continue to be charged tiered volumetric rates to promote efficient water use, while non- residential and recycled water customers are charged uniform volumetric rates based upon cost of service.
Comparative Analysis of Water Rates
The phased in nature of the proposed adjustments are intended to balance affordability with the City's obligation to maintain safe,reliable,and financially sustainable utility services.
At the request of management staff and as a part of the rate study, Raftelis evaluated customer bill impacts and compared the City's proposed rates to neighboring jurisdictions.After factoring in the proposed adjustments,Upland's water rates remain in most cases, lower than those of surrounding agencies when evaluated on an equivalent usage basis. As seen in Table 5 below,the City of Upland has the second lowest water rates compared to our neighboring communities within the Inland Empire demonstrating significant value to ratepayers.
Table 5: Single Family Residential Water Comparison
Single Family Residential Water Comparison, 5/8"
Meter, 36 hcf
$300
$252.65 $259.53
$250
$203.75
$200 $184.88
$152.51 $161.14 166.72 $168.32 $168.92
$150
$100
$50
$0
a a o o
o`'a ofio� G'r tiy ym4,
Go yo'; oa
09 G
a
V
4,6 4,6 os
JQti tia y2fi
OQ ,ya
6 Fixed •Variable
Wastewater(Sewer)
Raftelis also conducted a status quo analysis for the Wastewater Fund.Without rate adjustments,the Wastewater Fund is projected to fall below minimum reserve targets in Fiscal Year 2033 and deplete reserves by Fiscal Year 2034.This condition would limit the City's ability to maintain the collection system and respond to emergencies, regulatory requirements and plan for and fund future system-wide capital improvements.
To stabilize the Wastewater Fund,Raftelis recommends an industry-wide best practice of incorporating a phased five- year schedule of revenue adjustments to the City's local Sewer Service Charge, which funds the City's wastewater collection system.The recommended City wastewater revenue adjustments are summarized in the table below:
Table 6: City and IEUA Wastewater Rate Schedules
Current FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Effective Date July 1,2026 Jan. 1,2027 Jan.1,2028 Jan. 1,2029 Jan.1,2030 City Local Sewer Services Charges a $11.29 $11.98 $12.46 $12.96 $13.48 $14.02 • July 1,2026: 4%increase to City of Upland sewer collection rates • January 1,2027:4%increase in total wastewater revenues • January 1,2028:4%increase in total wastewater revenues • January 1,2029:4%increase in total wastewater revenues • January 1,2030:4%increase in total wastewater revenues These percentage adjustments represent total revenue increases and are implemented through updates to fixed service charges and volumetric rates in accordance with Proposition 218 and cost-of-service principles. These City rate adjustments would generate sufficient revenue to:
• Fund ongoing wastewater collection system operations and maintenance; • Support the City's wastewater capital improvement program; • Maintain reserve levels consistent with City financial policies; • Avoid larger,more abrupt rate increases in the future; • Sustain long-term wastewater system operations;and • Preserve long-term fiscal sustainability of the Wastewater Fund.
In addition to the City's local water and sewer service charges, water and wastewater customers within the City are also billed for potable water and regional wastewater treatment services provided by IEUA.The City provides potable water distribution and wastewater collection services, while IEUA is responsible for regional wastewater treatment and disposal.
Separate from the City's proposed wastewater rate adjustments, IEUA has adopted increases to its wastewater treatment charge per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) over a two-year period. The increase consists of a 9% adjustment effective July 1,2025,followed by an additional 9%adjustment effective July 1,2026.These IEUA rate increases are passed through to City of Upland wastewater customers as a separate line item and are not included in the City's proposed local sewer collection rate adjustments.
Table 7:IEUA Pass-Through Wastewater Rate Schedule
FY 202 P Y 2028 Y 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031
Effective Date Current July 1,2026 July 1,2027 July 1,2028 July 1,2029 July 1,2030 IEUA Sewer Treatment
Component $27 02* $29.45 TBD TBD TBD TBD (Pass-Through Rate)
J
*The City currently charges only$25.78 for IEUA although IEUA's current rate is$27.02 per EDU The aforementioned IEUA charges are passed through by the City of Upland to affected customers in accordance with the City's regional sewer service agreement. The City does not retain any portion of the IEUA treatment charge and acts solely as a billing and collection agent on IEUA's behalf. The pass-through rate reflects the actual cost charged by IEUA for regional treatment services.
IEUA also imposes an extra-territorial monthly sewer service charge on sewer customers whose properties are located outside IEUA's service area boundary,but who receive wastewater treatment services through IEUA facilities.These charges are intended to recover IEUA's costs to provide regional wastewater treatment services to non-member or extra-territorial customers.Effective July 1,2025,IEUA increased the extra-territorial monthly sewer service charge to$23.53 per month per EDU,which is applied in addition to the FY 2025/26 adopted IEUA monthly EDU treatment rate of$27.02.This only applies to approximately six(6)customers.The City currently charges only$22.10 for IEUA although IEUA's current rate is$23.53 per EDU.
IEUA Water and Wastewater Pass-Through Increases
The City pays certain fees to IEUA for wholesale water and wastewater treatment costs. These include fees for purchased water,meter equivalency unit charges for water connections,recycled water fees,and wastewater treatment fees.IEUA's adopted and projected rates are factored into the respective fees and charges described above.
The City cannot control whether IEUA increases its rates above those that are projected and factored into the City's water, recycled water, and wastewater service charges. As such, the City proposes to pass-through directly to customers any IEUA adopted rate increases in excess of the IEUA rates projected and factored into the City's fees.If adopted,the City's authority to pass-through IEUA rate increases will expire after 5 years,and in no event will it cause the impacted rate to increase by more than 15% in any calendar year. Additionally, the City will provide 30 days' written notice to all impacted customers of any IEUA pass-through fee increases.
IEUA pass-through fee increases typically occur on July 1 of each year. Currently,IEUA has not provided rates for fiscal years 2028 through 2030.The specific details of the IEUA pass-throughs will be described in the Proposition 218 notice mailed to customers.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15273 (a). The action involves the establishment of rates for the purpose of meeting operating expenses, funding capital improvements necessary to maintain service, and meeting reserve requirements within existing service areas.
FISCAL IMPACTS
There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with setting the public hearing and mailing Proposition 218 notices.
Postage and administrative costs will be absorbed within existing operating budgets.
If subsequently approved by the City Council following the public hearing, the proposed rate adjustments would generate revenues sufficient to:
• Fund water,recycled water,and wastewater operations and maintenance; • Support the City's necessary utility capital improvement program; • Maintain recommended reserve levels;
• Ensure long-term fiscal sustainability of the utility enterprise funds;and • Avoid larger,more abrupt rate increases in the future.
To maintain long-term fiscal sustainability, it is essential that the City's utility enterprise funds generate sufficient revenue to support ongoing operations and maintenance, fund planned capital improvement and infrastructure replacement projects and maintain prudent reserve levels to address emergencies and economic uncertainty. In prior years,the City Council elected to defer certain rate adjustments and IEUA pass-through increases in an effort to keep customer rates lower or flat. While intended to provide short-term relief to ratepayers, such deferrals can have significant cumulative financial impacts on the enterprise funds and ultimately rate payers in the long-term. In such scenarios, single-digit percentage increases may turn into larger double-digit increases. Additionally, not approving or deferring rates may constrain the City's ability to adequately fund infrastructure needs and maintain appropriate reserve balances over time.
Historical Rate Adjustment Deferrals—Water and Recycled Water Consideration of the proposed rate adjustments is of particular importance given the City's history of prior rate deferrals and the cumulative financial impacts to the enterprise funds, and ultimately to ratepayers. On December 9, 2019, implementation of the January 1, 2020, water and recycled water rate adjustment was deferred pending an additional rate study check-in to follow the rate study that had been completed the prior year. On March 9,2020,the City Council further deferred the adjustment by electing to maintain 2018 water and recycled water rates, and on October 26, 2020, the City Council reaffirmed that deferral. Although new rates were ultimately implemented on August 9,2021,the approved rates corresponded to those originally scheduled for January 2020—effectively delaying revenue realization by more than a year and a half. Similarly, on February 27, 2023,the City Council implemented rates that had been scheduled to take effect January 1,2022.These repeated deferrals resulted in substantial foregone revenue that was not received when originally planned, directly reducing enterprise fund cash flow and reserve balances. The delayed receipt of this revenue also diminished the compounding financial benefit that would have accrued over time,limiting the City's ability to build prudent reserves, fund capital reinvestment,and maintain long- term fiscal sustainability. As a result, enterprise fund shortfalls were ultimately offset, in part, by support from reserves,underscoring the importance of timely,consistent and sustainable rate implementation to protect both utility operations and broader City and ratepayer financial health.
Historical Rate Adjustment Deferrals-Wastewater
Similar financial impacts have occurred as a result of prior deferrals of IEUA pass-through wastewater treatment charge adjustments.In certain years,although IEUA adopted increases to its regional treatment rates,the City elected to keep customer sewer bills flat and did not fully implement the corresponding pass-through adjustments.While the City remained obligated to pay IEUA the full adopted treatment rates,the City absorbed those increases by reducing or holding down its local sewer service collection charges. This practice effectively shifted regional treatment cost increases onto the City's sewer enterprise fund, reducing the following: net revenues available for local system maintenance, capital replacement and rehabilitation, and reserve funding. Over time, absorbing outside agency cost increases in this manner contributed to structural pressure within the sewer enterprise fund,weakened reserve levels, and limited the City's financial flexibility to address infrastructure needs. Timely and consistent implementation of adopted pass-through charges is therefore critical to ensuring that the sewer enterprise remains financially self- supporting and that regional treatment costs are equitably allocated to ratepayers as intended.
ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.
CEQA:Not a Project
f 4• _...• ir,
illig '
,1,1' '.6• .0.0'''
. -'2 •
W "
-,..
. . r:i• ;
,!
, /i 1' •
\--• .
.•• ,•4 .J:,
; ler la,
_,L _ , - . •
e 1.
•• _••..N., *k‘• I . • _-
' 1 . •„••• 1' . . -- .1
. _.
.--..,_,,.., _ .. _ • - ' 4., ', \-• 1 . . - „, • ••. 1 ..,
. •
e
•Or
.--,- I
' • VW. iitfira.-_—.- _
%. •
•
/ .- . '
.R • e•
'
,
.- -:,
...
-','7,---'----- ' - - ' •-X1'.0' i'-::".-' Tcrietk ' . .iiis . „ ,_,___.. : , ___ .T _ •... k• -.-- .4.. ' s-.4 - ,..1
4 •:,. .m• , . a •''V - - , 1.
-, , -•,- - ,:,. ' :','C'
,' OP'.•:*% — ".0.%:' ''‘46 -. '-'. -..., ...,.. „. ._ —
4., # . - ..' '',•:7`9,:,' ..in.
.g ,:t• 4-zr---7-,--k_00,9.47/> .,,,'-',,\
.,. ... • .•. :::.:.!,.
)1
.4111411
, .
/III \
CITY OF UPLAND
Water and Wastewater
Rate Study
REPORT / March 16, 2026
01 trP4
4. lir.1 -,„.: _.•:----.,0
RAFTF1 i '
. „..
4, .........,...,
44-POIL v.
RAFTELIS
March 16, 2026
Mr. Richard Gonzales
Deputy Director of Utilities
City of Upland
460 N. Euclid Avenue
Upland, CA 91786
Subject: Water and Wastewater Financial Plan Study Report Dear Mr. Gonzales:
Raftelis is pleased to provide this Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report(Report) for the City of Upland (City)to develop a financial plan to help the City meet its annual expenses and provide fiscal stability, as well as to establish water and wastewater rates that are equitable and consistent with the cost of providing service.
The major objectives of the study include the following:
• Develop financial plans for the water and wastewater enterprises to ensure financial sufficiency, meet operation and maintenance(O&M)costs, ensure sufficient funding for capital replacement and refurbishment(R&R)needs, and improve the financial health of the enterprises • Recommend sound and sufficient reserve funds
• Review current rate structures for the water and wastewater enterprises • Recommend a five-year schedule of water and wastewater rates consistent with regulatory The report summarizes the key findings and recommendations related to the development of the financial plans for water and wastewater utilities and the development of the updated water and wastewater rates.
It has been a pleasure working with you, and we thank you, Mr. Gonzales, and the City staff for the support provided during the course of this study.
Sincerely,
try,40.,AD 2/4
Sudhir Pardiwala, PE(CA) Nicholas Kennedy
Senior Principal Consultant
611 Wilshire Boulevard,Suite 900,Los Angeles,CA 90017
www.raftelis.com Page 271 of 654
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
Contents
1_ Executive Summary 1
1.1. Background 1
1.2. Process 2
1.3. Proposed Water Financial Plan 2
1.4. Proposed Water Rates 4
1.4.1. Drought Rates 5
1.5. Proposed Wastewater Financial Plan 8
1.6. Proposed Wastewater Rates 10
2. Rate Setting Methodology ... ...1 12
3 '`ey Inputs and Assumptions Sk 14
3.1. Current Water Rates 14
3.2. Current Wastewater Rates 15
3.3. Projected Service Connections 15
3.3.1. Water Connections 15
3.3.2. Wastewater EDU's 15
3.4. Water Use Assumptions 16
3.5. Water and Wastewater Financial Plan Assumptions 16
4. Water Fncial J'lafi 18
4.1. Current Revenue 18
4.1.1. Calculated Water Rate Revenues 18
4.1.2. Other Revenues 19
4.2. Annual Expenses 19
4.2.1. Total Operations and Maintenance Budget 19
4.2.2. Capital Improvement Plan 23
4.2.3. Existing Debt Service 23
4.3. Reserve Targets 23
4.4. Proposed Financial Plan and Revenue Adjustments 24
5. Water Cost-of-Service Analysis 2t3
5.1. Revenue Requirement Determination 28
5.2. Allocation of Functionalized Net Revenue Requirements to Cost Components 29
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
5.2.1. Peaking Factors 29
5.2.2. Operating and Capital Allocation 31
5.3. Derivation of Units of Service 32
5.3.1. Equivalent Meters 32
5.3.2. Unit Costs of Service 33
6 r _nosed Water Rates and Charges 35
6.1. Proposed Bi-Monthly Service Charge 35
6.2. Proposed Commodity Rates 35
6.2.1. Base-Delivery Unit Cost 36
6.2.2. Supply Unit Cost 36
6.2.3. Peaking Unit Cost 37
6.2.4. Conservation Component 37
6.2.5. Offset Component 37
6.2.6. Recycled Water Commodity Rates 37
6.2.7. Proposed FY 2026 Commodity Rates 38
6.3. Proposed 5-Year Water Rate Schedule 38
7. Drought Rate:. . - .. 40
8. WastPutfater Financial n 44
8.1. Current Rate Revenue 44
8.1.1. Calculated Wastewater Rate Revenues 44
8.1.2. Other Revenues 44
8.2. Annual Expenses — Wastewater 44
8.2.1. Total Operations and Maintenance Budget 45
8.2.2. Capital Improvement Plan 45
8.2.3. Existing and Proposed Debt Service 45
8.3. Reserve Targets 45
8.4. Proposed Financial Plan and Revenue Adjustments 46 J■ rruaa:r CoSL-VI-va-■ r.GG /411Q1yM JV
9.1. Revenue Requirement Determination 50
9.2. Operating and Capital Cost Allocation 51
9.3. Derivation of Units of Service 51
9.3.1. Unit Costs of Service 51
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
10. Wastewater Rates 53
10.1.Wastewater Test Year Rate Derivation 53
10.2.Proposed Five-Year Wastewater Rate Schedule 53
11. Customer Impact Analysis & Neighboring Agen
Comparison 54
11.1.Customer Bill Impacts 54
11.1.1. Water 54
11.1.2. Wastewater 55
11.2.Neighboring Agency Comparison 56
11.2.1. Water 56
11.2.2. Wastewater 57
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
Tables
Table 1-1: Proposed Water Revenue Adjustments 3 Table 1-2: Proposed Five-Year Water Rate Schedule, Bi-Monthly Service Charge 5 Table 1-3: Proposed Five-Year Water Rate Schedule, Volumetric ($/hcf) 5 Table 1-4: Proposed Drought Surcharges 6 Table 1-5: Proposed Wastewater Revenue Adjustments 9 Table 1-6: Proposed Five-Year Wastewater Rate Schedule 11 Table 3-1: Current Water Rate Structure 14 Table 3-2: Current Wastewater Rate Structure 15 Table 3-3: Projected Number of Water Meters 15 Table 3-4: Projected Wastewater Dwelling Units 15 Table 3-5: Water Use Assumptions 16
Table 3-6: Expense Inflation Factors 16
Table 3-7: Water Purchase Inflation Factors 17 Table 4-1: Projected Fixed Charge Revenues Under Current Rates 18 Table 4-2: Projected Commodity Revenue Under Current Rates 19 Table 4-3: Projected Other Water Enterprise Revenues (Status Quo) 19 Table 4-4: Summary of Projected Potable Purchased Water Cost Expenses 21 Table 4-5: Summary of Projected Recycled Purchased Water Cost Expenses 22 Table 4-6: Water Operations and Maintenance Expenses Projection 22 Table 4-7: Projected Capital Improvement Projects 23 Table 4-8: Existing Water Debt Service 23
Table 4-9: Proposed Water Revenue Adjustments 24 Table 4-10: Water Financial Plan 25
Table 5-1: Revenue Requirement Determination, FY 2026 29 Table 5-2: Water System Peaking Factors 30 Table 5-3: Allocation of Net Operation & Maintenance to Cost Components 31 Table 5-4: Allocation of Asset Value to Cost Components 32 Table 5-5: Adjusted Cost of Service 32
Table 5-6: Equivalent Meters 32
Table 5-7: Calculation of Class Specific Peaking Factors 33 Table 5-8: Units of Service 34
Table 5-9: Reallocation of Peaking Costs 34 Table 5-10: Calculation of Unit Costs 34
Table 6-1: Bi-Monthly Service Charge Derivation 35
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
Table 6-2: Potable Water Supply Cost 36
Table 6-3: Supply Component Calculation 36 Table 6-4: Peaking Unit Cost Calculation 37 Table 6-5: Derivation of Recycled Water Commodity Rates 38 Table 6-6: Derivation of FY 2026 Commodity Rates ($/hcf) 38 Table 6-7: Proposed 5-year Service Charge Rate Schedule, ($/Bi-Monthly) 39 Table 6-8: Proposed 5-year Commodity Rate Schedule, ($/hcf) 39 Table 7-1: Projected Water Demand by Usage Reduction 40 Table 7-2: Percentage Reduction by Water Source 40 Table 7-3: Estimated Cost Savings by Usage Reduction 41 Table 7-4: Drought Rates by Usage Reduction 41 Table 7-5: Proposed Drought Surcharges 42 Table 8-1: Projected Rate Revenues Under Current Wastewater Rates 44 Table 8-2: Projected Other Wastewater Enterprise Revenues, Status Quo 44 Table 8-3: Summary of Projected Wastewater Operations and Maintenance Expenses 45 Table 8-4: Projected Wastewater Capital Improvement Projects 45 Table 8-5: Proposed Wastewater Revenue Adjustments 46 Table 8-6: Wastewater Cashflow 47
Table 9-1: Wastewater Revenue Requirement 50 Table 9-2: Wastewater Percentage Allocations 51 Table 9-3: Wastewater O&M Cost Allocation 51
Table 9-4: Wastewater Capital Asset Allocation 51 Table 9-5: Units of Service, FY 2027 52
Table 10-1: Sewer Services Charge ($/EDU) 53
Table 10-2: Proposed 5-Year Wastewater Rate Schedule 53 Figures
Figure 1-1: Proposed Water Financial Plan 3 Figure 1-2: Proposed Water Financial Plan — Projected Ending Balances 4 Figure 1-3: Water Capital Financing Plan 4 Figure 1-4: Single-Family Residential Bi-Monthly Bill Impacts, FY 2026 7 Figure 1-5: Multi-Family Residential Bi-Monthly Bill Impacts, FY 2026 8 Figure 1-6: Non-Residential Bi-Monthly Bill Impacts, FY 2026 8 Figure 1-7: Proposed Wastewater Financial Plan 9
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
Figure 1-8: Projected Wastewater Fund Ending Balance 10 Figure 1-9: Wastewater Capital Financing Plan 10 Figure 1-10: Wastewater EDU Bill Impact 11 Figure 4-1: Proposed Water Financial Plan 26 Figure 4-2: Projected Water Ending Fund Balance 26 Figure 4-3: Projected Water Capital Plan 27 Figure 8-1: Proposed Wastewater Financial Plan 48 Figure 8-2: Projected Wastewater Capital Plan and Funding Sources 48 Figure 8-3: Projected Wastewater Fund Ending Balance 49 Figure 11-1: Single-Family Residential Bi-Monthly Bill Impact 54 Figure 11-2: Multi-Family Residential Bi-Monthly Bill Impact 55 Figure 11-3: Non-Residential Bi-Monthly Bill Impact 55 Figure 11-4: Wastewater Monthly EDU Charge Bill Impact 56 Figure 11-5: Neighboring Water Comparison, Single-Family 56 Figure 11-6: Neighboring Wastewater Comparison, Single-Family 57
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
IN ...J
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 7 1 . Executive Summary
1 .1 . Background
In 2024, the City of Upland(City)engaged Raftelis to conduct a Water and Wastewater Rate Study(Study) to develop ten-year financial plans, conduct cost-of-service analyses, and develop five-year schedules for the water and wastewater utilities that are equitable and in compliance with Proposition 218.
This executive summary describes the rate study process, methodology, and recommendations for the City's water and wastewater rates. The City wishes to establish fair and equitable rates that:
• Meet the City's water and wastewater enterprise fiscal needs for operation and maintenance costs, capital replacement and refurbishment (R&R) costs, reserve goals, and ensure the financial health of each enterprise, and
• Prepare a five-year schedule of water and wastewater rates consistent with the cost of providing service.
The City occupies approximately 15 square miles and is located in the western end of San Bernardino County. It is bordered by the cities of Montclair and Claremont on the west, Ontario to the south, Rancho Cucamonga to the east, and the unincorporated areas of San Antonio Heights to the north. As of 2024, the City had a population of approximately 79,600.
The City's water enterprise serves the City of Upland. The City has access to local and imported water supply resources. Locally, the City has adjudicated groundwater water rights in the Chino, Cucamonga, and Six Basins. These adjudicated groundwater basins are actively managed and overseen by a designated Watermaster in accordance with their respective court decrees. The City water interests are a result of either a direct water right or indirectly through its shareholder interest(entitlement)in two private mutual water companies. The City has a stake in West End Consolidated Water Company(WECWC). The water received from WECWC is local groundwater. The City has a shareholder interest in San Antonio Water Company (SAWCo). Both local groundwater and surface water from San Antonio Canyon is provided by SAWCo. San Antonio Canyon surface water supply is subject to availability and is closely tied to rain and snowpack. This local surface water is treated at the City's San Antonio Water Treatment Plant. In addition to the local surface and groundwater supplies, the City invested in and acquired an interest in an 81 million gallons per day(mgd) imported water treatment plant, the Water Facilities Authority(WFA-JPA). The WFA water treatment plant receives Northern California State Project imported water from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California(MWD)through Inland Empire Utilities Agency(IEUA), an MWD member agency.
In 2013, IEUA completed regional pipeline facilities and began delivering recycled water. Recycled water is predominantly available in the southeastern sector of the City and is mostly used for large landscape irrigation areas, such as the Upland Hill Country Club Golf Course, City parks, several school grounds, and the Euclid Avenue median.
The sewer system is a gravity flow system consisting of approximately 210 miles of pipe ranging from 3 inches to 21 inches in diameter. The City provides sewer service to most businesses and residents within the City, as well as the unincorporated areas(San Antonio Heights)within the City's sphere of influence. Collected sewage is conveyed to the IEUA regional wastewater reclamation facilities for treatment and disposal of the effluent, sludge, and residual solids.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 2 Several areas in the southwest quadrant of the City cannot be served by gravity flow through the City's system to the regional trunk sewer. The sewer mains in these areas are connected to the sewer systems of Montclair and Claremont. The City is responsible for operations and maintenance(O&M)of the system within its boundaries. In addition, the City pays a fee to the adjoining City or agency for the conveyance of City flows from these areas to the regional plants owned and operated by IEUA(for flows through the Montclair system) or Los Angeles County Sanitation District(LACSD)21 (for flows through the Claremont system)for treatment.
1 .2. Process
Raftelis developed water and wastewater financial plans for the City. The financial plans consider the total revenue adjustments needed to meet capital investment, operational expenses, debt service, and reserve policies during the five-year rate setting period. After developing the financial plans, Raftelis performed cost- of-service analyses to determine the water and wastewater rates based on the financial plans.
The current water rate consists of a bi-monthly service charge, a tiered volumetric rate for single-family customers, and uniform rates for multi-family residential, landscape, commercial, school, government, and recycled water customer classes. The bi-monthly service charge is designed to primarily collect costs that are relatively fixed, including such things as billing and customer service costs, meter reading, and meter maintenance. The volumetric rate recovers the remaining costs. Raftelis is not recommending any changes to the current rate structure.
The current wastewater rate structure consists of a City local sewer services charge per equivalent dwelling unit(EDU), and an Inland Empire Utilities Agency(IEUA) Sewer Treatment charge per EDU. For this rate study, Raftelis is making rate recommendations only for the City charge. 1 .3. Proposed e. .cer Financial Plan
This section of the report details the water enterprise's long-term financial plan,based on the projected revenues, expenses, debt service, and capital project costs. With assistance from City staff, Raftelis modeled the financial plan without revenue adjustments(status quo)and with proposed revenue adjustments to ensure the financial sustainability of the water utility. Raftelis projects that with no rate increases over the study period(FY 2026-FY 2034), the City will fall below the minimum reserve targets beginning in FY 2029. The City would also fail to meet its debt service requirements beginning in FY 2028. Raftelis worked with City staff to develop proposed revenue adjustments over the five-year-rate-setting period(Table 1-1). The proposed water revenue adjustments were selected to ensure the water operating fund has sufficient funds to cover annual expenses and to ensure reserve target levels are met. The first rate adjustment effective June 1, 2026, is the result of the cost of service with a 5%revenue adjustment,because these rates are calculated through the cost of service analysis, the bill impact will not equal 5%for all customers. All future year revenue adjustments and rates increase by the 5%shown below. Reserve targets are discussed in detail in Section 4.3.
The proposed revenue adjustments for five years are shown in Table 1-1.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 3 Table 1-1: Proposed Water Revenue Adjustments
Effective Date Adjustment
June 1, 2026 5.0%
January 1, 2027 5.0%
January 1, 2028 5.0%
January 1, 2029 5.0%
January 1, 2030 5.0%
Figure 1-1 shows the proposed five-year water enterprise financial plan. Status quo revenue is shown by the solid line. Projected revenue is shown by the dashed line. Annual expenditures are shown by the columns.
The green bars above the X-axis show the net cash used to build up the reserves and the green bars below the X-axis show reserves being spent to fund costs. Revenue from current rates is not enough to cover annual operating and maintenance costs or capital expenditures. Therefore, revenue adjustments are required to generate sufficient revenue to cover these costs over the study period.
Figure 1-1: Proposed WatemnRancia4lan
N $50 Financial Plan
c 1
o
$40 __—________—'--_---'
$30
$20
$10
$0
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 -$10
Water Purchases O&M Expenses Mi Debt Service
Capital Projects Reserve Funding Current Revenues 4 __ Proposed Revenues
Figure 1-2 shows projected ending fund balances over the study period relative to the City's reserve targets.
Maximum and minimum targets are shown. The minimum targets are met in all years of the rate-setting period.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 4 Figure 1-2: Proposed Water Financial Plan — Projected Ending Balances Fund Balances
N $80
0 $70
2 $60 $5 $51.7
$50 $47.1
$42.2
$40 I
$37.7
$30
$20
$10
$0 —
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Ending Balance Reserve Target-Min Reserve Target-Max Figure 1-3 shows the proposed capital financing plan over the rate-setting period. The proposed financial plan assumes that capital projects will be funded through a combination of water rate revenues, cash reserves, and existing bond proceeds.
II
Figure 1-3: Water Capital lan
Capital Financing Plan
$10 $9.5
cn $9.0
C $8.6 58.5
0 $9
$8.0
2 $8
$7
$6
$5
$4
$3
$2
$1
$0
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 F Rate Funded •Debt Funded
1 .4. Proposed Water Rates
Table 1-2 shows the proposed five-year water rate schedule through FY 2030 for the bi-monthly service charge for potable and recycled water. Proposed FY 2026 rates are designed to collect about 5 percent more rate revenue than current FY 2025 rates. Proposed rates beginning in FY 2027 are calculated by increasing the prior year's proposed rates by the proposed annual revenue adjustments. All numbers are rounded up to the nearest cent to ensure adequate revenue recovery. Therefore, any manual bill calculations may not match the
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 5 precise results shown in the report. The service charges include the Meter Equivalent Unit(MEU) charge imposed by IEUA. Since those charges are not known for future years, any increases in those charges beyond the assumptions used in the rate study will be passed through to customers.
Table 1-2: Proposed Five-Year Water Rate Schedule, Bi-Monthly Service Charge Current FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Effective Date June 1,2026 January 1,2027 January 1,2028 January 1,2029 January 1,2030 Revenue Adjustment 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Bi-Monthly Fixed Charge
Meter Size
5/8" $65.26 $67.36 $70.73 $74.27 $77.99 $81.89 3/4" $82.68 $84.92 $89.17 $93.63 $98.32 $103.24 1" $117.52 $120.03 $126.04 $132.35 $138.97 $145.92 11/2" $204.72 $207.82 $218.22 $229.14 $240.60 $252.63 2" $309.35 $313.16 $328.82 $345.27 $362.54 $380.67 3" $588.33 $646.74 $679.08 $713.04 $748.70 $786.14 4" $902.15 $1,138.32 $1,195.24 $1,255.01 $1,317.77 $1,383.66 6" $1,773.93 $2,314.63 $2,430.37 $2,551.89 $2,679.49 $2,813.47 8" $2,820.12 $4,948.14 $5,195.55 $5,455.33 $5,728.10 $6,014.51 Table 1-3 shows the proposed water volumetric rates. Single-family residential rates are tiered, and all other classes receive uniform rates. The cost of service analysis resulted in the Government customer class rate for FY 2026 decreasing based on their peaking factors. This rate only applies to City Government customers. The City is opting not to decrease it and retain its current rate for FY 2026. Future years increase by the 5% revenue adjustments.Any increases in potable and recycled water purchase costs from IEUA beyond the assumptions used in the study will be passed through to customers. fable 1-34roposed Five-Year Watci Rate Schedule, Volumetric ($/hcf) Current FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Effective Date June 1, 2026 January 1, 2027 January 1, 2028 January 1, 2029 January 1,2030 Revenue Adjustment 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Single Family
Tier 1 $2.33 $2.40 $2.52 $2.65 $2.79 $2.93 Tier 2 $3.08 $3.21 $3.38 $3.55 $3.73 $3.92 Tier 3 $3.68 $3.73 $3.92 $4.12 $4.33 $4.55 Multi Family $2.87 $3.17 $3.33 $3.50 $3.68 $3.87 Landscape $3.17 $3.34 $3.51 $3.69 $3.88 $4.08 Commercial $2.76 $3.16 $3.32 $3.49 $3.67 $3.86 Schools $3.38 $3.29 $3.46 $3.64 $3.83 $4.03 Government $3.47 $3.47 $3.65 $3.84 $4.04 $4.25 Recycled Water $2.54 $2.64 $2.78 $2.92 $3.07 $3.23
1.4.1. Drought Rates
In times of drought or emergency water shortage, the City Council may declare mandatory water use restrictions. During times of mandatory water use restrictions, surcharges for consumption over the prescribed allocation may be imposed, as shown below to cover costs from reduced sales:
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 6 Table 1-4: Proposed Drought Surcharges
Customer Class FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Revenue Adjustments 5% 5% 5% 5%
0-10%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $0.08 $0.08 $0.09 $0.09 $0.10
Tier 2 $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Tier 3 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12 $0.13 $0.13
Multi Family $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Landscape $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Commercial $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Schools $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Government $0.11 $0.12 $0.12 $0.13 $0.13
10-20%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $0.24 $0.25 $0.26 $0.28 $0.29
Tier 2 $0.32 $0.34 $0.35 $0.37 $0.39
Tier 3 $0.37 $0.39 $0.41 $0.43 $0.45
Multi Family $0.31 $0.33 $0.34 $0.36 $0.38
Landscape $0.33 $0.35 $0.36 $0.38 $0.40
Commercial $0.31 $0.33 $0.34 $0.36 $0.38
Schools $0.33 $0.35 $0.36 $0.38 $0.40
Government $0.34 $0.36 $0.37 $0.39 $0.41
20-30%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $0.53 $0.56 $0.58 $0.61 $0.64
Tier 2 $0.71 $0.75 $0.78 $0.82 $0.86
Tier 3 $0.82 $0.86 $0.90 $0.95 $1.00
Multi Family $0.70 $0.74 $0.77 $0.81 $0.85
Landscape $0.74 $0.78 $0.82 $0.86 $0.90
Commercial $0.70 $0.74 $0.77 $0.81 $0.85
Schools $0.73 $0.77 $0.80 $0.85 $0.89
Government $0.76 $0.80 $0.84 $0.88 $0.92
30-40%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $0.86 $0.90 $0.95 $1.00 $1.05
Tier 2 $1.15 $1.21 $1.27 $1.33 $1.40
Tier 3 $1.33 $1.40 $1.47 $1.54 $1.62
Multi Family $1.13 $1.19 $1.25 $1.31 $1.37
Landscape $1.19 $1.25 $1.31 $1.38 $1.45
Commercial $1.13 $1.19 $1.25 $1.31 $1.37
Schools $1.18 $1.24 $1.30 $1.37 $1.43
Government $1.24 $1.30 $1.37 $1.44 $1.51
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 7 Customer Class FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 40-50%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $1.31 $1.38 $1.44 $1.52 $1.59
Tier 2 $1.75 $1.84 $1.93 $2.03 $2.13
Tier 3 $2.04 $2.14 $2.25 $2.36 $2.48
Multi Family $1.73 $1.82 $1.91 $2.00 $2.10
Landscape $1.82 $1.91 $2.01 $2.11 $2.21
Commercial $1.73 $1.82 $1.91 $2.00 $2.10
Schools $1.80 $1.89 $1.98 $2.08 $2.19
Government $1.89 $1.98 $2.08 $2.19 $2.30
Figure 1-4 shows a comparison of a 5/8" meter single-family bill at different usage levels under the proposed FY 2026 rates and current FY 2026 rates.
Figure 1-4: Single-Family Residential Bipe15nthly Billacts, FY 2026 Single Family Bi-Monthly Bill Impacts, 5/8" meter
$350
$300
$250
$200
$150
$1E
$
Very Low Use Low Use Median Use Average Use High Use Very High Use ■Current $83.90 $102.54 $111.86 $161.14 $195.02 $277.86 ■Proposed $86.56 $105.76 $115.36 $166.72 $202.03 $286.26 Usage(hcf) 8 16 20 36 47 70 Difference($) $2.66 $3.22 $3.50 $5.58 $7.01 $8.40 Difference(%) 3.2% 3.1% 3.1% 3.5% 3.6% 3.0% Figure 1-5 shows a comparison of a 5/8" meter with 3 dwelling units, multi-family bill at different usage levels under the proposed FY 2026 and current FY 2026 rates.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 8 Figure 1-5: Multi-Family Residential Bi-Monthly Bill Impacts, FY 2026 Multi Family (3 Dwelling Units) Bi-Monthly Bill Impacts 5/8" Meter
$450
$400
$300 I
$300
$250
ii . .
Very Low Use Low Use Median Use Average Use High Use Very High Use ■Current $119.52 $151.09 $208.49 $182.66 $277.37 $372.08 ■Proposed $127.02 $161.89 $225.29 $196.76 $301.37 $405.98 Usage(hcf) 18 29 49 40 73 106 Difference($) $7.50 $10.80 $16.80 $14.10 $24.00 $33.90 Difference(%) 6.3% 7.1% 8.1% 7.7% 8.7% 9.1% Figure 1-6 shows a comparison of average non-residential customer bills for each customer class under the proposed FY 2026 rates and current FY 2026 rates.
Figure 1-6: Non-Resident al Bi-Mogrftpcts, FY 2026
Average hly Bill Impacts by Customer Class
$3,500
$3,000
$2,500
$2,000 -
$1,500
S1,000
$soo . I
II II
II
$o 2'' 2'' 3" 2" 2"
Landscape Commercial Schools Government Recycled Water ■Current Bi-Monthly Bill $1,146 23 $607.43 $2,626.47 $857.61 $2,762.99 Proposed Bi-Monthly Bill $1,194 92 $654.44 $2,630.61 $861.42 $2,864.63 Usage(hcf) 264 108 603 158 966
Difference($) $48.69 $47.01 $4.14 $3.81 $101.64 Difference(%) 4.25% 7.74% 0.16% 0.44% 3.68% 1 .5. Proposed Wastewater Financial Plan
Raftelis modeled a status quo financial plan to evaluate whether current wastewater rates can adequately fund the City's collection system expenses over the study period(FY 2026-FY 2034). Using City-provided revenues, operating and maintenance expenses, debt service, and capital expenditures, Raftelis determined that, with no rate increases over the study period, the City will fail to meet its reserve targets in FY 2033 and
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 9 fully deplete its reserves by FY 2034. Under current rates, the City cannot fully fund its operating expenses, underscoring the need for revenue adjustments now to mitigate larger adjustments in the future and to ensure long-term sustainability for the wastewater enterprise.
Table 1-5 shows the proposed revenue adjustments for the wastewater enterprise.
Table 1-5: Proposed Wastewater Revenue Adjustments
Effective Date Adjustment
July 1, 2026 4.0%
January 1, 2027 4.0%
January 1, 2028 4.0%
January 1, 2029 4.0%
January 1, 2030 4.0%
Figure 1-7 shows the proposed five-year wastewater enterprise financial plan graphically. Status quo revenue is shown by the solid line. Projected revenue is shown by the dashed line. Annual expenditures are shown by the columns. The green bars below the X-axis show reserves are drawn down year to year to fund capital costs. Revenue from current rates is not enough to cover annual operating and maintenance costs and capital expenditures. Therefore, revenue adjustments are required to generate sufficient revenue to cover these costs over the study period.
lkFigure 1-7: Propos astewater Financial Plan
Illk Financial Plan
w $8
C
0 3 $6 ,-
$4
$2
$0 l m.
-$2
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 O&M Expenses Rate Funded Capital Projects
• ._ Reserve Funding Current Revenues
——— Proposed Revenues
Figure 1-8 shows projected ending fund balances over the study period relative to the City's reserve targets.
Maximum and minimum targets are shown. The minimum targets are met in all years, and the maximum target is met in all years except for FY 2032—FY 2034, as reserves are drawn down to pay for necessary capital improvement projects. While the reserves exceed the maximum targets, it is still necessary to have small rate increases to ensure that the rate revenue will cover the operating expenses.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 10 Figure 1-8: Projected Wastewater Fund Ending Balance
Fund Balances
, $16
Le
o $14 $13.4 $12.7
$12.0 $11.2
$12 $10.4
$10
$8
$6
$4
$2 il
$0
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Ending Balance -Reserve Target-Min Reserve Target-Max Figure 1-9 shows the proposed capital financing plan over the rate-setting period for the wastewater utility.
The proposed financial plan assumes that all capital projects will be funded through rate revenue, with no plans to issue debt.
Figure 1-9: Waste :tk '.al Financing Han
Capital Financing Plan
Ln $0.9 $0.9
a
0 $0.8
r 1
I
$0.8 $0.8
$0.8
$0.7
-iri 7
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 ■ Rate Funded
1 .6. Proposed Wastewater Rates
Table 1-6 shows the proposed five-year schedule of wastewater rates. Rates for FY 2026 reflect the cost-of- service analysis. Rates for all future years are equal to the prior year rates multiplied by the revenue adjustment. All numbers are rounded up to the nearest cent to ensure adequate revenue recovery. This rate study only proposes changes to the City Local Sewer Services Charge. San Antonio Heights customers are charged a rate 1.5 times the EDU rate based on an agreement between the City and San Antonio Heights.
IEUA also imposes a per-EDU wastewater charge on the City, which the City passes through directly to its customers. The table below shows the City's rate for FY 27 through FY 2030 and IEUA rates for the current
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 11 fiscal year and FY 27. Subsequent year IEUA rates will be passed through to customers when IEUA updates them. The IEUA FY 2027 charge is effective July 1, 2026. Any increases in IEUA treatment costs will be passed through to customers in July each year as shown below.
Table 1-6: Proposed Five-Year Wastewater Rate Schedule
$/EDU Wastewater Charge Current FY 2027 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Effective Date July 1,2026 January 1,2027 January 1,2028 January 1,2029 January 1,2030 Revenue Adjustment 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% City Local Sewer Services Charges $11.29 $11.98 $12.46 $12.96 $13.48 $14.02 Effective Date July 1,2026 January 1,2027 July 1,2027 July 1,2028 July 1,2029 IEUA Sewer Treatment Component(Pass-Through Rate)* $25.78 $29.45 $29.45 Pass-through Pass-through Pass-through *The City currently collects$25.78 per EDU for IEUA wastewater treatment services,although IEUA's current rate is$27.02 per EDU.
It should be noted that the current EDU for multi-family customers is 0.7 per dwelling unit. Based on the actual housing density(number of people per household), the EDU for multi-family will be 0.89 EDU.
Figure 1-10 shows a bill comparison for current and FY 2027 proposed rates, effective July 1, 2026, for a wastewater EDU.
Figure 1-10: Wstewater EDU Bl ct
Bill Impacts Wastewater
$12.20
$12.00 $11.98
#111111
$11.80
$11.60
$11.40 $11.29
$11.20
$11.00
$10.80
City Local Sewer Services Component($/EDU)
•Current •Jul-26
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 12
2. Rate Setting Methodology
This study was conducted using industry-standard principles outlined by the American Water Works Association (AWWA) in the publication, Manual of Water Supply Practice M1, Principles of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges and in the Water Environment Federation (WEF)publication, Manual of Practice No. 27, Financing and Charges for Wastewater Systems. The process and approach Raftelis utilized in the study to determine water and wastewater rates is informed of the legal requirements in California(namely, Proposition 218). Additionally, Raftelis considered City's policy objectives and the current water and wastewater systems and rates insofar as such considerations are consistent with Proposition 218. The resulting financial plans, cost of service analyses, and rate design process follow five key steps, outlined below, to determine proposed rates that fulfill the City's objectives, meet industry standards, and align with relevant regulations.
1. Financial Plan - Projections: The first step is to develop a multi-year financial plan that projects the City's revenues, expenses, capital project financing, annual debt service, and reserve funding. The financial plan is used to determine the revenue adjustment, which allows the City to recover adequate revenues to fund expenses and reserves.
2. Financial Plan-Revenue Requirement Determination: After completing the financial plan, the rate- making process begins by determining the revenue requirement for the test year,also known as the rate- setting year. The test year for this study is FY 2026. The revenue requirement should sufficiently fund the City's operating costs, annual debt service(including coverage requirements), capital expenditures, and reserve funding as projected based on the annual budget estimates.
3. Cost-of-Service Analysis: The annual cost of providing water/wastewater service, or the revenue requirement, is then distributed to customer classes commensurate with their use of and burden on the water/wastewater system. A cost-of-service analysis involves the following steps:
a. Functionalize costs—The different components of the revenue requirement are categorized into functions such as supply, transmission/collection, storage, customer service for water, and collection and customer service for wastewater.
b. Allocate to cost causation components — the functionalized costs are then allocated to cost causation components such as supply,base delivery,peaking, etc. for water and collection, and customer service for wastewater.
c. Develop unit costs—unit costs for each cost causation component are determined using units of service, such as total use,peaking units, equivalent meters, number of customers, etc., for each component.
d. Distribute cost components —the cost components are allocated to each customer class using the unit costs in proportion to their units of service(demand and burden on the system).
A water cost-of-service analysis also considers both the average water demand and peak demand.
Peaking costs are incurred during periods of peak consumption, most often coinciding with summer water use. There are additional capacity-related costs associated with designing, constructing, operating,maintaining,and replacing facilities to meet peak demand.Peaking imposes additional costs on a water utility and is used to determine the cost burden from peaking-related facilities.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 13
4. Rate Design: After allocating the revenue requirement to each customer class, the project team designs and calculates rates. Rates do more than simply recover costs;within the legal framework and industry standards,properly designed rates should support the City's policy objectives.Rates also act as a public information tool in communicating these policy objectives to customers. This process also includes a rate impact analysis and sample customer bill impacts.
5. Administrative Record Preparation and Rate Adoption: The final step in a rate study is to develop the administrative record (report) in conjunction with the rate adoption process. This report serves as the administrative record for this study. The administrative record documents the study results and presents the methodologies, rationale,justifications, and calculations used to determine the proposed rates. A thorough and methodological administrative record serves two important functions:
maintaining defensibility in a stringent legal environment and communicating the rationale for revenue adjustments and proposed rates to customers and key stakeholders.
I
Values shown in report tables and figures are rounded to the digit shown. Therefore, any manual reproduction of the calculations shown may not match the precise results displayed in the report.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 14
3. Key Inputs and Assumptions
The key assumptions outlined in this section of the report represent the global assumptions utilized in the Study to project the number of customer accounts, revenues, and expenses for future years. City staff provided data on customer accounts, usage, and actual revenues and expenses for FY 2024—FY 2025 and budgeted revenues and expenses for FY 2026. The remaining years of the study were projected based on this information and the key assumptions shown in this section.
3.1 . Current Water Rates
Table 3-1 shows the current water rate schedule. Water customers are currently charged a bi-monthly fixed charge and a commodity rate per hundred cubic feet(hcf) of water delivered. Fixed service charges vary based on meter size. Commodity rates vary by customer class. Single-family residential customers are charged based on a tiered rate structure, and all other classes have a uniform rate. Recycled water customers are charged the same fixed charge by meter size as potable water customers but have a class-specific uniform volumetric rate.
Table 3-1: Current Water Rate Structu
Bi-Monthly Fixed Charge
Meter Size $/bi-mo
5/8" $65.26
3/4" $82.68
1" $117.52
1 1/2" $204.72
2" $309.35
3" $588.33
4" $902.15
6" $1,773.93
8" $2,820.12
Commodity Charge($/hcf)
Customer Class
Single Family
Tier 1 $2.33
Tier 2 $3.08
Tier 3 $3.68
Multi Family $2.87
Landscape $3.17
Commercial $2.76
Schools $3.38
Government $3.47
Recycled Water $2.54
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 15
3.2. Current Wastewater Rates
Table 3-2 shows the current wastewater rate schedule implemented in November 2024. All customer accounts are charged a fixed charge per EDU.
Table 3-2: Current Wastewater Rate Structure
Service Charges (Monthly$/EDU)
City Local Sewer Services Charges $11.29
IEUA Sewer Treatment Component(Pass-Through Rate)* $25.78 *The City currently collects$25.78 per EDU for IEUA wastewater treatment services, although IEUA's adopted rate is$27.02 per EDU.
3.3. Projected Service Connections
3.3.1. Water Connections
Table 3-3 shows the actual number of potable water accounts by meter size for FY 2025 and the projected number of accounts through the study period. Raftelis is assuming zero growth in customer accounts over the study period, as shown in the table. The zero growth in customer accounts is based on recent trends in the City, and future expectations provided by City staff. The number of accounts shown is used to forecast the amount of fixed revenue the City will receive from the bi-monthly service charge.
Table 3-3: Proje3d of Water
Meter Size FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 5/8" 15,197 15,197 15,197 15,197 15,197 15,197 3/4" 810 810 810 810 810 810
1" 2,475 2,475 2,475 2,475 2,475 2,475 1 1/2" 545 545 545 545 545 545
2" 792 792 792 792 792 792
3" 65 65 65 65 65 65
4" 44 44 44 44 44 44
6" 10 10 10 10 10 10
8" 2 2 2 2 2 2
Total 19,940 19,940 19,940 19,940 19,940 19,940
3.3.2. Wastewater EDU's
Table 3-4 shows the current and projected wastewater dwelling units. The City provided Raftelis with the number of dwelling units for FY 2025. Raftelis is assuming no growth throughout the study period as shown below. The zero growth is based on recent trends and future expectations provided by City staff. The increase in EDUs in FY 2027 results from redefining the multi-family(MFR)EDU based on the residential density per household, which causes the MFR EDU to increase from 0.7 to 0.89.
Table 3-4: Projected Wastewater Dwelling Units
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030
Number of EDUs 29,931 32,321 32,321 32,321 32,321
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 16
3.4. Water Use Assumptions
Water use has a significant impact on the water utility both in terms of costs and revenues. It is therefore important to use a normal year to project water use with the understanding that rate revenues will change depending on wet or dry years and the resulting revenue fluctuations will be accommodated by the rate stabilization reserve. The water use assumptions project actual FY 2025 water use, which was a normal year, and assume customer classes will continue to use water similarly. As shown in Table 3-5, there is no increased water demand in the study period.
Table 3-5: Water Use Assumptions
I
Customer Class FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Single Family 3,786,229 3,786,229 3,786,229 3,786,229 3,786,229 3,786,229 Tier 1 1,768,123 1,768,123 1,768,123 1,768,123 1,768,123 1,768,123 Tier 2 1,278,101 1,278,101 1,278,101 1,278,101 1,278,101 1,278,101 Tier 3 740,005 740,005 740,005 740,005 740,005 740,005 Multi Family 1,201,826 1,201,826 1,201,826 1,201,826 1,201,826 1,201,826 Landscape 1,101,882 1,101,882 1,101,882 1,101,882 1,101,882 1,101,882 Commercial 784,815 784,815 784,815 784,815 784,815 784,815 School 112,615 112,615 112,615 112,615 112,615 112,615 Government 120,755 120,755 120,755 120,755 120,755 120,755 Condominiums 102,339 102,339 102,339 102,339 102,339 102,339 Total Potable Usage(hcf) 7,210,461 7,210,461 7,210,461 7,210,461 7,210,461 7,210,461 Recycled Water Usage(hcf) 267,548 267,548 267,548 267,548 267,548 267,548
3.5. Water mOrNastewater Iliancial Plan Assumptions Table 3-6 shows the expense inflation factors which are used to project future operating and capital project expenses for the study period. These factors were determined with input from City staff based on historical and projected cost increases, and reference industry standard escalations under current market conditions.
The inflation factors shown were applied in each year of the study period to project expenses in FY 2027 and beyond.
able 3-6: Expense Inflation Factors
FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030
General 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%
Personnel 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%
Benefits 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
Capital 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0%
Power 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
Table 3-7 shows inflation factors for water purchase rates, which are used to project rates for wholesale water costs in Table 4-4 and Table 4-5, when future rates were not available. All inflation projections are based on historical rate increases from the different agencies where the data was available, with the exception of WFA rates. The inflation factors shown for WFA are based on projected rate increases for Metropolitan MWD.
WECWC, Six Basin, and Chino Basin are being inflated by a general inflation factor of 7%based on historical industry standard escalations.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 17 Table 3-7: Water Purchase Inflation Factors
Inflation Factor FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 WFA($/AF) Inflation 7.9% 18.4% 11.9% 4.4% 6.1% WFA RTS Inflation 3.9% 4.8% 25.4% 12.6% 5.0% WFA Capacity Charge 11.5% 4.1% 32.5% 18.0% 14.0% SAWCo Water Availability Inflation Provided Provided Provided Provided Provided SAWCO ($/AF) Inflation Provided Provided Provided Provided Provided General Inflation for Water 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% IEUA Recycled Direct Use Provided Provided 9.0% 9.0% 9.0% IEUA Ground Water Recharge Provided Provided 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% IEUA MEU Provided Provided 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% IEUA Recycled Fixed Charge Provided 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 18
4. Water Financial Plan
This section of the report details the water enterprise's long-term financial plan, based on the projected revenues, operating and maintenance (O&M) expenses, debt service, and capital project costs. Raftelis modeled the financial plan without revenue adjustments(status quo) and with proposed revenue adjustments to ensure the financial sustainability and solvency of the water utility. The results of the water financial plan are the proposed rates for five years based on the proposed revenue adjustments.
4.1 . Current Revenue
The City's revenues consist of rate revenues, interest earnings, and other miscellaneous revenues. The rate revenue projections assume current rates are effective for each year of the study period. The rate revenue projections shown are assuming a June 1, 2026, effective date, with each year following being implemented on January 1.
4.1.1. Calculated Water Rate Revenues
Raftelis projected water rate revenues from fixed service charges and commodity charges for FY 2026—FY 2030 based on current FY 2026 water rates, the projected number of water meters, and projected annual water use.
The City collects fixed bi-monthly service charges from customers based on meter size. Table 4-1 shows projected fixed service charge revenues under current rates over the study period. These revenues are calculated by multiplying the current water rates in Table 3-1 by the corresponding number of water meters in Table 3-3. This is then multiplied by 6 (number of bills per year)to arrive at the total. able 4 : Project-d Fixed Charge Revenues Under Current Rates Meter Size FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 5/8" $5,950,537 $5,950,537 $5,950,537 $5,950,537 $5,950,537 3/4" $401,825 $401,825 $401,825 $401,825 $401,825 1" $1,745,172 $1,745,172 $1,745,172 $1,745,172 $1,745,172 11/2" $669,434 $669,434 $669,434 $669,434 $669,434 2" $1,470,031 $1,470,031 $1,470,031 $1,470,031 $1,470,031 3" $229,449 $229,449 $229,449 $229,449 $229,449 4" $238,168 $238,168 $238,168 $238,168 $238,168 6" $106,436 $106,436 $106,436 $106,436 $106,436 8" $33,841 $33,841 $33,841 $33,841 $33,841 Total $10,844,893 $10,844,893 $10,844,893 $10,844,893 $10,844,893 Table 4-2 shows projected volumetric revenues under current rates for the study period. Volumetric revenues are calculated by customer class based on current FY 26 water rates and projected water use (Table 3-5).
Annual Volume Charge Revenue =[FY2026 rate per hcf] x[Annual Water Use in hcf
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 19 Table 4-2: Projected Commodity Revenue Under Current Rates Customer Class FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Single Family $10,779,496 $10,779,496 $10,779,496 $10,779,496 $10,779,496 Multi Family $3,449,241 $3,449,241 $3,449,241 $3,449,241 $3,449,241 Landscape $3,492,966 $3,492,966 $3,492,966 $3,492,966 $3,492,966 Commercial $2,166,089 $2,166,089 $2,166,089 $2,166,089 $2,166,089 School $380,639 $380,639 $380,639 $380,639 $380,639 Government $419,020 $419,020 $419,020 $419,020 $419,020 Condominiums $293,713 $293,713 $293,713 $293,713 $293,713 Total Commodity Revenue $20,981,163 $20,981,163 $20,981,163 $20,981,163 $20,981,163 Recycled Water Commodity Revenue $679,572 $679,572 $679,572 $679,572 $679,572
4.1.2. Other Revenues
Table 4-3 shows all other revenues for the water enterprise. FY 2026 revenues are based on the City provided budget, except for interest income. Values for all other years shown were projected. Interest revenue reflects a status quo scenario where no revenue adjustments are being added. All other miscellaneous revenues are non- inflated.
Table 4-3: Projected Other Wat, -iterprist. 'es (Status Quo) Miscellaneous Revenues FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Other Operating Income $113,200 $113,200 $113,200 $113,200 $113,200 Other Non-Operating Income $489,600 $489,600 $489,600 $489,600 $489,600 Interest Income $1,526,465 $1,507,963 $1,320,477 $687,602 $452,405 Total $2,129,265 $2,110,763 $1,923,277 $1,290,402 $1,055,205
4.2, Annua :xpense.
The City's expenses include water supply purchases, operations and maintenance expenses, capital expenses, and debt service. These costs are discussed in more detail below.
4.2.1. Total Operations and Maintenance Budget
4.2.1.1. Water Purchase Cost
The City obtains water from multiple sources, including Imported Water through the Water Facilities Authority(WFA), which receives water through the Metropolitan Water District(MWD). Groundwater from West End Consolidated Water Company(WECWC), San Antonio Water Company(SAWCo), Six Basin Water Master, and Chino Basin Water Master. The City also purchases recycled water from the IEUA for direct use and to recharge in Chino Basin.
Table 4-4 shows the projected unit costs for the water supply in Lines 28-50. The purchased water costs are calculated for each water source as shown below. If future year water purchase rates were not available, the current rate is inflated by the respective inflation factors shown in Table 3-7. These inflation factors are based on historical rate increases for the different water sources. The exception to this is that WFA rates are being inflated by the projected rate increases from MWD. If historical rate increases by agency were not available, a 7% inflation factor based on historical industry rate increases was applied to the rates.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
Six Basin—Line 29 is calculated by multiplying the Six Basin supply in AF shown in Line 1 by the cost per AF in Line 11.
Chino Basin—Line 32 is calculated by multiplying Line 2 by Line 13. Line 33 is calculated multiplying Line 8 by Line 13.
WFA—Line 36 is calculated by multiplying Line 3 by Line 16. Line 37 is equal to Line 17. This charge is already annualized, so there is no calculation. Line 38 is calculated by multiplying the Monthly Readiness to serve charge in Line 18 by 12 (months). Line 39 is a provided value from WFA through FY 2029; FY 2030 is the average of the previous 5 years.
SAWCo—Line 42 is calculated by multiplying Line 4 by Line 20. Line 43 is calculated by multiplying the Monthly Readiness to Serve charge in Line 21 by 12(months). Line 44 is calculated by multiplying the Monthly Water Available charge in Line 22 by 12(months).
WECWC—Line 47 is calculated by multiplying Line 5 by Line 24. Line 48 is calculated by multiplying Line 25 by the number of shares(3,308). A
IEUA—Line 50 is equal to Line 26. This total value was provided for FY 2025. It was calculated by multiplying the total number of MEUs(35,686)by 12(months)by the rate ($1.14). The rate per MEU was provided by City staff for FY 2026 ($1.17)and FY 2027($1.20). This same calculation was done for these years, assuming the same number of MEUs. For subsequent years, the costs were inflated by 3%,based on historical IEUA MEU charge increases.
1 II
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 21 Table 4-4: Summary of Projected Potable Purchased Water Cost Expenses Line Potable Water Purchases FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 1 Six Basin 831 831 831 831 831 2 Chino Basin 1,641 1,641 1,641 1,641 1,641 3 WFA 3,858 3,858 3,858 3,858 3,858
4 SAWCo 8,815 8,815 8,815 8,815 8,815 5 WECWC 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 6 Total Supply(AF) 17,545 17,545 17 17,545 17,545 7 8 Groundwater Recharge(AF) 1,426 1,426 A 1,426 1,426 1,426 9 A
10 Supply Costs
11 Six Basin($/AF) $32 $34 $37 $39 $42 12 Chino Basin
13 Chino Basin($/AF) $125 $134 $143 $153 $164 14 Recycled Water AF Recharge Charge Total $715 A $769 $829 1$895 $966 15 WFA A NV
16 MWD-Water Facilities Authority WFA ($/AF) $1,069 $1,266 $1,417 $1,479 $1,569 17 Capacity Charge Obligation(Annualized) $156,351 $162,821 $215,656 $254,474 $290,058 18 Readiness to Service Charges Monthly $42,922 $44,977 ' $56,393 $63,470 $66,667 19 SAWCo
20 SAWCO($/AF) $257 $270 $283 $296 $309 21 SAWCO RTS Monthly Charge $29,810 $31,226 $32,709 $34,263 $35,891 22 SAWCO Water Available Monthly $36,396 $38,090 $39,914 $41,825 $43,823 23 WECWC
24 WECWC($/AF) $52 $56 _ $60 $64 $69 25 Rate per Share $161 $172 $184 $197 $210 26 IEUA MEU Charge Total Charge $501,031 $513,878 $529,295 $545,174 $561,529 27 28 Calculated Water Purchase Costs
29 Six Basin AF Charge Total $26,671 $28,538 $30,536 $32,673 $34,960 30 31 Chino Basin
32 Chino Basin AF Charge Total $205,565 $219,955 $235,352 $251,827 $269,454 33 Recycled Water AF Recharge Charge Total $1,019,101 $1,095,999 $1,182,303 $1,275,758 $1,376,976 34 35 WFA
36 MWD-Water Facilities Authority(WFA)AF Charge Total $4,124,498 $4,883,171 $5,465,799 $5,704,718 $6,052,617 37 Capacity Charge Obligation(Annualized) $156,351 $162,821 $215,656 $254,474 $290,058 38 Readiness to Service Charge(Annualized) $515,069 $539,727 $676,713 $761,645 $800,001 39 Capital Charge $1,055,404 $212,400 $378,000 $378,000 $435,717 40 41 SAWCo
42 SAWCO AF Charge Total $2,265,475 $2,380,669 $2,495,862 $2,611,056 $2,726,250 43 SAWCO RTS Monthly Charge(Annualized) $357,722 $374,713 $392,512 $411,157 $430,687 44 SAWCO Water Available Charge(Annualized) $436,757 $457,084 $478,974 $501,906 $525,881 45 46 WECWC
47 WECWC AF Charge Total $125,823 $134,630 $144,054 $154,138 $164,928 48 WECWC Charge from Shares Total(3,308 shares) $530,934 $568,099 $607,866 $650,417 $695,946 49 50 IEUA MEU Charge Total Charge $501,031 $513,878 $529,295 $545,174 $561,529 51 52 Total Potable Production Costs $11,320,402 $11,571,684 $12,832,922 $13,532,942 $14,365,004
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 22 Table 4-5 shows the projected recycled purchased water costs. Line 6 is calculated by multiplying the amount of recycled water (Line 1) by the rate shown in Line 3. Line 7 is calculated by multiplying the monthly fixed charge in Line 4 by 12. The sum of Lines 6 and 7 results in the total recycled purchase costs shown in Line 8 of Table 4-5
Table 4-5: Summary of Projected Recycled Purchased Water Cost Expenses Line FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 , , 2029 FY 2030 1 Recycled Water,AF 660 660 660 660 660 2 3 IEUA Recycled Water Direct Use($/AF) $507 $552 $602 $656 $715 4 Recycled Water Monthly Fixed Charge($) $26,626 $27,425 $28,247 $29,095 $29,968 5 6 IEUA Recycled Water Direct Use($/AF) $334,299 $364,388 $397,183 $432,930 $471,893 7 Recycled Water Monthly Fixed Charge($) $319,509 $329,094 $338,967 $349,136 $359,610 8 Total Recycled Purchase Costs $653,808 $693,482 $736,150 $782,066 $831,503
4.2.1.2. Operating and Maintenance Expenses
The City provided Raftelis with its actual expenses for FY 2025 and budget for FY 2026. Customer service costs from the Public Works and Finance department are shown separately to match the City's budget. The City also provided adjustments in future years to account for changes in staffing and reductions in anticipated operating and maintenance expenses. To project the City's O&M expenses, Raftelis used the escalation factors shown in Table 3-6. Table 4-6 shows a summary of the budgeted and projected O&M.
Table 4-6: Water Operations Waintenance Expenses Projection Potable Water O&M Expenses FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Administration $4,755,502 $4,969,097 $5,126,325 $5,288,560 $5,455,962 Customer Service $251,620 $290,336 $300,099 $310,191 $320,623 Meter Services $1,304,653 $612,341 $662,896 $684,664 $707,150 Production and Storage $3,216,797 $3,576,291 $2,613,559 $2,276,423 $1,810,409 Power $1,804,100 $1,930,387 $2,065,514 $2,210,100 $2,364,807 Water Purchase Costs $11,320,402 $11,571,684 $12,832,922 $13,532,942 $14,365,004 Transmission and Distribution $3,855,524 $4,555,581 $4,709,450 $4,868,537 $5,033,020 WECWC Management Control $355,569 $367,134 $379,077 $391,411 $404,149 Water Conservation $379,130 $841,029 $792,074 $817,766 $892,360 Storm Water MGMT& Recharge $725,553 $1,063,673 $1,097,724 $1,132,872 $1,169,152 PVPA $4,275 $4,413 $4,555 $4,702 $4,853
Customer Service $936,843 $966,665 $997,441 $1,029,204 $1,061,983 Total Potable Water O&M $28,909,967 $30,748,629 $31,581,637 $32,547,371 $33,589,474 Recycled Water O&M Expenses FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Recycled Water Production $653,808 $693,482 $736,150 $782,066 $831,503 Cross Connection $52,860 $54,446 $56,079 $57,762 $59,494 Recycled Water Retrofit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital Outlay $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Recycled Water Expenses $706,668 $747,928 $792,229 $839,827 $890,998
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 23
4.2.2. Capital Improvement Plan
Table 4-7 shows the City's water capital improvement plan for the rate-setting period. Previously issued bond funds are available to fund projects in the first couple of years. The average annual cost of CIP projects is roughly$8.7M.
Table 4-7: Projected Capital Improvement Projects
I
Funding Source FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Existing Bond Funded $8,637,740 $3,595,909 $0 $0 $0 Rate Funded $0 $4,404,091 $8,500,000 $9,000,000 $9,500,000 Total CIP $8,637,740 $8,000,000 $8,500,000 $9,000,000 $9,500,000
4.2.3. Existing Debt Service
Table 4-8 shows the existing debt service. The City currently has a water revenue refunding bond series 2021, water revenue refunding bond series 2022, and a State Water Resources Control Board(SWRCB)loan.
Table 4-8: Existing Waterbt Service
Existing Debt FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Water Revenue Refunding
Bond Series 2021
Principal $622,000 $633,000 $642,000 $651,000 $658,000 Interest $84,480 $75,068 $65,505 $55,808 $25,741 Water Revenue Refunding
Bond Series 2022
Principal $900,000 $915,000 $935,000 $955,000 $970,000 Interest $244,032 $226,608 $208,848 $190,704 $172,224 SWRCB Loan -Water
Principal $424,277 $432,338 $440,553 $448,923 $475,170 Interest $294,388 $286,327 $278,113 $269,742 $243,496 Total Existing Debt Service $2,569,177 $2,568,341 $2,570,019 $2,571,177 $2,544,631
4.35E-Reserve T Jets
The City maintains multiple water enterprise reserve funds.
Operating Reserve—The Operating Reserve is used primarily to meet ongoing cash flow requirements. The City's minimum reserve target is set at 20% of O&M expenses. The maximum target is set at 40% of O&M expenses.
Capital Reserve—The Capital Reserve is used to cover capital costs and any unexpected and unplanned infrastructure repairs and replacements not included in the budget, as well as to set aside money for future capital projects. The minimum target is set at 100% of the five-year average of capital projects. The maximum target is set at 200% of the five-year average of capital projects.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 24 Debt Reserve—The Debt Reserve target is legally required for the City's SWRCB debt. The reserve level required is equal to the amount of the outstanding principal of the SWRCB debt.
Rate Stabilization Reserve—The Rate Stabilization Reserve is used to primarily to help reduce an annual revenue adjustment due to short-term spikes in costs or decreases in revenues from droughts. The City's minimum reserve target is set at 10%of rate revenue. The maximum target is set at 50%of the rate revenues.
4.4. Proposed Financial Plan and Revenulaustments The proposed revenue adjustments shown in Table 4-9 are necessary to ensure adequate revenue to fund operating expenses, capital expenditures, and meet reserve targets. The first revenue adjustment is proposed to occur on June 1, 2026, with each following year being implemented on January 1. The proposed revenue adjustments would enable the City to meet operating costs, complete planned CIP projects, and meet all reserve targets throughout the study period.
Table 4-9: Proposed Water Revenue Adjustments
Effective Date Adjustment
June 1, 2026 5.0%
January 1, 2027 5.0%
January 1, 2028 5.0%
January 1, 2029 5.0%
January 1, 2030 5.0%
Table 4-10 shows the projected water financial plan with the proposed revenue adjustments from FY 2026 through FY 2030. Line 1 shows the projected rate-revenue under current rates. Line 9 shows the total projected rate revenue, including the proposed revenue adjustments. Lines 11 through 13 show other revenue sources. The sum of all revenues is shown in Line 14. Lines 19 through 32 show O&M expenses by department. All O&M expenses except for purchased water reflect a 5%reduction from budgeted expenses based on historical utilization of budgets. The sum of O&M expenses is shown in Line 33. Lines 35 and 37 show debt service and rate-funded capital projects, respectively. The net cashflow(Line 39)is negative for all years except FY 2026, as the City draws down cash reserves to fund capital project costs and minimize rate impacts to customers.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 25 Table 4-10: Water Financial Plan
Line Water Financial Plan FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 1 Revenue Under Existing Rates $31,882,156 $31,826,056 $31,826,056 $31,826,056 $31,826,056 2 Revenue Adjustments
3 Adjustment Mo.Effective
4 FY 2026 5.0% 1 $132,842 $1,591,303 $1,591,303 $1,591,303 $1,591,303 5 FY 2027 5.0% 6 $835,434 $1,670,868 $1,670,868 $1,670,868 6 FY 2028 5.0% 6 $877,206 $1,754,411 $1,754,411 7 FY 2029 5.0% 6 $921,066 $1,842,132 8 FY 2030 5.0% 6 $967,119
9 Total Rate Revenue $32,014,999 $34,252,793 $35,965,433 $37,763,705 $39,651,890 10 Other Revenue I
11 Other Operating Income $113,200 $113,200 $113,200 1 $113,200 $113,200 12 Other Non-Operating Income $489,600 $489,600 $489,600 $489,600 $489,600 13 Interest Income $1,528,457 $1,548,409 $1,460,628 $884,610 $790,987 14 Total Other Revenue $2,131,257 $2,151,209 $2,063,428 $1,487,410 $1,393,787 15 16 Total Revenue $34,146,256 $36,404,002 $38,028,861 $39,251,114 $41,045,677 17 18 O&M Expenses F
19 Administration $4,755,502 $4,969,097 $5,126,325 $5,288,560 $5,455,962 20 Customer Service $251,620 $290,336 $300,099 $310,191 $320,623 21 Meter Services $1,304,653 $612,341 $662,896 $684,664 $707,150 22 Damage to City Property $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 23 Production and Storage $3,216,797 $3,576,291 $2,613,559 $2,276,423 $1,810,409 24 Power $1,804,100 $1,930,387 $2,065,514 $2,210,100 $2,364,807 25 Water Purchase Costs $11,320,402 $11,571,684 $12,832,922 $13,532,942 $14,365,004 26 Transmission and Distribution $3,855,524 $4,555,581 $4,709,450 $4,868,537 $5,033,020 27 WECWC Management Control $355,569 $367,134 $379,077 $391,411 $404,149 28 Water Conservation $379,130 $841,029 $792,074 $817,766 $892,360 29 Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 30 Storm Water MGMT&Recharge $725,553 $1,063,673 $1,097,724 $1,132,872 $1,169,152 31 PVPA $4,275 $4,413 $4,555 $4,702 $4,853 32 Customer Service $936,843 $966,665 $997,441 $1,029,204 $1,061,983 33 Total-O&M Expenses $28,909,967 $30,748,629 $31,581,637 $32,547,371 $33,589,474 34 35 Debt Servi $2,569,177 $2,568,341 $2,570,019 $2,571,177 $2,544,631 36 37 Rate Funded CIP $0 $4,404,091 $8,500,000 $9,000,000 $9,500,000 38 39 Net Cashflow $2,667,112 -$1,317,059 -$4,622,795 -$4,867,434 -$4,588,428 Figure 4-1 shows the proposed five-year water enterprise financial plan in graphical form. Status quo revenue is shown by the solid line. Projected revenue is shown by the dashed line. Annual expenditures are shown by the columns. The green bar above the X-axis shows the net cash used to build up the reserves and the green bars below the X-axis show reserves being spent to fund costs. Revenue from current rates is not enough to cover annual operating and maintenance costs or capital expenditures. Therefore, revenue adjustments are required to generate sufficient revenue to cover these costs over the study period.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 26 Figure 4-1: Proposed Water Financial Plan
$50 Financial Plan
0 $40
$30
$20
$10
$0
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 202 ,FY-2030 -$10
Water Purchases O&M Expenses Debt Service
Capital Projects • Reserve Funding Current Revenues ——— Proposed Revenues
Figure 4-2 shows projected ending fund balances over the study period relative to the City's reserve targets.
Maximum and minimum targets are shown. The minimum targets are met in all years of the rate-setting period.
Figure 4-2: Projected Li. ing Furw'isalance
Fund ces
$so - —
0 $70
-
2 $60 $53.0 $51.7
$50 $47.1
$42.2
$40 _ $37.7
$30
$20
$10
$0 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Ending Balance Reserve Target-Min - Reserve Target-Max Figure 4-3 shows the proposed capital financing plan over the rate-setting period. The proposed financial plan assumes that capital projects will be funded through a combination of water rate revenues, cash reserves, and bond proceeds.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 27 Figure 4-3: Projected Water Capital Plan
Capital Financing Plan
$10 $9.5
$8.6 $9.0
2 $9 $8.5
$8.0
$8
$7
$6
$5
$¢
$3
$2
$1
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 20 FY 2030
•Rate Funded •Debt Fu
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
5. Water Cost-of-Service Analysis
This section of the report details the cost-of-service analysis and rate calculation process to determine the proposed water rates. The goal of this process is to determine the cost of providing water service to each of the City's water customer classes and to ensure equity and fairness among the various classes. i
After determining a utility's revenue requirement, the next step in a cost-of-service analysis is to functionalize its O&M costs to the following functions:
• Supply—cost of pumping groundwater
• Production-the cost of operation and maintenance of wells • Pumping—cost of pumping water through the system
• Distribution—cost associated with pipes,pumps, mains, etc. • Distribution Storage—cost associated with storing treated water • Meter Maintenance—costs associated with meter maintenance and replacement • Customer Service—costs associated with meter reading,billing, and customer service • General and Administration(G&A)—general and administrative costs incurred by the City The functionalization of costs allows us to better allocate the costs to the cost causation components and calculate the bi-monthly service charges and commodity rates.
Illk
5.1 . Revenue Ff lquiremeriL uetermination
Table 5-1 shows the net revenue requirement from rates for FY 2026. The total revenue requirement shown in Line 18 is equal to operating expenses and capital-related expenses(cash-funded capital plus debt service).
Revenue offsets, totaled in Line 11, comprise miscellaneous revenues and interest income and reduce the total revenue required from rates. The adjustment transfers out of reserves and reduces the revenue requirement.
The mid-year increase on Line 15 reflects that the FY 2026 revenue adjustment occurs partway through the fiscal year and adds to the revenue requirement to annualize the rate revenue. The net revenue required from rates on Line 18 is equal to Line 5 minus Lines 11 and 16.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
Table 5-1: Revenue Requirement Determination, FY 2026
Line Revenue Requirement- FY 2026 Operating Capital 1 Revenue Requirements
2 O&M Expenses $28,909,967 $0 $28,909,967 3 Debt Service $0 $2,569,177 $2,569,177 4 Rate Funded CIP $0 $0 $0
5 Total - Revenue Requirements $28,909,967 $2,569,177 $31,479,144 6 7 Revenue Offsets
8 Other Operating Income $113,200 $0 $113,200 9 Other Non-Operating Income $489,600 $0 $489,600 10 Interest Income $1,528,457 $0 $1,528,457 11 Total - Revenue Offsets $2,131,257 $0 $2,131,257 12 13 Less Adjustments
14 Transfer from (to) Reserves $0 -$2,667,112 -$2,667,112 15 Adjustment to Annualize Rate Increase -$1,461,266 $0 -$1,461,266 16 Total - Less Adjustments -$1,461,266 -$2,667,112 -$4,128,378 17 18 Total Revenue to be Recovered from Rates $28,239,975 $5,236,289 $33,476,264
5.2. Allocation of Functionalized Nevenue
Requireme ost Components
After functionalizing the net revenue requirements, the next step is to allocate the functionalized net revenue requirements to the following cost components.
• Supply—variable costs associated with providing water supplies for all customers • Base—fixed costs associated with providing service under average demand conditions • Peaking(Max Day and Peak Hour)—costs associated with meeting demand in excess of average use • Customer Service—the costs associated with meter reading,billing, and customer service • Equivalent Meters—costs associated with meter capacity, maintenance, and replacement • Capital—capital-related costs
5.2.1. Peaking Factors
Water demand varies from parcel to parcel. Water systems have to be designed to meet the highest levels of demand placed on the system. Components of the water system are therefore oversized compared to the requirement for average demands. For example, reservoirs are designed to meet maximum day requirements, and distribution lines are designed to meet instantaneous peak demands or peak hour demands. Therefore, peaking plays a significant part in the costs of operating and constructing a water system. Demonstrating that rates are proportional to the demands and associated costs that customer classes place on the utility system is critical to ensure that rates align with the intent of Proposition 218.The capital and operating costs of the system must then be allocated to customer classes in proportion to the demands they place on the system. For costs recovered through a water utility's fixed meter charge, costs are allocated either over all accounts or by meter size, depending on the type of expense. Variable costs are allocated among customer classes based on the demands they place on the water system and the cost of water supplies.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 30 Peaking costs are computed for a maximum day and peak hour. The maximum day(max day) demand is the maximum amount of water used in a single day in a year. The peak hour or max hour demand is the maximum amount of water used in a single hour on the maximum day. Different facilities, such as distribution and treatment facilities (and the O&M costs associated with those facilities), are designed to meet peak hour and max day demands, respectively. Therefore, extra capacity' costs include the O&M and capital costs associated with meeting peak customer demand. This method is consistent with AWWA Manual M1 and is widely used in the water industry for cost-of-service analyses. Importantly, it ensures that average and below-average users pay rates that reflect the level of capital investment necessary to serve them.
We know from experience that different classes have different peaking factors. Typically, the single family residential(SFR) class is different from the multi-family class, primarily because of irrigation requirements for the SFR class. Commercial and multi-family peaking factors are relatively close. Raftelis reviewed the usage by billing cycle to determine max day peaking factors for different classes by identifying the maximum usage in a billing period in a year to the average usage in a year. This represents the max day peak for each class. The max hour peak factor is determined here by multiplying the customer max day by the ratio of the system max hour to max day. The system max day and max hour factors are described below.
Table 5-2 shows the system-wide peaking factors used to derive the cost component allocation bases for base and peaking costs. These factors were derived from the production data provided by the City. Base costs represent average daily demand during the year and are represented by the factor 1.00. The max day and max hour factors are based on the City's production information. The allocation bases (Columns C, D, and E) are calculated using the equations outlined below the table.Table 5-2: Water System Peaking Factors (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Line System-Wide Peaking Factors Peaking Factor Base Max Day Max Hour Total 1 Base 1.00 100% 0% 0% 100% 2 Max Day 1.47 68% 32% 0% 100% 3 Max Hour 2.06 49% 23% 29% 100% The max day allocations are calculated as follows:
• Base Delivery: B1 / B2 x 100% = C2
• Max Day: 100%- C2 = D2
I
The peak hour allocations are calculated as follows:
• Base Delivery: B1 / B3 x 100% = C3
• Max Day: (B2—B1) / B3 x 100% = D3
• Peak Hour: 100%- C3—D3 =E3
These factors indicate the additional capacity required to meet demand above average daily use. As demand and capacity increase, facilities and pipelines must also be sized to meet those demands. This increases costs The terms extra capacity,peaking and capacity costs are used interchangeably.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 31 to construct, maintain, and replace. These allocations are used to assign certain functionalized costs to the cost causation components including production and transmission&distribution.
5.2.2. Operating and Capital Allocation
The next step in the cost-of-service analysis is to determine the operating and capital cost allocations by cost component. The cost components for water include Base, Max Day, Max Hour, Supply, Conservation, Meters, Customer Service, Revenue Offsets, and General.
Table 5-3 shows the operating costs by functional component in Lines 14-25. These costs are allocated by the corresponding percentages shown in lines 1-12. Allocations for each function are based on the engineering design of each component, for example, wells(production)are designed for max day requirements and are allocated to max day, similarly reservoirs are designed for max day and are allocated to max day. The design of different system components is used for allocation purposes.
Iii
Table 5-3: Allocation of Net Operation & Maintenance to .t Components Line O&M Allocation Allocation Basis Base Max Day Max Hour Supply Conservatio,i Meters Customer General Total 1 Administration General 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 35% 65% 100% 2 Customer Service Customer Service 0% 0% 0% 0% r 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 3 Meter Services Meters 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 4 Damage to City Property General 0% 0% 0% 0% , 0% 0% 35% 65% 100% 5 Supply Supply 0% 4 0% 0% 96% 0% 4% 0% 0% 100% 6 Production and Storage Max Day 68% 32% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 7 Transmission and Distribution Max Hour 49% 23% 29% 1. 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 8 WECWC Management Control Supply 0% 0% 0% 96% 0% 4% 0% 0% 100% 9 Water Conservation Conservation 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 10 Storm Water MGMT&Recharge General 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 35% 65% 100% 11 PVPA General 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 35% 65% 100% 12 Customer Service Customer Service = 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 13 14 Administration General $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,664,426 $3,091,076 $4,755,502 15 Customer Service Customer Service $0 $0 1MM $0 $0 $0 $0 $251,620 $0 $251,620 16 Meter Services Meters $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,304,653 $0 $0 $1,304,653 17 Damage to City Property General $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 18 Supply Supply $0 $0 I. $0 $12,599,522 $0 $524,980 $0 $0 $13,124,502 19 Production and Storage Max Day $2,191,327 $1,025,469 `$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,216,797 20 Transmission and Distribution Max Hour $1,876,027 $877,919 $1,1,578 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,855,524 21 WECWC Management Control Supply $0 $0 $0 $341,346 $0 $14,223 $0 $0 $355,569 22 Water Conservation Conservation $0 $0 $0 $0 $379,130 $0 $0 $0 $379,130 23 Storm Water MGMT&Recharge General $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $725,553 $725,553 24 PVPA General $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,496 $2,779 $4,275 25 Customer Service Customer Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $936,843 $0 $936,843 26 Total O&M Expenses $4,067,354 $1,903,388 $1,101,578 $12,940,868 $379,130 $1,843,856 $2,854,384 $3,819,408 $28,909,967 27 O&M Allocation 14.I% 6.6% 3.8% 44.8% 1.3% 6.4% 9.9% 13.2% 100% Table 5-4 shows the allocation of asset value by function to the cost components using the allocations shown in Lines 1-5. The total value in each line is multiplied by the corresponding percentages to arrive at the costs shown in Lines 7-11. Line 13 is determined by taking the weighted proportion of the total capital asset costs by each cost component.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 32 Table 5-4: Allocation of Asset Value to Cost Components Line Asset Allocation Allocation Basis Base Max Day Max Hour Supply Conservation Meters Customer General Total 1 Supply Supply 0% 0% 0% 96% 0% 4% 0% 0% 100% 2 Distribution Max Hour 49% 23% 29% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 3 Distribution Storage Max Hour 49% 23% 29% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 4 Meter Meters 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 5 General/Admin General 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 35% 65% 100% 6 7 Supply Supply $0 $0 $0 $344,057 $0 $14,336 A. $0 $0 $358,392 8 Distribution Max Hour $50,207,308 $23,495,375 $29,481,073 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $103,183,756 9 Distribution Storage Max Hour $57,947,859 $27,117,700 $34,026,223 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $119,091,782 10 Meter Meters $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,518,403 $0 $0 $4,518,403 11 General/Admin General $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,766,222 $19,994,411 $30,760,633 12 Total Assets $108,155,166 $50,613,075 $63,507,297 $344,057 $0 $4,532,739 $10,766,222 $19,994,411 $257,912,967 13 Asset Allocation 42% 20% 25% 0% 0% 2% 4% 8% 100% Table 5-5 shows the net revenue requirement allocated to the cost components. Operating costs are allocated by the same percentages shown in the last line in Table 5-3. Similarly, the capital revenue requirement in Table 5-1 is allocated as shown on Line 13 in Table 5-4. The revenue offsets, over which the City has discretion, are allocated to the cost centers based on the allocation of operating costs excluding supply costs.
The resulting net revenue requirement allocation is shown in the last line of the table. This allocation is further adjusted to reallocate General and Administration costs. This results in an adjusted net revenue requirement allocation shown in the last line.
Table 5-5:1►djusted Cost of Servi!
Revenue Requirement Base Max Day Max Hour Supply Conservation Meters Fire Protection Customer Service Revenue Offset General Total Operating Revenue Requirement $4,272,940 $1,999,596 $1,157,258 $13,594,969 $398,294 $1,937,054 $0 $2,998,660 $0 $4,012,462 $30,371,233 Capital Revenue Requirement $2,195,825 $1,027,574 $1,289,360 $6,985 $0 $92,026 $0 $218,582 $0 $405,937 $5,236,289 Revenue Offsets $0 $0 $0 $0' $0 $0 $0 $0 -$1,214,183 -$917,074 -$2,131,257 Total-Cost of Service $6,468,765 $3,027,170 $2,446,618 $13,601,954 $398,294 $2,029,080 $0 $3,217,242 -$1,214,183 $3,501,325 $33,476,264 Allocation of General Costs $1,287,828 $602,661 $487,083 $0 $79,294 $403,958 $0 $640,502 $0 -$3,501,325 $0 Total-Adjusted Cost of Service $7,756,593 $3,629,831 $2,933,700 $13,601,954 $477,587 $2,433,038 $0 $3,857,743 -$1,214,183 $0 $33,476,264
5.3. Derivation of Una of Slice
5.3.1. Equivalent Meters IIIIIIIIIr—
Table 5-6 shows the total equivalent meters. These totals are used as a denominator in developing unit costs for the rate components of the bi-monthly fixed service charges. .le 5-6: Equivalent Meters
Meter AWWA Capacity Equivalent
r Size
Count Ratio Meters
5/8" 15,197 1.00 15,197
3/4" 810 1.50 1,215
1" 2,475 2.50 6,188
1 1/2" 545 5.00 2,725
2" 792 8.00 6,336
3" 65 17.50 1,138
4" 44 31.50 1,386
6" 10 65.00 650
3" 2 140.00 280
10" 0 210.00 0
Total 19,940 35,114
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 33
5.3.2. Unit Costs of Service
Customer class demands vary depending on their respective usage characteristics. For example, the demand characteristics of a single-family residential customer will differ from the demand characteristics of an irrigation customer. Peak demands are a key difference in usage characteristics of customer classes. Raftelis used detailed customer billing data, by billing cycle, from FY 2025, which was provided by City staff, to assess the demand characteristics by customer class. The concept of proportionality requires that cost allocations consider both the average quantity of water consumed(base demand)and the peak rate at which it is consumed(peak demands).
The use of peak demands in the cost allocation process is consistent with cost-of-service principles because a water system is designed, constructed, and operated to meet peak demands. These additional peaking costs must be allocated to customer classes in proportion to their peak usage characteristics to ensure costs are being appropriately passed on.
Single-family use is shown by tiers. The tiers are defined and explained in Section 6.2 of this report. The max day peaking factors for customer classes, average and peak billing period use, are shown below in Table 5-7.
Bi-monthly data is used as a proxy for the max day data for different classes. This is a reasonable proxy for our analysis because we are comparing the peaks for different classes to allocate the costs proportionately, and comparing the billing cycle data provides a reasonable basis for the analysis. Establishing peaking characteristics is important to ensure that customer class rates reflect their proportionate share of costs for the use of the system. In the residential class, multi-family and condominium peaking factors are very similar based on FY 2025 water consumption data provided by City staff, and are grouped together in Table 6-4, under Multi-Family.
Table 5-7: culation of - s- ,ecific Pe. ing Factors Class-Specific Peaking Factors Bi-monthly Tiers i vg Bi-Month Max Bi-Month Peaking Factor Single Family
Tier 1 0-20 251,817 284,481 1.13
Tier 2 21-50 182,028 260,839 1.43 Tier 3 51+ 105,392 195,822 1.86
Multi Family All Use 186,154 218,937 1.18 Landscape All Use 105,796 168,239 1.59 Commercial All Use 114,647 132,659 1.16 School All Use 14,479 21,278 1.47
Government All Use 18,061 28,951 1.60
Condominiums All Use 15,238 17,569 1.15
Recycled All Use 37,473 68,234 1.82
Table 5-8 shows the units of service for each customer class and tier. Column A shows the projected annual use for FY 2026. Column B shows the average daily use. This is calculated by taking the value in Column A and dividing it by 365 days.
Max day and max hour extra capacity requirements for different customer classes are derived from the water consumption data provided by the City. Max hour data is determined by using the City's max hour factor and applying it to the max day factor for each class and tier. This provides a reasonable basis for allocating the max hour costs among the classes. These data are used to allocate peaking costs based on customer class- specific water use patterns during peak demand periods. Max day total capacity(Column D)is the average daily use(Column B)multiplied by the max day capacity factor(Column C). Max day extra capacity
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 34 (Column E)is the difference between the max day total capacity(Column D)and the average daily use (Column B). Max hour total capacity(Column G)is the average daily use(Column B)multiplied by the max hour capacity factor(Column F). Max hour extra capacity(Column H)is the difference between the max hour total capacity(Column G)and the max day total capacity(Column D).
Table 5-8: Units of Service
Max Day Max Hour
Annual Use Average Daily Total Capacity Extra Capacity Total Capacity Extra Capacity Number of Number of Customer Class Peaking Factor Peaking Factor
(hcf) Use(hcf/day) (hcf/day) (hcf/day) (hcf/day) (hcf/day) Equiv.Meters Customers Line (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (I) (J) Single Family 3,786,229 10,373 14,257 3,884 19,960 5,703 1 Tier 1 0-20 1,768,123 4,844 1.13 5,473 628 1.58 7,662 2,189 2 Tier 2 21-50 1,278,101 3,502 1.43 5,018 1,516 2.01 7,025 7 3 Tier 3 51+ 740,005 2,027 1.86 3,767 1,740 2.60 1 5,274 4 5 Multi Family 1,201,826 3,293 1.18 3,873 580 1.65 5,422 1,5 6 Landscape 1,101,882 3,019 1.59 4,801 1,782 2.23 6,721 1,920 7 Commercial 784,815 2,150 1.16 2,488 338 1.62 3,483 995 8 School 112,615 309 1.47 453 145 2.06 635 181 9 Government 120,755 331 1.60 530 19 2.24 42 212 10 Condominiums 102,339 280 1.15 323 1.61 129 11 12 Total Potable 7,210,461 19,755 26,725 6,9 7,416 10,690 35,114 19,940 13 14 Recycled 267,548 733 1.82 1,335 602 2.55 1,869 534 - - Table 5-9 shows the reallocation of peaking costs. Starting with the cost of service values from Table 5-5, peaking costs represent the capacity of the system to meet peak demands. Meters are sized based on the peak demands of a customer; therefore, a portion of the peaking costs is assigned to meters. To maintain the current level of revenue stability, approximately 75%of max day and max hour costs are assigned to meters.
The remaining costs are assigned to the commodity rate to recognize that system size is also dependent on water use. Applying these adjustments results in the total shown on Line 10 and repeated on Line 1 of Table 5-10.
Table a-9: Reallocation? Peaking Costs
Fixed Commodity
Line Cost Components Cost of Service Meter Customer Base Max Day Max Hour Supply Conservation Offset Total 1 Base $7,756,593 0% 100% 100%
2 Max Day $3,629,831 24% 100%
3 Max Hour $2,933,700 75 25% 100%
4 Supply $13,601,954 0% 100% 100%
5 Conservation $477,587 100% 100% 6 Meters $2,433,038 00% 100%
8 Customer Service $3,857,743 1 % 100% 9 Revenue Offset -$1,214,183 100% 100% 10 Total $33,476,264 $7,397,852 $3,857,743 $7,756,593 $871,160 $727,558 $13,601,954 $477,587 -$1,214,183 $33,476,264 Table 5-10 divides the adjusted cost of service for FY 2026 by the respective units of service for each cost component to determine the unit cost for each component.
Table 5-10: Calculation of Unit costs
Line Unit Costs Total Meter Customer Base Max Day Max Hour Supply Conservation Offset 1 Cost of Service $33,476,264 $7,397,852 $3,857,743 $7,756,593 $871,160 $727,558 $13,601,954 $477,587 -$1,214,183 2 3 Units of Service 210,684 119,640 7,210,461 6,971 10,690 7,210,461 7,210,461 1,768,123 Annual equiv. Annual use Peak capacity Peak capacity Annual use Use in Res Tier 4 meters Annual bills (hcf) (hcf/day) (hcf/day) Annual use(hcf) (hcf) 1 5 6 Unit Cost $35.11 $32.24 $1.08 $124.97 $68.06 $1.89 $0.07 -$0.69 7 equiv.meter bill hcf hcf/day hcf/day hcf hcf hcf
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
6. Proposed Water Rates and
Charges
6.1 . Proposed Bi-Monthly Service Charge
The City's water charges include a bi-monthly service charge based on meter size, and a commodity rate based on water use. The service charge has been calculated to recover the fixed costs the City incurs to provide the service, such as billing and collection, customer service, meter reading, meter maintenance, and a portion of costs associated with meeting peak demands. The volumetric charge recovers the balance of the remaining costs.
Recycled water customers receive the same bi-monthly fixed charge as potable water customers,based on meter size,because they use the potable system when recycled water may not be available. They receive a volumetric charge specific to the class,based on the cost of the recycled water purchased.
The Meter component is derived based on total equivalent meters. Therefore, the meter unit cost in Line 6 of Table 5-10 is multiplied by the capacity ratio for each meter size to appropriately reflect the share of cost by meter size. The Customer cost does not vary by meter size, and therefore, the Customer unit cost shown in Line 6 of Table 5-10 is applied uniformly across all meter sizes. These two components determine the proposed bi-monthly service charge shown below.
Table 6-1: Bi-Monthly Service Charge Derivation
Meter Size Capacity Ratio Meter Customer Proposed Bi- Monthly Charge
5/8" 1.00 $34.91 $32.24 $67.16
3/4" 1.50 $52.37 $32.24 $84.62
1" 2.50 $87.28 $32.24 $119.53
1 1/2" 5.00 $174.57 $32.24 $206.82
2" 8.00 $279.31 $32.24 $311.56
3" 17.50 $610.98 $32.24 $643.23
4" 31.50 $1,099.77 $32.24 $1,132.02
6" 65.00 $2,269.37 $32.24 $2,301.62
8" 4, 140.00 $4,887.87 $32.24 $4,920.12
6.2. Proposed Commodity kates
Raftelis recommends that the City retain its current rate structure with tiered rates for single-family customers and uniform rates for the remaining customers. Single-family usage is more homogenous and lends itself well to tiering, recognizing the costs of providing service in each tier. Non-single-family customers are of varying sizes and demands and are not homogeneous and therefore charged uniform rates. The current 10 hcf per month in Tier 1 provides a family of four using an average of 55 gpd indoor, about 10 hcf. Therefore, the first tier is retained at 10 hcf per month or 20 hcf bi-monthly. The second tier provides average water use in summer, and the third tier covers any additional usage.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 36 The tiers are selected so that the peaking characteristics of each tier are clearly defined. Tier 1 represents indoor use, which is pretty consistent throughout the year, and the associated costs can be readily determined.
Tier 2 primarily represents average irrigation use, and Tier 3 represents larger irrigation use for single-family customers. Tiers are selected to ensure the costs associated with peaking can be clearly determined and spread based on the cost of service. It should be noted that the costs for providing water in each tier are calculated based on the tiers and the use in each tier. This ensures that the appropriate peaking factor is used and also that the type of use is considered in the tier definitions.
The City's water commodity rates consist of five components: Base, Peaking, Supply, Conservation, and Offset. The following subsections will present the calculations for each of the components;
6.2.1. Base-Delivery Unit Cost
The Base component is applied uniformly across all units of water and is equal to the Base unit cost in Table 5-10, Line 6.
6.2.2. Supply Unit Cost
Table 6-2 show the calculation of the unit cost for each source of water. The water purchase costs for each source (Lines 1 and 2)were provided by City staff and are divided by the estimated demand from each source (Line 3)to calculate the unit costs(Line 5). Line 6 takes the $/AF value in Line 5 and divides it by 435.6 to convert to a$/hcf rate. Table 6-3 shows the supply unit cost calculation for each customer class and tier. A non-differentiated unit supply cost is being used, meaning that all customer classes pay the same amount for the supply unit cost. This cost is shown in the last column on Line 6 of Table 6-2. It is calculated by dividing the total costs by the total demand.
Table Potable er Supply Cost
Line Unit Costs of Water Six Basin W, C SAWCo Chino Basin WFA Total 1 Cost of Water $28,888 11,342 $3,314,277 $1,326,452 $6,337,645 $11,718,604 2 Cost of Power $109,519 $316,324 $1,161,911 $216,346 $1,804,100 3 Quantity of Water,AF 784 2,264 8,316 1,548 3,640 16,552 4 Quantity of Water,hcf 341,443 986,192 3,622,442 674,492 1,585,598 7,210,167 5 Unit Cost,$/AF $176.57 $453.92 $538.26 $996.37 $1,741.10 $816.97 6 Unit Cost$/hcf $0.41 $1.04 $1.24 $2.29 $4.00 $1.88 A
The water from each supply is allocated proportionally to the use in class as a whole. In the single-family class, the water is allocated so that the first tier gets the benefit of the lowest cost sources of water, and the next tier gets the next lowest cost water, and so on. The results are shown in Table 6-3.
Table 6-3: Supply Component Calculation
Water Use %of Water Supply Unit
Line Customer Classes Six Basin WECWC SAWCo Chino Basin WFA Total Demand Total Cost (hcf) Use Cost
1 Single Family 3,786,229 53% 179,293 517,851 1,902,152 354,177 832,601 3,786,075 $7,100,801 $1.88 2 Tier 1 1,768,123 25% 179,293 517,851 1,070,979 0 0 1,768,123 $1,935,698 $1.09 3 Tier 2 1,278,101 18% 0 0 831,173 354,177 92,751 1,278,101 $2,207,919 $1.73 4 Tier 3 740,005 10% 0 0 0 0 739,850 739,850 $2,957,185 $4.00 5 6 Multi Family 1,201,826 17% 56,911 164,377 603,782 112,423 264,285 1,201,777 $2,253,939 $1.88 7 Landscape 1,101,882 15% 52,178 150,707 553,571 103,074 242,307 1,101,837 $2,066,501 $1.88 8 Commercial 784,815 11% 37,164 107,341 394,281 73,414 172,583 784,783 $1,471,864 $1.88 9 School 112,615 2% 5,333 15,403 56,576 10,534 24,764 112,610 $211,201 $1.88 10 Government 120,755 2% 5,718 16,516 60,666 11,296 26,554 120,750 $226,467 $1.88 11 Condominiums 102,339 1% 4,846 13,997 51,414 9,573 22,505 102,335 $191,929 $1.88 12 13 Total Water Available by Source(hcf) 7,210,461 100% 341,443 986,192 3,622,442 674,492 1,585,598 7,210,167 $13,522,704 $1.88
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 37
6.2.3. Peaking Unit Cost
Table 6-4 shows the peaking unit cost calculation for each customer class and tier. Peaking costs are the sum of max day and max hour costs for each class and tier. This is calculated by multiplying the unit rates shown for max day and max hour from Line 6 of Table 5-10 by the corresponding extra capacity value in column E of Table 5-8 for max day, and by the corresponding extra capacity value shown in column H for max hour.
Peaking costs are divided by annual use to determine the Peaking unit cost for each class and tier. Due to similar patterns in peaking factors, residential accounts in condominiums are combined with multi-family accounts.
Table 6-4: Peaking Unit Cost Calculati•
Peaking Unit Cost Annual Use (hcf) Peaking Costs Unit Cost Single Family 3,786,229 $873,534 $0.23
Tier 1 0-20 1,768,123 $227,509 $0.13
Tier 2 21-50 1,278,101 $326,071 $0.26
Tier 3 51+ 740,005 $319,955 $0.43
Multi Family 1,304,165 $192,052 $0.15
Landscape 1,101,882 $353,365 $0.32
Commercial 784,815 $109,949 $0.14
Schools 112,615 $30,451 $0.27
Government 120,755 $39,365 $0.33
Total 7,210,461 $1,598,717
6.2.4. Conservation Component
The conservation unit rate recovers costs of the City's water conservation program. Costs include staffing and education and outreach. Since the conservation program is targeted to reduce demand on the system to benefit the availability of water to larger users, the total single-family conservation cost is applied to single- family residential Tier 3 only. All other customer classes receive a uniform conservation rate. This component is shown in Table 5-10, Line 6 under the column labeled conservation.
6.2.5. Offset Component
The offset component is applied to single-family residential Tier 1 only. It is equal to the Offset unit cost (Table 5-10, Line 6). The offset helps provide affordability in Tier 1.
6.2.6. Recycled Water Commodity Rates
Recycled water customers have a specific commodity rate based on the cost of purchasing the recycled water, shown in Table 4-6. Table 6-5 shows the recycled water expenses the City incurs, and the units of recycled water used for FY 2026. By dividing these values, you arrive at the proposed FY 2026 commodity rate for recycled water customers.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 38 Table 6-5: Derivation of Recycled Water Commodity Rates Recycled Commodity Rates
($/hcf)
Proposed Rate
Recycled Water Operating Expenses $706,668
Recycled Water Units (hcf) 267,548
Recyled Water Commodity Rate($/hcf) $2.64
6.2.7. Proposed FY 2026 Commodity Rates
To calculate the FY 2026 commodity rate for each customer class, the components mentioned above are summed to arrive at a total commodity rate. Table 6-6 shows the calculation for the FY 2026 commodity rate.
The total rate is rounded up to the nearest cent to ensure adequate cost recovery. It should be noted that the Government customer class cost of service results resulted in a decrease from their current rate. This rate applies only to City Government customers. The City has opted to maintain its current rate and not reduce the commodity charge, as shown in Table 6-8. All future years for the customer class will increase by the proposed revenue adjustments. 1
Table 6-6: Derivation o Y 2026 Commodity Rates ($/hcf) Commodity Charges :.Pi' P-. L Si . .!' CO - . 0 - Pr... •• Single Family
Tier 1 $1.08 $0.13 $1.88 -$0.69 $2.40 Tier 2 $1.08 $0.26 $1.88 $3.21
Tier 3 $1.08 $0.43 $1.88 $0.34 $3.73 Multi Family $1.08 $0.15 $1.88 $0.07 $3.17 Landscape $1.08 $0.32 $1.88 $0.07 $3.34 Commercial $1.08 $0.14 $1.88 $0.07 $3.16 School $1.08 $0.27 $1.88 $0.07 $3.29 Government $1.08 $0.33 $1.88 $0.07 $3.35 Recycled Rate � 4 $2.64
6.3Wroposed 5-Year Water Rate Schedule
Table 6-7 shows the proposed 5-gear rate schedule of fixed water charges. Table 6-8 shows the proposed 5- year schedule of commodity water rates. The Government customer class is opting to retain its current rate instead of the resulting rate from the cost of service analysis, which resulted in a lower rate. All other rates for FY 2026 are the result of the cost-of-service analysis,while future years are multiplied by the revenue adjustment. Rates are rounded up to the nearest cent. The proposed FY 2026 rates are effective June 1, 2026.
Each following year is effective January 1st. The service charges include the Meter Equivalent Unit(MEU) charge imposed by IEUA. Since those charges are not known for future years, any increases in those charges beyond the assumptions used in the rate study will be passed through to customers. Any increases in potable and recycled water purchase costs from IEUA beyond the assumptions used in the study will be passed through to customers.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 39 Table 6-7: Proposed 5-year Service Charge Rate Schedule, ($/Bi-Monthly) Current Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Service Charges(Bi-Monthly) FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 5/8" $65.26 $67.36 $70.73 $74.27 $77.99 $81.89 3/4" $82.68 $84.92 $89.17 $93.63 $98.32 $103.24 1" $117.52 $120.03 $126.04 $132.35 $138.97 $145.92 11/2" $204.72 $207.82 $218.22 $229.14 $240.60 $252.63 2" $309.35 $313.16 $328.82 $345.27 $362.54 $380.67 3" $588.33 $646.74 $679.08 $713.04 $748.70 $786.14 4" $902.15 $1,138.32 $1,195.24 $1,255.01 $1,317.77 $1,383.66 6" $1,773.93 $2,314.63 $2,430.37 $2,551.89 $2,679.49 $2,813.47 8" $2,820.12 $4,948.14 $5,195.55 $5,455.33 $5,728.10 $6,014.51 Table 6-8: Proposed 5-year Commodity$ote Schedule, ($/hcf) Current Proposed Proposedo Proposed Proposed Proposed Commodity Charges FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Single Family
Tier 1 $2.33 $2.40 $2.52 $2.65 $2.79 $2.93 Tier 2 $3.08 $3.21 $3.38 $3.55 $3.73 $3.92 Tier 3 $3.68 $3.73 $3.92 $4.12 $4.33 $4.55 Multi Family $2.87 $3.17 $3.33 $3.50 $3.68 $3.87 Landscape $3.17 $3.34 $3.51 $3.69 $3.88 $4.08 Commercial $2.76 $3.16 $3.32 $3.49 $3.67 $3.86 Schools $3.38 $3.29 $3.46 $3.64 $3.83 $4.03 Government $3.47 $3.47 $3.65 $3.84 $4.04 $4.25 Recycled Water $2.54 $2.64 $2.78 $2.92 $3.07 $3.23
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 40
7. Drought Rates
Raftelis calculated a demand reduction surcharge(drought rates or drought surcharge)in order to recover the revenue shortfall that occurs because of demand reductions during water shortage scenarios.
Drought rates may take effect during times of declared drought, where certain levels of reduction are mandated. Drought rates are charged to each unit of water used and are calculated to recover costs through volumetric revenue due to reduced water use. The changes to the drought rates are different at different reduction levels based on the projected revenue shortfall.
To determine the demand reduction surcharge, the first step is to project the water demand reduction for each customer class under different levels of shortage. Table 7-1 shows the projected water demand for each customer class and tier at different levels of reduction. Raftelis analyzed individual customer usage data, assuming that customers using more water are expected to reduce more since they have more discretionary water use. The analysis calculates the increase in commodity rates that must be applied to all usage, including the tiers, for each reduction stage. Note that the reduction achieved under each drought stage is lower than the maximum targeted at each level but falls near or within each range.
Table 7-1: Projected Water Der iiiind by U uction Customer Bi-Monthly Proposed 40-50%
FV2026 %Reduction 0-10% %Reduction 10-20% %Reduction 20-30% %Reduction 30-40% %Reduction Class Tier Rates Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction Single Family
Tier 1 0-20 $2.40 1,768,123 -5.0% 1,679,717 -7.0% 1,644,355 -10.0% 1,591,311 -15.0% 1,502,905 -24.0% 1,343,774 Tier 2 21-50 $3.21 1,278,101 -15.0% 1,086,386 -20.0% 1,022,481 -30.0% 894,671 -40.0% 766,861 -50.0% 639,051 Tier 3 51+ $3.73 740,005 -20.0% 004 -40.0% 444,003 -60.0% 296,002 -80.0% 148,001 -95.0% 37,000 Subtotal Single Family 3,786,229 -11.3% 3 ,107 -17.8% 3,110,838 -26.5% 2,781,984 -36.1% 2,417,766 -46.7% 2,019,824 Multi Family $3.17 1,304,165 -8.0% 1,199,832 -12.0% 1,147,665 -25.0% 978,124 -25.0% 978,124 -25.0% 978,124 Landscape $3.34 1,101,882 -10.0% 991,694 -25.0% 826,412 -35.0% 716,223 -50.0% 550,941 -70.0% 330,565 Commercial $3.16 784,815 -8.0% 722,030 -12.0% 690,637 -25.0% 588,611 -35.0% 510,130 -40.0% 470,889 Schools $3.29 112,615 -8.0% 103,606 -12.0% 99,101 -25.0% 84,461 -35.0% 73,200 -40.0% 67,569 Government $3.47 120,755 -8.0% 111,095 -12.0% 106,264 -25.0% 90,566 -35.0% 78,491 -40.0% 72,453 Subtotal Non-Single Family 3,424,232 -8.6% 3,128,256 -16.2% 2,870,080 -28.2% 2,457,986 -36.0% 2,190,885 -43.9% 1,919,599 Total Potable Water(hcf) 7,210,461 6,486,363 5,980,918 5,239,969 4,608,651 3,939,424 Demand Reduction Achieved -10.0% -17.1% -27.3% -36.1% -45.4% The next step is to estimate the water supply cost savings that result when there is a reduction in demand.
Table 7-2 shows the estimated percentage reduction from each water source for each reduction stage. In the first stage, it is expected that the City would reduce WFA usage so that it still will use a minimum of 2,000 ac- ft per year. Any remaining reduction is applied uniformly to all the remaining sources. The variable costs associated with each supply are used to determine the cost savings. Almost all other costs are fixed; therefore, no other costs are included in the analysis. Table 7-3 shows the estimated cost savings in the water supply costs for each stage due to the reduction in usage.
Table 7-2: Percentage Reduction by Water Source
Reduction Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Groundwater -0.2% -9% -15% -14% -18% WFA -45% 0% 0% 0% 0%
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 41 Table 7-3: Estimated Cost Savings by Usage Reduction
FY 2026 0-10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% 40-50%
Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction Supply(AF)
Six Basin 784 782 712 608 520 427 WECWC 2,264 2,259 2,055 1,757 1,503 1,234 SAWCo 8,316 8,297 7,550 6,455 5,521 4,532 Chino Basin 1,548 1,545 1,406 1,202 1,028 844 WFA 3,640 2,009 2,009 2,009 2,009 2,009 Total Potable Supply(AF) 16,552 14,892 13,732 12,031 10,582 9,046 -10.0% -7.8% -12.4% -12.0% -14.5%
Variable Cost ($/AF)
Six Basin $171.82 $171.82 $171.82 $171.82 $171.82 $171.82 WECWC $300.22 $300.22 $300.22 $300.22 $300.22 $300.22 SAWCo $396.72 $396.72 $396.72 $396.72 $396.72 $396.72 Chino Basin $979.81 $979.81 $979.81 $979.81 $979.81 $979.81 WFA $1,068.96 $1,068.96 $1,068.96 $1,068.96 $1,068.96 $1,068.96 Total Variable Costs $9,521,726 $7,765,791 $7,259,831 $6,518,126 $5,886,164 $5,216,254 Cost Savings $1,755,935 $2,261,895 $3,003,600 $3,635,562 $4,305,472 The final step is to calculate the drought surcharge, shown in Table 7-4. First, the projected potable water revenue is calculated by multiplying the demand projections from Table 7-1 for each level of reduction in use and the proposed water rates in FY 2026. The revenue shortfall is determined by comparing this revenue for each reduction level with the FY 2026 revenues. Next, we add the estimated cost savings from Table 7-3 for each reduction level. The net revenue is the sum of the revenue shortfall and cost savings. The percent revenue shortfall is then the shortfall divided by the projected variable revenue. The percentages shown will be applied to all water usage rates in place throughout the duration of the shortage.
Table 1r 4: Drought Rates by Usage Reduction
FY 2026 Up to 10% Up to 20% Up to 30% Up to 40% Up to 50% Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction Projected Variable Revenue $22,190,445 $19,850,493 $18,160,252 $15,740,118 $13,686,633 $11,580,881 Revenue Shortfall -$2,339,952 -$4,030,193 -$6,450,327 -$8,503,812 -$10,609,564 Cost Savings $1,755,935 $2,261,895 $3,003,600 $3,635,562 $4,305,472 Net Revenue to be Recovered -$584,017 -$1,768,298 -$3,446,727 -$4,868,250 -$6,304,092 %Commodity Rate Increase 3% 10% 22% 36% 54% Table 7-5 shows the proposed drought surcharges for each year of the study period. The surcharges are calculated by taking the FY 2026 proposed volumetric rate for each class and tier shown in Table 6-8 and increasing them by the percentage shown above for each reduction stage. The surcharge for FY 2026 is the difference between this new calculated rate and the proposed rate from Table 6-8. For future years, the surcharge for FY 2026 shown below is increased by the proposed revenue adjustments of 5% each year.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 42 Table 7-5: Proposed Drought Surcharges
Customer Class FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Revenue Adjustments 5% 5% 5% 5%
0-10%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $0.08 $0.08 $0.09 $0.09 $0.10
Tier 2 $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Tier 3 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12 $0.13 $0.13
Multi Family $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Landscape $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Commercial $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Schools $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12
Government $0.11 $0.12 $0.12 $0.13 $0.13
10-20%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $0.24 $0.25 $0.26 $0.28 $0.29
Tier 2 $0.32 $0.34 $0.35 $0.37 $0.39
Tier 3 $0.37 $0.39 $0.41 $0.43 $0.45
Multi Family $0.31 $0.33 $0.34 $0.36 $0.38
Landscape $0.33 $0.35 $0.36 $0.38 $0.40
Commercial $0.31 $0.33 $0.34 $0.36 $0.38
Schools $0.33 $0.35 $0.36 $0.38 $0.40
Government $0.34 $0.36 $0.37 $0.39 $0.41
20-30%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $0.53 $0.56 $0.58 $0.61 $0.64
Tier 2 $0.71 $0.75 $0.78 $0.82 $0.86
Tier 3 $0.82 $0.86 $0.90 $0.95 $1.00
Multi Family $0.70 $0.74 $0.77 $0.81 $0.85
Landscape $0.74 $0.78 $0.82 $0.86 $0.90
Commercial $0.70 $0.74 $0.77 $0.81 $0.85
Schools $0.73 $0.77 $0.80 $0.85 $0.89
Government $0.76 $0.80 $0.84 $0.88 $0.92
30-40%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $0.86 $0.90 $0.95 $1.00 $1.05
Tier 2 $1.15 $1.21 $1.27 $1.33 $1.40
Tier 3 $1.33 $1.40 $1.47 $1.54 $1.62
Multi Family $1.13 $1.19 $1.25 $1.31 $1.37
Landscape $1.19 $1.25 $1.31 $1.38 $1.45
Commercial $1.13 $1.19 $1.25 $1.31 $1.37
Schools $1.18 $1.24 $1.30 $1.37 $1.43
Government $1.24 $1.30 $1.37 $1.44 $1.51
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 43 Customer Class FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 40-50%Reduction
Single Family
Tier 1 $1.31 $1.38 $1.44 $1.52 $1.59
Tier 2 $1.75 $1.84 $1.93 $2.03 $2.13
Tier 3 $2.04 $2.14 $2.25 $2.36 $2.48
Multi Family $1.73 $1.82 $1.91 $2.00 $2.10
Landscape $1.82 $1.91 $2.01 $2.11 $2.21
Commercial $1.73 $1.82 $1.91 $2.00 $2.10
Schools $1.80 $1.89 $1.98 $2.08 $2.19
Government $1.89 $1.98 $2.08 $2.19 $2.30
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 44
8. Wastewater Financial Plan
This section of the report details the wastewater enterprise's long-term financial plan, based on the projected revenues, expenses, debt service, and capital project costs. Raftelis modeled the financial plan without revenue adjustments(status quo)and with proposed revenue adjustments to ensure the financial sustainability of the wastewater utility. The results of the water financial plan are the proposed rates for five years based on the proposed revenue adjustments.
8.1 . Current Rate Revenue
The City's revenues consist of rate revenues, interest earnings on cash reserves, and other miscellaneous revenues. The rate revenue projection shown below assumes that current FY 2026 rates are in effective throughout the study period. This status quo scenario provides a baseline from which Raftelis evaluates the need for revenue adjustments.
8.1.1. Calculated Wastewater Rate Revenues
Raftelis projected wastewater rates revenues from the City's monthly charge per EDU for the study period based on current wastewater rates, and the projected number of equivalent dwelling units(EDUs).
The City collects fixed bi-monthly charges from its customers based on the number of EDUs. San Antonio Heights customers are charged a rate 1.5 times the EDU rate based on the additional infrastructure needed to provide service to customers in that area and is based on an agreement between the City and San Antonio Heights. Table 8-1 shows projected rate revenues the City will collect under current rates for the rate-setting period.
Table 8-1: Projected Rate Revenues Under Current Wastewater Rates Sewer Rate Revenue FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 City Local Sewer Services Charges $4,032,427 $4,356,224 $4,356,224 $4,356,224 $4,356,224 SA Heights Sewer Services Charges,1.5 times the rate $22,557 $22,557 $22,557 $22,557 $22,557 Total City Local Services Charge Revenue $4,054,984 $4,378,781 $4,378,781 $4,378,781 $4,378,781
8.1.2. Other Revenues
Table 8-2 shows the projected miscellaneous revenues for the wastewater enterprise, assuming no revenue adjustments.
e 8-2: Projected Other wastewater tnterprlse Kevenues, Status Quc Line Item FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Other Operating Revenue $150,800 $152,308 $153,831 $155,369 $156,923 Interest Income $552,567 $382,077 $350,927 $260,712 $177,254 Total Other Revenue $703,367 $534,385 $504,758 $416,081 $334,177
8.2. Annua_ expenses - Wastewate.
The City's annual expenses include operations and maintenance expenses and capital expenses. This section discusses the expenses in detail.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 45
8.2.1. Total Operations and Maintenance Budget
The City provided Raftelis with its actual expenses for FY 2025 and budget for FY 2026. The City also provided adjustments in future years to account for changes in staffing and reductions in anticipated operating and maintenance expenses. To project the City's O&M expenses, Raftelis used the escalation factors shown in Table 3-6. Table 8-3 shows a summary of the budgeted and projected O&M.
Table 8-3: Summary of Projected Wastewater Operations and Mainterre Expenses Line Item FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Customer Service $89,000 $91,670 $94,420 $97,253 $100,170 Maintenance & Operations $3,185,302 $3,645,893 $3,766,296 $3,890,697 $4,019,230 Sewer- Residential $946,840 $977,125 $1,008,384 $1,040,650 $1,073,953 Sewer- Non-Residential $341,280 $352,811 $364,734 $377,061 $389,806 Capital Projects $5,650 $5,876 $6,111 $6,355 $6,610 Total $4,568,072 $5,073,376 $5,239,945 $5,412,016 $5,589,770
8.2.2. Capital Improvement Plan
Table 8-4 shows the City's capital improvement plan for wastewater capital projects through FY 2030. The plan averages roughly$810,000 a year over the study period.
I able 8-4: Projected Wastewater Capital improverilip Projects FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Total Rate Funded CIP $750,000 $780,000 $811,200 $843,648 $877,394
8.2.3. Existing and Proposed Debt Service
The City currently has no existing debt for the wastewater utility. Raftelis is not proposing any new debt issuances.
8.3. Reserve Targets
The City maintains multiple wastewater enterprise reserve funds.
Operating Reserve—The Operating Reserve is used primarily to meet ongoing cash flow requirements. The City's minimum reserve target is set at 25% of O&M expenses. The maximum target is set at 50% of O&M expenses.
Capital Reserve—The Capital Reserve is used to cover capital costs and any unexpected and unplanned infrastructure repairs and replacements not included in the budget as well as to set aside money for future capital projects. The minimum target is set at 100%of the five-year average of capital projects. The maximum target is set at 300% of the five-year average of capital projects.
Rate Stabilization Reserve—The Rate Stabilization Reserve is used primarily to help reduce an annual revenue adjustment due to short-term spikes in costs. The City's minimum reserve target is set at 25% of rate revenues.
The maximum target is set at 50% of rate revenues.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 46
8.4. Proposed Financial Plan and Revenue Adjustments The proposed revenue adjustments are necessary to ensure adequate revenue to fund the wastewater enterprises'operating expenses. The first revenue adjustment is effective on July 1, 2026,with each following year effective on January 1. The proposed revenue adjustments would allow the City to cover its O&M costs.
The CIP projects are mostly funded through the existing reserves. Table 8-5 shows the proposed wastewater revenue adjustments for the five-year rate-setting period. Even though the wastewater enterprise has adequate reserves, revenue adjustments are still needed to ensure that rate revenues cover operating expenses over the next five years.
Table 8-5: Proposed Wastewater Revenue A'er
Effective Date Adjustment
July 1, 2026 4.0%
January 1, 2027 4.0%
January 1, 2028 4.0%
January 1, 2029 4.0%
January 1, 2030 4.0%
Table 8-6 shows the wastewater cashflow for the study period, taking into account the revenue adjustments shown above in Table 8-5. Line 1 shows the projected wastewater rate-revenue under existing rates. Line 9 shows the total rate-revenue including the proposed revenue adjustments. Line 14 shows total wastewater fund revenue, including miscellaneous revenues and interest. Line 24 shows total O&M expenses. Line 26 shows rate funded capital costs for each year. The wastewater enterprise does not have any current debt service, and Raftelis is not proposing to issue any. Line 28 shows the net cash flow. As shown, each year of the rate-setting period results in a negative cashflow. This is the result of reserves being drawn upon to minimize customer bill impacts.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 47 Table 8-6: Wastewater Cashflow
Line Item FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 1 Revenue Under Existing Rates $4,054,984 $4,378,781 $4,378,781 $4,378,781 $4,378,781 2 Revenue Adjustments
3 Adjustment Mo. Effective
4 FY 2026 0.0% 12 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 5 FY 2027 4.0% 12 $175,151 $175,151 $175,151 $175,151 6 FY 2027 4.0% 6 $91,079 $182,157 $182,157 $175,151 7 FY 2028 4.0% 6 $94,722 $189,444 $189,163 8 FY 2029 4.0% 6 $98,511 $196,730 9 FY 2030 4.0% 6 $102,300
10 Total Rate Revenue $4,054,984 $4,645,011 $4,830,812 $5,024,044 $5,217,277 11 Other Revenue
12 Other Operating Revenue $150,800 $152,308 $153,831 $155,369 $156,923 13 Interest Income $552,567 $386,070 $365,814 $287,206 $213,817 14 Total Other Revenue $703,367 $538,378 $519,645 $442,575 $370,740 15 16 Total Revenue $4,758,351 $5,183,389 $5,350,457 $5,466,619 $5,588,016 17 18 O&M Expenses
19 Customer Service $89,000 $91,670 $94,420 $97,253 $100,170 20 Maintenance&Operations $3,185,302 $3,645,893 $3,766,296 $3,890,697 $4,019,230 21 Sewer-Residential $946,840 $977,125 $1,008,384 $1,040,650 $1,073,953 22 Sewer-Non-Residential $341,280 $352,811 $364,734 $377,061 $389,806 23 Capital Projects $5,650 $5,876 $6,111 $6,355 $6,610 24 Total O&M Expenses $4,568,072 $5,073,376 $5,239,945 $5,412,016 $5,589,770 25 26 Rate Funded CIP $750,000 $780,000 $811,200 $843,648 $877,394 27 28 Net Cash Flow -$559,720 -$669,986 -$700,688 -$789,044 -$879,147 Figure 8-1 shows the proposed five-year financial plan for the wastewater enterprise. Status quo revenue is shown by the solid line. Projected revenue is shown by the dashed line. Annual expenditures are shown by the columns. The green bars below the X-axis show reserves are drawn down year to year to fund capital costs. Revenue from current rates is not enough to cover annual operating and maintenance costs. Therefore, revenue adjustments are required to generate sufficient revenue to cover these costs over the study period.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 48 Figure 8-1: Proposed Wastewater Financial Plan
Financial Plan
i $8
$6$4
$2
$0
-$2
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 O&M Expenses Rate Funded Capital Projects
Reserve Funding Current Revenues
——— Proposed Revenues
Figure 8-2 shows the projected wastewater capital improvement plan for the study period. The City does not plan to issue debt to pay for future CIP.
Figure 8-2: Projected Wasteer Capital Plan and Fung Sources Capital Financing Plan
$0.9
so
3 $0.9 $0.8
$0.8
$0.8 $0.8
$0.8
$0.8
$0.7
$0.7
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 •Rate Funded
Figure 8-3 shows the projected wastewater enterprise ending balance for each year of the study period. The gray line represents the maximum reserve targets, and the black line represents the minimum reserve targets.
The green bars represent the ending fund balance for each year of the study period. The balances are being drawn down to fund the CIP.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 49 Figure 8-3: Projected Wastewater Fund Ending Balance
Fund Balances
N $16
o $14 $13.4 $12.7
$12.0 $11.2
$12
11 ilk
—$10.4
$10
$g
$6
$4
$2
$0
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Ending Balance —Reserve Target-Min Reserve Target-Max
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 50
9. Wastewater Cost-of-Service
Analysis
The cost-of-service analysis utilized to develop the wastewater rates followed the guidelines for allocating costs outlined in the WEF Manual No. 27.
Using these principles, the revenue requirement is distributed to customers. This section details the cost-of- service analysis for the City's wastewater collection system. p
9.1 . Revenue Requirement Determination
The first step of the cost-of-service analysis is to determine the revenue requirement for the test year, or rate- setting year. The test year of this study is FY 2026. The total revenue requirement shown in Line 5 is equal to operating expenses(Table 8-6, Line 24), and capital expenses (Table 8-6, Line 26) for FY 2026. Revenue offsets in Line 11 are equal to (Table 8-6, Line 14)for FY 2026. These reduce the total revenue required from rates. The transfer to or from reserves (Line 14) is subtracted to account for the draw from reserves. The adjustment to annualize rate increase (Line 15) is to account for the revenue adjustment occurring part way through the fiscal year and helps determine the rate as if the rate were calculated for the whole year, in this case since the revenue adjustment is applied to the whole year, it is zero. The total revenue to be recovered from rates is equal to Line 5 minus Line 11 and Line 16.
Table 9-1: Wastewater Revenue Requirement
Line Revenue Requirement- FY 2027 Operating Capital Total 1 Revenue Requirements
2 O&M Expenses $5,073,376 $5,073,376
3 Debt Service $0 $0
4 Rate Funded CIP $780,000 $780,000
5 Total - Revenue Requirements $5,073,376 $780,000 $5,853,376 6 7 Revenue Offsets
8 Other Operating Revenue $152,308 $152,308 9 Non-Operating Revenue $0 $0
10 Interest Income $386,070 $386,070
11 Total - Revenue Offsets $538,378 $0 $538,378 12 13 Less Adjustments
14 Transfer from (to) Reserves $669,986 $669,986 15 Adjustment to Annualize Rate Increase $0 $0 16 Total - Less Adjustments $669,986 $0 $669,986 17 18 Total Revenue to be Recovered from Rates $3,865,011 $780,000 $4,645,011
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report
9.2. Operating and Capital Cost Allocation
In order to allocate the City's revenue requirements to cost causation components, Raftelis functionalized expenses.
Table 9-2 shows the functional allocations of O&M expenses and assets. Table 9-3 and Table 9-4 use these percentages by multiplying the total shown in each row, which are the functionalized values, by the corresponding percentage to allocate the costs. Table 9-3 and Table 9-4 show the percentage allocation of costs.
Table 9-2: Wastewater Percentage Allocation-
Customer Service and
Function Collection Fixed Capacity Related General Costs
Collection 100% 100%
Customer Service 100% 1017%
General&Admin 100% 100%
lir
Table 9-3: Wastewater O&M Cost Allocation
Customer Service and
O&M Expenses Collection Fixed Capacity Related General Total Costs
Collection alio $0 $4,126,624
Customer Service $37 , 8 $0 $374,738 General&Admin $8 $0 $572,013 $572,013 Total ,126 - $374,738 $572,013 $5,073,376 Operating Allocation% 01181% 7% 11%
Table 9-4: Wastewater Capital Asset Allocation
Customer Service and
Asset Allocation Collection Fixed Capacity Related General Total Costs
Collection $31,578,205 $0 $0 $31,578,205 Customer Service $0 $0 $0 $0
4General&Admin $0 $0 $791,568 $791,568
Total -1' $31,578,205 $0 $791,568 $32,369,773 Asset Allocation% 98% 0% 2%
9.3. Awkrivatio f Units of Service
9.3.1. Unit Costs of Service
Raftelis calculated unit costs for each cost component by assessing the total number of EDUs. Table 9-5 shows the units of service and unit costs calculations for the City's wastewater collection system. General costs are reallocated to Collection and Customer components based on their proportional percentage of the total cost of service. After the reallocation of general costs, the adjusted cost of service is divided by the units of service(EDUs). Since the City charges wastewater accounts on an EDU basis, the net revenue requirement for each cost component is divided by the total number of EDUs to derive the unit cost. The proposed charges per EDU are shown in the last two rows of the table for the annual and monthly costs, respectively. The sum of Columns B, C, and D equals the total cost per EDU shown in Column A. It is important to note that this value is rounded up to the nearest cent in future tables.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 52 Table 9-5: Units of Service, FY 2027
(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Customer Class 2027 Collection Customer Revenue Offsets General Total Operating Cost $4,403,389 $3,581,666 $325,251 $0 $496,473 $4,403,389 Capital Cost $780,000 $760,926 $0 $0 $19,074 $780,000 Revenue Offsets $0 $0 $0 -$538,378 $0 -$538,378 Total Cost of Service $5,183,389 $4,342,591 $325,251 $0 $515,547 $4,645,011 Percent excluding General Costs 93% 7% 0% Allocation of General Costs $0 $479,624 $35,923 $0 $0 $0 Total Cost of Service $4,645,011 $4,822,216 $361,174 -$538,378 $0 $4,645,011 Units of Service(EDUs) 32,321 32,321 32,321 32,321 Unit Cost/year $143.72 $149.20 $11.17 -$16.66 Unit Cost/Month $11.98 $12.43 $0.93 -$1.39
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 53
10. Wastewater Rates
10.1 . Wastewater Test Year Rate Derivation
Raftelis calculated updated wastewater rates for FY 2027. The revenue requirement is divided by the number of EDUs to determine the monthly charge per EDU as shown above in Table 9-5. The total rate is shown in the last line of the column labeled FY 2027. This value is the sum of all rate components.
Currently, multi-family residential accounts are charged 70%of the EDU rate. Raftelis proposes to change this percentage to 89%,based on a dwelling density analysis, which shows the household density of a multi- family residence is roughly 89%that of a single-family residence.
Table 10-1 shows the test year, FY 2027 service charges effective July 1, 2026, for wastewater customers on a per-EDU basis.
t
Table 10-1: Sewer Services Char•e all)
EDU Charges Jul-. -
City Local Sewer Services Component($/EDU) $11.98 IEUA Sewer Treatment Component (Pass-Through Rat( $29.45
10.2. Proposea rive-Year Vilest, Jallikrate Schedule Table 10-2 shows the proposed 5-year wastewater rate schedule. July 2026 rates reflect the cost-of-service.
Rates for future years equal the FY 2027 rates multiplied by the revenue adjustment for the given year. Rates are rounded up to the nearest cent. San Antonio Heights customers are charged a rate 1.5 times the EDU rate based on an agreement between the City and San Antonio Heights. Wastewater customers also pay a monthly fee to IEUA for treatment. This rate is passed through each year,based on the cost to treat the wastewater. The IEUA FY 2027 charge is effective July 1, 2026. Any increases in IEUA treatment costs will be passed through to customers in July each year as shown below.
Table 10- . •osed 5-Year Wastewater Rate Schedule $/EDU Wastewater Charges Current FY 2027 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Effective Date July 1,2026 January 1,2027 January 1,2028 January 1,2029 January 1,2030 City Local Sewer Services Charges($/EDU) $11.29 $11.98 $12.46 $12.96 $13.48 $14.02 Effective Date July 1,2026 January 1,2027 July 1,2027 July 1,2028 July 1,2029 IEUA Sewer Treatment Component(Pass-Through Rate)* $25.78 $29.45 $29.45 Pass-through Pass-through Pass-through *The City currently collects$25.78 per EDU for IEUA wastewater treatment services,although IEUA's adopted rate is$27.02 per EDU.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 54 11 . Customer Impact Analysis &
Neighboring Agency Comparison
11 .1 . Customer Bill Impacts
11.1.1. Water
Figure 11-1: shows a comparison of a 5/8" meter single-family residential bill at different usage levels for proposed FY 2026 rates, and for current rates.
Figure 11-1: Single-Family Residential i-Monthly Bill Impact Single Family Bi-Monthly Bill Impacts, 5/8" meter
$350 -
$300 -
$250 -
$200
$150
$1Eu'
$ ,Very Low Use Low Use Median Use Average Use High Use Very High Use ■Current $83.90 $102.54 $111.86 $161.14 $195.02 $277.86 ■Proposed $86.56 $105.76 $115.36 $166.72 $202.03 $286.26 Usage(hcf) 8 16 20 36 47 70 Difference($) $2.66 $3.22 $3.50 $5.58 $7.01 $8.40 Difference(%) 3.2% 3.1% 3.1% 3.5% 3.6% 3.0% Figure 11-2 shows a comparison of a 5/8" meter with 3 dwelling units, multi-family residential bill at different usage levels for proposed FY 2026, and for current rates.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 55 Figure 11-2: Multi-Family Residential Bi-Monthly Bill Impact Multi Family (3 Dwelling Units) Bi-Monthly Bill Impacts 5/8" Meter
$450
$400
$350 -
$300 -
$250 -
$200 -
$150
$100 .. , ihr li I _
$0 Very Low Use Low Use Median Use Average Use High Use Very High Use ■Current $119.52 $151.09 $208.49 $182.66 $277.37 $372.08 ■Proposed $127.02 $161.89 $225.29 $196.76 $301.37 $405.98 Usage(hcf) 18 29 49 40 73 106 Difference($) $7.50 $10.80 $16.80 $14.10 $24.00 $33.90 Difference(%) 6.3% 7.1% 8.1% 77% 8.7% 9.1% Figure 11-3 shows a comparison of average non-residential customer bills for each customer class under the proposed FY 2026 rates and current FY 2026 rates.
Figure 11-3: Non-Re ic
tial ill Impact
Average Bi-Monthly Bill Impacts by Customer Class
$3,500
$3,000
$2,500
$2,000
$1,500
$1,000
$500 . I
I
I
$0 I,' 2, 3" 2,' 2,
Landscape Commercial Schools Government Recycled Water ■Current Bi-MonthlyBill $1,146.23 $607.43 $2,626.47 $857.61 $2,762.99 •Proposed Bi-Monthly Bill $1,194.92 $654.44 $2,630.61 $861.42 $2,864.63 Usage(hcf) 264 108 603 158 966 Difference($) $48.69 $47.01 $4.14 $3.81 $101.64 Difference(%) 4.25% 7.74% 0.16% 0.44% 3.68%
11.1.2. Wastewater
Figure 11-4: shows the monthly bill impact per EDU, comparing current rates to proposed FY 2027 rates.
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 56 Figure 11-4: Wastewater Monthly EDU Charge Bill Impact
Bill Impacts Wastewater
$12.20
$12.00 $11.98
$11.80
$11.60
$11.40 $11.29
$11.20 L
$11.00
$10.80 I
City Local Sewer Services Component($/EDU)
■Current •Jul-26
11 .2. Neighboring Agency maarison
11.2.1. Water
Figure 11-5 shows a comparison to neighboring agencies for a single-family residential bi-monthly bill. These comparisons are based on a 5/8" meter and 36 hcf of water consumption over a 2-month period.
Figure 11-5: Neighboring Water Comparison, Single-Family Single mily Residential Water Comparison, 5/8" Meter,36 hcf $300 —
$252.65 $259.53
$250 1
$203.75
$200 $184.88
$152.51
$161.14 $166.72 $168.32 $168.92
$150
$100
$50
$0
CVWD Upland Upland Pomona Chino Ontario MVWD La Verne Claremont Current Proposed (GSWC)
Fixed •Variable
City of Upland/Water and Wastewater Rate Study Report 57
11.2.2. Wastewater
Figure 11-6 shows a comparison to neighboring wastewater agencies for a single-family residential monthly bill. These comparisons are for one EDU or assume 18 hcf of wastewater discharge for a single-family residence.
Figure 11-6: Neighboring Wastewater Comparison, Single-' y Residential Wastewater Comparison
$so
— $69.16
$70
$60 —
$50 1
$11.71 $99.81 447.25
$41.041 Er'
$36.68 $37.07 $37.45
$40 $31.22 ,,
$30
$20 , ,
$10
$o
• ■ _ ► �
La Verne CVWD Upland Pomona na • hino ntario Chino Hills Rialto Current Pro
•Fixed • le .tment
ALP'
- ,....,
Proposition 218 Notice . _,. or tiPt - Utility Rate Studyand
ti
-
Costof Service Review
tt.
,..
At:
op ,
if/ 1,5r '
* . ._ , ,)
_....„,_ A ''.4t Pik POP
ublic Works a , _ {' ` f ,r� City Council Meeting GG}, �,.
r ;;x MADONNA OFTHE TRAIL
r
sys
March 23, 2026 `� " '�
Damien R. Arrula , Assistant City Manager
Richard Gonzales, Deputy Director of Public
Works - Utilities -:_ _
\\IL ii - e
f__ Vic;` -: . I \. g,.
_ _ I �> ,, -, ' II Page 336 of 654
What Council Is Being Asked To Do
Tonight G,��cF upt91:
74 ,
gLIFOR��O
• Set Public Hearing Date Ø
June8, 2026 � 1 Hearing
• Authorize Mailing of
Proposition 218 Notices PROP �
• Begin Public Input & Protest �'� k Notices Process 21 8
• No Rates Are Being Adopted
Tonight (4. _ 1111 Public
Input
4 OF Upi iiiiiiiar
14-1
44tyt, .
Ilk . : _
E ,, p... . .„ r
_. r.
O4LxFOR��4�
System
_.:.,. ... , ,
...i.!--, ci..-:;., ,
Background 0
..
,
! _ "V 7
a.
`,........46
10..
6 111111.
•
44 ell... '' .
, V I II pl IOW 41.........1 .... 1
-:---=-- - 'AC ti.':' :"' . . .-. •
=r >'*a =
di
J 4111rr ' - .4- 38 of 654
Background - Water Service Area
pF UPL
,,,,,
47 rh__5 ,i,,,,.:.
__,,_
0.4 ''s.t,
• Access to local and imported
water supply resources
. • L
f • Groundwater rights in Chino Basin, cur:ar rrg Cucamonga Basin, and Six Basins r.athio... citY (If
Basin
• Majority shareholder in West End
r � Consolidated Water Company and
errSan Gabriel Upland San Antonio Water Company Valley Basin
a ��
Clare - I LUKamO • Canyon Water - surface water treated at the City's San Antonio
Water Treatment Plant
Montclair Chino Basin
Ont rio
Background - Water Portfolio
UPLAND'S 2024 WATER SOURCES
Ground Water Surface Water • Imported Water
17%
19%
64%
44, or UPL
44,
1\ - '
Alit
Background - Wastewater Collection System
IpF UPL
"r. 5 ,..,,.3s
4.47 ;iv
�LrFQRv l
• City-owned wastewater collection - -a �n f
system ! �Ilm1110 H�a
___________ _\
• Wastewater sent to Inland Empire
Utilities Agency (IEUA)
/ \-., —
• Upland is one of several contract cities cvl, • Discharge compliance
f
f
• Must meet strict discharge limits f
{
{
• Ensures public and environmental safety L..___ _ _L _ _. .. • Treated wastewater available to 1.___._,..___________T purchase as recycled water ,5ystern Seri ice PIsea CRY umn5
C.21 GAT•8r lJpl3nd
CAy or hMantclair
CTy or Oritarn Page 341 of 654
CT1 or Fz 1 14CuCel}78nga
Background - Recycled Water System
of 1434
VP
• City's recycled water supplied by IEUA
• Tertiary treated (per Title 22 regulatory
l mil,
standards) rw CITY OF
• Safe for non-potable use: parks, medians, golf UPLAND
p g
courses
• Groundwater recharge boosts groundwater
supply and drought resilience
Inland Empire Utilities Agency
• Critical benefits A MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT • Reduces imported water demand
• Improves local water supply reliability and long- term sustainability
By the Numbers :• _. r
o m E
o =
1- 0 r 5
-1811 . 0 . 1...,
......_ _,
„.., _ i
23,450 Water 13 Water 200 Fire 3.3 Miles of 6 Million Gallons Per Recycled Day Treatment
Meters Reservoirs Hydrants Water Lines Plant AM& 1
114") rI, SEWER ® •
-- o vo -0- � l ol
II1 .w, 1 -
OF up 20,500 Water 210 Miles of 46 Recycled 439 Miles of � L�4, Sam les Taken 11 Active Wells Y ~ti Annually Sewer Line Water Meters Water Lines 4 \ -.,": ;St
04LrF0R��4�
- 'n....�-
OF Ups -
: .._ --r- — - -- •-
C. ts,
I
0.\li
�
tIl
41-F01134 ! -
Ifr
r j ; �
•
;-- •C ' ,
.. 1
Ir
Rate StudyScope & ___....„ _a.
Considerations
I
-. -
. . . - ,
Background - Consultant
pF UPL
3 ‘LrFOR,/
RAFTELIS
Sudhir Pardiwala, PE
1 45+years of experience
e - Consultants Supported rate and financial studies for If 100+ agencies across California, Oregon,
Washington, Nevada, and Arizona.
••••....
32+ Mears
"" Serving the Public Sector
Nick Kennedy
3+years of experience
I 1 700+ Supported rate and financial studies for Inglewood, Seal Beach, Manhattan Beach,
Mr/ Public Agencies Assisted Fountain Valley, Ventura, and Oxnard.
Depthandof This Stu
dy
pF UPL
'47, *4.4;
• Comprehensive water, recycled
water, and wastewater analysis
• Included :
\T( 43-) • Financial plans
71:):;k • Cost-of-service analyses
• Five-year rate schedules
• Customer impact analysis
0 3
• Reserve policy evaluation
• Conducted using:
i III • AWWA & WEF industry standards • Proposition 218 legal requirements
Master Plan Integration into the
Rate Study G,�l �F upt9,�t)
First rate study in over a decade to directly cgLIFOR��� integrate updated utility master planning Planning into financial modeling and rate
development.
This allows the rate to reflect:
• Actual system condition and remaining asset life Modeling • Current and upcoming regulatory requirements
• Community growth and future service demand g • Long-term infrastructure replacement needs
Sustainable
The rate study determines how we responsibly
fund those needs over time. Rates
gStudygLong- Ran a Plannin & Rate Timeline Master Plan History 2025 Wastewater and Water
Rate Study History
2026 2026 Utilities Rate Study
Master Plans Adopted 2024
2022
2020 2020 Water and Recycled Water Rate Study
2018 2018 Water and Recycled Water Rate Study
2016
2014 2014 Water & Recycled Water Rate Study
2012
2010 Water System Master Plan 2010
2008 Recycled Water Master Plan 2008
ti� °r UpL� 2007 Water System Master Plan Current rate study is directly informed �4 t 2006 Sewer Master Plan 2006
by updated utility master planning
a0r '4 «
,,,. 2004
0444.00�4� 2002
1992 Water Master Plan Page 348 of 654
2000
Whya Rate StudyIs Necessary
pF UPL
oioit7wv
.,,. ., , ,,,,..
„. .
_.
0,4 .s.,
‘,.,..F.0.4
System & Financial Drivers
• Completion of comprehensive water, . recycled water, and wastewater master ' plans
• Rising costs for:
• Purchased water . - - ' 1 • Operations & maintenance - - - Ng . , • Federal & State mandates - m
• Comprehensive capital replacement and
rehabilitation _'
• Aging infrastructure
• Sufficient funding for long-range planning
• Need for long-term fiscal sustainability NM _ T= ' !
How UtiLity Services Are Funded
pF UPL
Water and Wastewater utilities as operate Enterprisep • Unlike the General Fund , Enterprise Funds are supported primarily through user rates and charges
• Rate revenues fund :
• Operations and maintenance
• Capital replacement and rehabilitation
• Debt service obligations
• Required reserve levels
• Forever Chemicals & Chemicals of Emerging Concern (PFAS, PFOA, CECs, etc.) This structure ensures the City's utility operation remains sustainable.
•P . -?' '-31:iit ,,....... -al-
T..." '''"I's 1
i. . ,
------
f•' :.it1 , X1414tf ---
a ar . e - . rt l'
- ',..N. • ":- t- -• ' - •". 40674 s -., ,i OF UP4 . I., i'" ' • .' 4,..;•-•-1:44.'• • .' -..."• '•P... • .- '" I . • '''', -!.?'--•1...'• , -.''.: .' .4 •‘,. ___•-• 4- . ... . .,.. ..11.- .... . rc ...;1 - ,:::• A r el •• .1,,, ' , _ : . •.1, , _ _,.....-----"---- ,r,
7, • --..- - ...'',*
-..1 • . •v:'-. :4•le . v" • •
C..) iiist •t) ; ,:3.
0• ;:11
. 'A t' •• .. e
1_41 .
r. • .. .. , ;7. ' • -.....44:4*• 6 _ - .. . 0. e ' • ,•% 4thette 1.#.. ''', . '. ,. •,,,':' _,—...--- ' -It.',-.•S .tr.44.d.. ,c ,....I. r ••
••• . •iy: 1:1!1- •o I '.." ' ,-tJa. P. .____.----- "77. , ..: .6,yr.,,,,..-t • ,...7.......:•- 1,..-7i,-.4t,l•'• . lit
ii IP .
011yltio: 4•11‘1111110 411.1'''''"•••••%..\ 1. Of fi.
... .,....:._ r...-- "',fr:40 4 P
oie ei, - '4' . 6.illg- 447.Z+f : -4 °- .e•-: :
• -%,.....
It 141'
'0.$ 4 Nir.'1 6•;t4f -•
......‘14
' ••.:4,-.• ..-- .. Fr.. jillim: .. litratoit„, •, . .,_. ':.14§ 4 I•41.7%,":: .'1.4.:' .•o•• , •••• \OD I.• •....",-,-.• , . • . -
--71:r '''...f.' •„7... - '.7,..';'• - ' •
,,.-
,.14 1-;"4.
•
0,1111: ' '. "4- k-:, .Y.\:. ... • . Pr!, e.A...• -.4...i.:..er.t. .. -,t.iii, :• :. ,., ------ IL....... ,. .... ...
.
. r:Si. • ., , , , , ;fief.
. i•-r •• . -.. ,e.
lig r 4• ... f. ''-*
;alfr7- -'v.. . . r•
1.‘ 19iillaili."77r''' 1 n''k.ei•• ' 11:4: db-o M -C.',11-m , ,..-' ‘itit ,, ----- -tat; .-• ., __....-- _
4111. -r-•,: •-
a "'• i.r."••• .-111 .- -
••
-... ..."':-.•-_.:_.... ..r................_,
:•
;....I_L
• .•'.
Masterplan
..-., ,.
•
Integration
,
.,......; 0_11ir110„. , .
.11iIV'
'-'• -.... • •
lilli
it 1111.1.!*1(• ciiii77r
• - •
•• —A L
....r,,,..,
,so _•, ...,
,.....
c Ali"
.... •
: . • .7-
.
.- ,-...
.1 .
• '
. . f ...
.. ,.... '
.. .. . . .„ ,
• -
.... . . .. .
,•
. ., • • • , . •
.1114,.IIII
•
fal.
• . '
;-:4.4:---”...-2---Z:.-.,',--,',:‘ ' "'•'` -
_... ....- .-_,., ,_...•..,.;- - . ._
- - • -••- - -• --- -, ,
,..._.
...
`•.:, -. ----- -- WA TVII
IS 111,
••••mar i
--.-
=--
,4, \\. . I •• .- I.
1. -,•
ILL OK '
• .7_,_.
- ............. ...- .
-•• •
, '. .....,_ ___- 7.,• :•rt-• d.
. '1.......
•
,1;›,•..• i
111141
"-• .- _
.-
"ale 35 of 654
Masterplan Foundations
pF UPL
CIA lr light:
Brown Caldwell
L Planning Documents Used
City of UplanE 1Br:::
Caldwefl • Water Master Plan
Master Plate' c:.o'P-uo,:,,,'c:,"a. .,
City ofUpiand: • Recycled Water Master Plan Water and Recycled Water
Master Plan • Sewer (Wastewater Collection) Master Plan December • Capital Improvement Program (CIP) These plans identified :
it
• System deficiencies
„ z' ';'
°,trpo$ ,b • Required infrastructure investments • Regulatory and reliability needs
Water & RecycLed Water Master Plan
- KeyFindings � .
ti
41111
Water & Recycled Water System Needs r"
• Aging pipelines, reservoirs, and facilities
• Continued reliance on : =
• Local groundwater
• Imported water supplies `f =--xt� ' • Recycled water system expansion and
maintenance
Need for:
•
Airi
• Capital reinvestment -1ge
yy
• Emergency preparedness
• Long-term supply reliability -` = ~� ; ti,;....- 6
Wastewater Master Plan
- Key Findings 4pFUp4
10, 5 ,4, ,es
Ade\ - '6
Wastewater Collection System Needs -,
• Approximately 200+ miles of sewer
pipelines
• Ongoing maintenance and rehabilitation ,, : , required = ��
Q. A. r
w
• Increased costs for: 1 r;
• System repairs , .,,,,,,it
• Regulatory compliance To
r q i
• Conveyance agreements `= "
y.' .y
• Importance of maintaining reserve levels
w
for emergencies
I 1
1. .. . .
• „., ::-.:',r,:.'-.11-7. t - 6 -'-6. . ' .••%•. . '..• „ . 't, 1••• . •
.•
' '' '' ' ' '' : • ,
•
•
•
64.4:• '6'.01
---4'
1 .
- . •
. .. --7 0_ IL .. :1,,_,:i.;-- -. •-" , . . ..
„,
'?..,:;., ,... . • j- _._ ...H• i 47-t-..!` 4 - 1 _ - '7 ''''' ... # ',ii _r,. 1'•,-. - ,
, .
:1.,,'''.. . .... lEt.1 --' •1 --1*---:4 '' i, . A - -...., • - ... v-
a.
17;,..,.____ :=-• _ -• - 1 —,*7.Z.-- .,,',,,:.-4 ,.1.1:t_- . 4
,_.,....„ ,,
. __ _.
, ,,.,' ,. ,,,„,...
_ ..._ ..s.. .:,, __ .,..... . AI...
ch :,
. ,
. . ri
--,4—,
st. .-------
hill
-41
. • _
, • _ .
it
All:T
ila
f
r lii
, 0
„...,
co
I• • 1 1
E
.._ _
u)-- IA
C
or.
CO
1 11 i
ato
T
111 0
. ,
0 .-
4-0
.,..._,
goY2
CI:
CO 1= \
i\
41111111 ''i C
0 73 i
I
' i 1 UM •
C01)
0 4.•
co 0
,,--0.
... Ito
Ce Cli)
;IA raf
-lei - - •
0 Financial Health : Status Quo vs Action
pF UPL
4,,,,k., ,..:::.
„,
, , ,..
0,, „,
4.-,00
What Happens If Rates Are Not Adjusted
• Water Fund :
' • * P i • Reserves fall below minimum targets by FY 2029 4 • • • • 'f-
• Difficulty meeting debt service requirements
1 • • Wastewater Fund :
1 c �% • Reserves depleted by FY 2034
• Increased risk of:
` i z ' isko ' , 0 •qite Deferred maintenance ` :f . ,r Aging infrastructure - Reactive vs Proactive at. .,
} ` • Larger future rate increases
• Service reliability issues
First-Year Adjustment ExpLained
r.:.
�LrFOR��
• Cost-of-service analysis identified certain customer classes were not aligned with their proportional cost of service • Prior rate structure resulted in cross-subsidization between customer groups
• First-year adjustments realign each class with its actual cost of service
• Years 2-5 reflect uniform annual adjustments
First-Year
Based on average usage by account type.
Current Bi- Proposed Bi-
Customer Class Meter Size Usage (hcf) Monthly Bill Monthly Bill Difference ($) Difference (/) Single Family 5/8" 36 $161.14 $166.72 $5.58 3.46% Multi Family (3 5/8" 40 $182.66 $196.76 $14.10 7.72% Dwelling Units)
Landscape 2" 264 $1,146.23 $1,194.92 $48.69 4.25% Commercial 2" 108 $607.43 $654.44 $47.01 7.74% Schools 3" 603 $2,626.47 $2,630.61 $4.14 0.16% ��4, of UpL4ii\ ,
d Government 2" 158 $857.61 $861.42 $3.81 0.44% Recycled Water 2" 966 $2,762.99 $2,864.63 $101.64 3.68% 444,00
Years 2-5
Predictable, modest annual adjustments to maintain system stability and avoid future spikes.
• 5% annual adjustment - Effective January 1 , 2027 • 5% annual adjustment - Effective January 1 , 2028 • 5% annual adjustment - Effective January 1 , 2029 • 5% annual adjustment - Effective January 1 , 2030 OF 1444
��`��Al t
�d 2027 2028 2029 2030
+5% +5% +5%
Proposed Five-Year Water Rate
Schedule , Volumetric ($Ihcf Proposed I Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Commodity Charges Current
FY 2027 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 M
Effective Date hp July 1, 2026 January 1, 2027 January 1, 2028 January 1, 2029 January 1, 2030 Revenue Adjustments Variable/Class* 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% SingleIIII-
Tier 1 $2.33 $2.40 $2.52 $2.65 $2.79 $2.93 Tier 2 $3.08 $3.21 $3.38 $3.55 $3.73 $3.92 Tier 3 $3.68 $3.73 $3.92 $4.12 $4.33 $4.55 Multi Family $2.87 $3.17 $3.33 $3.50 $3.68 $3.87 Landscape $3.17 $3.34 $3.51 $3.69 $3.88 $4.08 Commercial $2.76 $3.16 $3.32 $3.49 $3.67 $3.86 54, o tU';/.44l"hiw
Schools $3.38 $3.29 $3.46 $3.64 $3.83 $4.03 `r4
v~ �� Government $3.47 $3.47 $3.65 $3.84 $4.04 $4.25 :.
, 'a►
Recycled Water $2.54 $2.64 $2.78 $2.92 $3.07 $3.23 ,,LrFO0st
*Rates variable for each usage class Page 360 of 654
RegionaL Rate Comparison
Water Rate
Single Family Residential Water Comparison, 5/8" Meter, 36 hcf $300
$252.65 $259.53
$250
$203.75
$200 $184.88
$161.14 $166.72 $168.32 $168.92
$152.51 -
$150
$100
$50
C
f UpL� $0
CVWD Upland Current Upland Proposed Pomona Chino Ontario MVWD La Verne Claremont 41; 4,a (GSWC)
\ _.,„
"�'s� Fixed Variable111
124
FOR��� Rates shown as of July 1 , 2025.
4 oF up4
C' 5' , It rnf. .w..
AS,
.4.t/rolk-
111
•"
.,,
. .
.. _
iEuA pass-Through
1 ..
.__ .
:
Charges
' IT .
ii. ._ .-Immilmagaiiima!W - ._ Ili -.--
am 1
i 1
.
4 ' • . -,4. .
. . • 11.1.111
'..
Itil 1 111111
.www•--• ..-- •‘..T - ••.. '--1 •••r r
lam ,
- - • 1, _ . .. .
.,_
. • kuril 1 • 1 . _ ..
L. ',...
.r
k
I . .. ... la
,- , 1
I '
' Pa i 654
I i• •... -6 • F ..
k: ,
,___ _
.
Whatisa Pass-
Through Charge?
;Ah: r'ilii_r____,
l A ass-throu h char e is a cost
. 1 _
�� � , �, p g g_ y ' _ v the City pays to an external e . s psi _ iuh_ f --1 - - , ; - wholesale or treatment agency, z. ,- in this instance IEUA, and then i � 11 '
bills to customers without
,Lit* 7 ► -t_ u'izi
Ii -% markup or profit. These
- rt ' separate charges are
i kN i �t -, �� p g
or Uplit zs considered pass-through
�45, �t -- `~ ti charges, and the City does not a : 'a. mar , {
.y� . . control them .
o.; .sty i
rF6
Regional Water Recycling Plant No. 5
"Water Smart- Thinking in Terms of Tomorrow"
Preliminary Treatment
Bar Screens I
Influent Pump Grit Classifiers
Station .
Residential ''''‘ r�
Primary
Treatment
IEUA `► 41111i- & Primary I E UA's Services Headquarters Clarifiers
Industrialill .
"4410
C - • Regional wastewater{-- .-
treatment
Frir
411111110.„-r
=s#r; • I EUA establishes the
k rAw___41 ' -- \
., -f
• regional wastewater
410
otii;
treatment rate
- n i,, a
• - • and manage--.0 -- -
ft
ell •. V , regional water resources, ► �, including recycled water
for UpL
��ti � � .;.'. 1.;,: and groundwater recharge ;` Equalization Basin
Renewable .....
0 :.A. '-iqr Main Control Room — Energy Efficiency .�: ' 4/1,00 Project Building
Solar Fief+ Page 364 of 654
IEUA Pass-Through Background
°F UPL
14,
..„.
• IEUA establishes regional wastewater treatment `411.00� rates
• City of Upland acts as the billing and collection agent • Pass-through charges reflect actual IEUA costs. IEUA , . recent charges to retail customers, such as Upland, have been on a biannual basis.
• City rate studies and most utilities follow a five-year t cycle. IEUA's recent practice of biannual rate
increases creates challenges for implementation of _ �- rate adoptions and sufficient time to notify rate y payers.
• Timing differences can create pressure for larger, less predictable adjustments and create confusion
for rate payers on rates the City does not control
IEUA Wastewater Treatment Rates
pF UPL
�IEUA Pass-Through Charges 44,00
• IEUA adopted an 18% rate increase over the past two years
• Effective July 1 , 2026 - 9%
• Effective July 1 , 2027 - 9%
• Passed through as a separate line item
IEUA Pass-Through Wastewater - ate Schedule
Effective Date Current July 1 , 2026 July 1 , 2027 July 1 , 2028 July 1 , 2029 IEUA Sewer Treatment
Component $27.02 $29.45 TBD TBD TBD (Pass-Through Rate)*
* The City currently charges only $25.78 for IEUA, although IEUA's current rate is $27.02 per EDU.
IEUA Pass-Through Authority
pF UPL
6'.1A7r Inv
`LrFQRti
• Resolution No. 6676 authorized IEUA pass-through adjustments through June 30, 2026, allowing the City to reflect IEUA treatment cost increases in sewer rates, with any single increase not to exceed 7%. • Fully in compliance with Proposition 218
• Pass-through authority allows the City to plan ahead and maintain rate stability for customers
• IEUA recently adopted 9% increases in each of the last two FYs • Given IEUA's recent rate increases, coupled with biannual rates inconsistent with most utilities, staff is recommending a 15% pass-through authorization • Allows the city utility to conduct pass-throughs while reducing administrative burden
Proposed Five-Year Sewer Rates
• 4% per year uniform rate adjustment
Monthly Charges Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective and Rates CURRENT 7/1/2026 1/1/2027 /1/2028 1/1/2029 1/1/2030 City Local Sewer Service
Charges (Per EDU*) $11.29 $11.98 $12.46 $12.96 $13.48 $14.02 IEUA Sewer Treatment Pass- Pass- Pass- Component (Pass- $25.78** $29.45 $29.45
Through Rate)** through through through Total $37.07 $37.76 $41.91 TBD TBD TBD *The current EDU for multi-family customers is 0.7 per dwelling unit. Based on the actual housing density(number of people per household), 0 Up the EDU for multi-family will be 0.89 EDU.
��� L��d **The City currently charges only$25.78 for IEUA even though the IEUA current rate is $27.02 per EDU. t -
ip,....: % ,,,,w
��LrFOR���
RegionaL Rate Comparison
Sewer Rate
Residential Wastewater Comparison
$80
$70.50
$70
$60
$50
$41.26 $41.65 $42.28
$40 $37.07 $37.45 $37.76 $38.61
$34.25
$29.22
$30
411$20
a
$10
44, pF UN
$0
GIffi d La Verne CVWD Upland Current Pomona Upland Fontana Chino Hills Ontario Chino Rialto Proposed
�I 1 ''ii►
y`. �r�r Fixed Tariable ■Treatment 044- '00
*Approximate -Rounded to the nearest percentage point. Page 369 of 654
, oFUP4 T .
457' let -...i.,.. . .4(
Clik . _ 16
,r.
...„.
. ..
IL.
O4LxFOR�s� % r
. , - N• 411(416t ' . r'. ,
; 0- \ •-
a -
ei . •r *1' r
. -
~:1
BalancingCostPressure & ...F , • •
4 Customer Stability ,,..., OP
r
I. .
- ;'
4. li
R r
hid
le,: • t
IL tr
-y
ili .
iliiiF 4•
�., Cn ' -- 370
Long-Term Fiscal Sustainability
of UPL
11 • Prior Councils deferred certain rate adjustments `4zrFOR�8� • January 1 , 2020 Rate Adjustment
• Deferred on December 9, 2019
• Deferred on March 9, 2020
• Deferred on October 26, 2020
• Implemented on August 9, 2021
• January 1 , 2022 Rate Adjustment
• Approved February 27, 2023 but delayed until May 1 , 2023 • Deferrals provide short-term customer relief but generate long-term fiscal impacts
• Current phased approach :
• Stabilizes utility finances
• Supports infrastructure reinvestment
• Avoids larger future rate spikes
Goal: responsible and sustainable utility funding Page 371 of 654
Customer Impact & AffordabiLity U
OF PL
is ; .'*.
Balancing Cost & Prudent Implementation
• Phased increases over five years
m
• Avoids sudden rate shocks to
rate payers
• Generally, rates remain lower in
many categories
CITY OF UPLAND
• Maintains safe, reliable, and Water and Wastewater Rate Study
compliant utility services DRAFT REPORT I Ma/eh 11 2026 ti4
-e}l
'.j
R RAFTELIS
�. e,t tPos4%t
Proposition 218 Process
pFUPL
4c
04 c:I.7.::,.. . ,....,-..,.:...:d:,
or. • , -,.t:.•:,,A•iii:
'ILrFa%
lit
What Happens Next
titjp UPLAND
• Proposition 218 notices mailed
•
•• • 45-day public review period
N CE TO PROPERTY OWNERS
* �M� • Public hearing tentatively on June 8, 2026 Tars Hn Provided by rno City of Upland it aethmesre with Wtirre xil o.t Section 0l lM 10-
nrooml Californiai h Div water anther
rssew 2con which nor pro the Caa p rep,thf Wiley awron d rate aalumaaents and[right o math._connections of proposed wapr,rtYcaea water.and sewer Tot Wend 6q Cowdl will conduct a Pubic HearrM on Monday.lune 0.cl tl wi 6r..a rgnsitler atldcogproar�rite
stimon andrth t°mee meterm..,sube _ lrwca • Wr• itten protests counted minrice charges.all interested Persons an tweed to elle.the Punk.a9,e 9 Y Ira ion art axoral reaan,and wraterce of
Ksmrenmre din u�
lb
.r tmerts at the a Pro Heannq tome absence d a.dear sewn tales in resparse t. rnYM adbvsl the prWmea water pry[da wa�na
a wither triter,ilssubrrareevpt allweratir^-°rwmaaam.ur..da oa i - •rsawiemar.�eM ..6.12 ie 2026 aopted m wCrY rale ad,9 a t year ante 2017 0..0 2030.and with authencation to Pass 11.60 wheiesale ra a, ap�o�Par�Cab�w�.�.uP � • Council may adopt rates if no •majority 1;r PYtLe Aand .ethawow.andsewer.errcesraw
Preip0M
Dui water.re�daw9er.a�, aY„etha •
protest
�e�a E .i ma.�r< p
I bra-pmrrUpland Howeef.•Ken
saktya...rand mproSts hgn. ity of Ma
were i ns.an dtlpane.Hosnr,i,• .••••••retwit•posts lw watersappins. repWaliors.anddMtbnrd•••.ceo to•o uweraldu4ergez costs mwrrePWNe • .,rmalr,aw r.Piue water and eevee*mba.aactPre wrn as wefts.pith. .,, otheressential facades continue to increase
•
•
Image above is of the draft 218 notice and not representative of the actual document. Page 373 of 654
:,.-:-.."-.A1/4)47.:.. ."--, .,.::,' '` .•
._ _
.,
_. ....• .
- Pro 218 N of c e
.. ..
S` �r 1:._ ... ,*. It
t . _„.. .
__i.e.. .., ,,, .... .. .
�� Schedule
.. 4►R'� -4P - - -•fir- .:.,..-' . `3�^ - - s:" _ _ -.., ,,.,�• • SRC:
r., ; r _ �, ' .. ylY _ F� Council Meeting == " .r
"� Y • March 23 2026
(� Public Hearing:
J _ : _ . . : , .. - June 8, 2026—tentatively .:- . .„1:4:,..,;-...:2.;.,:--,-,i;-.•-_-...„j..„,.. } Prepared with Raftelis
%J *(:4pk 0i.y1-2.C1..0..o..4,l^i
._ Financial Consultants
T .. • IrI
-_-•'--vt..c".A...•.
,/
rg
•'%_A4r r.14.l7
pF UpL _ : �� •.
,r =' L1AE s
i F Page 374 of 654
�, * _ fo f ,.
Summary
,11'6
pFUpL
02,..sododift.....4,
: iim.
\,k
�� rFOR 14'
L
• Rate studies are the most comprehensive
to date
1 y
• First rate stud to consider establishment , ' `� « jam. - of comprehensive reserve policies
p fi{ .
• Rates tied directly to cost of service ° 5 ` , • City and IEUA charges are separate x • City sewer increases are conservative V4 � Action tonight starts thepublic process h4 .�� � • g 3k ,� '„
Staff Recommendation
„ up.,
64,4,,,,,,,,
/ \ 1116
• Tentatively set a public hearing for June 8, 2026 to consider proposed water, recycled water, and ,, +;„ 4� .�: �o a. sewer rate adjustments
A '
' A'
i p
• Direct staff to distribute the Proposition 218 ; - y ` �L,,J x1 ;X
notice i _ ' .
f 1
• Receive and file the Water, Recycled Water, and \crit t..-, . i ei W asewt t r RaeSudy t t "' ` ae �-
• Consider and approve the recommended rate =`~4 , r schedules and related adjustments, with ' f
proposed effective dates of July 1 , 2026
n.,,,,oF uel.IS, #9' re ' ___... .4,4
Nil
. 11,244.14, ••••.- Id
- . et%., _. „
i1 7t,
t,k
\-14 .4s1Z''
IP ik
Thank you !
CITY OF
' UPLAND
NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNERS & CUSTOMERS
This Notice is provided by the City of Upland in accordance with Article XIII D, Section 6 of the California Constitution (Proposition 218), which requires the City to notify property owners of record with City water and/or sewer connections of proposed water, recycled water, and sewer rate adjustments and their right to protest.
The Upland City Council will conduct a Public Hearing on Monday, June 8, 2026, at 6:00 p.m., to consider adopting proposed rate adjustments to the City's current water, recycled water, and sewer service charges. All interested persons are invited to attend the Public Hearing. The City Council will hear and consider all oral testimony and written materials submitted regarding the proposed rate adjustments at the Public Hearing. In the absence of a majority protest, the City Council has the authority to adjust the proposed water, recycled water, and/or sewer rates in response to oral testimony and written materials submitted for consideration, provided adjustments do not increase rates beyond those proposed in this Notice. If adopted by the City Council, the proposed rate adjustments will become effective on July 1, 2026, with annual local rate adjustments on January 1 of each year from 2027 through 2030, and with authorization to pass through wholesale rate increases as they are imposed upon the City by its wholesale service providers.
Reasons for Proposed Rate Adjustments
The City is committed to providing safe and reliable water, recycled water, and sewer services, now and in the future. Effective financial management of our water, recycled water, and sewer systems is essential for long-term resilience, public health & safety and maintaining the high-quality of life we have come to expect in Upland. However, aging infrastructure, rising costs for water supplies, evolving regulations, and inflation pose financial and operational challenges. Costs incurred by the City to operate, maintain, repair, and replace water and sewer infrastructure such as wells, pipes, pumps, and other essential facilities continue to increase. 1 Page 378 of 654
Reasons for Proposed Rate Adjustments (continued)
The majority of funds required to operate and invest in our water and sewer systems come directly from the rates customers pay for service. Revenues from current rates are no longer adequate to support operations and fund the much-needed system improvements and maintenance planned over the next 5 to 10 years. Per state law, revenues generated from rate increases must only be used to fund the costs to provide the service, including operations and maintenance, capital improvements, the cost of debt to finance capital equipment, and maintaining cash and emergency reserves.
With costs continually outpacing revenues in recent years, the City enlisted utility finance experts to examine our costs to operate each system. The study looked at operating and capital costs and revenue needed to ensure the financial stability of water and sewer services in the years to come, including funding reserves to manage financial risks. Reserves help address challenges such as drought conditions, emergency repairs, natural disasters, increased costs for purchasing water, and aging infrastructure that is at or near the end of its useful life, all while continuing to provide high- quality service.
The rate study revealed a revenue shortfall and the need for annual rate increases over the next five years. This Notice summarizes the rate study findings and proposed rate adjustments that the Upland City Council will consider to the City's water, recycled water, and sewer service charges over the next 5 years. The proposed changes to water and sewer rates and charges are necessary to:
• Address rising costs of wholesale water supply, utilities, chemicals, and supplies. • Replace and modernize our aging infrastructure to prevent breaks and service disruptions and improve system resiliency.
• Meet minimum debt service requirements and fund emergency/unplanned expenses. • Invest in advanced water treatment systems to comply with evolving state and federal regulations,including removal of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and other Chemicals of Emerging Concern (CECs), to protect public health and maintain safe drinking water quality.
For more information, visit the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at www.epa.gov/ pfas and www.epa.gov/wgc/contaminants-emerging-concern-including-pharmaceuticals-and- personal-care-products.
What Happens If the City Does Not Raise Rates?
Current rates are not sufficient to sustain the utility enterprise funds. Investment in critical infrastructure would need to be deferred,which could place the City's aging systems in a vulnerable status. Deferring maintenance and improvements could result in higher costs and possible increased regulatory oversight and fines by permitting agencies, as well as creating increased risk of operational interruptions to customers.
2 Page 379 of 654
How Did the City Determine the Proposed Rates and Charges? The proposed rates will ensure the City collects sufficient revenue to cover operating and capital expenses to maintain high-quality, reliable water and sewer services that customers rely upon. The proposed rates were determined based on the projected revenue needed to fund:
• Operations and Maintenance, such as purchased water, supplies, chemicals, electricity, etc. • Capital Improvements, such as large projects to repair/replace pipes, wells, pump stations, and equipment.
• Debt Service to pay back loans.
• Reserves to meet minimum debt service requirements and fund emergency or unplanned expenses.
• Water Treatment for forever chemicals and CECs.
fit
tilt. r
r *\ , ' '''i
e
i-
+`ter
A -19
**., k 7 7 „, ,1 n
\ i.\ \ . ,
..‘ lig"
. , 1 kg" , —, oel. -
r
1 t
3 Page 380 of 654
Proposed Water Rates
The City's water rate structure includes a fixed charge and a volumetric rate shown in the tables below.
TABLE 1: Proposed Schedule Rate Adjustments of Bi-Monthly Water Volumetric Rates
Table 1 shows the volumetric rate, which is the amount each customer pays per one hundred cubic feet of water consumption, which is about 748 gallons of water used. The tier rates shown for single-family homes represent different levels of water usage, with tier 1 being lower use and tier 3 being higher use.
Volumetric Rates Current Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective (per 748 gallons) 7/1/2026 1/1/2027 1/1/2028 1/1/2029 1/1/2030 Single-family
Tier 1
(0-20 hcf) $2.33 $2.40 $2.52 $2.65 $2.79 $2.93 Tier 2
(21 - 50 hcf) $3.08 $3.21 $3.38 $3.55 $3.73 $3.92 Tier 3
(51 hcf and greater) $3.68 $3.73 $3.92 $4.12 $4.33 $4.55 Multi-family $2.87 $3.17 $3.33 $3.50 $3.68 $3.87 Landscape $3.17 $3.34 $3.51 $3.69 $3.88 $4.08 Commercial $2.76 $3.16 $3.32 $3.49 $3.67 $3.86 Schools $3.38 $3.29 $3.46 $3.64 $3.83 $4.03 Government $3.47 $3.47 $3.65 $3.84 $4.04 $4.25 Recycled Water $2.54 $2.64 $2.78 $2.92 $3.07 $3.23 irili
/ W \ \ -
.. -;
Pr" Af
v M.��� ri • •,
loir.
7w
4 Page 381 of 654
TABLE 2: Proposed 5-Year Schedule of Bi-Monthly Fixed Meter Rate Table 2 shows the bi-monthly fixed meter charge, which is the amount each customer pays per meter. The fixed meter charge is based on the size of the meter serving the parcel.
Service Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Charges Current 7/1/2026 1/1/2027 1/1/2028 1/1/2029 1/1/2030 (Bi-Monthly)
5/8" $65.26 $67.36 $70.73 $74.27 $77.99 $81.89 3/4" $82.68 $84.92 $89.17 $93.63 $98.32 $103.24 1" $117.52 $120.03 $126.04 $132.35 $138.97 $145.92 11/2" $204.72 $207.82 $218.22 $229.14 $240.60 $252.63 2" $309.35 $313.16 $328.82 $345.27 $362.54 $380.67 3" $588.33 $646.74 $679.08 $713.04 $748.70 $786.14 4" $902.15 $1,138.32 $1,195.24 $1,255.01 $1,317.77 $1,383.66 6" $1,773.93 $2,314.63 $2,430.37 $2,551.89 $2,679.49 $2,813.47 8" $2,820.12 $4,948.14 $5,195.55 $5,455.33 $5,728.10 $6,014.51 Drought Rates
In times of drought or emergency water shortage, the City Council may declare mandatory water use restrictions. During times of mandatory water use restrictions, an additional charge will be added to the volumetric rates based upon the amount of restriction required. For example, when a 10% water use reduction is required, volumetric rates will increase by 3%. See all proposed drought rates as detailed in Table 3 and Table 4 below:
TABLE 3: Proposed Drought Rates Per Drought Stage
Up to 10% Up to 20% Up to 30% Up to 40% Up to 50% Drought Surcharge Water Use Water Use Water Use Water Use Water Use Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction Volumetric Rate Surcharge 3% 10% 22% 36% 54% Increase
5 Page 382 of 654
Proposed Water Rates
In the event of a declared mandatory water use restriction that triggers imposition of drought rates, the actual drought rate shall be imposed in addition to the volumetric rate, and shall be equal to the lesser of the volumetric rate imposed at that time multiplied by the percentages in the table above, or the rates set forth in the table below.
TABLE 4: Proposed Drought Rates Surcharge*
Customer Class Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed 7/1/2026 1/1/2027 1/1/2028 1/1/2029 1/1/2030
Maximum Drought Surcharge (40-50% Reduction) $/hcf
Single Family
Tier 1 $1.31 $1.38 $1.44 $1.52 $1.59 Tier 2 $1.75 $1.84 $1.93 $2.03 $2.13 Tier 3 $2.04 $2.14 $2.25 $2.36 $2.48 Multi-family $1.73 $1.82 $1.91 $2.00 $2.10 Landscape $1.82 $1.91 $2.01 $2.11 $2.21 Commercial $1.73 $1.82 $1.91 $2.00 $2.10 Schools $1.80 $1.89 $1.98 $2.08 $2.19 Government $1.89 $1.98 $2.08 $2.19 $2.30 *The maximum rates above do not include any pass-through increases described below. As such, the actual maximum rate may be higher than the amounts set forth in Table 4 in the event the City passes through rate increases from its wholesale water provider.
•
/ )
. - LI ., _
{
6 Page 383 of 654
Pass-Through Rates
The City purchases water from the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA). Projected water purchase costs from IEUA are included as a part of the City's volumetric rates. Additionally, IEUA imposes a Water Meter Equivalency Unit (MEU) charge on the City based on the size of each potable water meter serving parcels within the City.The proposed volumetric (including both potable and recycled water) and fixed meter charges include projected rates imposed on the City by IEUA. However, it is possible that IEUA will increase its rates in an amount that exceeds what the City projected in its rates.
As such, should IEUA increase its rates imposed upon the City in an amount that is greater than the assumptions included in the proposed potable and recycled volumetric rates or fixed meter charges set forth above, the City proposes to pass through such additional increases to its customers. If adopted, the City may pass through such cost increases at any time from July 1, 2026 through Januaryl, 2030, provided that such a pass through shall not cause the impacted rate to increase by more than 15% in any calendar year, nor shall it cause the impacted rate to exceed the cost of providing potable or recycled water service.
Bi-Monthly Water Bill Impacts: Three Single-Family Residential Customers*
• Low Usage: Uses 16 HCF of water for two months and will see their 2026 bi-monthly bill increase by $3.22
• Typical (Average) Usage: Uses 36 HCF of water for two months and will see their 2026 bi-monthly bill increase by $5.58
• High Usage: Uses 47 HCF of water for two months and will see their 2026 bi-monthly bill increase by $7.01
*Examples reflect estimated bill impacts in the first year of the proposed 2026 rates for most common 5/8" meter size. HCF= one hundred cubic feet or 748 gallons.
Low Usage Typical Usage High Usage
O 0C 000
U cgd
16 hcf 36 hcf 47 hcf
+$3.22 +$5.58 +$7.01
per two-month per two-month per two-month
billing cycle billing cycle billing cycle
7 Page 384 of 654
Proposed Sewer Rates
TABLES 5 & 6: Proposed 5-Year Schedule of Increases for Monthly Sewer Charges and Rates
Tables 5 and 6 on the next page show the current and proposed monthly sewer service rate. The rate is comprised of two components:
• A Local City Sewer Service Charge for collection and conveyance of wastewater. • A fee imposed on the City by IEUA (IEUA Fee), the regional wastewater facility, and passed through to customers, for treatment of collected wastewater.
The rate study proposes changes to the Local City Sewer Service Charge and the IEUA Fee. The following table shows the Local City Sewer Service Charge for 2026 through 2030 and rates for the IEUA Fee for Fiscal Years 2026 and 2027. Beginning July 1, 2027, and each July 1 thereafter through and including July 1, 2030, the City shall increase the IEUA Fee by passing through the actual adopted rate increase by IEUA, provided such pass through shall not cause the IEUA Fee to increase by more than 15% in any calendar year.
The rate is charged per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU), which is an average single-family residential household. Non-residential properties are assigned one or more EDUs based upon their total impact on the sewer system. For standard buildings, the Agency counts plumbing fixtures. For businesses with higher needs, the Agency calculates EDUs based upon the actual volume of water discharged (270 gallons per day equals one EDU) and the strength of the wastewater (BOD), as defined by the customer's discharge permit.
o •
4 8 Page 385 of 654
TABLE 5: City Sewer Rate Schedule
Monthly Charges and Current Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Rates 7/1/2026 1/1/2027 1/1/2028 1/1/2029 1/1/2030 City Local Sewer
Service Charges (Per $11.29 $11.98 $12.46 $12.96 $13.48 $14.02 EDU*)
*The current EDU for multi-family customers is 0.7 per dwelling unit. Based on the actual housing density (number of people per household), the EDU for multi-family will be 0.89 EDU.
San Antonio Heights customers pay 1.5 times the City's rate.
TABLE 6: IEUA Pass-Through Wastewater Treatment Rate Schedule Monthly Charges Current Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective and Rates 7/1/2026 1/1/2027 7/1/2027 7/1/2028 7/1/2029 IEUA Wastewater
Treatment $25.78** $29.45 $29.45 Pass Pass Pass Component through through through
**The City currently charges only$25.78 for IEUA although the IEUA current rate is $27.02 per EDU.
IEUA also imposes an extra-territorial
monthly wastewater service charge
on sewer customers whose properties
are located outside IEUA's service area
boundary but who receive wastewater
treatment services through IEUA
facilities. These charges are intended to
recover IEUA's costs to provide regional
dar: ro°+ �sr ax
wastewater treatment services to non- - d • member or extra-territorial customers. _ �" am ..a"�; • .
Effective July 1, 2025, IEUA increased = the extra-territorial monthly wastewater —
service charge to $23.53 per month a—
per EDU, which is applied in addition to
the FY 2025/26 adopted IEUA monthly
EDU treatment rate of $27.02. This only
applies to approximately six customers. _
9 Page 386 of 654
How to Protest the Proposed Rate Adjustment
The proposed water (including drinking water and recycled water) and sewer rate adjustments are subject to a majority protest process under Proposition 218. Any record owner of a property that receives water and/or sewer service from the City or occupant who is directly liable for payment of the City's water and/or sewer service charges (Customer of Record) may submit a written Protest against the proposed rate adjustments for water and/or sewer service. Owners of multiple parcels may file one Protest for each parcel owned within the City's service area. Only one written Protest against the proposed rate adjustments for the water or sewer service charges per parcel will be counted in determining whether a majority protest exists.
A written Protest must include all of the following to be counted in determining whether there is a majority protest:
• Clearly stated opposition to the proposed rate adjustments for either the water service charges, or sewer service charges, or both, as applicable;
• Name of the record property owner or account holder who is submitting the Protest; • Identification by street address or other clear identification of the property for which the Protest is made; and
• Signature and legibly printed name of the record property owner or customer who is submitting the Protest.
You may submit a written protest until the public hearing closes on Monday, June 8, 2026. Before the hearing, you can mail or hand-deliver your protest to the City Clerk at the Submittal Location below by 6 p.m. on June 8. You may also give your protest directly to the City Clerk during the hearing. The City will not accept phone, email, fax, oral, or late postmarked protests.
At the Public Hearing, the City Council will accept and consider all written Protests and hear all oral comments on the proposed rate adjustments. However, oral comments will not be counted in determining the existence of a majority protest.
What is a Majority Protest?
The existence of a majority protest will be determined separately for proposed water rate adjustments and proposed sewer rate adjustments. A majority protest against the proposed water or sewer rate adjustments will exist if at the end of the Public Hearing there are written protests submitted and not withdrawn that represent a majority of the parcels (50% +1) that receive water or sewer service, as applicable. The City Council cannot adopt the proposed rate adjustments if a majority protest exists.
Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies -Written Objection How do I preserve my ability to judicially challenge the Proposed Rates? Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 53759.1 and 53759.2, a person or entity will be prohibited from bringing a judicial action or proceeding alleging that the proposed rates do not comply with Proposition 218 unless that person or entity has submitted a written Objection to the proposed rates. This is known as an Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies requirement and is separate from the Proposition 218 majority Protest process described above. 10 Page 387 of 654
To exhaust your administrative remedies, your written Objection must meet the following criteria:
• State that the correspondence is an Objection.
• Include the name and signature of the record property owner or account holder who is submitting the Objection.
• Identify the property by street address or other identifying information. • Include the specific grounds for alleging noncompliance of the proposed rates with Proposition 218 in sufficient detail to allow the City to determine whether any adjustments to the proposed rates are necessary. A statement that the proposed rate adjustments are too high, or that the proposed rates violate Proposition 218 without an explanation as to why, will be insufficient for purposes of exhausting administrative remedies.
Written Objections may be mailed or personally delivered to the City Clerk at a Submittal Location listed below and must be received by the City Clerk by 4 p.m., Monday, May 18, 2026. Note that this deadline for submitting a written Objection is three weeks before the Public Hearing, whereas written Protests may be submitted until the Hearing is closed. Failure to timely submit a written Objection to the proposed rate adjustments in accordance with the requirements above, bars any right to challenge the rate adjustments through a legal proceeding.
The City will review each written Objection and respond in writing to all timely written submittals.
The written basis supporting the proposed rate adjustments can be found at www.uplandca.gov/ water-services and www.uplandca.gov/environmental-sewer-storm-water .
SUBMITTAL LOCATIONS
Mail: City Clerk, ATTN: Utility Rates Protest or Objection, City of Upland, ❑� AD 460 N Euclid Ave, Upland, CA 91786 . .
.1.■
In Person: Upland City Hall, City Clerk's Office, 460 N. Euclid Ave., Upland, ET.•lee p :
CA 91786
www.uplandca.gov/
Statute of Limitations for Challenging Proposed Rates water-services Please note that pursuant to California Government Code section 53759,there is a 120-day statute of limitations for judicially challenging all rates set forth in this Notice that runs from the date the Upland City Council adopts a Resolution approving the proposed rates.
Questions? Submit questions and comments via email to rgonzales@ 0 qt1t,❑� uplandca.gov or call the Public Works Department at (909) 291-2966.
Protests and objections sent to Public Works will not be accepted; they must be sent to the City Clerk. Er .. 0 1 . : ..
Visit the Rate Study webpage by going to www.uplandca.gov/water- services and www.uplandca.gov/environmental-sewer-storm-water . www.uplandca.gov/ environmental-sewer-
Review the rate study in person at the City Clerk's office, storm-water 460 N. Euclid Ave., Upland, CA 91786.
11 'age ;; o . 4
,4,S4-o1 UpL9'G City of Upland
\ ,-�_, 460 N Euclid Ave.
,diUpland, CA 91786
gLIFOR�l
.~ � -s w .
1 OF UpL
IK., 1114.._,
;ram,7 , '1 ',,,..„ , -------- . ,,,,. ,, ,,, ,,,,,,,,
._ t. illiii ,..... ,_
,-
y I
��LI FOg���
L\k‘ I _. ..
, , ”.., -,...% „ , r ! 4, ,
. . . , ,
11 \ a
r 1 1 osed Adjustme , ,
to Water and - -� -..._. �``,,6.
�, rnr . .°4 - Win.
Sew :� Rates = ' � . A
1 When: 6 p.m., Monday, June 8, 2026
Where: City of Upland City Council Chamber- `
'460 N. Euclid Ave, Upland, CA 91786 -_ . .7m\i. ----- - WIFIMIlb ,..,
(909) 931-4120 I uplandca.gov 1 [email protected]
4c,°v °p`qt CITFUP LAND
o "The City of Gracious Living"
- -
DATE: March 23,2026
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MICHAEL BLAY,CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:DAMIEN R.ARRULA,ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
RICHARD GONZALES,DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR-UTILITIES
TANYA GARCIA,MANAGEMENT ANALYST
SUBJECT: LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the updated City of Upland Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP).
GOAL STATEMENT
The proposed action supports the City's goal of protecting public safety,infrastructure,and community resilience by proactively identifying hazards and implementing strategies that reduce long-term risks associated with natural and human-caused disasters.
BACKGROUND
On March 31, 2022,the City applied for$112,500 in federal funding from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program to support the City's efforts to update its Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. On November 21,2023,the City was awarded $85,427.91 through the Fiscal Year 2023-24 grant cycle(Account No.2171201-5258-42031).The City is required to provide$8,997.67 towards the plan to cover the total project cost of$94,425.58.
The City of Upland is updating the LHMP to ensure that the natural and human-caused hazards the City faces are adequately understood and analyzed.In 2025 the City initiated the preparation of the LHMP.The purpose of an LHMP is to provide a better understanding of the issues and concerns associated with hazards,allow for the development of goals and strategies to address these hazards, and create opportunities to better integrate the plan into other planning documents(General Plan Safety Element and Emergency Operations Plan)as well as City functions.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA),under the Stafford Act as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000), governs the LHMP and requires frequent updates (every 5 years) to ensure that communities focus on the reduction of loss of life and property, human suffering, and economic disruption, and provides disaster assistance for costs resulting from natural disasters.An updated plan ensures the City is eligible for federal grant opportunities under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program(HMGP),Flood Mitigation Assistance(FMA), and Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities(BRIC)programs.
One of the many requirements to receive State and Federal approval includes incorporating community feedback,as well as developing a robust planning team of key community stakeholders.Release of this draft plan for public review is a key step in the outreach and engagement effort, allowing for input on the plan and process. Upon completion of the public review period, the City will begin the LHMP review and approval process with the California Office of Emergency Services and FEMA.Once approved by both agencies,this plan will be submitted to the City Council for final adoption in compliance with DMA 2000 requirements.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
The updated Local Hazard Mitigation Plan establishes a framework for reducing disaster risks through proactive policies,programs,and projects designed to protect lives and property.Adoption of the plan does not obligate the City to undertake specific projects or expenditures;rather, it provides guidance for future decision-making and positions the City to pursue funding opportunities as they become available. Maintaining an approved plan strengthens the City's ability to prepare for emergencies,coordinate response efforts,and reduce long-term recovery costs following disaster events. The plan also enhances the City's eligibility for federal Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs administered by FEMA.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Adoption of the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act because it represents a planning and administrative action that does not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment.
FISCAL IMPACTS
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
ALTERNATIVES
Provide alternative direction to staff.
CEQA:Not a Project
Aill fOr#111111211116414k,r
II
IA.
10A1 ''' ' . q"
...\!sif t.-- i t
617 . \ Irlif '
Yao0MMR Or T$ Tim&
r
Upland Cityof
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Public Review Draft, March 2026
This page intentionally left blank.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1
Plan Purpose and Authority 1
Plan Organization and Use 3
Plan Goals 4
Planning Process 4
Plan Resources 10
CHAPTER 2 - COMMUNITY PROFILE 12
Setting and Location 12
History 12
Demographics 15
Disabilities and Access and Functional Needs 17 Climate 18
Economy 18
Development Profile 20
Infrastructure 23
CHAPTER 3 - RISK ASSESSMENT 25
Hazard Identification 25
Hazard Profile: Seismic Hazards 33
Hazard Profile: Fire 42
Hazard Profile: Human-Caused Hazards 48
Hazard Profile: Severe Weather 65
Hazard Profile: Infrastructure Failure 75
Hazard Profile: Flood 81
CHAPTER 4 - THREAT AND VULNERABILITY 89
Threat Assessment Process 89
Threat Profile: Seismic Hazards 95
Threat Profile: Fire 101
Threat Profile: Human-Caused Hazards 106
Threat Profile: Severe Weather 119
Threat Profile: Infrastructure Failure 123
Threat Profile: Flood 125
CHAPTER 5 — HAZARD MITIGATION STRATEGY 130
Strategy Development Process 130
Capabilities Assessment 130
Hazard Mitigation Strategies 146
Hazard Mitigation Actions 149
2025 Hazard Mitigation Actions Plan 151
National Flood Insurance Program 167
CHAPTER 6 — PLAN MAINTENANCE 169
Plan Adoption 169
Plan Implementation 169
Coordinating Body 169
Plan Maintenance Process 171
Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms 173 Continued Public Involvement 174
Point of Contact 174
APPENDIX A — HMPC Meeting Materials A-1
APPENDIX B — Outreach Engagement Materials B-1
APPENDIX C — Resolution of Adoption C-1
APPENDIX D — Hazard Mitigation Implementation Handbook D-1 ;; Page 395 of 654
CHAPTER 1 -
INTRODUCTION
Plan Purpose and Authority
A hazard event is an emergency created by a natural or human-caused event that has the potential to cause harm. These events can lead to injuries or death, affect the overall health and safety of a community, damage or destroy public and private property, harm ecosystems, and disrupt key services. Although hazard events often get the most attention, it is only part of a larger emergency management cycle.
Emergency planners and responders can take steps during the cycle's response, recovery, mitigation, and , . ' ' preparedness phases to minimize the harm caused by a ^ dleness - ' disaster. The City of Upland 2025 Local Hazard Mitigation e ` - n{^sq -- Plan (LHMP) focuses on optimizing the mitigation phase of f f the process. o
Hazard mitigation is "any sustained action taken to reduce . RESILIENCY or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from yQ natural or human-caused hazards and their effects."1 This mitigation involves making a community more resilient so Recover-1 that when hazard events do ultimately occur, the community suffers minor damage and can recover quickly
and effectively. Mitigation differs from preparedness, which C Emergency Management Cycle
involves advanced planning for how best to respond when a disaster occurs or is imminent. For example, a policy to entityencyisthe "capacity of any entity—an individual, a
make homes structurally stronger so they suffer minor community, an organization, ora damage during an earthquake is a mitigation action, while natural system—to prepare for fullydequipping emer enc shelters to accommodate shocksions, stresses,to res frdm emergency shocks and and to adapt
people who lose their homes in an earthquake is a and grow from a disruptive preparedness action. Some activities may qualify as both.2 Like other communities, the City of Upland (City) could suffer severe harm from hazard events.
Although large disasters may cause widespread devastation, minor disasters can have more substantial effects. The City cannot make itself completely immune to hazard events, but this LHMP can help make the community a safer place to live, work, and play. This LHMP provides a comprehensive assessment of the city's threats from natural and human-caused hazard events and a coordinated strategy to reduce these threats. It identifies resources and information to help community members, City staff, and local officials understand local threats and make informed decisions. The LHMP can also support increased coordination and ' California Governor's Office of Emergency Services.2017. State of California Emergency Plan. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/Preparedness/Documents/California State Emergency Plan2017.pdf 2 Rodin,J.2014.The Resilience Dividend: Managing Disruption,Avoiding Disaster,and Growing Stronger in an Unpredictable World. New York: Public Affairs.
1 Page 396 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland collaboration between the City, other public i agencies, local employers, service providers,
community members, and other key stakeholders. - FEDERAL AUTHORITY "
The City is not required to prepare an LHMP, but
state and federal regulations encourage it. The , federal Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and = - Emergency Act, amended by the Disaster Local Mitigation Planning Management Act of 2000, creates a federal Policy Guide framework for local hazard mitigation planning. It
FP 206-21-0002
states that jurisdictions seeking eligibility for federal Released April 19,2022,Effective April 19,2023
hazard mitigation grant funding must prepare a OMB Collection#1660-0062 hazard mitigation plan that meets a set of guidelines
and submit it to the Federal Emergency FEMA Management Agency (FEMA) for review and
approval. These guidelines are outlined in the Code FEMA's Local Mitigation Planning of Federal Regulations, Title 44, Part 201, and Policy Guide discussed in greater detail in FEMA's Local This guide provides the official policy and Mitigation Plan Review Tool. interpretation of the applicable statutes and mitigation planning regulation in 44 Code
STATE AUTHORITY of Federal Regulations.
California Government Code Sections 8685.9 and 65302.6
The California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) Section 8686 limits the State of California's share of disaster relief funds paid to local governments to 75 percent of the funds not covered by federal disaster relief efforts. California Government Code Section 8685.9 (also known as Assembly Bill 2140) adds a caveat: If a jurisdiction has adopted a valid hazard mitigation plan consistent with the Disaster Management Act of 2000 and has incorporated the hazard mitigation plan into the jurisdiction's General Plan, the state may cover over 75 percent of the remaining disaster relief costs.
All cities and counties in California are required to prepare a General Plan, including a Safety Element that addresses various hazard conditions and other public safety issues. The Safety Element may be a stand-alone chapter or incorporated into another section, as the community wishes. California Government Code Section 65302.6 indicates that a community may adopt an LHMP into its Safety Element if the LHMP meets applicable state requirements. This enables communities to use the LHMP to fulfill state requirements for Safety Elements. As the General Plan is an overarching long-term plan for community growth and development, incorporating the LHMP into it provides a stronger mechanism for implementing it.
California Government Code Section 65302 (g)(4)
California Government Code Section 65302 (g)(4), also known as Senate Bill (SB) 379, requires that the safety element of a community's general plan address the hazards created or exacerbated by climate change. The safety element must identify how climate change is 2 Page 397 of 654
expected to affect hazard conditions in the community and include measures to adapt and be more resilient to these anticipated changes.
Because the LHMP can be incorporated into the safety element, including these items in the LHMP can satisfy the state requirement. SB 379 requires that climate change be addressed in the safety element when the LHMP is updated after January 1, 2017, for communities that already have an LHMP or by January 1, 2022, for communities without an LHMP.
This LHMP is consistent with current standards and regulations, as outlined by the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and FEMA. It uses the best available science, and its mitigation actions/strategies reflect best practices and community values. It meets the requirements of current state and federal guidelines and makes the City eligible for all appropriate benefits under state and federal law and practices. Note that while FEMA is responsible for reviewing and certifying this LHMP, and Cal OES is responsible for conducting a preliminary review, it does not grant FEMA or Cal OES an increased role in the governance of the city or authorize either agency to take any specific action in the community.
Plan Organization and Use
The Upland LHMP is both a reference document and an action plan. It has information and resources to educate readers and decision-makers about hazard events and related issues, and a comprehensive strategy that the City and community members can follow to improve resilience in the city. It is divided into the following chapters:
• Chapter 1: Introduction. This chapter describes the Plan's background, its goals and objectives, and the process used in its development.
• Chapter 2: Community Profile. This chapter discusses Upland's history, physical setting, land use, demographics, and other important community characteristics. • Chapter 3: Hazard Assessment. This chapter identifies and describes the hazards that threaten Upland and discusses past and future events and the effects of climate change. • Chapter 4: Vulnerability Assessment. This chapter describes each hazard's threat to Upland's key facilities and community members, including socially vulnerable individuals.
• Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategy. This chapter lists the mitigation actions to reduce Upland's vulnerability to hazard events and provides an overview of the community's existing capabilities to improve hazard resilience.
• Chapter 6: Plan Maintenance. This chapter summarizes the implementation, monitoring, and updating of the LHMP, as well as opportunities for continued public involvement.
PREVIOUS UPLAND LHMP-2016
This is an update to Upland's 2016 LHMP. This update, once approved and adopted by the City Council, will reinstate the City's eligibility to apply for FEMA grants for hazard mitigation projects and monetary relief during emergency situations. The content from the previous Plan has been included in this document and updated accordingly. As for integrating the previous Plan into 3 Page 398 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
other planning mechanisms, the City successfully incorporated one aspect of it: the hiring of an emergency manager. Key modifications in this plan focus on expanding the risk assessment (understanding potential losses and vulnerable populations) in Chapter 4 and on revising and modifying mitigation strategies and actions in Chapter 5.
Key updated elements from the previous Upland LHMP include the following:
• Updated demographic information for Upland residents • Updated hazard categories
• Descriptions of recent hazard events
• An updated threat assessment that incorporates recent data • Updates to the Capabilities Assessment to reflect the most recent framework • New and revised hazard mitigation actions to better meet current priorities of the City
PREVIOUS PLAN INTEGRATION
As this is an update to Upland's LHMP, the City will be looking to integrate this document into other planning documents and processes. To ensure this future integration occurs, Chapter 6 of this Plan includes additional guidance on how to best integrate the LHMP into the General Plan Safety Element, Emergency Operations Plan, and other planning mechanisms the City uses. The previous plan was not integrated into other City planning documents/efforts. In response the City sees this update as a good opportunity to begin this practice.
Plan Goals
The overarching intent of this updated LHMP is to increase resiliency to hazard events in Upland. This LHMP has six distinct goals to achieve this purpose:
1) Protect against threats from natural hazards to life, injury, and property damage within the Upland Community.
2) Increase public awareness of potential hazard events. 3) Preserve critical services and functions by protecting key facilities and infrastructure for the community.
4) Protect natural systems from current and future conditions. 5) Coordinate mitigation activities among City departments, neighboring jurisdictions, and with state and federal agencies.
6) Prepare for long-term changes in hazard conditions.
Planning Process
State and federal guidance for LHMPs does not require that jurisdictions follow a standardized planning process. FEMA encourages communities to create a planning process that reflects local values, goals, and characteristics. FEMA does suggest a general planning process that follows the steps identified below.
4 Page 399 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland The planning process used to create this plan for the City of Upland is described as follows:
Identify the
planning and the > Build the planning > Create an outreach N resources it team team
contains
Identify the risks 1 Review the Develop a hazard and threats to the > community's >
community capabilities mitigation strategy
I
Review and adopt Implement the plan Keep the plan the plan > to create a safe and > current
resilient community
I
HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
The City established a Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (hereafter referred to as the HMPC). The HMPC comprises representatives from key city departments and stakeholders from local and regional agencies and companies that are key to hazard mitigation activities.
Table 1-1 identifies the members who were invited and/or attended HMPC meetings.
TABLE 1-1: UPLAND HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING COMMITTEE (HMPC) Name i Title Department
Jessica Gordon Deputy Director Public Works Department, Operations Richard Gonzales Deputy Director Public Works Department, Utilities Division
Damien Arrula Assistant City Manager City Manager's Office Marcelo Blanco Chief of Police Upland Police Department Bob Critchfield Engineering Manager Public Works Department, Engineering Division
Robert Dalquest Director Development Services Department Ed Diggs Interim Utilities Manager Public Works Department, Utilities Division
Jessica Escoto Parks and Recreation Manager Community Services Department, Recreation and Community Services
1 Division
Loralee Farris Planning Manager Development Services Department, Planning Division
Norberto Ferreira Chief Water Treatment Operator Public Works Department, Water Quality Division
Tanya Garcia Management Analyst Public Works Department, Utilities Division
5 Page 400 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland I. TABLE 1-1: UPLAND HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING COMMITTEE (HMPC) Name Title Department
Richard Jeganathan IT Manager Administrative Services Department, Information Technology Division
Jason Lara Utilities Supervisor Public Works Department Tracy Montez Dispatch Supervisor Upland Police Department Christopher Morgan Building Official Development Services Department, Building and Safety Division
Stephen Parker Assistant City Manager City Management Klasha Ray Emergency Services Officer San Bernardino County of Emergency Services
Justin Salgado Emergency Services Officer San Bernardino County of Emergency Services
Richard Smiderle Operations Manager Public Works Department, Operations Division
Staci Sullivan Finance Manager Finance
Lon Teague Patrol Operation Commander Upland Police Department Cecilia Todd Deputy Director of Human Administrative Services Department, Resources and Risk Management Human Resources/Risk Management Division
Marc Warner Utilities Supervisor Public Work Department Aaron Pfannenstiel Consultant Atlas Planning Solutions Crystal Stueve
Robert Jackson
The Planning Committee held two meetings throughout the plan update development process to lay out the Plan's methods and approach, draft and review content, make revisions, and engage members of the public.
• Kick Off Meeting (December 2, 2024): The initial meeting with HMPC coordinators and the consultants to discuss the schedule, potential HMPC members, timeline, and initial research materials gathering.
• HMPC Meeting #1 (May 14, 2025): The Planning Team members confirmed the project goals and responsibilities. They revised the community engagement and outreach strategy, confirmed and prioritized the hazards to be included in the Plan, and identified critical facilities for the threat assessment.
• HMPC Meeting #2 (June 5, 2025): Members discussed the results of the hazards assessment and mapping that showed the areas facing an elevated risk. The HMPC also reviewed the hazard prioritization results. The team reviewed the risk assessment results to identify populations and assets that may be at greater risk in a hazard event and discussed potential hazard mitigation actions to address vulnerabilities. • HMPC Meeting #3 (August 11, 2025): This was a follow-up meeting on mitigation actions.
6 Page 401 of 654
Invitations and meeting materials were provided via email. Appendix A contains copies of invitations, meeting agendas, sign-in sheets, and other relevant materials distributed for these meetings.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Under FEMA guidelines, local hazard mitigation planning processes should create opportunities for public involvement in Plan development—at a minimum, during the initial drafting stage and Plan approval. Due to the policy changes in the post-COVID-19 pandemic world, some in- person public workshops and meetings were replaced with virtual workshops, meetings, and discussion groups. The HMPC developed a community engagement and outreach strategy to guide all public engagement activities. To ensure all residents were aware of the project, City staff conducted the following activities:
• City social media: posts via Instagram, Facebook
• LHMP City webpage (see below)
• English flyers at City facilities
• Promotion at City Meetings/Events (see below)
• Promotion at City Facilities (City Hall, etc.) with signage on Plan review content and QR codes for the Hazard Mitigation Survey were posted at the front desk. • Information shared with businesses via the Chamber of Commerce Stakeholder Engagement
As part of the plan update process, the City invited stakeholders to review and comment on the Public Review Draft of the LHMP. These stakeholders included neighboring jurisdictions, medical centers, utility providers, the local school district, railroads, and County agencies.
Information on this engagement opportunity is in Appendix B.All jurisdictions and stakeholders were invited via email and/or by direct telephone communication from the HMPC project manager, the City of Upland's Assistant City Manager, Public Works. The following is a list of stakeholders invited to participate in the plan development process and review. • American Red Cross
• Cable Airport
• California Highway Patrol
• Caltrans
• Neighboring Jurisdictions:
o City of Claremont
o City of Montclair
o City of Ontario
o City of Rancho Cucamonga
• San Antonio Regional Hospital
• San Bernardino County Fire District
• San Bernardino County Office of Emergency Services • San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department
• San Bernardino County Planning and Land Use
• San Bernardino County Public Health Department
• San Bernardino County Public Works
7 Page 402 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
• San Bernardino County Transportation Authority
• Southern California Edison
• Southern California Gas
• Upland Chamber of Commerce
• Upland Unified School District
Vulnerable Populations Outreach
Signage was posted at City facilities with information on both the Public Review LHMP and the Hazard Mitigation Survey. Having the signage and information on the LHMP and the feedback survey posted at community centers was a key focus, ensuring this portion of the community was made aware of the Plan and the City's request for feedback. It was important that the City didn't solely rely on online sources to publicize LHMP process and plan.
Future Outreach Opportunities
Recognizing that other vulnerable populations may exist in the City, this Plan focuses on these populations. Opportunities to share information, such as the annual Upland Birthday Celebration, the Halloween Festival, Winter Wonderland, and the National Night Out, become great opportunities for outreach. Continued outreach occurs during the implementation of the Plan, and future updates will continue to refer to this resource to help identify vulnerable populations and key issues affecting their vulnerability.
Community Meetings and Events/Public Engagement Opportunities The City regularly conducts community meetings and events intended to provide useful information to participants/attendees. During the planning process, three outreach meetings and events were held, during which City staff discussed the Plan and process currently underway and provided opportunities for feedback. The following information provides dates for each meeting:
• City Council Meeting — March 23, 2026
• Stakeholder Meeting
Online Engagement
The City conducted a variety of online engagement activities that support the hazard mitigation planning process. The following are key activities conducted. 8 Page 403 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland LHMP Project Webpage
The City created a page on its website dedicated to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan to reach a broad audience and increase public engagement and participation. The webpage is a simple, one-stop location for community
members to learn about the LHMP. UPLAND M..�..:
The webpage explains what an LHMP • _ p is, why the City should have one, how
7roERAPrM_Ns -_
it is developed, and how the public can %niim1 SS Local Hazard Mitigation Plan(LHMP) participate in the planning process, op ° Local Hazard Mitigation Plan including a link to the LHMP survey o`,:;h°:';:— ' ((*)) (see below). The webpage is available
at [ https://www.uplandca.gov/local-
hazard-mitigation-plan-Ihmp].
LHMP Website
Online Survey
The City released an online survey to community members to gather feedback on the planning process and hazards of concern. The City advertised the survey on their social media channels and on the City website. Flyers were also posted at City facilities in both English and Spanish and at community events and meetings.
At the time of the Public Review Draft release, the City received a total of 32 responses from community members and stakeholders during the survey period. Due to the small number of survey responses, the City recognizes that the method by which the survey was shared may not have been the most effective means to engage with the community. Future outreach will look to identify additional strategies to improve survey response. Based upon those survey responses, the following information was gathered and shared with the HMPC:
• Approximately 52% of responders have been impacted by a natural hazard event in their current residence.
• The top three hazards of concern that have impacted residents in their homes are: (1) High Winds, (2) Drought, and (3) Extreme Heat.
• The top three hazards of greatest concern according to responders are: (1) Earthquakes, (2) High Winds, and (3) Wildfire.
• Approximately 53.1% of responders are very concerned that climate change may exacerbate or create new hazardous situations in Upland, while approximately 9.4% aren't concerned at all.
• Approximately 57% of responders indicated that they are familiar with the special needs of neighbors in the event of a disaster(special needs may include limited mobility, severe medical conditions, and memory impairments).
• Approximately 47% of responders are trained members of the Upland Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), and 31% of responders would like to learn more about CERT.
9 Page 404 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland As part of the outreach strategy, a QR code was created for use on 0 • j 0 promotional materials and handouts at fairs and booths operated by _P' •_... T
City staff at community events. This QR code provided quick access to • -iti •. 0. the City's Online Survey. °' o
•
The survey results were provided to the HMPC. The data was then .••_I 11::
analyzed, reviewed, and incorporated into the LHMP content by the ° L..o f •
HMPC. The survey provided unique local insight into hazard concerns 0 and assessed the public's overall opinion and perception of the hazards affecting Upland. The full hazard mitigation survey results and copies of all materials used for public outreach are provided within Appendix B of the LHMP, including the survey questions and answers.
Social Media Outreach
The City promoted and provided information on both the Hazard Mitigation Survey and the LHMP Public Review Draft on multiple social media platforms. Social Media analytics are provided in Appendix B (upon completion of the public review period).
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
On March 24, 2026, the Public Review Draft of the Plan was distributed to the residents and businesses of Upland for a 15-day public review period. The City's LHMP website [ https://www.ci.upland.ca.us/820/Local-Hazard-Mitigation] hosted public electronic copies of the Plan.
Hardcopy versions of the Plan were made available at the following locations:
• City Hall —460 N. Euclid Ave
• City Public Works Yard — 1370 N. Benson Ave
The City received (X) number of comments during this review period.
CALOES AND FEMA REVIEW (UPDATED AFTER PUBLIC
REVIEW)
Upon completion of the public review period and adoption, the City transmitted the document to the California Office of Emergency Services for their review and approval on Month, Day, Year.
Upon Cal OES approval, the plan was transmitted to FEMA for review and approval.
PLAN ADOPTION (UPDATED AFTER FEMA APPROVAL)
On Month, Day, Year, the Upland City Council adopted the 2026 Upland Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The resolution of adoption is included in Appendix C.
Plan Resources
The City referred to several plans, studies, technical reports, datasets, and other resources to prepare the Plan's hazard assessment, mapping, threat assessment, and other components.
Table 1-2 provides some of the HMPC's primary resources to prepare this Plan. 10 Page 405 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland 111 TABLE 1-2: KEY RESOURCES FOR PLAN DEVELOPMENT I.
Section Key Resources Reviewed Data Incorporated from Resource
Multiple • City of Upland 2016 Hazard Mitigation Plan • Science and background • City of Upland Climate Action Plan information on various • City of Upland General Plan hazard conditions
• City of Upland reports • General data about hazard mitigation plans
• California Department of Water Resources • Records of past disaster • FEMA Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Guidance events in and around • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Upland and San Bernardino Administration County
• West End Consolidated Water Company: Urban • Projected climate conditions Water Management Plan in and around Upland
• San Antonio Water Company: Urban Water • Information on the City's Management Plan history and current
• National Weather Service demographics and
• U.S. Census Bureau characteristics
Community Profile • California Energy Commission • Information about utility • Western Regional Climate Center services in Upland • Current climate conditions
in and around Upland
Hazard Assessment
Drought • Safeguarding California • History of drought events • US Drought Monitor • Current and projected future drought conditions
Flood • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Records of past floods in • FEMA Map Service Center and around Upland
• Locations of flood hazard
zones in Upland
Human-Caused • California Department of Toxic Substances • Locations and status of Hazards Control hazardous material facilities • California Office of Emergency Services spill • Historic records of terrorism release reports and hazardous material
• Global Terrorism Database releases
• State Water Resources Control Board
• US Environmental Protection Agency
Seismic Hazards • Southern California Earthquake Data Center • Locations of fault zones and • U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earthquake seismic hazard areas Archive • Records of past seismic
• USGS ShakeMap scenarios events
• USGS Third Uniform California Earthquake • Future seismic event Rupture Forecast scenarios
Wildfires • California Department of Forestry and Fire • Records of past fire events Prevention • Locations of fire zones in
and around Upland
Note: Sections not individually identified in this table relied primarily on sources identified in multiple sections. 11 Page 406 of 654
CHAPTER 2 -
COMMU N ITY PROFILE
The Community Profile section of the LHMP describes Upland, including information about the community's physical setting, history, economy and demographics, current and future land uses, and key infrastructure. The Community Profile helps establish the baseline conditions in Upland, which informs the development of the hazard mitigation strategies and actions in Chapter 5.
Setting and Location
The City of Upland (population approximately 78,940) is located 27 miles west of San Bernardino and 35 miles east of Los Angeles, nestled at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains in San Bernardino County. The city is bounded by Ontario to the south, Rancho Cucamonga to the east, Claremont, and Montclair to the west, and on the north and east by mountainous terrain. It uses the council/mayor form of government common across the state.
The City of Upland covers 15.84 square miles. It's located within the Santa Ana River watershed, which includes much of Orange County, the northwestern corner of Riverside County, the southwestern corner of San Bernardino County, and a small portion of Los Angeles County. Its 2,800-square-mile watershed is bounded to the south by the Santa Margarita watershed, to the east by the Salton Sea and Southern Mojave watersheds, and to the north and west by the Mojave and San Gabriel watersheds.
Upland's sphere of influence includes the small, unincorporated community of San Antonio Heights, bordered by the San Bernardino National Forest to the north. This community is primarily residential and is primarily built out.
History
The area that is now Upland used to be the home of the Tongva people, who inhabited most of the San Bernardino and western San Bernardino regions. The 1771 founding of Mission San Gabriel and its establishment as a major supply hub on the trail blazed by the Anza expedition in 1774 led to the Spanish colonizers expanding their cattle-grazing range to the east, engulfing the Tongva tribal lands around the future Upland. In 1810, a party under Padre Dumetz left Mission San Gabriel to find a suitable location for an eastern supply outpost along the Anza Trail. They entered a large valley on San Bernardino's feast day and named the valley for the saint. They also bestowed the name "Cucamonga" (Tongva for "sand place") on the area that would eventually become Upland.
Anglo settlers began to carve out farms and ranches from the Cucamonga rancho after the Mexican War took California into the United States. Canadian brothers George and William Chaffey arrived in the early 1880s, establishing the Etiwanda irrigation colony in 1881 and the Ontario Model Colony in 1882, along with the San Antonio Water Company to provide water from the nearby mountains.
12 Page 407 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 2-1. Upland General Plan Land Use Map
1 -26th Street - i
;�- MCuntlaln Ave
ii
� 25th Street I - �'
I �
m I
— h trPEt _ --
lam ... .4 23rdStreet .I
r - 22nd Sheet - _ 'tt-
�1 aT o 21st Street ir;
_,
t'.f- L - _._ E:
20th Street I ,I _
` i
V 91H'Slreet -
lath Street 40
ii 1 I I I F �e ie
- m - = 17th Street A a- .---.i , 9 / ire m
/ 1O L° 16th Street 1,, — — i // Q 0 v rn ci Ile:
I A S 0 15Lh Street a !
, li
Q9 o b L
m b l o
= m 14th Street m y `m
1 1
1 -,-,,,,4,-_,..„,,,,r=4Tn4H610T
V 13th Street I ' m `
= m
a
m
cam..
„-, kir ....----
A illUt ::i'iiii-,m ' 6.mp- '-,..-----'
7- rallialrPFRA: II 16-:ze'''''.2".11111 j .I T 1 : ,, I 'Iji —
.•- a.,1„,„1.. ...M ii iliii imiL...
_ d
a7 — — rtr PF ', ' u s1i
1E1.1Y Lt- 7 tau'r 1"` .I i _ -
Nut ( t. 4
Valql.R. 1 ii::::_0,40 it 1 i .it..?,,,',44:iti”M'..
.A.Z1t mR_—� U6LIE nee.it ' �►
0 0.6 1 Mies
I
Source:Clly of Upland
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN LOW(P-4 deter':SFR-L) MI Neighborhood Commercial(NC Light Industrielthroiness Park(LI-BP) -Specific Plan(SP) I MEDIUM(4-10 duhc:SFR-M) -Highway CommerNalNC) - Industrial rPSI 1.The Colonies 7.Foothill Benson Terra ce
2.Upbnd HMIsountUClub B.Foothillove
3.Hrslaric tlovmtavm H.WyeyelhUpland Cave
llllllllll1 Mobile Horne(5-14 dust,MCI —Regional Commercial(RC) I Gravel rule cGr4) 4.College Park 10.Park View _ 5.College Commerce Center 11.The Enclave
Office/Professional(OP) R_Harvest el Upland
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SPECIALANSTITUTIONAL
—I LOW(10-2U dufae',MFR-L) -Cable Arp (CA) ccMelrolink M M
IXED-USE
—MEDIUM(20-33 dufae:HELM) MICommemlaVResidential Mired-Use(0R-MLI) II. Inatllueonat(II —i—,— hell Lee -HIGH(30-40 dulao,MPH-H) -Cdtrmerreeomre 7 CivirlSchool IC-P) ---- Pacific Electric Trail f,77A Business/Residential Mixed-Use(BIR-MU( PerklMpre SpOPE(P-OS( L. l Clty Limits�i Public UNBies(PU) Sphere of Influence y y - mm Coerciapindustrial Mixed-Cue OW-WC
..,'; 11Vp1[iiitl�y R-Reservoir
L-Landsll O County HoonoMry
. Att - EE-Edison Easement
FC/R-Flood Control/Recharge
FIGURE LU-I
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
13 Page 408 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland What is now Upland was known as "North Ontario" or "Magnolia" at that time.
The Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad established a stop in North Ontario in 1887, linking the future Upland to its vast network to the east and west. When Ontario incorporated in 1891, it left North Ontario. By 1901,
however, Ontario's power structure , '-
feared that North Ontario might
ir
incorporate and, coveting the district's
rail line, train depot, and bustling 1,:__ • packing houses, pushed through a I T
huge expansion of the city. North T
p Y ' _" - -
Ontario residents fought back andiii;,,
approved a vote for incorporation in - - _ _ Y 1906. The City of Upland was born on _ ; • �._ ..
May 15, 1906, stopping Ontario's } � '� "' ` =Y�:." per• march north. It didn't regain its prized Downtown Upland, looking north, 1890s rail line and station until 1935.
Between 1880 and 1920, the citrus industry dominated Upland's economy. Profits from the industry were distributed across the board, from wealthy growers to town businesses to field hands. The growers' disposable incomes fueled investment in land development. Within two decades, new construction in the commercial district continued steadily with all services needed to sustain the city. As new mechanized fruit packing and handling technology arrived between 1925 and 1945, the citrus industry tripled in size. In the 1930s, construction of modernized packing houses with large administrative offices began to replace the older establishments.
Citrus continued to prosper during WWII.
However, returning WWII veterans caused
the population to soar, with housing
subdivisions rapidly replacing orchards. A
boom in the construction of schools and
shopping centers followed. Within a few ��� , years, citrus growing, once the leading # : a. e,
business, played a steadily diminishingjj
]
role in the city's wealth. The economy has 4 . ` t`, l ^ flourished, and the population has grown
over the decades. Commercial and --- --- - industrial development continues to meet
Modern downtown Upland
the community's needs.
Present-day Upland retains many of the same features it had in the past, most notably Euclid Avenue (designed by George Chaffey), the primary north-south, tree-lined street that runs through town, as well as many of the older adobe and ranch-style houses. Other Upland features include Upland Town Center—an open-air mall in the downtown area at the intersection of 9th Street and 2nd Avenue—and a clear view of Mount Baldy. Upland has two sister cities:
Mildura, Victoria, Australia, and Caborca, Sonora, Mexico. 14 Page 409 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Demographics
This section paints a portrait of Upland through data. Basic demographics data (Table 2-1) comes from the most comprehensive American Community Survey 2018-2023 (ACS), administered by the United States Census Bureau (U.S. Census) completed in 2023, and from the California Department of Finance (CDOF).
Upland's population is 3.6% of San Bernardino County's total population and forms 3.8% of the County's total households.
TABLE 2-1: BASIC DEMOGRAPHICS—UPLAND & SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Demographic Upland San Bernardino County
Total Population 78,940 2,187,816
Percent of children who are less than 10 years old 11% 10.9% Percent of residents who are senior citizens (65+) 15% 14.7% Median Age 37.5 34.4
Total households 28,366 738,535
Median household income $101,407 $82,184
Percent of residents 25+ HS graduate or higher 90.5% 82.1 Percent of rental households 43.1% 38.4%
Source:American Community Survey,ACS 2023 5-Year Projections On average, the City's residents tend to be slightly older than the county as a whole (median age of 37.5 years for the city vs. 34.4 years for the county). Figure 2-2 shows a distribution of the City's population into five age brackets.
Figure 2-2. Age Distribution of Residents
15.0% ■Under 18 Years
21.6%
■ 18 to 24 Years
9 2% ■25 to 44 Years
24.9%
■45 to 64 Years
■65 Years and
29.3% Over
Source:U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 American Community Survey(ACS). Percentage values are rounded to the nearest tenth decimal.
15 Page 410 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Non-Hispanic Whites constitute a larger share of Upland's population than of the county's (45.2% vs. 39.1%). Conversely, Black people and Asians are less represented in the City.
Figure 2-3 breaks down the City's population into five categories.
Figure 2-3. Racial Composition of Residents
■White Alone
18.2%
• Black or African
A jigiliii,
American Alone
45.2% •American Indian or
18.1% Alaska Native Alone
■Asian Alone
10.4% •Some Other Race Alone
1.2% 6.9%
•Two or More Races
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 American Community Survey(ACS). Percentage values are rounded to the nearest tenth decimal. In this dataset, "Latino/Hispanic"is not included as a race. Survey respondents may use "Some Other Race Alone"as an analog for "Latino/Hispanic."
Over 91% of the City's residents speak either Spanish or English at home, with over two-thirds preferring English. Figure 2-4 details language usage in the City.
Figure 2-4. Languages Spoken at Home (Residents Aged 5+)
1.6% 1.2%
1 8% •English
1.0%
2.5°,
•Spanish
21.1% •Other Indo-European
allibi- _.I.T. languages
•Chinese(incl. Mandarin,
Cantonese)
70.7% •Tagalog(incl. Filipino)
•Other Asian and Pacific
Island languages
■Arabic
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 American Community Survey(ACS). Percentage values are rounded to the nearest tenth decimal.
16 Page 411 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Slightly over 90% of City residents have achieved at least a high school diploma, a higher proportion than the county. Over 44% hold some level of college degree. This may account for the City's 23.4% higher median income than the counties. Figure 2-5 shows educational attainment details for the City's residents.
Figure 2-5. Educational Attainment of Residents Aged 25+
13.7% 3.6% 5.9% ■ Less than 9th Grade
■9th to 12th Grade, No
22.2% Diploma
22.0% • High School Graduate
(includes equivalency)
•Some College, No Degree
9.1% ■Associate's Degree
23.4%
• Bachelor's Degree
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 American Community Survey(ACS). Percentage values are rounded to the nearest tenth decimal.
Disabilities and Access and Functional Needs
No two disasters are ever the same. However, virtually all incidents disproportionately affect individuals with disabilities and access and functional needs (DAFN). This term refers to individuals who have:
• Physical, developmental, or intellectual disabilities • Chronic conditions or injuries
• Limited English proficiency
• Older adults
• Children
• Pregnant women
• Low income, homelessness, and/or transportation-disadvantage (i.e., people dependent on public transit)
These are often the most overlooked parts of our populations; city and emergency planners may not even know the size of these communities or where they live or work. The data presented in Table 2-2 are intended to provide a general overview of the prevalence of DAFN communities in Upland, enabling the city to engage them during mitigation planning and implementation.
17 Page 412 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 2-2: DAFN COMMUNITIES IN UPLAND
Number Percentage
Residents below 15 years of age 13,869 17.7% Residents 65+ years of age 11,880 15.1%
Residents 65+ years living alone 2,207 2.8% Residents with incomes below the poverty level in the past 9,167 11.7% 12 months
Total residents with a disability* 8,763 11.1% Under 18 with a disability 534 0.6%
65+ with a disability 4,377 5.6%
Residents 5+who speak English less than very well 7,308 9.8% Residents 16+who depend on public transportation 579 1.4% Households that have no access to a vehicle 1,049 3.8%** Households with no telephone service 261 0.96%** Households with no internet access 870 3.2%** Source:American Community Survey,ACS 2023 5-Year Projections * Defined by the U.S. Census Bureau as vision difficulty, hearing difficulty, cognitive difficulty, ambulatory difficulty, self-care difficulty, or independent living difficulty. ** Percentage of households.
Climate
Like much of Southern California, Upland enjoys a Mediterranean climate, with hot, dry summers and mild winters. The warmest month of the year is August, with an average maximum temperature of 90.7° F; the coldest month of the year is December, with an average minimum temperature of 41.2° F. Temperatures vary up to 25° F between daytime and nighttime in summer, and about 22° F in winter. The annual average precipitation is 16.5 inches.
Economy
Upland's economic base has fully transitioned from an agricultural focus (which is now the smallest industry sector in the city) to services (including healthcare and education), retail, and professional occupations.
Unlike other San Gabriel Valley and Inland Empire cities, Upland never had a significant concentration of defense or aerospace industries and thus was relatively untouched by the post- Cold War crash in that sector. Its relatively low dependence on manufacturing and construction also mostly shielded it from recurring boom/bust cycles in those industries.
The U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-Year Estimate for 2018-2023 says 62.6% of Upland residents 16 years and older are employed in a range of industry sectors, as shown in Table 2-4. 18 Page 413 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 2-4: EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY SECTOR, RESIDENTS 16 YEARS AND OLDER -11111 Number
Industry Sector Employed Percent
Educational services and health care and social assistance 11,111 27.7% Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and 4,322 10.8% waste management services
Retail trade 4,259 10.6%
Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and food services 3,881 9.7% Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 3,496 8.7% Manufacturing 2,695 6.7%
Construction 2,598 6.5%
Public administration 2,187 5.5%
Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing 2,032 5.1% Other services, except public administration 1,986 5.0% Wholesale trade 755 1.9%
Information 583 1.5%
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 215 0.5% Total 40,120 100.0%
Source:American Community Survey,ACS 2023 5-Year Projections The City's median household income has increased by 134.3% since 2000, faster than the county's median household income growth of 106.5% over the same period. Table 2-5 shows the distribution of household income over the past twelve months.
TABLE 2-5: DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN LAST 12 MONTHS (2023 DOLLARS) Income Range Number of Households Percent Less than $10,000 1,081 4.0%
$10,000 to $14,999 668 2.5%
$15,000 to $24,999 1,045 3.8%
$25,000 to $34,999 1,276 4.7%
$35,000 to $49,999 2,181 8.0%
$50,000 to $74,999 3,678 13.5%
$75,000 to $99,999 3,448 12.7%
$100,000 to $149,999 5,242 19.3%
$150,000+ 8,566 31.5%
Total 27,185 100.0%
Source:American Community Survey,ACS 2023 5-Year Projections Like many communities in Southern California, most local residents commute outside the City to work. Upland experiences a net outflow of over 5,400 workers during the daily going-to-work commute (29,540 outbound vs. 24,128 inbound).
19 Page 414 of 654
The City's top ten private-sector employers are concentrated on retail and services, as shown in Table 2-6.
TABLE 2-6: TOP 10 PRIVATE-SECTOR EMPLOYERS (2024)
% of Total City
Employer Type of Business # Employees Employment* San Antonio Regional Hospital Healthcare 2,000 5.3% Upland Unified School District Public Education 1,272 3.4% VCI Construction Construction 458 1.2%
Holliday Rock Co. Inc Construction Materials 350 0.9% Upland Rehabilitation & Care Center Healthcare 343 0.9% Home Depot Retail 324 0.9%
Lewis Group Property Development 314 0.8%
City of Upland Local Government 280 0.7%
Target Retail 264 0.7%
Walmart Retail 201 0.5%
Total 5,806 15.4%
Source: Upland FY 2024 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report.
Total City private-sector employment is 40,120.
Development Profile
Upland has reached development levels close to complete build-out. Developers view the remaining small parcels as primarily commercial and industry usages.
The San Bernardino County Mapping Division completed a land-use survey for the County on a parcel-by-parcel basis. The land uses were characterized based on the County's land-use code categories. The summary of information on existing land use is shown on the General Plan Land Use Summary. According to data collected:
• Most of the City's land is dedicated to residential uses (3,427.92 acres, or 43.05 percent of the land surveyed).
• The next largest category of land is vacant or non-taxed land (2,236.77 acres, or 28.44 percent of the land in the City). This category includes public owned properties, open- space land, flood control, water recharge areas, and mineral resources areas. • Industrial uses comprise 822.38 acres (10.40 percent), of which 817.83 acres are committed to light industrial uses and 4.55 acres are occupied by heavy industrial use. • Office and retail uses are located on 513.12 acres of land (6.51 percent). These uses include small office (157.03 acres or 1.99 percent), medium office (.27 acres), and retail uses (355.83 acres or 4.52 percent).
• The City has 71 acres of land (.90) percent) committed to airport uses. • The land surveyed includes parking (9.82 acres) and special public facilities, including San Antonio Community Hospital, churches, and publicly owned buildings. 20 Page 415 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
HOUSING
Like most Southern California communities, Upland's housing stock and land usage are dominated by single-family detached homes. This type of development is one of the greatest contributors to our current housing shortage and its attendant high prices and homelessness.
However, the wood-frame, single-family detached house is one of the most seismically resilient building types in our cities, though its performance during urban conflagrations leaves much to be desired. Table 2-7 shows the details.
TABLE 2-7: HOUSEHOLD TENURE BY NUMBER OF UNITS IN STRUCTURE Number of
Households Percent
Owner-occupied units
1 unit, attached/detached 14,416 53.0%
2-4 units 87 0.3%
5 or more units 132 0.5%
Mobile homes, RVs, boats, etc. 834 3.1% Renter-occupied units
1 unit, attached/detached 3,517 12.9%
2-4 units 2,247 8.3%
5 or more units 5,874 21.6%
Mobile homes, RVs, boats, etc. 78 0.3%
Total households 27,185 100%
Source:American Community Survey,ACS 2023 5-Year Projections
COMMERCIAL
Upland's 2nd Avenue commercial area has historically functioned as Upland's "main street" since its founding. Other major commercial strips are Foothill Boulevard and Mountain Avenue in the City's south, and the strip of Highway 210 east of Euclid Avenue. Most of the City's industrial development is next to the airport in the southwest.
DEVELOPMENT TRENDS
The development of infrastructure and residential and commercial structures is ongoing to keep up with the resulting demands. However, the city's land area is relatively small, 15.84 square miles, and will thus serve to limit growth in the future. The lack of opportunity to build out will force a denser population per acre in residential developments.
The overall intention is to preserve the city's scale and general character. Current strategies focus on opportunities to recapture commercial and industrial development along with employment-generating land uses. The emphasis is on projects such as the Colonies at San Antonio, a mixed-use, master-planned community of residential, commercial, and recreational development. Other planned development projects include:
21 Page 416 of 654
2( City of Upland
• An Opportunity Zone bordered by Benson Avenue on the west, Foothill Boulevard and 11th Street on the north, San Antonio Avenue and Mountain Avenue on the east, and 9th Street on the south.
• A mixed-use, commercial/residential development north of Highway 210 and east of Benson Avenue, across from the mall.
• The Harvest at Upland residential development on Monte Vista Avenue south of Foothill Boulevard.
All future development will be built in compliance with current development codes and standards, taking all hazards into account.
OPEN SPACE
The City operates at least eight public parks, most of which are south of Highway 210. The public Upland Hills Country Club offers an 18-hole golf course east of North Campus Avenue along East 16th Street, and the private Red Hill Country Club hosts an 18-hole course next to Upland's eastern border north of Foothill Boulevard. Aside from this, the bulk of outdoor recreation opportunities lies in the mountains north of San Antonio Heights and in the watershed along San Antonio Creek immediately west of Upland.
HISTORICAL RESOURCES
Upland has no registered National Historic Landmarks and only one State Historical Landmark:
the "Madonna of the Trail," a 1929 statue commemorating the westward expansion. Three other areas in the City form informal historic districts:
1) Period structures still dot Foothill Boulevard (previously known as Historic Route 66), including the 1929 Buffalo Inn and an original "golden arches" McDonald's. 2) Euclid Avenue entered the National Register of Historic Places in 2005. Pre-1950s homes lined much of the road from north of Interstate 10 to Foothill Boulevard. The three-mile-long Bridle Trail, which separates the northbound and southbound lanes, remains a linear park for joggers and walkers.
3) Historic Downtown Upland encompasses the area east of Euclid Avenue between 8th Street and Arrow Highway. An eponymous business organization seeks to preserve the remaining period structures in Upland's traditional downtown, once known as "Old Magnolia."
4) Carnegie Library located at 123 East D Street, was completed in 1913 and holds the distinction of being the city's first public building. Funded in part by a $10,000 grant from Andrew Carnegie, the building served as the town's public library until 1969. It currently serves as a community center and hosts the city's Literacy Program.
The City website hosts a catalog of over 600 houses built in or before 1950. None of them is currently listed in federal or state registries, but the City is committed to acknowledging, protecting, and enhancing them as historic resources.
General Plan goals and policies support this commitment by recommending the protection of these sites, subject to further study of their historical significance. 22 Page 417 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Infrastructure
Infrastructure plays a vital role in mitigating the effects of hazard events. When infrastructure fails, it can exacerbate the effects of a hazard event or complicate rescue efforts to reach victims. For example, fallen utility poles resulting from strong winds or seismic activity can obstruct roadways and prevent emergency vehicles from reaching affected areas.
ELECTRIC POWER
Southern California Edison is the primary provider of electrical power in Upland. SCE's service area includes portions of 15 counties and hundreds of cities and communities across a 50,000- square-mile region in central, coastal, and Southern California. It operates the electrical transmission paths across Upland as well as the substations and switching yards in the distribution system.
NATURAL GAS
SoCalGas is the natural gas service provider for most of Southern California, including Upland.
In addition to providing natural gas service, it owns and operates the natural gas infrastructure in and around the City.
WATER
The City's Water Division has access to local and imported water supply resources. City water interests are a result of either a direct water right or indirectly through its shareholder interest (entitlement) in two private mutual water companies. Locally, the City has adjudicated groundwater water rights in the Chino, Cucamonga, and Six Basins. The City has a 93% shareholder interest in West End Consolidated Water Company's (WECW Co's) local groundwater operations. The City has a 68% shareholder interest in San Antonio Water Company (SAW Co.), which provides both local groundwater and surface water from San Antonio Canyon. Local surface water is treated at the City's San Antonio Water Treatment Plant.
In addition to the local surface and groundwater supplies, the City invested in and owns a 22% interest in an 81-million-gallon imported water treatment plant, the Water Facilities Authority (WFA-JPA)Agua de Lejos, located on Benson Avenue north of 17th Street.
WASTEWATER / STORMWATER
The City's Environmental Division is responsible for the collection of wastewater within the city limits and delivery to the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA). IEUA provides wastewater treatment and is the wholesale distributor of imported water and recycled water for the San Bernardino Valley. Upland is in IEUA Division 1.
The San Bernardino County Flood Control District provides flood protection within its boundaries. The District has developed and operated an extensive system of dams, conservation basins, channels, and storm drains to intercept and convey flood flows through and away from the major developed areas of the county.
23 Page 418 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
TRANSPORTATION
Two major freeways provide direct access to Upland: 1-10 (along Upland's southern border) and State Highway 210 (cutting across the City's north end). Euclid Avenue, which connects Upland with Chino via Ontario, is also partly a state highway (CA-83). Foothill Boulevard is part of CA-
66. The regional surface street grid continues largely without interruption through the city.
Omnitrans, the San Bernardino Valley's bus transit system, provides bus transportation in and through Upland.
Metrolink owns the former ATSF right-of-way through Upland. The San Bernardino Line stops at the historic Upland train station. BNSF runs freight operations on the same trackway.
Cable Airport, the world's largest family-owned, public-use, general aviation airport, is located next to the primary industrial area in Upland's southwest corner.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
AT&T and Frontier Communications provide landline phone and data service to a steadily dwindling number of customers in Upland. The three major wireless communications companies operate cell sites in the City.
24 Page 419 of 654
CHAPTER 3 -
RISK ASSESSMENT
Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential impact on life, property, and the economy resulting from natural hazards. The intent of the risk assessment is to identify—as much as practicable, given existing, available data—the qualitative and quantitative vulnerabilities of a community. The results of the risk assessment provide a foundation for developing and prioritizing mitigation actions to reduce damage from natural hazards by improving preparedness and response times and better allocating resources to areas of greatest vulnerability.
This risk assessment section evaluates the potential loss from each hazard by assessing the vulnerability of buildings, infrastructure, and people to its effects. It identifies the characteristics and potential consequences of hazards, how much of the community a hazard could affect, and its impact on the community's population and assets. The risk assessment approach consists of two components:
1) Hazard Identification: Identification and screening of hazards. 2) Hazard Profiles: Review of historical occurrences and assessment of the potential for future events.
Hazard Identification
HAZARD SCREENING CRITERIA
FEMA guidance identifies several hazards that communities should evaluate for inclusion in a hazard mitigation plan. Communities may also consider additional hazards for their plans. The HMPC reviewed an extensive list of hazards and excluded those that don't pose a significant threat to Upland. Table 3-1 lists the hazards considered and explains the reasoning for inclusion or exclusion. For context, this table shows whether a hazard is recommended for consideration by FEMA, if it's included in the 2023 California State Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP), and if it's included in the San Bernardino County Hazard Mitigation Plan (SBC HMP). This table doesn't include all potential impacts; the table is based upon FEMA and state guidance and the most probable impacts within Upland. As a result, some hazards—like war or foreign invasion—are better addressed at the federal level.
25 Page 420 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 3-1: HAZARD EVALUATION FOR UPLAND LHMP
Hazard Source of Included in Reason for Inclusion or Exclusion Recommendation LHMP?
Agricultural SHMP No The Planning Committee did not Pests consider the LHMP to be the
appropriate place to address disease
and pest management hazards.
Air Pollution SHMP No While air pollution remains a chronic hazard for Upland's residents, its
mitigation is the domain of regional,
state, and federal agencies.
Aircraft SHMP Yes Transportation incidents, including Incident vehicle, air, and rail mass casualties, are identified as a hazard of concern
for the City.
Aquatic SHMP No There are no standing bodies of water Invasive in Upland large enough to host invasive Species aquatic species.
Avalanche FEMA guidance No Not applicable. Snowfall is not a typical SHMP occurrence in Upland, and there is no
historical record of this hazard in the
region.
Civil SHMP Yes Civil disturbances are included under Disturbance or human-caused hazards; however, they Riot may be related to mass casualty
incidents, some of which may be
outgrowths of extreme civil
disturbances. MCIs are included in the
"Human-Caused Hazards" profile.
Climate SHMP Yes Climate change can affect the Change SBC HMP (as a frequency, intensity, and/or location of component of different hazards. It is not a stand-
other alone hazard and will be discussed as
hazards) a factor of other hazards rather than as
a distinct event.
Coastal FEMA guidance No Not applicable. Coastal erosion and Flooding and SHMP storms occur within the coastal Storm communities. Upland is not a coastal community.
Cyber Threats SHMP Yes Cybercrime and cyberterrorism are hazards of concern for all levels of
government in the state and nation.
Dam Failure FEMA guidance Yes Upland lies within the inundation zone SHMP for dams.
SBC HMP
Drought SHMP Yes Droughts are a recurring and SBC HMP potentially severe hazard in Upland.
Energy SHMP No The Planning Committee did not Shortage consider the LHMP to be the
appropriate place to discuss energy
shortages.
26 Page 421 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 3-1: HAZARD EVALUATION FOR UPLAND LHMP
Hazard Source of Included in Reason for Inclusion or Exclusion Recommendation LHMP?
Epidemic, SHMP No While epidemics and pandemics are Pandemic, potential hazards of concern for
Vector-Borne Upland, their mitigation is the domain Disease of county, state, and federal agencies.
Erosion FEMA guidance No There are no known erosion hazards in SHMP the City.
Expansive Soil FEMA guidance No There is no known expansive soil in Upland.
Extreme Cold FEMA guidance No Extreme cold events are not a hazard SHMP to the community.
Extreme Heat FEMA guidance Yes Extreme heat events are a recurring SHMP hazard in Upland.
Fault Rupture FEMA guidance Yes Upland is in a seismically active area SHMP and has experienced past earthquakes.
SBC HMP
Flooding FEMA guidance Yes Floods are a hazard in Upland.
SHMP
Fracking SHMP No Fracking does not occur in Upland.
Hail FEMA guidance No The Planning Committee found that hail severe enough to constitute a
hazard in Upland is too rare to be
included in this Plan.
Hazardous SHMP Yes Various modalities of hazardous Materials materials released are potential threats Release to the City.
Hurricane FEMA guidance No Hurricanes do not occur in Upland.
SHMP
Infrastructure SHMP Yes Reservoir replacement due to faulty Failure design. Closed landfill.
Landslide FEMA guidance No Landslide-prone areas are outside and SHMP to the north of the City.
Levee Failure SHMP Yes Certain levees along the City's eastern border may pose a hazard during high-
water-flow events. This is addressed as
part of the Flood Hazard profile.
Lightning FEMA guidance No Lightning is not a sufficient hazard to be addressed in this Plan.
Liquefaction FEMA guidance No Liquefaction is not considered to be a SHMP hazard of concern for the City.
SBC HMP
Methane- SBC HMP No There are no known methane- containing containing soils in Upland.
Soils
Natural Gas SHMP Yes A natural gas transmission pipeline Pipeline crosses the City's downtown and
Hazards industrial areas.
27 Page 422 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 3-1: HAZARD EVALUATION FOR UPLAND LHMP
Hazard Source of Included in Reason for Inclusion or Exclusion Recommendation LHMP?
Oil Spills SHMP No Hazardous materials release is identified as a City concern; however,
significant oil spills were not included.
Power Failure SHMP Yes Public Safety Power Shutoffs may affect the northern part of the City
during Red Flag events.
Radiological SHMP No Hazardous materials release is Accidents identified as a City concern; however, radiological materials release was not
included.
Sea-level Rise FEMA guidance No Upland is not a coastal community and SHMP so is not susceptible to sea level rise.
Seiche FEMA guidance No There are no standing bodies of water SHMP in Upland large enough to create a
significant seiche.
Seismic FEMA guidance Yes Upland is in a seismically active area Shaking SHMP and has been impacted by earthquakes SBC HMP in the past.
Severe Wind FEMA guidance Yes Severe winds occur in Upland and may pose a threat to the community.
Severe Winter FEMA guidance No Severe winter storms are not identified Storms SHMP as a threat to Upland
SBC HMP
Storm Surge FEMA guidance No Upland is not a coastal community and so is not susceptible to storm surge.
Subsidence FEMA guidance Yes While subsidence in general is not a concern for the City, the presence of a
former landfill is. Former landfills can
often experience subsidence as the
materials below the surface settle or
decompose.
Terrorism SHMP Yes Since active-shooter incidents and (Mass-Casualty terrorism may happen anywhere, the Incident) Planning Committee determined that
mass-casualty incidents should be
addressed in the Plan.
Thunderstorm SHMP No The San Bernardino Valley rarely experiences thunderstorms severe
enough to pose a threat to Upland.
Tornadoes FEMA guidance No Tornadoes do not pose a threat to SHMP Upland.
Transportation SHMP Yes Major transportation routes, heavy Incidents road, air, and rail traffic, and a gas pipeline put Upland at risk from
transportation-related incidents.
Tree Mortality SHMP No The City currently manages its urban forest effectively and does not feel it
constitutes a hazard of concern.
28 Page 423 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 3-1: HAZARD EVALUATION FOR UPLAND LHMP
Hazard Source of Included in Reason for Inclusion or Exclusion Recommendation LHMP?
Tsunami FEMA guidance No Tsunamis are a coastal hazard, and SHMP Upland is not a coastal community.
Urban Fire SHMP Yes Wildland/Urban Interface fires can SBC HMP become urban conflagrations under
extreme weather conditions.
Volcano SHMP No There are no volcanoes near enough to Upland to reasonably pose a risk to the
community.
Wildfire FEMA guidance Yes Upland is located approximately one SHMP mile below the San Bernardino
National Forest, and wildfires have
affected the City in the past.
* Federal disasters are declared at the county level. A disaster declared for San Bernardino County did not necessarily cause any harm to Upland.
After hazard evaluation and the organizational changes were made by the HMPC, this Plan discusses seven broad hazard types with their respective sub-categories, including climate change, which is discussed in each hazard profile, these are depicted in Table 3-2.
TABLE 3-2: HAZARD CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES
Hazard Category Sub-Categories
Seismic Hazards • Fault Rupture
• Seismic Shaking
Fire • Wildland Fire
• Wildland/ Urban Interface Fire
Human-Caused Hazards • Hazardous Materials Release
• Landfill Subsidence
• Transportation Incidents (Rail, Aircraft, Highway)
• Cybercrime Incidents
• Mass Casualty/Fatality Incidents
Severe Weather • Extreme Heat
• Drought
• Severe Wind
Infrastructure Failure • Power Failure
• Public Safety Power Shutoff
Flood • Surface Flooding
• Dam and Levee Failure
HAZARD SCORING AND PRIORITIZATION
The HMPC followed FEMA guidance for hazard mitigation plans, prioritizing each of the eight hazards and their respective subcategories. In the initial step, it assigned a score of 1 to 4 for each of the hazards for the following criteria:
• Probability: The likelihood that the hazard will occur in Upland in the future. • Magnitude/Severity: The severity of the direct damage of the hazard to Upland. • Warning Time: The time the city has before a disaster event/hazard impacts Upland. 29 Page 424 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland • Duration: The time that the disaster event will affect Upland.
The HMPC assigned a weighting value to each criterion, giving a higher weight to the criteria deemed more important and multiplied the score for each criterion by weighing the factor in determining the overall score for each criterion. FEMA recommends these weighting values:
• Probability: 2.0
• Location: 0.8
• Maximum Probable Extent (Primary Impact): 0.7
• Secondary Impacts: 0.5
After calculating the total impact score for each hazard (sum of the location, maximum probable extent, and the secondary impact), FEMA guidance recommends multiplying the total impact score by the overall probability to determine the final score for each hazard. A final score between 0 and 12 is considered a low-threat hazard, 12.1 to 42 is a medium-threat hazard, and a score above 42 is considered a high-threat hazard. This final score determines the prioritization of the hazards. Table 3-3 depicts the criteria for scoring each hazard previously discussed, including probability, location, primary impact, and secondary impacts.
In compliance with the Disaster Mitigation Act (and as further specified by Interim Final Rule 44 CFR Section 206.401(c)(2)(i)), this LHMP addresses, in substantial detail, the primary hazards facing the City. Lower-priority hazards are addressed at a lesser level of detail due to their relatively reduced impacts, as identified in the hazard assessment discussion. Table 3-4 shows each hazard's criterion scores, final score, and threat level based on the above prioritization process.
30 Page 425 of 654
TABLE 3-3: CRITERION SCORING
Category Description Score Weighting
Factor
Extremely rare with no documented history of
Unlikely occurrences or events. Annual probability of less 1 than 0.001
Extremely rare with no documented history of
Possible occurrences or events. Annual probability of 2 between 0.01 and 0.001 2.0
o Occasional occurrence with at least two or more L
a Likely documented historic events. Annual probability of 3 between 0.1 and 0.01
Highly Likely Frequent events with a well-documented history of 4 occurrence. Annual probability of greater than 0.1
Ne li able The impact zone is a small part of the planning area 1 g g (a few structures).
o Limited The impact zone is a limited part of the planning 2 area (a neighborhood or city block). 0.8
o Significant The impact zone is a significant part of the planning 3 area (multiple blocks or neighborhoods; a district).
Extensive The impact zone covers much of the planning area 4 (multiple districts).
Negligible property damages (less than 5% of
Ne li able critical and non-critical facilities and infrastructure). 1 g g Injuries or illnesses are treatable with first aid, and there are no deaths
Slight property damages(greater than 5%and less
9 P P Y 9
W than 25% of critical and non-critical facilities and a, co Limited infrastructures). Injuries and illnesses do not result 2 7o a
• E in permanent disability, and there are no deaths o L Moderate property damages (greater than 25% 0.7 a and less than 50% of critical and non-critical E E Critical facilities and infrastructures). Injuries or illnesses 3 • a result in permanent disability and at least one x death
ca
2 Severe property damages (greater than 50% of
Catastrophic critical and non-critical facilities and infrastructure). 4 Injuries or illnesses result in permanent disability
and multiple deaths
No loss of function, downtime, and/or evacuations.
Negligible Shutdown of critical facilities for less than 24 hours. 4 Negligible quality of life lost
Minimal loss of function, downtime, and/or
evacuations. Shutdown of critical facilities for more
Limited 3
than 1 day and less than 1 week. Limited quality of
life lost 0.5
Some loss of function, downtime, and/or
c evacuations. Shutdown of critical facilities for more Moderate 2
than 1 week and less than 1 month. Moderate
quality of life lost
Major loss of function, downtime, and/or
High evacuations. Shutdown of critical facilities for more 1 than 1 month. Significant quality of life lost
31 Page 426 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland ir 11.
TABLE 3-4: UPLAND HAZARD PRIORITIZATION SCORES AND THREAT LEVELS Impact (2.0) Hazard
Probability Location Primary Secondary Total Planning Hazard (2.0) (0.8) Impact(0.7) Impact(0.5) Score Consideration Seismic Hazards 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 36.0 Medium • Fault Rupture 3 2 3 2 28.2 Medium • Seismic Shaking 3 4 3 4 43.8 High Fire 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 1 39.0 Medium • Wildland Fire/
Wildland Urban 3 3 3 4 39.0 Medium Interface Fire
Human-caused 2.8 1.8 2.6 2.6 25.1 Medium Hazards
• Hazardous 3 2 2 3 27.0 Medium Materials Release
• Landfill 3 1 2 2 19.2 Medium Subsidence
• Transportation
Incidents (Rail, 2 2 3 3 20.8 Medium Aircraft, Highway)
• Cybercrime 4 2 3 2 37.6 Medium Incidents
• Mass Casualty/ 2 2 3 3 20.8 Medium Fatality Incidents
Severe Weather 2.7 3.0 2.0 2.7 28.0 Medium • Extreme Heat 2 3 2 3 21.2 Medium • Drought 2 2 2 3 18.0 Medium • Severe Wind 4 4 2 2 44.8 High Infrastructure 2.5 4.0 2.2 3.0 28.6 Medium Failure
• Power Failure 2 4 2 3 24.4 Medium • Public Safety 3 4 2 3 32.7 Medium Power Shutoff
Flood 2.0 3.0 2.5 3.0 20.3 Medium • Surface Flooding 3 2 2 3 27.0 Medium • Dam and Levee 1 4 3 3 13.6 Medium Failure
32 Page 427 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Hazard Profile: Seismic Hazards
DESCRIPTION
An earthquake is a sudden motion or trembling caused by the release of strain accumulated within or along the edge of the Earth's tectonic plates. The effects of an earthquake can be felt far beyond the site of its occurrence. They usually occur without warning and can cause massive damage and extensive casualties after just a few seconds.
Common effects of earthquakes are ground motion and shaking, surface fault ruptures, and ground failure. Ground motion is the vibration or shaking of the ground during an earthquake.
When a fault ruptures, seismic waves radiate, causing the ground to vibrate. The severity of the vibration increases with the amount of energy released and decreases with distance from the causative fault or epicenter. This sudden discharge of energy into the crust can lead to rupturing of land that sits on top of fault lines, liquefaction in areas with wet soil, or landslides in hilly or mountainous areas.
Fault Rupture
The shifting and movement of the Earth's tectonic plates are responsible for seismic events.
These tectonic plates can pull away from, move toward, or pass by each other. As they do, the plates sometimes lock together. This creates tension, and the built-up tension is eventually released like a springboard. The tension dissipates into the Earth's crust.
The location at which two tectonic plates join is called a fault line. Fault lines are sometimes visible on the Earth's crust as sudden rifts or anomalies in the continuity of the landscape.
California's major north-south fault line is the San Andreas Fault, where the North American and Pacific Plates meet. Constant friction between the two plates over the millennia has caused the areas where they intersect to become fragmented, creating new, smaller faults.
The area near a fault line is at risk of damage due to the potential for a fault rupture, the deformation or displacement of land on either side of the fault, which may move a few inches to several feet in opposite directions. Any buildings or infrastructure situated around, on top of, or across a fault line could potentially be severely damaged or destroyed. The direction of the fault rupture depends upon the fault type: dip-slip faults produce vertical shearing, strike-slip faults produce horizontal shearing, and oblique-slip faults produce both vertical and horizontal shearing. A fourth kind of fault, called a "blind" fault, produces virtually no visible land displacement.
Some faults have emerged recently in geologic history. Quaternary faults have developed at any time between the Holocene Era and the present (within the last 1.8 million years). These faults are especially concerning because they are most likely to be active and to cause future earthquakes. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act enables the California State Geologist to designate zones surrounding active faults as Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zones, which are special regulatory zone that requires additional study to determine the location of the fault and the limits of the area prohibited from surface construction on top of the known location of an active fault.
33 Page 428 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Seismic Shaking
Seismic shaking is the motion felt on the Earth's surface caused by an earthquake. In most cases, earthquakes are not powerful enough to be felt. However, particularly powerful earthquakes can generate significant shaking, causing widespread destruction and property damage.
LOCATION AND EXTENT
Fault Rupture
The City of Upland is near several known active and potentially active earthquake faults. The San Jacinto Fault, approximately 15 miles from the City, experienced its most recent surface rupture on April 9, 1968 (M 6.5) on its Coyote Creek segment. The Cucamonga Fault is part of the Sierra Madre fault zone. It traverses the northern section of the City and runs directly through San Antonio Heights. Activity has been low on this fault.
The southern segment of the San Andreas Fault is located approximately thirty miles from the City of Upland. The current probability of a magnitude 8.3 or greater earthquake on this fault is between 2 and 5 percent.
New faults are continuously being discovered within the region. Scientists have identified almost 100 faults in the greater Los Angeles area known to be capable of a magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquake. January 17, 1994, magnitude 6.7 Northridge Earthquake (thrust fault), which produced severe ground motion, caused 57 deaths, 9,253 injuries, and displaced over 20,000 people.
Depending on the magnitude and duration of an earthquake along one of the region's faults, Upland can expect to see varying degrees of damage citywide. The city's natural topography means there are areas of the community constructed on slopes, which may be subject to earthquake-induced landslides (see the landslide hazard profile for further discussion).
Seismic Shaking
Southern California, including Upland, is a highly seismically active region due to the major faults that run through it and are subject to seismic shaking. The intensity of seismic shaking is usually measured using the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale, which is based on the observed damage. The MMI scale has replaced the Richter scale, which is no longer used since it loses effectiveness when measuring larger earthquakes. Since the degree of shaking, and consequently damage, generally decreases as the seismic energy travels further away from the fault rupture's point of origin, different sections of a city or region can report different MMI measurements in different locations. The MMI scale uses Roman numerals on a 12-point scale to measure shaking intensity by degree. Table 3-5 shows the MMI scale, while Table 3-6 lists earthquake faults that may affect the City.
34 Page 429 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 3-5: MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE
Intensity Description Description
I Instrumental Felt by very few people, under especially favorable conditions.
II Feeble Felt by a few people at rest, especially on the upper floors of buildings.
III Slight Noticeable by people indoors, especially on upper floors, but not always recognized as an earthquake.
IV Moderate Felt by many people indoors and by some people outdoors. Sleeping people may be awakened. Dishes, windows, and doors are disturbed.
V Slightly strong Felt by nearly everyone, and many sleeping people are awakened.
Some dishes and windows broken, and unstable objects overturned.
VI Strong Felt by everyone. Some heavy furniture is moved, and there is slight damage.
VII Very strong Negligible damage in well-built buildings, slight-to-moderate damage in ordinary buildings, and considerable damage in poorly built buildings.
Slight damage in well-built buildings, considerable damage and partial VIII Destructive collapse in ordinary buildings, and great damage in poorly built buildings.
Considerable damage to specially designed structures. Great damage IX Ruinous and partial collapse in substantial buildings, and buildings are shifted off their foundations.
X Disastrous Most foundations and buildings with masonry or frames are destroyed, along with some well-built wood structures. Rail lines are bent.
XI Very Most or all masonry structures and bridges are destroyed. Rail lines disastrous are greatly bent.
XII Catastrophic Damage is total. The lines of sight are distorted, and objects are thrown into the air.
Source: https://www.usgs.00v/media/images/modified-mercalli-intensitv-mmi-scale-assigns-intensities TABLE 3-6: SELECTED SHAKING SCENARIOS FOR UPLAND 111 Magnitude Distance
Fault Name (Mw) (Miles) * MMI range in Upland San Jose 6.66 8.34 7.5—8.0
Cucamonga 6.88 9.37 7.5—8.0
San Jacinto (Lytle Creek) 6.72 13.47 6.0—7.0 San Jacinto (San Bernardino) 6.96 17.02 6.5—7.0 San Andreas NSB+SSB 7.21 26.87 6.5—7.0
Note: UCERF3 results consist of two individual models (3.1 and 3.2), each of which provides rupture probabilities for each segment of the fault. This table shows the maximum probability for a section of the fault in either model.
Another scale for measuring seismic shaking is the moment magnitude scale (MMS, denoted Mw or simply M). The MMS measures the energy released by the fault rupture, starting at 1.0 and increasing as the earthquake's energy grows. The MMS is a logarithmic scale, meaning that the difference between numbers on the scale increases as the numbers increase. An earthquake with 5.0 M is approximately 1.4 times greater than 4.9 M, 32 times greater than 4.0 M, and 1,000 times greater than 3.0 M.
35 Page 430 of 654
City of Upland
Seismic shaking can also be measured in relationship to the force of Earth's gravity (g) or percent g. This method is useful for displaying areas of seismic shaking potential on a map.
Percent g is computed by determining the acceleration of the earthquake's motion relative to the force of gravity. The acceleration of gravity is 980 centimeters per second, so if, for example, an earthquake's acceleration is measured at 765 centimeters per second, the shaking is modeled as 765/980, or .781 g (78.1% g). Figure 3-1 plots the seismic hazard zones and associated faults in and around Upland, while Figure 3-2 shows the seismic shaking potential in the City.
PAST EVENTS
Since seismologists began recording earthquakes, tens of thousands have been recorded in Southern California, most with magnitudes below 3. No community in Southern California is beyond the reach of a damaging earthquake.
Fault Rupture
There haven't been any recorded instances of fault rupture within Upland despite the occurrence of earthquakes.
Seismic Shaking
Upland has experienced two earthquakes in the last 40 years of a magnitude greater than 4.0. 1) June 26, 1988, Upland earthquake (Mw 4.7) caused minor damage in the epicenter area (3 km NW of Upland) and would have been of relatively little notice were it not for the possibility that it might have been triggered by the Whittier Narrows earthquake nine months earlier and 20 km away.3
2) February 28, 1990, Upland earthquake (Mw 5.4) displayed similar behavior as its immediate predecessor. It was much more damaging than the 1988 quake, causing considerable damage near the epicenter and triggering landslides that blocked roads in the Mount Baldy area. It also caused some damage to the San Antonio Dam, which lies across the path of the main watershed coming south from Mount Baldy. Thirty-eight people sustained minor injuries. The quake was felt as far northeast as Las Vegas and as far south as Ensenada.4
In both cases, the causative fault was the San Jose fault, an 18-km-long concealed fault that splays west-southwest from the frontal fault of the central Transverse Ranges.
Other strong regional earthquakes have occurred in Southern California, but their epicenters have been so distant from Upland that seismic shaking generated by the event did not cause significant property damage or harm to the City.
The most recent significant earthquake affecting the Southern California region was the Northridge Earthquake in 1994. At 4:31 A.M. on Monday, January 17, a 6.7 earthquake struck the San Fernando Valley. Thousands of aftershocks occurred in the following days and weeks, causing additional damage to affected structures and the populace:
SCEDC(2013): Southern California Earthquake Center.Caltech. Dataset.doi:10.7909/C3WD3xH1 4 Ibid.
36 Page 431 of 654
2(
• Fifty-seven people were killed, and more than 1,500 people were seriously injured. • For days afterward, thousands of homes and businesses were without electricity; tens of thousands had no gas, and nearly 50,000 people had little or no water. • Approximately 15,000 structures were moderately to severely damaged, leaving thousands of people temporarily homeless; 66,500 buildings were inspected, nearly 4,000 were severely damaged, and over 11,000 were moderately damaged. • Several collapsed bridges and overpasses created commuter havoc on the freeway system. Extensive damage was caused by ground shaking, but the earthquake triggered liquefaction, and dozens of fires also caused additional severe damage. • Due to the impact in neighboring counties, San Bernardino County experienced transportation disruptions and some economic losses.
Table 3-7 shows significant earthquakes—magnitude 6.0 Mw or greater—that have occurred within 100 miles of Upland since 1933. Upland had no significant reported incidents of damage.
Authorities made disaster declarations in Los Angeles County for the 1994 Northridge Earthquake and the 1987 Whittier Narrows Earthquake.
TABLE 3-7: SIGNIFICANT EARTHQUAKES (MW 6.0+) WITHIN 100 MILES OF UPLAND Date Name Magnitude Fault
3/11/1933 Long Beach 6.4 Newport-Inglewood 3/25/1937 Terwilliger Valley 6.0 San Jacinto 4/10/1947 Manix 6.5 Manix
12/4/1948 Desert Hot Springs 6.0 Banning (San Andreas S) 7/21/1952 Kern County 7.5 White Wolf
2/9/1971 Sylmar (San 6.6 San Fernando
Fernando)
7/8/1986 North Palm 6.0 Banning or Garnet Hill Springs
4/23/1992 Joshua Tree 6.1 Eureka Peak
6/28/1992 Landers 7.3 Johnson Valley, Landers, Homestead Valley, Emerson, Camp Rock
6/28/1992 Big Bear 6.3 Unknown
1/17/1994 Northridge 6.7 Northridge Thrust 10/16/1999 Hector Mine 7.1 Lavic Lake, Bullion Source: Southern California Earthquake Data Center. 2025. Earthquake Catalogs SCSN Catalog Search (1933— Present). http://service.scedc.caltech.edu/eq-catalogs/radius.php 37 Page 432 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 3-1. Seismic Hazard Zones and Associated Faults In and Around Upland 'Wrier Mounraln /DC.4//
,� y cyii -•.•r• Y�
_PL
, lril-� �� c24,' Almond 5t
i:._•,1 4
ior::.
San Antonio
tK.4:-i-itimki
'. o� rWeights
t 1
cam
�1 �a
�1 a ay "
boo` �oaa dst ¢ iii
W 22nd St Bony,
c
V
n z
W 21st St
CITY OF
Parnell('Dr a' CITY 20th St - �iJi1210�
to C UC.AMONGA
a W 19th St
m W 18th St tu ✓
ato
c _
1581 ft o z `149 n
m
W 16th St B a
z-- 7.1aI - ¢ -0 Upland Hills c N Country Club iri
�t __ W 15th St
z z
w
a W 14th St E 14th St a,
Cable Airport > da
o C1� c
(
g a o
z
W Foothill Blvd 66 E Ea da
J�
r
.��Erg
W 11th St E 11th St ReA`e
Pont 83
les
VI Arrow Ste W Arrow Hwy Upland E Arrow Hwy i
j
W 9th St f6
E 9th St m
/
/
Arrow Hwy W 8th St E Sth s`
7/
Olive St
Moreno St `` W 7th St ����� E 7th 5t 10 r" l Dl ___ _ _--._
CI W 6th Stet
E 6th St
• MONT IAIR
W 5th St CITY OF \ E 5th St
Q City Boundary I I Alquist-Priolo
tt
CITY OF Rail Qt Flaultsard Zones
UPLAND
Parks
Source:Sari Bernardino
County,ESRI,California
Department of Conservation,
California Geological Survey
38 Page 433 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 3-2. Seismic Shaking Potential in Upland
mounsarn -7 -r,�-,- �y p ? 1 • N. _ tL
`
. . i ti a -i' (a 'r _ Almond Si
1./ 1
,.. j_ San Antonio
Heights Hill
jt
Pomello Dr CITY OF
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA i`
m W 18LI,Sr
a -
¢ I IS
C
i W 16th St e
z r21U G
W 1SIh St z
x 4h1 I4tlr S[
1 our St
o
o ii3`1
z
1.,51 Foothill Blvd 66 6r.,
fib
Vv iiih Sr
'r t 83
W Arrow Hwy Upland ;
¢
m
Arrow Hwy -----.---i
Morena St _ E 7th St
Mil o/ y
W 6th Sr r
CI II E 6th St
MONTCCAIR
W Sth Sr CITY OF
E 5th St
Q City Boundary Seismic Shake Potential
(2%at 50 years)
Rail F 0.95
\ CITY OF
UPLAND Parks 1 11.05
Source:San Bernardino
County,£SRI,California
Department of Conservation,
California Geological Survey
39 Page 434 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
RISK OF FUTURE EVENTS
Fault Rupture
Given the presence of faults within the City, it is likely that fault rupture could occur in the future.
As depicted in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), fault rupture is considered likely. An occasional occurrence with at least two or more documented historic events, with an annual probability of between 0.1 and 0.01.
Seismic Shaking
Historical and geological records show California has a long history of seismic events. Southern California is probably best known for the San Andreas Fault, a 750-mile-long fault running from the Mexican border to an offshore point west of San Francisco. Geologic studies show that over the past 1,400 to 1,500 years, large earthquakes have occurred at about 130-year intervals on the Southern San Andreas Fault. As the last large earthquake on the Southern San Andreas occurred in 1857, that section of the fault is considered a likely location for an earthquake within the next few decades. The Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3) was released in 2015 and is the most recent assessment of the probability of a major earthquake on various faults between 2015 and 2044. Table 3-8 shows the results for Upland's nearby and regional fault lines.
TABLE 3-8: EARTHQUAKE PROBABILITIES FOR KEY FAULTS NEARBY (2015-2044) Probability t
Distance
Fault (Miles) * 6.7+ Mw 7.0+ Mw 7.5+ Mw 8.0+ Mw
San Jose 2.62 0.30 0.20 0.03 Negligible Cucamonga 3.57 1.09 0.97 0.61 0.03 Sierra Madre 5.52 1.10 1.06 0.72 0.03 Chino Alt 1 7.12 1.42 0.15 0.08 Negligible Fontana 7.84 0.23 Negligible Negligible Negligible San Jacinto (Lytle Creek) 7.89 1.13 1.13 1.12 0.49 San Gabriel 9.34 0.46 0.42 0.18 https://wgcep.org/UCERF3 40 Page 435 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland The entirety of California is prone to earthquake effects. Figure 3-3 represents the UCERF3 probabilities of having a nearby earthquake rupture (within 3 or 4 miles) of magnitude 6.7 or larger in the next 30 years. As shown in the table, the chance of having such an event somewhere in California exceeds 99%. The 30-year probability of an even more powerful quake of magnitude 7.5 or larger is about 4%.As in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), seismic shaking is considered likely. An occasional occurrence with at least two or more documented historic events, with an annual probability of between 0.1 and 0.01.
Figure 3-3. UCERF3 Probabilities of a Nearby Earthquake �� ' 4 CALIFORNIA AREA
�] S '`Gs EARTHQUAKE PROBABILITIES
i ^Si' y.4" F
a._ 5 e,,, Magnitude 30.Year Probability
. x. 6.7 >99%
a� 4
ram;.. 7.0 94%
11. c 7.5 46%
\`VOLd- Sacraments , .1%. B0 4%
r? 'Probabilitcesdonol indade the
San F anyac0 caswd,a Sobdo[tian Zone.
30-Year _ .--
Earthquake .- ,
Probability -� - `
10o% 1
10%
I1%
0.1%
0.01% Los Angeles r'�-
0.001% _ _
Sao Diego_
SCAC raUSGS
.'
CLIMATE CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS
Fault Rupture
Generally, there's no known direct connection between earthquake fault rupture and climate change. Some evidence suggests that increased oceanic pressure on tectonic plates due to melting land ice could influence the behavior of seismic events. Still, little indicates that this would play a major factor in any seismic event, including fault rupturing.
Seismic Shaking
There's no direct link between climate change and seismic activity, so climate change isn't expected to cause any changes to the frequency or intensity of seismic shaking. Some research indicates that climate change could result in "isostatic rebounds," or a sudden upward movement of the crust due to reduced downward weight from glaciers. As glaciers are known to melt when global temperatures increase, climate change could indirectly lead to increased seismicity in Southern California.5
5 Masih,A.January 2018."An Enhanced Seismic Activity Observed Due to Climate Change: Preliminary Results from Alaska." lOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science.doi :10.1088/1755-1315/167/1/012018. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/167/1/012018/pdf 41 Page 436 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Hazard Profile: Fire
DESCRIPTION
Wildland Fire
Wildland fires (wildfires) are fires that burn in largely undeveloped and natural areas. They are a regular feature of ecosystems throughout California. These fires help to clear brush and debris from natural areas and are necessary for the health of many ecosystems and various species' life cycles. However, since the early twentieth century, the common practice was to suppress naturally occurring fires in wildland areas, allowing dry plant matter and other fuels to build up.
Lightning, accidents, or arson can spark wildfires. The size and severity of any fire depend on fuel, weather conditions, and topography availability. However, wildfires in the WUI do not need to be large to be damaging. In Oakland, the 1991 Tunnel Fire was relatively small—only 1,600 acres—but it was one of California's deadliest and most destructive wildfires.6 The flames from wildfires create severe risks to property and lives. Smoke and other particulate matter from wildfires pose a health risk, even to those not near the blaze. Burned areas can be more susceptible to flooding and landslides because wildfires destroy the vegetation that helps slow down water runoff and hold slopes together.' The ground may repel water rather than absorb it when faced with ash deposits. Due to the change in the landscape structure after a fire, repelled water can carry debris into water reservoirs.8 Wildland/ Urban Interface Fire
Human activity has caused changes in the buffer zone between urbanized and undeveloped areas, known as the wildland-urban interface (WUI). The more natural setting of a WUI can make these zones highly desirable places to live. In many parts of California, the WUls have become developed, sometimes at densities approaching those of urbanized areas. This development activity has brought more people into wildfire-prone areas. The availability of fuel and increasing encroachment into WUI, together with a changing climate, have made wildfires among California's most common and dangerous natural hazards. Additionally, invasive pests such as the polyphagous shot hole borer can kill trees, creating more dead material that will potentially provide additional fuel for wildfires.
An urban fire is a fire that causes damage to buildings or infrastructure in an urban area. In some minor situations, the fire prompts the evacuation of the building's occupants, and the fire is contained within a short amount of time by firefighting teams or the building's fire suppression systems. In severe cases, the fire can destroy the building and spread to surrounding properties.
Common causes of urban fires include stoves that are accidentally left on, short-circuited electrical equipment, or mishandling of household tools. Breaches in gas pipelines may cause s Cal OES.2016. https://webservices.caloes.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/10/Top20Deadliest.pdf EPA.2019."Wildfires: How Do They Affect Our Water Supplies?" https://www.epa.gov/sciencematters/wildfires-how-do-they- affect-our-water-supplies
$ Bichell, R.2019."How Wildfires May Muck Up the West's Reservoirs."Colorado Public Radio. https://www.cpr.org/2019/09/25/how-wildfires-may-muck-u p-the-wests-reservoirs/ 42 Page 437 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
larger urban fires, large transportation accidents, or downed electrical transmission wires.
Arsonists may intentionally start fires.
When urban fires get out of control, they may become urban conflagrations, burning hundreds or even thousands of structures. The two most likely causes of urban conflagration are major earthquakes and wildfires that move through the WUI. The twin firestorms in Pacific Palisades and Arcadia in January 2025 show graphically what can happen when wildland fires driven by severe winds push through the WUI and reached developed areas.
LOCATION AND EXTENT
Wildland Fire
Wildfires are not measured on a specific scale and are usually classified by size (e.g., acres burned) or impact (buildings destroyed or damaged, injuries or deaths, cost of damage, etc.).
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) defines the wildfire hazard zones on a three-tier scale of fire hazard severity zones (FHSZs): very high, high, and moderate.
These zone classifications don't correspond to a specific risk or intensity of fire but are qualitative terms that consider many factors.
Fire-prone areas are also classified by the agency responsible for fire protection. Federal Responsibility Area (FRAs)fall to federal agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the National Park Service. State Responsibility Areas (SRA), which includes unincorporated land within counties with statewide watershed value, fall to the Cal Fire.
Local Responsibility Areas (LRA), which include portions of incorporated cities with identified wildfire hazard zones, fall to local governments.
Due to the topography adjoining San Antonio Heights, Upland's sphere of influence is in an area susceptible to wildfires, and portions of the community are within the WUI. Wildfires present a significant threat to the city and the county in or near the WUI, as they have relatively high temperatures, low humidity, and low precipitation during the summer. Fall brings with it the Santa Ana winds to exacerbate the area's already dry conditions, increasing the foothills and canyons' susceptibility to wildfire. Fire threat assessment and Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping for Upland identify the WUI as the area within the City with the highest fire risk.
Figure 3-4 identifies portions of the City located within the WUI and historic fire perimeters in the City.
According to county and Cal Fire FHSZ mapping of the city, the northern border of San Antonio Heights is adjacent to an SRA Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). San Antonio Heights itself is part of a county Fire Safety Overlay that regulates how structures may be built to present the least fire risk. The San Antonio Creek scrublands along the western border of Upland proper are in an LRA VHFHSZ, as is the partly developed area north of Highway 210 and east of 2nd Avenue.
The potential for a wildfire to begin in the SRA and spread into the city's LRA is highly probable if the fire can't be contained with the SRA. The SRA located in unincorporated San Bernardino County falls under the jurisdiction of CAL Fire, while the LRA is under the control of the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District.
43 Page 438 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 3-4. Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) and Historical Wildlife Perimeters `o``\.r.��a:...r 7 .►\iZzi.\\\....v.p. -..i��` l�r' 1 ��!♦����r��`•_��` 04. 7r�w�'_ -NI g, .. ���` . ` ` �,.��:°'i'i'*i i�'Z'O'i'i'4Pi' ' i'� 'i0'ii''''''''''i'i ii''ij i''i _ ` r r .•• all.♦♦•,•♦•.•+♦••+.•••••!♦•+.,..•• , ,-, _,..,.„):‘,...- •:•:i.Z.i:4 /or .ti:::;i:ii:::}Sii:::it 0/1";4";
4.4 • `e •4,..X.ice.$ '://j4 . •''
/ •'Oi!:''••i'•'•••+•444:4,
" L .•••••••• / •
+NN,
.•..n. .. W 19th St \`\ \\
....: �'�.4 i- W 18th St
y0
fith St
/if- Upland Hills ,
ry Country Club
z
W 15th St z
N
a
W 14th St E 14th St N
2 r m
z
W Foothill Blvd CI m
66 W 11th St Filth St
ont 85
!es
ow Rte W Arrow Hwy U n land E Arrow Hwy
t,
W 9th St E 9th St en
/
/ �`
7/
Arrow Hwy W 8th St E 8th
Olive St
Moreno St W 7th St /th St
IQ 10 Fri
—
crrfoy W 6th St �o
MONTCLAIR ---,,,,,.
t'^ sth sr CITY OF
L 5th St
Q City Boundary - Very High Fire Hazard Severity Rail Wildland Urban Interface
/ CITY OF
_• UPLAND
p wT T Parks E��� Historical Fire Perimeters
lJ L l 1� J J Source:San Bernardino
County,ESRI,California
Department of Forestry
and Fire Protection,2011
and 2021
44 Page 439 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
A fire can ignite only if three elements are present: heat, fuel, and oxygen. Lacking any one of these elements, a fire will extinguish itself. Thousands of structures In Upland provide copious amounts of fuel, making them extremely flammable. Activity that creates intense, unmonitored, or unregulated heat may lead to the ignition of a fire. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, Fire Research Division, has developed a scale that measures the increase in temperature and the kind of fire response that develops. Table 3-9 shows the progression of temperature relative to fire response.
TABLE 3-9: FIRE SUSCEPTIBILITY BASED ON TEMPERATURE INCREASE Temperature (°F) Response
98.6 °F Average normal human oral/body temperature. 101 °F Typical body core temperature for a working firefighter. 109 °F Human body core temperature that may cause death. 111 °F Human skin temperature when pain is felt. 118 °F Human skin temperature causes a first-degree burn injury. 130 °F Hot water causes a scald burn injury with 30 s exposure.
Once a fire has ignited, it can conceivably grow indefinitely if abundant fuel and oxygen are available. For example, a fire that ignites in one house could hypothetically continue to expand and spread to other adjacent houses due to ember casting or fuel linking the structures. Fires in confined spaces may occasionally burn so intensely that they consume all the oxygen available and burn out before they can expand.
Wildland/ Urban Interface Fire
Most of Upland's buildings are wood-frame construction and are susceptible to catching fire.
Even structures that don't have wooden frames, such as large medical facilities or office towers, are at risk of urban fires. These locations contain furniture, papers, plant material, textiles, and other objects that can ignite. Given that nearly all of Upland is developed, urban fires can occur at any location in the City since any of these structures can potentially burn.
Fires are also likely to occur where significant pieces of infrastructure are located, such as gas pipelines, power lines, or highways.
• SoCalGas operates a large, high-pressure gas pipeline across the southern edge of the City. If the pipeline breaches and the released gas ignites, any structures located along the extent of the breach would likely catch fire.
• SoCal Edison owns and operates above-ground, high-voltage transmission lines strung from towers on rights-of-way through the City. While there are no structures directly beneath the towers in the utility right-of-way, trees or opportunistic plants (weeds) could ignite if a downed power line comes into contact with them. If this open space catches fire, it could spread to surrounding homes and buildings if hot cinders from the fire encounter the buildings.
45 Page 440 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
PAST EVENTS
Wildland Fire
The 2003 Old Fire grew to historic proportions as it spread across the San Bernardino Mountains for more than a week. In addition to the normally dry brush, the fire was fueled by thousands of dead, bark beetle-infested trees caused by several years of drought. The Old Fire spread west, where it crossed the 1-15 freeway and merged with the expanding Grand Prix Fire.
The combined fires created a path of destruction more than 30 miles wide. During the course of the Old Fire, six lives were lost and 70,000 citizens were evacuated. The fire consumed 91,281 acres and destroyed 940 residences, 30 commercial buildings, and 300 outbuildings. At the height of the blaze, more than 4,000 firefighters battled the flames. The Grand Prix Fire burned 69,894 acres and destroyed 194 residences; one life was lost.9 The September 8, 2024, Bridge Fire broke out near the Cattle Canyon Bridge in San Gabriel Canyon and spread quickly through dense brush resulting from an abnormally wet winter earlier in the year. It grew to 56,030 acres before becoming 100% contained on November 26. While it remained within the San Bernardino National Forest and the San Gabriel Mountains, its southern extent reached to within 3-4 miles north of Upland, Claremont, and Laverne.
Wildland/ Urban Interface Fire
Upland has no recent history of large, multi-structure fires within its city limits. However, the proximity of San Antonio Heights to the San Gabriel foothills closely parallels that of Altadena, an unincorporated Los Angeles County community 28 miles west of Upland. In January 2025, the Eaton wildfire, driven by extreme Santa Ana and downslope winds, roared out of the San Gabriel Mountains and engulfed Altadena, destroying over 9,000 structures and killing 17 residents. Like Upland, Altadena was mostly built out in a typical suburban zoning pattern. This tragedy suggests that a similar conflagration may be only a bad windstorm away in Upland.
RISK OF FUTURE EVENTS
Wildland Fire
The probability of future wildfires is influenced by weather and fuel conditions. Typically, October represents the beginning of the primary time of concern for offshore flow across California.
These dry, windy conditions can lead to very significant fire events in areas of high population.
Fuels continue to be very dry in California because of long-term drought and increased vegetation stress and mortality. Under windy conditions, these fuels can become extremely volatile and can support extreme fire behavior. Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above) shows the HMPC-set annual wildfire probability to be between 0.1 and 0.01%, though with the rapid progression of climate change, this estimate may understate the growing risk. 9 San Bernardino County Fire Chiefs'Association. Lessons Learned Report:Fire Storm 2003"Old Fire." https://web.archive.org/web/20150924013239/http://www.firescope.org/training/aars/2003/2003-old-fire-lessons-learned- report.pdf
46 Page 441 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Wildland/ Urban Interface Fire
The conditions for a major urban fire exist in Upland as they do in most other Southern California cities. Given that each fire event has a unique origin, it's impossible to predict the precise likelihood of an urban fire emerging in the city. Some areas, however, are at an increased risk of an urban fire igniting, including the San Antonio Heights development and the scrublands along the San Antonio Creek channel. As with wildland fire, the HMPC-estimated annual WUI fire probability is between 0.1 and 0.01%, though with the rapid progression of climate change, this estimate may also understate the growing risk.
CLIMATE CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS
Wildland Fire
Climate change is expected to cause an increase in temperatures and more frequent and intense drought conditions. This will likely increase the amount of dry plant matter available for fuel, worsening wildfire risk statewide. Climate change is expected to increase the number of acres burned annually in mountains and foothills that are already highly prone to wildfires.
However, increases in fuel supplies could cause wildfires to move faster or spread into more developed areas, increasing the future threat to Upland and other surrounding communities.
Wildland/ Urban Interface Fire
While climate change has been linked to a potential increase in wildfire events, it is unclear exactly how climate change could influence the ignition or behavior of urban fires in Upland except as extensions of a WUI fire.
47 Page 442 of 654
Hazard Profile: Human-Caused Hazards
DESCRIPTION
Hazardous Materials Release
The State of California defines hazardous materials as substances that:
• Are toxic, ignitable, or flammable, reactive, and/or corrosive • Show high acute or chronic toxicity
• Are carcinogenic (cause cancer)
• Have bioaccumulative properties (accumulate in the body's tissues) • Are persistent in the environment
• Are water-reactive
Hazardous materials release refers to an event whereby harmful concentrations of hazardous or toxic substances are released into the environment. This occurs when storage containers of hazardous materials leak or fail. This can happen due to industrial accidents, vehicle crashes, as a direct result of other disasters (e.g., a flood or earthquake), or as a deliberate act.
The primary concern associated with hazardous materials release is short- and/or long-term effects on the public from exposure to hazardous materials.
The threat that hazardous materials pose to human health depends on the type of material, frequency, and duration of exposure, and whether chemicals are inhaled, penetrate the skin, or are ingested, among other factors. Exposure to hazardous materials can result in short-or long- term effects, including death or major damage to organs and systems in the body. Hazardous waste is any material with properties that make it dangerous or potentially harmful to human health or the environment and is no longer of use, requiring disposal. Hazardous materials can also cause health risks if they contaminate soil, groundwater, and air, potentially posing a threat long after the initial release.
Landfill Subsidence
Subsidence is a general term for the downward vertical movement of the Earth's surface. It can be caused by both natural processes and human activities. Subsidence involves little or no horizontal movement, which distinguishes it from slope movement.
Processes that lead to subsidence include:
• Dissolution of underlying carbonate rock by groundwater • Gradual compaction of sediments
• Mining
• Settling of poorly consolidated soil
• Pumping of subsurface fluids, such as groundwater or petroleum • Warping of the Earth's crust by tectonic forces
48 Page 443 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Subsidence resulting from tectonic deformation of the crust is known as tectonic subsidence and can provide accommodation for sediment accumulation and eventual lithification into sedimentary rock.
Transportation Accidents
For the purposes of this Plan, "transportation accident" includes incidents involving:
• Commercial air carrier (airline) aircraft
• Air taxi, charter airline, air cargo carrier, air tour, or aeromedical aircraft • General aviation aircraft
• Passenger or freight trains
• Bulk goods pipelines
• Passenger motor carriers (buses)
Any of these modes of transportation can be upset in any number of ways. Aircraft can collide with each other or the ground; trains can crash into each other or derail because of natural or human-caused forces; pipelines can be breached by digging, land subsidence, seismic forces, or age; buses can hit or be hit by other vehicles or run off the road due to bad conditions or driver inattention. Transportation-related accidents happen countless times a day all across the nation. In most cases, the results are minor, with few casualties and little damage to anything other than the vehicles themselves and their occupants.
However, major transportation accidents do happen on a regular basis. A major transportation accident occurring in a heavily populated area can result in considerable loss of life and property. There's no controlling where a train travels once it leaves its track or when an airplane falls from the sky; it may leave a trail of wreckage, hit buildings, or collide with normal street traffic.
The aftermath of a major transportation emergency presents responders with many threats:
hazardous materials releases, fire, severe damage to buildings or vehicles, and loss of life to passengers or people in adjacent buildings, in vehicles, or otherwise near the accident.
Cybercrime Incidents
The United Nations defines cybercrime as "an act that violates the law, which is perpetrated using information and communication technology (ICT)to either target networks, systems, data, websites, and/or technology or facilitate a crime."10
Cyberterrorism is a subset of cybercrime. The UN defines cyberterrorism as "a cyber-dependent crime perpetrated for political objectives to provoke fear, intimidate and/or coerce a target government or population, and cause or threaten to cause harm (e.g., sabotage)."11 Cybercrime is typically committed for profit or personal gain; cyberterrorism is to make a statement.
Digital information systems—a discrete set of information resources organized for collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information, and over the past forty years have become central to nearly every aspect of advanced society. Computers 1° United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. E4J University Module Series: Cybercrime Module 1:Cybercrime in Brief. https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/cybercrime/module-1/key-issues/cybercrime-in-brief.html 11 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. E4J University Module Series: Cybercrime Module 14: Cyberterrorism. https://www.unodc.org/e4j/zh/cybercrime/module-14/key-issues/cyberterrorism.html 49 Page 444 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland and networks facilitate virtually all commercial activity, telecommunications, transportation, process control, logistics, business and governmental situational awareness, mass entertainment, healthcare, and education. Entire industries now exist entirely in the digital realm, employing millions and generating trillions of dollars in wealth.
While this technological explosion has brought into everyday use capabilities that not so long ago were pure science fiction, it's also introduced an unprecedented vulnerability to the global economy. Anyone sufficiently skilled and equipped can, from anywhere in the world, attack the very underpinnings of our society without firing a shot or dropping a bomb, either for profit or in the service of ideology.
Unlike natural disasters that occur because of some impersonal geophysical process—seismic activity, atmospheric conditions, climate change—cybercrime and cyberterrorism are the products of people willfully subverting our infrastructure to achieve their own ends. Over the past ten years, the number and type of threat factors have grown wildly as knowledge and tools have spread worldwide.
Cybercriminals can be individual thieves of various kinds, extortionists, blackmailers, vandals, members of organized crime groups, and spies (private- and public-sector). Cyberterrorists can be lone political or religious zealots, activists, members of organized terrorist groups, private hacking teams supported by or affiliated with governments, or military personnel conducting cyber warfare operations.
Each of these factors has a different motive, objective, and modus operandi. This makes prevention and protection (a.k.a. mitigation) exceptionally hard.
Just as the varieties of threat actors have proliferated over time, so have the ways they can attack information systems and their users. Each type of attack exploits a particular weakness in the system involved: a design or manufacturing flaw, incompetence, or inattention on the part of the system's administrators, missing or insufficient security practices, or the endless ignorance and gullibility of the user community.
Civil Disturbances (Description only, not profiled further) Civil disturbances range from posting a protest sign on a telephone pole to staging a violent riot or an armed takeover of public or private property. The vast majority of"civil disturbances"are peaceful exercises of First Amendment rights to free assembly and expression and aren't of any concern to this Plan.
As defined for this Plan, civil disturbance is an event that threatens or temporarily interrupts normal City operations through violent protests, riots, shootings, or armed standoffs. Civil disturbances of this sort may be single events or a string of related events. Property damage to businesses, public facilities, or homes can occur during these events. In some situations, death or injury may result.
Riot control and the containment of armed standoffs are the province of law enforcement and are best overseen through mutual aid and established police procedures. If the disturbance leads to multiple casualties or fatalities, however, it's considered a mass casualty or mass fatality incident, which this Plan addresses separately (below). For the purposes of this plan, the only discussion related to civil disturbance is provided in the mass casualty/mass fatality incident profile.
50 Page 445 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Mass Casualty/Fatality Incidents
A mass casualty incident (MCI) is any incident that produces casualties (living and dead) in such number and severity of injuries that it overwhelms the available emergency medical services resources. A mass fatality incident (MFI) is a specialized form of MCI in which most or all of the resulting casualties are deceased. An MFI is always an MCI, but an MCI isn't always an MFI; the difference lies in who is responsible for the scene, what operations they undertake (for example, rescue versus recovery), and the follow-on effects.
MCIs tend to come in several forms, both prosaic (train or bus crashes, industrial accidents, HAZMAT releases) and uncommon (floods, landslides, earthquakes, violent protests, or riots).
The events more likely to cause MFIs are marked by their violence: mass shootings, airplane crashes, building collapses, mass poisonings (accidental or deliberate), or terrorist attacks.
Most of these causes are self-explanatory. Two require further definition:
1) Mass shootings. The FBI defines an active shooter as "one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area."12 The Investigative Assistance for Violent Crimes Act of 201213 defines mass killings as "3 or more killings in a single incident." Put together, they describe a phenomenon that has become common in America: one (usually) or more people arrive at a public place and start shooting everyone they see. The FBI's list of U.S. active shooter incidents between 2000 and 201814 cites 289 cases from all across America, with a notable increase in numbers in recent years. Unfortunately, this is likely a severe undercount. 2) Terrorism. Executive Order 13224, signed by President George W. Bush on September 23, 2001, defines terrorism as "an activity that (1) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, property, or infrastructure; and (2) appears to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or hostage-taking."15 This term is broken down into two categories, defined by the FBI:16
a. Domestic terrorism is "[v]violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature." b. International terrorism is "[v]violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored)."
12 FBI Active Shooter Safety Resources. https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/active-shooter-safety-resources 13 S.1793-Investigative Assistance for Violent Crimes Act of 2012. https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/senate- bill/1793/text
14 FBI.Active Shooter Incidents in the United States from 2000-2018. https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/active-shooter- safety-resources/active-shooter-i ncidents-from-2000-to-2018 15 U.S. Department of State. Executive Order 13224. https://www.state.gov/executive-order-13224/ 16 FBI What We Investigate:Terrorism. https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism 51 Page 446 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
LOCATION AND EXTENT
Hazardous Materials Release
Hazardous materials and chemicals are used daily in households and businesses throughout Upland. In addition to the locations of large commercial and industrial uses, sources of hazardous materials can originate from seemingly harmless places such as gas stations, auto repair shops, dry cleaners, medical centers, and almost any industrial business. Hazardous waste can take the form of liquids, solids, contained gases, or sludge. It can be the by-product of manufacturing processes or simply discarded commercial products, like cleaning fluids and pesticides.
In severe situations, Upland may also be at risk of HAZMAT release events on a regional level.
With the right prevailing wind conditions, airborne toxic material could spread to and impact various parts of the air basin, including areas of Upland.
Figure 3-5 identifies stationary hazardous materials locations within Upland that store, use, or produce hazardous materials regulated by the state. While these locations are fixed, roadways throughout the community are commonly used to transport hazardous materials and waste.
These facilities are common locations for spills and releases. While there's no scale for hazardous materials release, the probability of an incident is anticipated to be occasional (less than 10% chance of occurrence) each year.
Landfill Subsidence
The Upland Landfill was closed in 1979 when it reached its capacity and failed to meet the more stringent environmental standards established by the Resource and Recovery Act of 1976.
Storage of waste in the landfill caused hazardous methane gas production, increased the risk of groundwater contamination, including the potential presence of unregulated toxins and hazardous materials. Located between 14th and 15th Streets along Campus Avenue, the landfill served the community for decades before its closure. The sites' closure followed the standard regulatory pattern of phasing out older, unlined disposal sites in favor of modern sanitary facilities. Following its closure, the site was utilized for landfill gas management, with a reciprocating engine burner for landfill gas being listed as "defeated" later in 1983. Closure of the site was intended to avoid contact with hazardous materials within the community and the people living there. Subsidence can affect the area formerly occupied by the site due to landfill compaction, which can create voids and compact the underlying soil as waste (especially organic materials) decompose over time. The site is currently used as a storage facility for recreational vehicles.
Today, the City of Upland manages its waste disposal needs through modern facilities and programs, such as the Household Hazardous Waste Collection Center located on N. Benson Ave.
52 Page 447 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 3-5. Stationary Hazardous Materials Locations W, ,, Jirl . 7 7-.1cmithin Upland 41" . r
r f ' _— _ , �/f t �/ /1j '� ` _ Almond St I
,u":\ San Antonio
. ,�-. F Heights
s10)1,.�
' I
�adyaa jrdSt
/ El of .� ,nr i L -
0' ''
5. W 22nd St z B .
c :0_'
V
n z /J
W 21st St
Parnell('Dr a' W 20th St CITY OF
C_ULAI IONGA
w19thSt 4
i C, W 18thSt m
a _) ¢
c
R �
1581 ft • o z `149 n
m
2 `' W 16th St
—z�a,0I - Upland Hills IC
ry • Country Club
I �I -- W 15th St
z z
r w
•
W 14th St E 14th St a,
Cable Airnct
R
• 2 C'� 0
z
W 'othip Blvd • c� -'E
66 a • W 11th St E 11th St
tout 83
jes •
VI Arrow Ste • W Arrow Hwy Upland E Arrow vy e, •
• -` • Y
-• Ir.• .
_ • E 9th SrSt
*row H. • W Sth St •� It h S�
• Olive St
Moreno St - u •• W 7th St 61 ®F 7th St
CI W�bth St J — ��, I
Elk St
fM IR \ ,
W 5th St CITY OF �\ F 5th St
_
Q City Boundary 0 Cal EPA Environmentally
f CITY OF — Regulated Facilities
_.It
UPLAND all DISC• Cleanup Sites
Parks
Source:San Bernardino County,
ESRI,California Department of
Toxic Substance Control,California
Environmental Protection Agency
53 Page 448 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Transportation Accidents
The City has one airport inside its borders and lies beneath the flight paths and control zones of several nearby airports.
• Cable Airport (CCB) is a non-towered general aviation airport located two miles northwest of Upland's central business district and adjacent to its industrial area. It bases over 270 aircraft and generates over 92,000 flight operations a year. The FAA CAROL database shows reports of five fatal accidents out of 26 reported incidents since 2000.
Departure and approach patterns fly at low altitudes directly over central Upland. • Ontario International Airport (ONT) is located south of Upland, two miles east of downtown Ontario. The easternmost of Los Angeles's major airports, it generated 106,715 flight operations in 2024 involving 7.08 million passengers and over 793,000 tons of cargo. It services various scheduled airlines and is the regional hub for UPS and a major distribution depot for FedEx. While typical departure and arrival patterns take traffic west or east, some air routes overfly Upland. The FAA CAROL database lists ten reported incidents since 2000 with no reported fatalities. • San Bernardino International Airport (SBD) is 23.7 miles east of Upland near downtown San Bernardino. Once a major Air Force base, SBD now services a commuter airline and various Part 291 air cargo services, generating 52,218 flight operations in 2024. Like ONT, it can accommodate Boeing 747s and Airbus 380s. SBD also hosts an executive terminal for business jets. The FAA CAROL database lists 11 reported accidents since 2000, including one fatal accident, although it's unclear how many involved the airport. Approach and departure patterns may take aircraft directly over Upland.
• March Air Reserve Base (RIV) in Moreno Valley is 26.7 miles southeast of Upland. It's the sole military airfield left in the Inland Empire and serves as a transit point for various military aircraft as well as the base for the 452nd Air Mobility Wing operating C-17s and KC-135s. California Air National Guard squadrons operate F-15s and MQ-9 Reaper drones from the field. The greatest threat posed by RIV's operations lies not in the volume of its operations, but in their type: high-performance military aircraft, potentially armed fighter jets and helicopters, and cargo aircraft possibly carrying hazardous payloads.
• Other airports that contribute to the crowded sky above Upland include:
o Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
o John Wayne Airport (SBD) (initial approach begins over the San Bernardino Valley and proceeds over the San Gabriel Valley)
o Chino Airport (CNO), a three-runway general aviation, executive, and reliever airport, which generates over 164,000 flight operations a year o A host of smaller general aviation airfields, such as Riverside Municipal, Corona Municipal, Redlands Municipal, and Brackett Field.
54 Page 449 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Freight and passenger trains cross Upland 24 hours a day, seven days a week, serving businesses, commuters, and tourists. These trains may travel over 60 mph. A Metrolink commuter passenger car can hold 147 seated passengers and many more standing; Amtrak passenger cars can hold anywhere from 65 to 95 passengers each.
A Southern California Gas transmission pipeline cuts across the southern edge of Upland just north of Interstate 10.17 Figure 3-6 shows the approximate route this pipeline takes across the City.
Figure 3-6. Approximate Route of a Southern California Gas Transmission Pipeline y en DIM 4;aar w 71; r ) -F ';' -7 1 / -d / , 1f,
,A[}( /,[1 S S ) •_ Almond st
t 1 I )1')�t t l' 1'
San Antonio
Heights Hillside
n a
,m rd St
a'
tt
z
W 22nd St E Ban),
it 3
W21st5t D CITY OF
Pamello c- in
w_©st atci
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
W 19th St
W 1 Bth St
a' a'
a t7 1587/r a 2 749 ^
25 W 16th St
—z �`6 a Upland Hills
g rt Country Club
0 W 15th St /j
ri
W 14th St E 14th St
a ¢
Cable Airport 00
(���{(�\)
2 M a
z
W Foothill Blvd C> El M
CO 11th St E 1 •�
t 1T�
le �_ /
W Arrow Rte W Arrow Hwy U E Arrow Hwy
W 9th St (CO)) U
E 9th St
Arrow Hwy ‘ CO
lQ — O __ `
E 8th s
Olive St
Moreno St St w -L•1- - L il
1t
1° so fD et -
CI / W 6th 5t E 6th St
R
W 5th St CITY OF e t,-st
Q City Boundary ® City Facility
/ CITY OF Rail
141 _ UPLAND
� Parks Non-Public Facility
Parks Facility
Gas Transmission � SO...:San Betnardfno
Pipeline \p) Transportation Infrastructure P a e Ma I•Net`onal pe Ppmg ystem
17 National Pipeline Mapping System. https://pvnpms.phmsa.dot.gov/PublicViewer/ 55 Page 450 of 654
Cybercrime Incidents
We can predict what areas a flood will damage or the kinds of buildings that will fail in an earthquake. However, there are far too many ways to misuse or abuse an information system, and far too many objectives to be served by doing so, to let us do anything more than guess at how and why any particular system may be attacked, and by whom.
There's no central authority in charge of cataloguing hardware and software vulnerabilities or publicizing them to users. (If there were, it would be the number one target for hackers worldwide.) Each individual manufacturer discovers these flaws through internal testing, customer trouble reports, hacking incidents, or notices issued by third parties, such as the makers of security hardware or software, academic researchers, or white-hat hackers. The manufacturer then has to devise a patch (if possible), notify its customers (if possible), and hope that the customers will quickly apply the fix to close the vulnerability. With this process, the wonder isn't that there are so many vulnerable information systems, but that there are no secure systems at all.
Some major hardware and software manufacturers aggressively assess their products for vulnerabilities and push out regular updates to fix them. For example, Microsoft issues numerous security and quality updates every month for its Windows operating system and other products. Smaller companies may not patch their products regularly or may wait to roll out security fixes with product updates they issue every few months or every year. Some vulnerabilities (such as passwords embedded in loT device firmware) may never be fixed because the systems themselves aren't designed to allow it. Of course, patches and updates are only useful if the users or system administrators install them—a common failing that's been at the root of several major cyberattacks.
System administrators are ultimately responsible for the security of their systems. They may find vulnerabilities through manufacturers' notices, articles in the specialized press, alerts generated by cybersecurity software or hardware installed on the system, and bulletins issued by agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security's National Cyber Awareness System.
Mass Casualty/Fatality Incidents
MCIs and MFIs can occur anywhere, although public spaces and locations where many people congregate are most common. A list of the places where mass shootings and terrorist attacks have happened since 2000 is a description of our everyday world: offices, parks, schools, daycare centers, places of worship, grocery stores, shopping centers, restaurants, movie theaters, nightclubs, airports, festivals, athletic events...the list goes on endlessly.
While it's commonly thought that terrorists of whatever stripe will try to attack infrastructure or government-related targets, the reality is that they are far more likely to attack the same soft targets as do mass shooters. The only difference is their motivation.
MCIs are typically measured by the fatalities, injuries, and destruction they cause; no universal scale is used to measure these events.
56 Page 451 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
PAST EVENTS
Hazardous Materials Release
Upland has experienced an average of 5.33 hazardous materials spills reported annually to the Cal OES Spill Release Reporting database. Table 3-10 displays this data. Most of these incidents involve the release of sewage and petroleum products.
TABLE 3-10: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE REPORTING
Year Reported Releases
2010 9
2011 3
2012 8
2013 3
2014 7
2015 5
2016 6
2017 3
2018 5
2019 5
2020 7
2021 4
2022 9
2023 4
2024 2
Annual Avg. 5.57
Source: https://www.caloes.ca.gov/cal-oes-divisions/fire-rescue/hazardous-materials/spill-release-reporting Landfill Subsidence
No incidents of general subsidence have been identified within the City. The closed landfill location is annually inspected for signs of disturbance, which can range from cracking in the asphalt cover to ground movement (subsidence). The City frequently monitors these activities and conducts repairs as occurred in 2023.
Transportation Accidents
Transportation accidents happen regularly across the country. Some examples from California:
• On August 31, 1986, a four-seat Piper Archer aircraft originating from Torrance Airport collided with Aeromexico Flight 498, a DC-9 on descent into Los Angeles International Airport. Both aircraft crashed into northeastern Cerritos. All 67 people on both aircraft and another fifteen people on the ground died; the crash also destroyed four houses and damaged seven more.
57 Page 452 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland • At 4:22 p.m. on September 12, 2008, a Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink) passenger train ran a red signal and collided head-on with a Union Pacific freight train in Chatsworth. Twenty-five people died, 135 were injured (46 critically), and the crash caused over $7 million in damage.
• A thirty-inch Pacific Gas & Electric natural gas pipeline exploded on September 9, 2010, in San Bruno, California. The explosion and resulting fire in the suburban Crestmoor neighborhood killed eight people, blew a 167-foot-long, 40-foot-deep crater in the street, and destroyed 35 homes. Over 200 firefighters battled the resulting eight-alarm fire, which burned for over 12 hours.
• On October 23, 2016, a USA Holiday tour bus returning to Los Angeles from the Red Earth Casino near the Salton Sea crashed into a tractor-trailer rig near Palm Springs, killing the driver and 12 passengers and injuring dozens of others.18 Cybercrime Incidents
Cybercrime is geography independent. Threat factors can conduct their attacks from anywhere in the world that has a sufficiently robust information infrastructure to support their activities.
Profit-seeking threat actors may not even know or care where their victims are; their attacks seek out particular vulnerabilities in systems. Brett Callow, a threat analyst at Emsisoft, told the Washington Post, "Most ransomware attacks are spray-and-pay in nature, and those hit are the ones with the weakest systems. Local governments seem to have the weakest systems."19 For example, an August 2019 mass ransomware attack against 22 Texas state and local government information systems mauled Wilmer, a town of 4,000 people on the far fringes of Dallas that had neither the financial nor the personnel resources to meet the criminals' demands.
DDoS and TDoS attacks are motivated by "an interest in obtaining financial reward, making an ideological statement, creating a geopolitical advantage, or exacting revenge for a particular government action, corporate campaign, or policy stance."20 They're still a favorite tool of ideological threat actors who often aim their attacks at government information and communication systems. The victimized government entity may not have done anything to earn the attackers' ire other than being part of a class of disfavored entities (law enforcement, public health, military, foreign policy, etc.).
Upland is in no way immune to cyberattacks by being small, semi-obscure, inoffensive, or in a "nice" neighborhood.
Another difficulty in sizing the threat is that victims report only some small fraction of cyberattacks. No one can even agree on how small that fraction is; estimates range from less than 10% to perhaps 25%. What reporting there is, is fragmented among various public and private organizations and databases. The public is more likely to hear about attacks against 18 "Police: 'No appearance of braking'in deadly bus crash." CNN, Oct.24, 2016. https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/23/us/california- bus-accident/
19 "Ransomware poses threat to vulnerable local governments." Washington Post,Aug.22,2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/09/07/cybersecurity-202-ransomware-is-wreaking-havoc-us-cities/ 20 "The risks of DDoS attacks for the public sector."Government Computer News,Jan. 15,2021. https://gcn.com/2021/01/the- risks-of-ddos-attacks-for-the-publ ic-sector/315952/
58 Page 453 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland public-sector victims because of state and federal transparency laws, though smaller agencies in states with weak transparency laws may be able to slide by without releasing this information.
With this in mind, following are some national statistics and specific cyberattacks against small- to-medium-sized jurisdictions to provide insight into the possible costs and consequences for Upland in a potential future attack.
• At least one reported ransomware attack against a U.S. city, county, or state government happened each month in 2022. Somerset County, NJ (population 330,151) and Quincy, IL (pop. 40,111) were May's victims. Quincy spent over $600,000 countering its attack and restoring its systems (out of a $47.8 million budget) in an attempt to avoid paying a ransom of less than $500,000.21
• In 2020, at least 1,794 U.S. governmental and educational organizations reported experiencing a ransomware attack.22 At least 113 of these were against governmental organizations at all levels, including Tillamook County, OR (pop. 26,782), Hall County, GA(pop. 203,136), and Torrance, CA(pop. 145,000).
• Tillamook County lost the use of its network for nearly two weeks and eventually paid the hackers $300,000 for a decryptor after discovering its backups were also compromised.23
• The Hall County incident provides an unusually detailed view of the cost of responding to a ransomware attack. The attack started on October 7, 2020, causing the county to shut down all its information systems...too late. While its public safety systems still worked, around 2,000 workstations needed to be wiped and reconfigured, leaving the parts of the county government not associated with public safety "back to 1980," in the words of Assistant County Administrator Zach Propes—including the county's response to Hurricane Zeta. The county's network finally returned to service on December 15. All told, Hall County spent $1.7 million to avoid paying ransom to restore its systems: $1.13 million for infrastructure changes, $478,000 for recovery activities, $85,000 for security monitoring, and $30,590 for force-account overtime.24 (The 2020 Hall County budget was $103 million.)
• A ransomware attack on the City of Torrance on 1 March 2020 took down the city's website, email system, and credit card processing system. The DopplePaymer attackers demanded 100 bitcoin ($689,147) in ransom from the city, claiming they had encrypted 150 servers and 500 workstations to steal more than 200 gigabytes of files.25 While the city claims it never paid the ransom, it spent $50,000 on an insurance deductible, and DopplePaymer put over 200GB of stolen data on the dark web, including personal 21 "May ransomware attacks strike municipal governments, IT firms." TechTarget,Jun.2,2022. https://www.techtarget.com/searchsecu rity/news/252521021/May-ransomware-attacks-stri ke-m u n icipal-governments-IT-firms 22 "The State of Ransomware in the US: Report and Statistics 2020."Emsisoft Malware Lab,Jan. 18,2021. https://blog.emsisoft.com/en/37314/the-state-of-ransomware-i n-the-us-report-and-statistics-2020/ 23 "Top 10 cybersecurity incidents in 2020."ZDNetLive,Sep.4,2020. https://www.znetlive.com/blog/top-10-cybersecurity- incidents-in-2020/
24 "Hall County's'crippling'cyberattack last year cost$1.7M. Here's what else we've learned since then." Gainesville Times, Dec. 18,2021. https://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/government/hall-countys-crippling-cyberattack-last-year-cost-l7m- heres-what-else-weve-learned-since-then/
25 "Cyberattacks continue amid COVID-19 pandemic."Daily Breeze,Apr.23,2020. https://www.dailybreeze.com/2020/04/23/cyberattacks-conti nue-amid-covid-19-pandemic/ 59 Page 454 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland information about city employees.26 No estimates of lost revenues or productivity, excess overtime, or tort claims are available.
• An attack using Maze ransomware took down the email, phones, 311 customer service, and online electric and sanitation payment systems belonging to the City of Pensacola, FL (pop. 52,918) for several days in December 2019. While the attackers took pains to not affect 911 service—the city was still dealing with the NAS Pensacola mass shooting—they did steal 6GB of city data and demanded $1 million in Bitcoin for a decryptor.27 Pensacola didn't pay the ransom, but it did pay for a systems audit by Deloitte &Touche and identity protection services for 57,000 people affected by the data loss.28 Similar attacks in June 2019 affected Lake City, FL (pop. 12,166), which paid $460,000 to the cybergang that encrypted its systems, and Riviera Beach, FL (pop. 35,025), which paid $600,000.29
Ransomware isn't the only threat. DDoS and TDoS attacks against vital services can be as damaging but are easier to launch and harder to block. TDoS attacks can last for several days.
As the transition to Next Generation 911 (NG911) proceeds, Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs)will become more vulnerable to DDoS attacks as well as more traditional TDoS attacks; NG911 is based on Voice-over-IP architecture using the Internet, providing hackers with more avenues of attack.
• On Oct. 26, 2016, a junior hacker experimenting with Apple iOS exploits accidentally unleashed code that caused a TDoS attack against PSAPs in twelve states.30 During that attack, it took only a hundred spurious calls arriving in a few minutes to shut down 911 service for Surprise, AZ (pop. 139,007) and Peoria, AZ (pop. 172,109).31 While this discussion focuses on direct attacks against U.S. city and county governments, there's no need for cybercriminals or cyberterrorists to go after a government agency's systems to damage that agency. Over 1,300 of those 2020 ransomware attacks mentioned previously affected public schools and colleges. Compromised system vendors (Microsoft Exchange Server, 2021), utilities (Delta-Montrose Electric Association, CO, 2021), communications providers (T-Mobile, 2018-21; Bandwidth.com, 2021), or hospitals (too many to mention) can interrupt vital services, expose confidential personal data, or both.
Mass Casualty/Fatality Incidents
The following MCIs/MFIs have occurred within San Bernardino County, the state, or the nation and may be relevant to the community:
26 "Hackers post Calif.city's data online after it denied leak."Statescoop,Apr. 22, 2020. https://statescoop.com/hackers-post- torrance-california-data-online-after-denied-leak/
27 "Maze Ransomware Behind Pensacola Cyberattack,$1M Ransom Demand."Bleeping Computer, Dec. 11,2019. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/maze-ransomware-behind-pensacola-cyberattack-1 m-ransom-demand/ 26 "Cyberattack postmortem reveals Florida city lost 6GB of data."Insurance Business America, Feb. 12, 2020. https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/cyber/cyberattack-postmortem-reveals-florida-city-lost-6gb-of-data- 213486.aspx
29 "Pensacola Ransomware Attack Update:Cybercriminals Release Data."MSSPAlert, Dec.26,2019. https://www.msspalert.com/cybersecurity-breaches-and-attacks/ransomware/pensacola-ransomware-attack-data-released/ 30 "DHS:Teenager's malware disrupted 911 call centers in 12 states."Cyberscoop, Nov. 14,2016. https://www.cyberscoop.com/911-call-center-ddos-dhs-maricopa-county/ 31 "Young hacker arrested for disrupting 911 Service with a TDoS attack."Security Affairs, Oct. 31, 2016. https://securityaffai rs.co/wordpress/52895/cyber-cri me/911-service-attacks.html 60 Page 455 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland • April 19, 1995: Timothy McVeigh detonated a bomb outside the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, OK. The blast was so powerful that the Federal Building was destroyed, and more than 300 nearby buildings were damaged or destroyed. The bombing killed 168 people, including 19 children. Timothy McVeigh's motive for bombing the Federal Building was that he hoped to inspire a revolution against the federal government.32
• April 15, 2013: Two bombs detonated near the finish line of the Boston Marathon. The explosion killed three spectators and wounded more than 264 other people. Police captured 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in connection with the bombing; the second suspect, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, died following a shootout with law enforcement.
Investigators concluded that the Tsarnaev brothers planned and conducted the attack on their own and were not connected to any specific terrorist group.33 • December 2, 2015: A terrorist attack consisting of a mass shooting and an attempted bombing occurred at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California. The perpetrators—Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, a married couple living in the city of Redlands—targeted a San Bernardino County Department of Public Health training event and Christmas party of about 80 employees in a rented banquet room.
Fourteen people were killed and 22 others were seriously injured. Farook was a U.S.- born citizen of Pakistani descent who worked as a health department employee.34 • October 1, 2017: Stephen Paddock opened fire on the Route 91 Harvest Festival concert in Las Vegas from an elevated position at the Mandalay Bay Hotel. The attack resulted in 61 people killed (including two victims who died in 2019 and 2020 and Paddock himself) and 867 injured. Paddock shot and killed himself before responding officers reached him. The FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit determined no clear motivation for the attack. Although this attack did not occur in California, many California residents were affected by the event, as more than half of the 61 people killed were from California.35
• January 21, 2023: A 72-year-old shooter, Huu Can Tran, committed the deadliest mass shooting in the history of Los Angeles County in Monterey Park. Tran killed eleven people and injured nine others at the Star Ballroom Dance Studio after a nearby, all-day Lunar New Year Festival, and at the Lai Lai Ballroom in nearby Alhambra. He died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound during a standoff with police in Torrance the next day.36 • October 25, 2023: Forty-year-old Robert Card conducted a spree shooting in Lewiston, Maine, United States, killing 18 people and wounding 13 others. The initial attack occurred at the Just-In-Time Recreation bowling alley during a youth league event, 32 Federal Bureau of Investigation. Famous Cases and Criminals. https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/oklahoma-city- bombing
33 History.com Editors.June 2019. Boston Marathon Bombing. https://www.history.com/topics/21st-century/boston-marathon- bombings
34 Bringing Calm to Chaos:A Critical Incident Review of the San Bernardino Public Safety Response to the December 2,2015, Terrorist Shooting Incident at the Inland Regional Center. (2016).Office of Community Oriented Policing Services(COPS Office), U.S. Department of Justice. https://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter/Home.aspx?page=detail&id=COPS- W0808&utm
35 Los Angeles Times Staff."Las Vegas Shooting Victims: Portraits of the Fallen."October 2017. https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-na-las-vegas-shootings-victims-list-20171002/ 36 "2023 Monterey Park Shooting."Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023 Monterey Park shooting 61 Page 456 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland followed shortly by a second shooting at the Schemengees Bar & Grille Restaurant.
Following an organized search, police found Card dead from a self-inflicted wound.37 • January 1, 2025: Shamsud-Din Bahar Jabbar drove a pickup truck into a Bourbon Street crowd celebrating New Year's Eve in New Orleans. He killed 14 people and injured over
57. He may also have delivered or set two IEDs prior to his attack on the crowd, none of which are known to have exploded. The investigation is still ongoing as of this writing, but it appears Jabbar may have become radicalized through the Internet and may have been inspired by Islamic State-linked vehicle attacks in Europe.38
RISK OF FUTURE EVENTS
Hazardous Materials Release
Most of the release events within Upland have occurred due to human error, malfunctioning equipment, or a deliberate act. Given this, it is anticipated that future events within Upland will include minor incidents like some of the past occurrences identified above in Table 3-9.
Activities to prevent future releases, as well as response strategies, should take this into consideration. As identified in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), the future probability of hazardous materials release is likely with between a 0.1% and a 1% chance of occurrence each year.
Landfill Subsidence
Subsidence can potentially remain a concern for the City due to decomposition of waste at the former site. It is anticipated that minor events could occur in the future. As identified in Table 3- 4, the future probability of subsidence events occurring has an annual probability of between
0.1% and 0.01%.
Transportation Accidents
As mentioned before, because the different transportation-related modalities are so omnipresent, transportation accidents happen regularly and typically don't result in much more than a localized cleanup problem, a short-lived traffic tie-up, or a handful of injuries. However, a significant transportation accident can be highly destructive and costly in lives and property.
As identified in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), the future probability of a significant transportation accident is considered possible, however extremely rare, it has between 0.01% and 0.001% of occurrence each year.
Cybercrime Incidents
Cybercrime and cyberterrorism will only grow in scope and capability over time. As organized crime and national actors (militaries and intelligence agencies) become more involved and cyber warfare becomes established doctrine among nation states, highly skilled and well- resourced hackers will pose an ever-greater threat to IT systems of all stripes. State and local governments will continue to be targets, especially as they are known to be soft targets. As 37 "2023 Lewiston Shootings."Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023Lewistonshootings 38 FBI. Bourbon Street Attack Investigation Updates. https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/bourbon-street-attack- investigation-updates
62 Page 457 of 654
2(
identified in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), a "highly likely" probability indicates a greater than 10% chance of a damaging cyberattack occurring annually.
Mass Casualty/Fatality Incidents
Given that MCIs and MFIs can stem from a variety of factors—infrastructure decay, extreme weather, industrial accidents, economics, societal pressures, warfare, mental health, geopolitics, national or local politics, religion, etc.—it's impossible to predict when an incident will occur. Upland doesn't host any significant national or state facilities and is unlikely to attract the attention of international terrorist groups. However, most MCIs and MFIs in the U.S. are caused by disasters or by "the guy next door."39 Unfortunately, these events are increasingly common and can happen anywhere. As identified in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), the future probability of an MCl/MFI incident is considered possible, however extremely rare, with between 0.01% and 0.001% of occurrence each year.
CLIMATE CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS
Hazardous Materials Release
Climate-related natural hazard events, such as increased precipitation and subsequent flooding, could cause an increase in hazardous materials release. Some of these incidents could result from transportation crashes (due to poorer road conditions) or damage to storage containers or vessels containing these substances. Climate-related hazards could also exacerbate the effects and impacts of such events. For example, heavier rains could lead to more runoff from a contaminated site with hazardous materials. These issues should be monitored during the five-year implementation period of this plan.
Landfill Subsidence
Climate change may bring about an increase in subsidence associated with warmer temperatures and increased precipitation. While the site appears to be stable, if temperatures increase over time and the asphalt cap on top of the landfill degrades more quickly, or experiences more cracking due to the temperature changes, the landfill materials could be exposed more easily. In addition, more cracking could allow water infiltration to become easier, impacting settlement. Increased temperatures and more intense precipitation could impact operations and maintenance of the landfill cap, increasing potential exposure of underlying materials, which could increase settlement.
Transportation Accidents
Climate change may bring about an increase in transportation accidents in a number of ways. • Over-pumping groundwater sources can cause ground subsidence (this is already happening in California's Central Valley). Sinking land can damage bridges and roadways and break pipelines, leading to vehicle crashes or explosive pipeline breaches.
39 "Of the 172 individuals who engaged in public mass shootings covered in the database, 97.7%were male."National Institute of Justice,"Public Mass Shootings: Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of U.S. Mass Shootings with Firearms, Generating Psychosocial Histories," February 3,2022, nij.ojp.gov: https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/public-mass-shootings- database-amasses-details-half-century-us-mass-shootings 63 Page 458 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
• More numerous and severe storms could cause or contribute to more air accidents, especially in general aviation operations in which less-experienced pilots may find themselves overmatched by conditions they aren't used to and can't cope with. • Likewise, more severe storms, high-volume rains, and flooding may undermine roads, creating hazards that contribute to more road accidents involving high-profile and high- weight vehicles.
• High winds generated by extreme storms can and do knock over high-profile vehicles, including those carrying hazardous cargo.
Cybercrime Incidents
As with MCIs/MFIs, it's possible but as yet unproven that the ill effects of climate change may aggravate existing societal tensions and inspire more people to lash out in bloody ways.
Restrictions on water or power supply, spiraling food costs due to reduced availability, or rises in utility rates or gas prices could cause people already on edge to take out their frustrations on their schools, offices, or stores.
Mass Casualty/Fatality Incidents
The link between MCIs/MFIs and climate change isn't well understood. However, it has been suggested that the impacts of a changing climate may exacerbate existing social, political, religious, and ethnic tensions. For example, longer, more intense droughts may restrict food supply or limit economic growth for cities, regions, or even whole countries. Nevertheless, the likelihood of climate change impacting MCIs/MFIs in Upland is negligible since these changes are more likely to impact developments on the national or international level. 64 Page 459 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Hazard Profile: Severe Weather
Severe weather poses a risk to life and property in Upland by creating conditions that disrupt essential systems such as public utilities, telecommunications, and transportation routes.
Severe weather is generally any destructive weather event, but in Upland, it usually occurs as extreme heat, drought, or severe wind.
DESCRIPTION
Extreme Heat
Extreme heat is a period when temperatures are abnormally high relative to the normal temperature range. There are generally three types of extreme heat events:
1) Extreme Heat Days: A day during which the maximum temperature surpasses 98 percent of all historic high temperatures for the area, using the time between April and October from 1950 to 2005 as the baseline.
2) Warm Nights: A day between April and October when the minimum temperature exceeds 98 percent of all historic minimum daytime temperatures observed between 1950 and 2005.
3) Extreme Heat Waves:A successive series of extreme heat days and warm nights where extreme temperatures do not abate. While no universally accepted minimum length of time for a heatwave event exists, Cal-Adapt considers four successive extreme heat days and warm nights to be the minimum threshold for an extreme heatwave.
Drought
Drought is a deficiency of rain over an extended period, usually a season or more. This results in a water shortage for some activity, group, or environmental sector. "Drought" as a condition is relative to some long-term average balance between precipitation, evaporation, and transpiration in a particular area—what residents consider "normal." It's also related to the timing (e.g., principal season of occurrence, delays at the start of the rainy season, occurrence of rains in relation to principal crop growth stages) and the effectiveness of the rains (such as rainfall intensity and the number of rainfall events). Drought is often associated with other climatic factors—such as high temperatures, high wind, and low relative humidity—that can significantly aggravate its severity.
Drought isn't merely a physical phenomenon or natural event. Its impacts on society results from the interplay between a natural event (less precipitation than expected resulting from climatic variability) and the demand people place on the water supply. Humans often aggravate drought's impact. The economic and environmental effects and personal hardships caused by recent droughts in both developing and developed nations have underscored the vulnerability of all societies to this "natural" hazard.
A single dry year may not constitute a drought in California; however, it can serve as a reminder that droughts are a natural part of the state's water cycle. California's extensive water supply infrastructure—its reservoirs, groundwater basins, pipelines, aqueducts, and so on—mitigates the effect of short-term dry periods for most water users. 65 Page 460 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Defining when a drought begins is a function of drought impacts to water users. Drought is highly variable depending on location. Hydrologic conditions constituting a drought for water users in one location may not constitute a drought for water users elsewhere, or for water users having a different water supply. Individual water suppliers may use criteria such as rainfall/runoff, amount of water in storage, or expected supply from a water wholesaler to define their water-supply conditions.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), and academic institutions such as the University of Nebraska- Lincoln's National Drought Mitigation Center generally agree that there's no clear definition of when a drought begins or ends.
Severe Wind
Windstorms and severe weather pose a risk to life and property in the region by creating conditions that disrupt essential systems such as public utilities, telecommunications, and transportation routes. High winds can and do occasionally cause tornado-like damage to local homes and businesses. Severe windstorms can present a very destabilizing effect on the dry brush that covers local hillsides and urban-wildland interface areas. High winds can have destructive impacts, especially on trees, power lines, and other utility services. In Upland, severe weather patterns, such as Santa Ana Wind conditions (Figure 3-7), are recognized as hazards.
Figure 3-7. Santa Ana Winds Description
SANTA ANA WINDS
Hot,Dry Winds Of Southern California 4 '.
•Caused by large pressure gradient h e /
•Funnel through mountain passes
•Accelerate downhill to high speeds . r
•Can spread wildfires
WIND
AccuWeather 111111111111
Wind is simply the movement of air caused by differences in atmospheric temperature. High- pressure air will naturally move to areas of low pressure. Usually, the distance between these high- and low-pressure zones is far; however, these low- and high-pressure zones may occasionally be near one another. When this happens, air will flow dramatically, creating high- speed winds. The most common wind events in Southern California are the "Santa Ana" wind conditions that typically occur in the fall and winter.
When winds are fast enough, they can cause property damage to homes, public facilities, utilities, and other infrastructure. They can also uproot or topple mature trees or pick up debris and send it careening through the air. This debris can injure or even kill bystanders who may find themselves stranded outside. High-speed winds can deposit this debris in the middle of rights-of-way, such as roads, freeways, and railways, blocking exit routes for would-be evacuees or impeding access to first responders trying to reach wounded people. 66 Page 461 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
LOCATION AND EXTENT
Extreme Heat
Extreme heat events will differ from region to region since different areas have historically high temperatures. For example, an extreme heat day on the coast will feel different than an extreme heat day in the High Desert. The reason for this is how humidity affects the perceived heat that people feel. Humid conditions will make a day feel hotter than non-humid conditions, even though the temperature may be the same. The difference between the perceived and actual temperatures is known as the "heat index." To illustrate the effect of the heat index, a 90-degree day with 50 percent humidity feels like 95° F, whereas a 90° F Day with 90 percent humidity feels like 122° F. Figure 3-8 illustrates the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Weather Service Heat Index.
Extreme heat events are not limited to any part of the city. They occur with the same intensity and duration at the same time across all locations in Upland. For Upland, an extreme heat day involves a temperature that exceeds 99.7° F, and a warm night involves a temperature that exceeds 66.9°F.40 These thresholds are based on a 2% probability event.
Figure 3-8. National Weather Service Heat Index
NWS Heat Index Temperature {°F)
80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106 108 110 40 80 81 83 65 88 91 94 97 101 105 109 114 119 124 45 80 82 84 87 89 93 96 100 104 109 114 119 124 50 81 83 85 88 91 95 99 103 108 113 118 124 55 81 84 86 89 93 97 101 106 112 117 124 60 82 84 88 91 95 100 105 110 116 123 1-129 137 s= 85 82 85 89 93 98 103 108 114 121 128 136 _ 70 83 86 90 95 100 105 112 119 11T36 134 75 84 88 92 97 103 109 116 124 132
10 80 84 89 94 100 106 113 121 129
pe 85 85 90 96 102 110 117 135
90 86 91 98 105 113 122
95 86 93 100 108 117
100 87 95 103 112 121
Likelihood of Heat Disorders with Prolonged Exposure or Strenuous Activity ❑ Caution ❑ Extreme Caution • Danger • Extreme Danger Drought
Southern California's Mediterranean climate makes the region especially susceptible to variations in rainfall. The potential risk to Upland is in no way unique. Severe water shortages will affect the economic well-being of its community and that of all its neighbors.
Comparison of rainfall records from Los Angeles with water well records beginning in 1930 from the San Gabriel Valley indicates the existence of wet and dry cycles on a 10-year scale as well as for much longer periods. The climate record for the Los Angeles region beginning in 1890 40 https://cal-adapt.org/tools/local-climate-change-snapshot 67 Page 462 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland suggests increasingly dry conditions over the last century. Climate data also suggests that the last significant wet period was the 1940s. Well-level data and other sources seem to indicate the historic high groundwater levels (reflecting recharge from rainfall) occurred in the same decade. Since that time, rainfall and groundwater level trends appear to have declined. This decline may be part of a naturally occurring long-term wet/dry cycle, evidence of overuse of groundwater, or a harbinger of accelerating climate change; there's not yet clear evidence one way or another.
Climatologists compiled rainfall data from 96 stations in the state that spanned a 100-year period between 1890 and 1990. An interesting note: during the first 50 years of the reporting period, only one year (1890) had more than 35 inches of rainfall, but the second 50-year period recorded 5-year intervals (1941, 1958, 1978, 1982, and 1983) that exceeded 35 inches of rainfall in a single year. The year of maximum statewide rainfall was 1890, when the average annual rainfall was 43.11 inches; the second-wettest year on record occurred in 1983, when the state's average was 42.75 inches. The driest year of the 100-year study period was 1924, when the state's average rainfall was only 10.50 inches.
Drought is a chronic hazard, not an acute one. Its effects accumulate over months and years and are often subtle. Since there's no universally accepted definition for the beginning (or end) of a drought, we can be in the middle of a drought emergency before we know it's begun. The previously discussed hazards' damage modes can be described as demolition; drought's damage mode is closer to erosion.
Nearly every functioning process within the City depends on a reliable, safe water supply. This includes infrastructure, homes, businesses, places of employment, industry, and recreation.
Drought poses different levels of risk depending on the type of community it affects. A drought in an agricultural community may cause extensive—even fatal—damage to the local economy by killing crops or livestock. In a typical urban or suburban community such as Upland, drought's main effects are the slow degradation of the quality of life, a slowdown or end to development, and a loss of water-intensive industries.
Table 3-11 identifies the drought classifications used by the U.S. Drought Monitor program. This classification system synthesizes multiple different scales into a descriptive index.
TABLE 3-11: US DROUGHT MONITOR CLASSIFICATION SCHEME
Category Description Possible Impacts
D0* Abnormally Dry Slower growth of crops and pastures D1 Moderate Some damage to crops and pastures. Water bodies and wells are low.
Drought Some water shortages may occur or may be imminent. Voluntary water use restrictions can be requested.
D2 Severe Likely crop and pasture losses. Water shortages are common, and Drought water restrictions can be imposed.
D3 Extreme Major crop and pasture losses. Widespread water shortages and Drought restrictions.
D4 Exceptional Exceptional and widespread crop and pasture losses. Emergency Drought water shortages develop.
Source: US Drought Monitor
* DO areas are those under"drought watch," but not technically in a drought. They are potentially heading into drought conditions or recovering from drought but are not yet back to normal. 68 Page 463 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland As of December 2024, about half of California is experiencing abnormally dry to extreme drought conditions. San Bernardino County is experiencing DO (Abnormally Dry)to D3 (Extreme Drought) conditions. Figure 3-9 illustrates the severity of the drought conditions experienced in the county over the past 24 years.
Figure 3-9. Area Percentage of San Bernardino County Within U.S.
Drought Monitor Categories
1Do.00%
00.00% 011ie
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
O.DO%
Y A ? A D A A A D A A D A A A D D A D A D A Y A A A rt N N N N N N N N N N N N N rt N N N rv` N N N N N N NP O
Pa Ot O , Pa
`�j N W cP `�• �l '�j � N W D cP C -1 00O N 8 .3.
DO(Abnormally Dry) D2(Severe Drought) D4(Exceptional Drought) D1 (Moderate Drought) U D3(Extreme Drought)
USDA teoMc=
From the U,S,Drought Monitor wedsite, https://droughtmonito r.unl.edufDm Data/TimeSeries,aspx,3-31-2025 � �n Severe Wind
In Southern California, the most common type of windstorm event is called the Santa Ana winds.
During the fall and winter months, high pressure over Nevada and Utah forces air currents down from the high desert toward the ocean. As the winds descend, they heat up and increase in speed, sometimes carrying particulate matter and aggravating the respiratory health of those with allergies.41
The entire City can be affected by windstorms. Usually, they cause minimal damage; however, severe storms can cause massive damage to the City and personal property. Santa Ana winds blowing through the mountains and foothills often affect Upland. Santa Ana winds are a leading cause of wildfires in California.
Generally, winds are measured using the Beaufort scale, developed in 1805, categorizing wind events on a force scale from 0 to 12 using their speed and impacts.Any wind classified as force nine or above is generally considered a windstorm event. Table 3-12 details how the Beaufort scale classifies wind events.
41 Means,Tiffany."What Are the Santa Ana Winds?"Farmers'Almanac-Plan Your Day. Grow Your Life.,June 5, 2024. https://www.farmersalmanac.com/what-are-the-santa-ana-winds 69 Page 464 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 3-12: BEAUFORT SCALE
Force Speed (mph) Description
1 0 to 1 Calm: Smoke rises vertically, and the sea is flat 2 1 to 3 Light air: The direction of wind is shown by smoke drift, but not wind vanes
3 4 to 7 Light breeze: Wind is felt on the face, leaves rustle, and wind vanes are moved. Small wavelets appear on the ocean but do not rise 4 8 to 12 Gentle breeze: Leaves and small twigs are in motion, and light flags are extended. Large wavelets appear on the ocean, and crests begin to rise
5 13 to 18 Moderate breeze: Dust and loose paper become airborne, and small branches are moved. Small waves appear on the ocean
6 19 to 24 Fresh breeze: Small trees begin to sway and moderate waves form 7 25 to 31 Strong breeze: Large branches are in motion, and using an umbrella becomes difficult. Large waves begin to form
8 32 to 38 Near gale: Whole trees are in motion and walking against the wind can be hard. Foam from rising waves is blown in streaks
9 39 to 46 Gale: Walking is difficult, and twigs break off trees 10 47 to 54 Severe gale: Slight structural damage. Crests of waves begin to topple 11 55 to 63 Storm: Trees are uprooted and there is considerable damage to structures. Very high waves form in long, overhanging crests 12 63 to 72 Violent storm: Widespread damage. Exceptionally high waves form, and the ocean is completely covered in foam
Source: US Drought Monitor. https://www.weather.gov/mfl/beaufort
PAST EVENTS
Extreme Heat
Based on Cal-Adapt's historical information (1975 through 2004), the City experienced five extreme heat days yearly. During this same period, the City experienced a four-day heatwave approximately every four years.
In 2022, California experienced one of the worst heatwaves ever. From September 1st through September 9th, 2022, temperature records for September were shattered across the western portion of the United States, including Upland, where temperatures were reported as reaching 108° F. Prior to this, a heat wave in 1997 affected Southern California, causing five deaths.
Temperatures in Upland reached 108° F during this event. 70 Page 465 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Drought
The following sampling of droughts known to have affected the area we now call Southern California helps put the state's twentieth-century droughts into perspective. Most of the dates shown below are necessarily approximations.
• Griffin & Anchukaitis (2014) used reconstructed tree-ring data to estimate annual precipitation for California since 1200. Their study indicates there was a prolonged dry spell from about 1755 to 1820. Floods in 1825 were followed by a severe drought in 1827-29; drought returned in 1844-46.42
• The drought of 1862-64, following on the heels of the epic floods of 1861-62, drove home the final nail in the coffin of the rancho system in Southern California. More than 70% of cattle in Los Angeles County died of disease or starvation.43 • The great western drought of 1928-34 that gave us the term "Dust Bowl" was geographically centered in the Great Plains yet ultimately affected water supplies in California. The drought conditions in the Plains resulted in a large influx of people to the West Coast. Approximately 350,000 people from the Great Plains emigrated mainly to California's Central Valley.As more people moved into California, including Los Angeles County—increases in intensive agriculture led to overuse of the Santa Ana River watershed and groundwater, resulting in regional water shortages. • Yet another statewide drought began in 2012, featuring record-low Sierra snowpack, massive drawdowns of the State Water Project reservoirs, and rapid depletion of groundwater stocks that has led in some places (such as the San Joaquin Valley) to significant ground subsidence. A weak El Nino condition partly broke the drought in Northern California during the winter of 2015-16, but the drought continued in the southern part of the state for the better part of another year. According to the California Natural Resources Conservation Service, among the many effects of this drought was the extensive devastation of forests in the San Bernardino, San Jacinto, Palomar, and Sierra mountain ranges. The lack of rain and snow weakened millions of trees, making them susceptible to infestation by bark beetles.44 In turn, dry vegetation and beetle- infested trees are more susceptible to fire than healthy forests.
DWR-recorded hydrology shows that the most significant statewide droughts in the past century occurred during 1928-34 (mentioned above), 1976-77, 1987-92, 2007-09, and 2012-16.45 Figure 3-9 (above) shows that San Bernardino County has been in drought almost constantly over the past 24 years.
42 J.M. Guinn: Exceptional Years:A History of California Drought and Flood. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41167825.pdf 43 https://articles.latimes.com/1991-06-13/news/nc-7801cattle-industry 44 http://www.sbcounty.gov/calmast/sbc/cros/Docs/BarkBeetle112906ProgramLaunchFINAL2 .pdf 45 https://water.ca.gov/Water-Basics/Drought
71 Page 466 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Severe Wind
There have been several strong wind events recorded around the City of Upland. The following depicts some of these Santa Ana winds and other major windstorm events in the City, neighboring communities, San Bernardino County, and the surrounding region. Santa Ana wind events have been and will continue to be a hazard of concern for the City.46 • January 2-3, 2001: Santa Ana winds gusted at 52 mph in Ontario and 60 mph in Rialto.
The winds fan the Viejas Fire, which burned 5,500 acres. Trees and power lines were downed.
• February 8-10, 2002: Santa Ana winds gusted to 80 mph in Descanso, 78 mph in Fremont Canyon, and 76 mph in San Bernardino. On February 9, the winds blew over semis, felled trees, damaged several homes, destroyed 12 million pounds of avocados in northern San Diego County, and started numerous wildfires. Fallen power lines caused most of the wildfires, with the largest being the Gavilan Fire near Fallbrook that burned 5,763 acres and 45 homes.
• January 6-7, 2003: Very widespread Santa Ana winds blasted gusts of 100 mph in Fremont Canyon, 90 mph in Ontario, 80 mph in Upland, 72 mph in Trabuco Canyon, and 70 mph in Riverside. The storm left 2 dead and 11 injured, along with widespread property damage, road closures, power outages, fallen trees, wildfires, and crop damage.
• December 3, 2006: Offshore winds gusted to 92 mph, with seven gusts over 75 mph in northwest San Bernardino and gusts to 75 mph in Fremont Canyon. Downed power lines sparked a small fire in the Inland Empire. Sixteen power poles were downed in Valley Center.
• August 16, 2016: Gusty winds and low humidity swept through the Cajon Pass. Winds fanned the Blue Cut Fire into a fury on this day. The fire spread rapidly, forcing 84,000 mandatory evacuations and threatening 35,000 homes. Numerous roads were closed, including 1-15 in both directions for two days. The fire destroyed 105 homes and 313 smaller structures and scorched 36,274 acres before it was extinguished. • January 21-22, 2022: Strong Santa Anas peaked in the foothills of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains and adjacent valleys, ranging from 50 to 80+ mph. Numerous trees and power poles were downed in Upland, Ontario, and Claremont, crushing several vehicles, damaging homes, and knocking out power.
• October 29-31, 2023: Widespread, strong Santa Ana winds struck Southern California.
Worst hit were the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains and through northern portions of the Inland Empire and the Santa Ana Mountains. Top gusts touched 100 mph in the San Gabriels, and several foothill locations had gusts up to 70-80 mph. Very windy and dry conditions led to wildfires, including the Highland Fire, which burned nearly 2,500 acres near Aguanga.
46 "A History of Significant Weather Events in Southern California."National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. May 2017. https://www.weather.qov/media/sgx/documents/weatherhistory.pdf 72 Page 467 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
RISK OF FUTURE EVENTS
Extreme Heat
As temperatures rise throughout California, the number of extreme heat days will also increase.
According to Cal-Adapt data (which relies on NOAA data sources), the City historically (1965- 2004) experienced an average of five extreme heat days annually. That number increases to 17 days annually through 2035-2064. Cal-Adapt projects that the City may experience an annual average of 25 extreme heat days by 2070-2099, with a 30-year range of 4 to 50 days a year.
Drought
Given California's centuries-old boom/bust relationship with water and drought, it's nearly certain that Southern California in general and Upland in particular will continue to experience cycles of extreme drought punctuated by brief periods of torrential rain. Climate change (see below) will likely alter the specifics but won't change the overall theme. While the HMPC assessed a 0.1% to 1% annual probability of drought, the U.S. Drought Monitor data (above) demonstrates that the real probability is closer to 80%.
Severe Wind
Given the region's history of windstorm events in nearby cities, it is highly likely that wind events will continue to impact the city. The most probable source of wind events in the future will likely originate from the Santa Ana winds or extreme storms. All expectations are that the probability of windstorm events occurring again in the future is highly likely.As discussed in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), a "highly likely" probability indicates a greater than 10% chance of windstorms occurring annually.
CLIMATE CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS
Extreme Heat
The primary effect of climate change is warmer average temperatures. The hottest years on record have occurred since 2000, with 2024 and 2023 in the top spots.47 As climate change accelerates in the 21st century, extreme heat events are anticipated to become more frequent and intense in the city. The projection is that Upland's extreme heat days could increase between 14 and 20 days annually by 2100, and the City can expect a shift in residential and business needs for cooling and addressing heat-related issues.
Drought
If as predicted, climate change brings more of what Upland already has, the City can look forward to longer and deeper droughts, more punishing torrential rainstorms, more heat waves, and heavier winds. Drought may become a chronic scourge we endure rather than a periodic condition we manage.
47 "Topic:Temperature Rankings."NOAA. https://www.noaa.gov/topic-taqs/temperature-rankings 73 Page 468 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Severe Wind
It is anticipated that the atmospheric rivers that deliver storms to Southern California may intensify because of climate change. While the average number of storms in Southern California will remain the same, storms are expected to increase in intensity between 10 and 20 percent.48 This increase in storm intensity may also bring more intense winds to the Southern California region, including Upland.
Studies indicate that climate change may affect Santa Ana wind events in varying ways, but it is unknown whether the frequency and intensity of events may be some of those ways.
According to one study that examined two global climate models, there's a projected increase in future Santa Ana events. However, other studies have found that the number of Santa Ana events may decrease by about 20% in the future.49 Given the anticipated increases in temperatures throughout the region, future events are expected to become more severe in some cases, even if the number of events decreases.
0.8 Oskin, B. (2014).Atmospheric Rivers to Soak California as Climate Warms. Live Science. https://www.livescience.com/49225- atmospheric-rivers-double-climate-change.html
49 Hall,Alex, Neil Berg, Katharine Reich. (University of California,Los Angeles).2018. Los Angeles Summary Report.
California's Fourth Climate Change Assessment. https://www.energv.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/Req%20Report- %20SUM-CCCA4-2018-007%20LosAngeles ADA.pdf
74 Page 469 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Hazard Profile: Infrastructure Failure
DESCRIPTION
Power Failure
A power failure is an event that occurs within an electric power system when the total real or reactive power of the power plants in the system is insufficient to supply all consumers with electric power of the required quality. These events are considered a lifeline system failure.
These failures can be the primary hazard or can directly result from another hazard, such as an earthquake, extreme weather event, or flood. These failures can also be simultaneous with other lifeline system failures such as natural gas, communication, drinking water, wastewater disposal, or transportation. Power failure can exacerbate and or create detrimental effects on these operational and lifeline systems. For this hazard profile discussion, energy/power failure incidents are the primary hazard of concern; however, power failure associated with other hazard events is a concern for many of the other hazards profiled in this Plan.
Generally, these power failure events are the direct result of events beyond the control of the City. These events often occur during a time of extreme demand/need for power, such as an extreme heatwave that creates an enormous strain on the power grid as residents try to stay cool. Most of these energy outages are short-term but can last for weeks if the situation is dire.
There are three types of power/energy failures or outages; each is categorized based on duration and the actual effect of the failure/outage event:
1) Permanent: A massive loss of power typically caused by a fault on a powerline.
However, power is restored automatically once the fault has been cleared. 2) Brownout: A sag (or drop) in voltage in an electrical power supply. They can cause equipment or various operational systems to perform poorly. 3) Blackout: A total loss of power in an area. The worst form of a power outage. Blackouts can last from a few minutes to multiple weeks, depending on the nature of the causal event and the configuration of the actual electric network.
Public Safety Power Shutoff
A Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) is a practice that Southern California Edison (SCE, provider of electricity for Upland) and other utility companies may use to preemptively shut off power in high fire hazard areas to reduce fire risk during extreme and potentially dangerous weather conditions (hot, dry, and windy). According to the SCE50, PSPS events are the last resort option in a line of operational procedures employed to mitigate fire risk when conditions warrant. In considering whether to shut off power to lines in affected areas, SCE considers the following factors, which may include, but are not limited to:
• The National Weather Service has issued Red Flag Warnings for counties with SCE circuits in High Fire Risk Areas.
so Wildfire and PSPS Fact Sheets. https://www.sce.com/wildfire/psps 75 Page 470 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland • Ongoing assessments from the SCE in-house meteorologists regarding the local wind speed, humidity, and temperature conditions are informed by strategically deployed weather stations.
• Real-time situational awareness information from highly trained personnel positioned locally in High Fire Risk Areas identified as at risk for extreme weather conditions. • Input from SCE fire management experts regarding any ongoing firefighting efforts. • Specific concerns from local and state fire authorities regarding the potential consequences of wildfires in select locations.
• Awareness of mandatory or voluntary evacuation orders in place. • Expected impact of de-energizing circuits on essential services, such as public safety agencies, water pumps, traffic controls, etc.
• Other operational considerations to minimize potential wildfire ignitions.
In advance of PSPS events, SCE will inform local governments about the PSPS protocol, including the location of circuits in their jurisdictions that may be shut off during an event.
Notification is provided to residents 48 hours before the potential PSPS event, with follow-up notification occurring 24 hours before the power is shut off. Notifications will be made throughout the outage when power has been shut off and then finally again when it is restored. However, as extreme weather can be unpredictable, sometimes advance notification and coordination don't conform to this protocol. Notification may occur by phone call, text, the SCE.com website, email, and/or social media accounts.51
LOCATION AND EXTENT
Power Failure
The entire city of Upland is vulnerable to power failure. Most power failure events, as stated earlier, are not necessarily caused by humans. An overwhelming demand for power due to accidents, equipment malfunction/failure, weather conditions, or other natural hazards the City is susceptible to can be the catalyst that creates a loss of power.
According to the California Energy Commission, electricity is transmitted to the distribution network from transmission lines that originate from outside city limits from multiple 220-287kV transmission lines north of the City. The transmission lines terminate into the Upland Substation, and the neighboring city of Claremont (Figure 3-10). From these sources, power is then distributed to the City through a series of under 100kV distribution lines running through the city, generally in an east-west direction.
51 "SCE's 2020 Planning for Public Safety Power Shutoffs(PSPS)". https://www.sce.com/sites/default/files/2020- 06/SCE%E2%80%99s%202020%2OPSPS%20Preparations.pdf
76 Page 471 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 3-10. U.S. Electric Power Transmission Lines in Upland rA Banyan St
6 4 � � 4
21 •Z> g
-a 5t 19th W c 171h St
Pa1knn u'
W i8th 5t ca^
of 39S''k•vb Ann
C� 71 Loma
I5 Bkh
• Ca. in�d 1 W16th St aEIG St can ey nb 5c hod Fa se LineI z
W 19th SLq 1509
Cable Avport a oulry
b
i •!d 13th S1 lab
G 6ralnonl eh W-Foolhiit Blvd r ul athilt•E led Colleges I
r. A.11th SI
z tl Arrow Hwy Upland
pal:
Claremont h'J 9th SI 1 9th St
SIY Crs,
4ne:3
c.
Jurene t
•
Monxlalr _. .d e.r�.i -
Mit 5/ti SI http://www.caiso.com/about/Paqes/OurBusiness/ISO-history.aspx 77 Page 472 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 3-11. All Independent System Operators (ISOs) in North America Aback]
Swein
elrrkir
oae 4roi
_ E 1 t -
•
P 4,Engle d
'10114/111'
P4 ,York ISM
PJM
hierconnechcei
ISO
Vedic Reipbi4rp
Ccncil of Trsoy
Public Safety Power Shutoff
PSPS is based on circuits that provide power for certain areas. Each circuit has a name. During a Red Flag Warning or other weather event that poses a threat to a High Fire Risk Area, SCE will evaluate the state of its circuits in high-risk areas. If it finds an unacceptable risk in a particular circuit area, it will plan to de-energize that circuit when necessary. This will deprive the area served by that circuit of power until the PSPS conditions diminish.
Customers who don't live in high fire risk areas may also be affected because of the way the electrical grid is interconnected.
There are five SCE circuits providing service to the City and the surrounding region: Ferrara, Faro, Parina, Santorini, and Tully. While the Ferrara circuit primarily serves Upland the remaining circuits can potentially impact portions of the city should a PSPS event occur in the greater region and neighboring cities.
The City faces potential PSPS events in these areas. This potential is exacerbated during the hot and dry summer/fall months, especially when significant Santa Ana wind events occur. The City needs to anticipate and prepare for the potential effects of these events, including power degradation, an influx of people from neighboring communities/cities affected by power loss and/or evacuation, and increased calls for service.
PAST EVENTS
Power Failure
Due to maintenance actions or infrastructure faults, small-scale power failures frequently occur throughout Southern California. On several occasions, Upland has lost power due to human- caused errors and natural hazards. These small-bore events may affect a few dozen to a few hundred people, typically for a few hours.
78 Page 473 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland The most damaging power failures tend to occur on a regional scale, affecting Upland residents and businesses depending on the location of the failure. California has experienced some major statewide and regional energy failures due to various reasons, including:
• December 1982 (near Tracy, California): Loss of a transmission tower, two 500-kV lines, and a pair of 230-kV lines. Five million people were affected. (Equipment failure)53 • October 1989 (Loma Prieta Earthquake): Loss of substations; 1.4 million people impacted. (Seismic event)54
• August 1996 (region): Cascading impacts from loss of power from 1996 North American Blackouts.55
• December 1998 (San Francisco): Loss of substations, impacting 350,000 buildings and 940,000 people. (Infrastructure failure, human error)56 • 2000 (statewide): Power outages. (electricity crisis)57 • 2011 (Southwest Blackout): Cascading impacts from the loss of power from the 23 distinct events on 5 separate power grids impacted 1.4 million people. This was the largest power failure in California history.58
• July 2017 (Los Angeles): An explosion at a power plant caused widespread outages in San Fernando Valley.59
Public Safety Power Shutoff
PSPS-related power losses have become a regular event during fire events throughout California and are nearly too many to mention. The latest major examples happened during the January 2025 Eaton and Palisades fires, when up to 1.2 million Los Angeles County residents were without power on January 8. Additional fires and PSPS activations in Ventura, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, and San Diego counties affected more than 2.1 million customers at 11:30 a.m. that day.60 Hundreds of thousands of people remained without electrical service until late in January.
53 "The 3 Worst Power Outages in the History of the U.S". https://www.a-1-electric.com/the-3-worst-power-outages-in-the- history-of-the-u-s/
54 Eguchi, R.T.;Seligson, H.A. (1994), "Lifeline perspectives"Practical lessons from the Loma Prieta earthquake, National Academies Press.
s5 Venkatasubramanian, Mani V. (2003-08-20) "Analyzing Blackout Events: Experience from the Major Western Blackouts in 1996."
56 "Technician's error caused 1998 outage" https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Technician-s-error-caused-1998-outage-1- death-2595806.php
57 Sweeney,James L.2002."The California Electricity Crisis: Lessons for the Future." https://www.nae.edu/Publications/Bridge/OurEnergyFuture/TheCaliforniaElectricityCrisisLessonsfortheFuture.aspx 58 Medina,Jennifer(September 10,2011)"Human Error Investigated in California Blackout's Spread to Six Million".The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/10/us/10power.html 59 DWP Plant Explosion Causes Massive Power Outage In San Fernando Valley, https://laist.com/news/dwp-plant-explosion- causes-massive
6o https://www.kget.com/news/millions-without-power-in-southern-california-map-shows-latest-outages/ 79 Page 474 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
RISK OF FUTURE EVENTS
Power Failure
Today, several mechanisms are in place to monitor, manage, and adapt to changing conditions and demands to help reduce and/or eliminate energy failures. California and regional organizations such as Cal ISO, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Western Electricity Coordinating Council, North American Electric Reliability Corporation, California Public Utilities Commission, and the California Energy Commission are focused on energy production, use, and management. Each agency plays a role in planning, managing, and coordinating the allocation of energy within California.
Upland may experience a power failure anytime and anywhere throughout the year. The probability of it occurring again will always be present, as the City depends on electricity to function. As depicted in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), the future probability of a significant power failure is considered possible, however it has between 0.01% and 0.001% of occurrence each year.
Public Safety Power Shutoff
As mentioned previously, PSPS operations have become common parts of the many wildfires California experiences each year. As electric utilities continue to be hit by multi-million-dollar fines when their equipment causes or contributes to the start of a fire, they will become more aggressive in shutting off circuits whenever conditions show the possibility of a fire near their transmission towers, transformers, and distribution lines. Those conditions aren't going away.
As depicted in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), the future probability of a PSPS event is considered likely, with an annual probability of occurrence between 0.1% and 0.01%.
CLIMATE CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS
Power Failure
Projections of changing climatic conditions through the end of the century suggest that the City should address future power failure concerns. Energy demand is not expected to increase significantly throughout the City due to compliance with updated codes and requirements; however, electricity production occurs outside the City, reducing opportunities for Upland to be energy independent. To better address power failure, Upland's current and future climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts should prioritize energy efficiency measures, generating energy locally from clean and renewable sources, and building reliability & redundancy using the latest energy storage and backup systems technologies.
Public Safety Power Shutoff
As mentioned in the Hazard Profile: Fire section of this document, climate change is likely to intensify and accelerate the conditions that lead to major wildland and WUI fires. This means that more, larger fires will start more often and spread farther and faster. In turn, this will force increasingly risk-averse electric utilities to use PSPS more aggressively not only to lower the fire risk, but also to lower the risk of being held liable for the start or spread of fires. 80 Page 475 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Hazard Profile: Flood
DESCRIPTION
Surface Flooding
Flooding occurs when an area becomes inundated with more water than it can drain in a specified period. This can range from a small, confined area—such as a grassy field in a park that floods for a few hours after a rainstorm—to whole city sections, such as streets becoming impassable because of floodwaters.
When floods are small, they may represent only a minor inconvenience as some recreational pathways and curb cuts become flooded. These smaller instances of flooding, where water collects into pools of standing water, are referred to as "ponding." On the other hand, larger flood events can hamper a city's operations. For example, if multiple streets flood simultaneously, the results could prevent emergency workers from reaching people who need assistance. Flooding can also damage critical infrastructure. For instance, unprotected electronic equipment can short-circuit if it becomes inundated by floodwaters. This could lead to outages in street lighting, traffic signals, and even city and government computer systems.
Flooding has many potential causes. In Southern California, the primary cause of flooding is usually heavy rain occurring during the winter storm season. Most precipitation in California arrives either via atmospheric rivers or the ENSO cycle. Atmospheric rivers are channels of moist air located high in the atmosphere. The ENSO cycle is a regional meteorological phenomenon in the southern Pacific Ocean consisting of ocean water and air temperature variations. These variations give rise to two distinct phases: El Nino, the warm and wet phase, and La Nina, the dry and cold phase. When the El Nino phase is active, California will likely receive higher-than-normal precipitation levels. These higher-than-normal levels of rainfall can quickly overwhelm the capacity of certain sections of land to drain the precipitation before the rainwater begins to pool effectively.
A failure in infrastructure may also cause flooding. For example, a water main or sewage pipeline that bursts could cause flooding if left uncontained for a significant period of time. A more serious infrastructure failure, such as the failure of dams, reservoirs, or levees, could cause extensive flooding.
Dam and Levee Failure
Dam, reservoir, and levee failure can result from several causes, such as earthquakes, rapidly rising floodwaters, and structural design flaws. These hazards can occur instantaneously or very gradually, depending on the source of the failure. Inundation associated with these events can cause loss of life, damage property, and result in other impacts, such as displacement of persons residing in the inundation path and loss of critical infrastructure. 81 Page 476 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
LOCATION AND EXTENT
Surface Flooding
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) designates which areas in the United States are susceptible to flooding and how likely they are to experience flooding. FEMA uses a complex classification system to categorize the level of risk for each section of land. The two most well-known measures of flood event likelihood are the 100-year flood and 500-year flood zones. These designations don't refer to floods that occur every 100 or 500 years but to the likelihood of occurring yearly. For example, a 100-year flood zone has a 1 in 100—or 1 chance—of occurring in any given year, while a 500-year zone has a 1 in 500—or 0.2% chance—of occurring in any given year. These likelihood measures are combined with each locale's specific geography to produce specific flood "zone" designations. Table 3-13 shows a detailed list of all the flood zone categories used by FEMA.
TABLE 3-13: FEMA FLOODPLAIN ZONES
Zone Description
A Within a 100-year flood plain, but the water height of the 100-year flood is not known.
Al-30 or AE Within a 100-year flood plain and the water height of the 100-year flood is known.
AO Within a 100-year flood plain, and the water height of the 100-year flood is between one and three feet but not specifically known.
A99 Within a 100-year flood plain, protected by flood protection infrastructure such as dams or levees.
AH Within a 100-year flood plain, and the water height of the 100-year flood is between one and three feet and is specifically known.
AR Within a 100-year flood plain, protected by flood protection infrastructure that is not currently effective, but is being rebuilt to provide protection.
V Within a 100-year flood plain for coastal floods, but the water height of the flood is not known.
V1-30 or VE Within a 100-year flood plain for coastal floods and the water height of the flood is known.
VO Within a 100-year flood plain for shallow coastal floods with a height between one and three feet.
B Within a 500-year flood plain, or within a 100-year flood plain with a water height less than one foot (found on older maps)
C Outside of the 500-year flood plain (found on older maps) X Outside of the 500-year flood plain (found on newer maps) X500 Within a 500-year flood plain, or within a 100-year flood plain with a water height less than one foot (found on newer maps)
D Within an area with a potential and undetermined flood hazard.
M Within an area at risk of mudslides from a 100-year flood event.
N Within an area at risk of mudslides from a 500-year flood event.
P Within an area at risk of mudslides from a potential and undetermined flood event.
E Within an area at risk of erosion from a 100-year flood event. 82 Page 477 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland FEMA also uses Base Flood Elevation (BFE)to determine the minimum depth of the floodwaters during one of these flood events. For example, an area with a three-foot BFE can expect to see a minimum floodwater depth of three feet with potentially additional depth in particularly severe flood events.
FEMA has designated most of Upland as lying within Zone "X," generally meaning the City isn't in danger of a 500-year flood. The City is at risk from the kind of urban flooding caused by unusually high amounts of rain, overwhelming the storm drains and flood control channels.
The City of Upland participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) with FEMA through annual mapping review and building compliance activities. The City continues to maintain compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program.
Table 3-14 identifies relevant data regarding Upland from the NFIP.
TABLE 3-14: NFIP DATA FOR UPLAND
Total Number of Policies: 23
Total Premiums: $17,861
Coverage in Force: $7,640,000
Total Number of Closed Paid Losses: 19
$ of Closed Paid Losses: $184,044.96
#of Repetitive Loss (RL) Properties 1
#of Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) Properties 0
CRS Class Rating —
Source: FEMA(httos:// www.fema.00v/about/openfema/data-sets#nfip) , 2025 Figure 3-12 depicts the city's 100-year, and 500-year flood zones as mapped by FEMA.
Dam and Levee Failure
Inundation from the following dams and reservoirs could potentially result in flooding in Upland in the event of failure.
The San Antonio Dam, located at the northwest corner of San Antonio Heights, is owned and operated by the Los Angeles District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It's normally empty except during or immediately after periods of significant runoff. Inundation of Upland due to dam failure is considered unlikely unless dam failure occurs due to a combination of two relatively rare events: significant seismic activities on the Cucamonga Fault and unseasonal precipitation.
Other potential threats of water release come from four Ontario owned/operated water reservoirs located within Upland's city limits:
• 13th Street and Campus Avenue
• 8th Street and Campus Avenue
• Euclid Avenue and 8th Street
• Fern Avenue and 8th Street
Figure 3-13 shows the projected inundation zones associated with uncontrolled releases from San Antonio and other local dams.
83 Page 478 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 3-12. FEMA-Designated 100- and 500- Year Flood Zones in Upland , I
i .J /f I70 .w
``4 Almonu St
/ San Antonio
/ Heights r.,,sine
1 11
o
'"'' rd St autu
` u
W 22nd 5t rt, a i f Bany,
n
W 21st St
CITY OF
W20th St
S' orei 19i
=':.AhiONGA
`D. W 19th St
i W 18th St -o
c r
• t7 o z .149 n
-rg a.
2 - � o
• �t'�.. ¢ a Upland Hills
o
Country Club
z
W 17th St Z
W 14th St E 14th St m y
a
r
a io
W Foothill Blvd 66
o
W 11th St _.l. E 1th St — '
nr 83'
!os
W Arrow Hwy Upland E Arrow Hwy a
W 9th St E 9th St m
I Arrow Hwy W 8th St E 80,S`
Olive St
r Moreno St L
W 7th St ++10 1 0)
CI
�� atn St ,°
MON IR
K.
w 5th st CITY OF
Flood Hazard Zones
Q City Boundary I 1 Area of Minimal Flood Hazard CITY OF Rail I 1%Annual Chance
a th
Parks UPLAND FloodHazard
1 0.0.2%Annual Chance
of Flood Hazard
Source:San Bernardino County,
ESRI,Federal Emergency Management
Administration
84 Page 479 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 3-13. Projected Dam Inundation Zones In and Around Upland nnounrarn J y �'
j.
IN
) 1
�` 1� / `� - Almond St
.b'lmt,. c7.; / $ ' ?
n. San Antonio
• Heights
HI
I-1 ,,-
,.''`� �.rd St
m =
z ,,4.7. ,/
W 22nd St C '', Bony.
C .n 7.. �•
A-
W 21st St
~
W 20th St CITY OFRANCHO
n -iw ; , l T -CUCANif7NGA
W 19th St .
W 18th St m
ro
;sl f o z -- . -ice 1`7, n
a
W 1 Gth St 2
e a Upland Ililts- _- - m
ry - }• . Country Club -'� -
z
W 15th St z .-_
W 14th St
E 14[h 5t
hle Airpe t1,7'o
W Foothill Blvd - 6666l
W 11th St 1 E 11th St3-)lies
WArrow Hwy Upland E Arrow HwyW 5th St E Sah St m :Hwy W Bth St npthOlivc St
S0SrioSt W7th St E 7th
///
Rrn
r 101 m -a�
1 i CIS�� W Stir St
j MONTCLAIR
W5thSt CITY OF
!s- ell.IT,r,r.- rh 5r
Q City Boundary San Antonio Dam
at. CITY OF Rail =I Cucamonga Creek
UPLAND Debris Basin, No. 87-9
Parks _ Upland Basin
Source:San Bernardino
County,ESRI,California
Department of Water Resources
85 Page 480 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
PAST EVENTS
Surface Flooding
Upland has experienced repeated flooding incidents resulting from unusually high volumes of rain falling in a short period. Two occurrences in 2016 and 2019 saw flooding on Euclid Avenue and Mountain Avenue, respectively. In 2022, 9.14 inches of rain fell on Lytle Creek in the San Gabriel Mountains in the 48 hours prior to November 8, while 7.2 inches fell on San Sevane Flats nearby. Local creeks filled, joining the runoff from significant rains on the 8th (Ontario Airport reported 1.61 inches on that day) and causing storm channels to overflow. San Bernardino Fire reported making swift-water rescues in Devore, Upland, and Ontario. At least one person drowned during the storm.61
Ponding events can occur on any flat surface where sufficient drainage is unavailable. These include parking lots, landscaped areas, lawns, or roadways. Since ponding is so small in scale, it's impossible to predict exactly where in the City they will occur or how severe they will be.
Dam and Levee Failure
California's dam infrastructure varies in age (some are decades old, while others are more recently constructed), type, and size. While there have been no recorded dam failure events in Upland, there have been several catastrophic dam failure events in California. • San Francisquito Canyon Dam. One of the earliest dam failures in California history.
The dam experienced a structural failure because of insufficient geotechnical engineering analysis, leading to inadequate construction by the then Los Angeles Bureau of Water Works and Supply. At midnight on March 13, 1928, the 205-foot-tall structure failed catastrophically, unleashing a 120-foot-high wave of water traveling 18 miles per hour down the San Francisquito Canyon. By 5:30 AM, the wave had traveled 54 miles from the dam site to the Pacific Ocean, killing at least 438 people, razing towns, and destroying infrastructure. Victims' bodies were reportedly recovered from the ocean as far south as the Mexican border. The disaster is considered one of the worst engineering failures in US history.62
• Baldwin Hills Dam. December 14, 1963, a structural failure in the dam caused a breach that unleashed 250 million gallons of reservoir water. Diligent work by maintenance crews detected the developing failure in the dam four hours before it was breached. With the cooperation of local law enforcement, they successfully evacuated and saved nearly 1,500 people downstream from the reservoir. Five lives were lost, 65 homes were destroyed, and nearly $11 million worth of property damage was incurred.63 • Brea Dam. The Brea Dam failed on February 22, 2005, following an extensive episode of winter rains, causing water to spill over its crest. The Fullerton Golf Course and 61 Floodlist.com."USA—1 Dead,2 Missing After Record Rain Triggers Floods in California." https://floodlist.com/america/usa/floods-southern-california-november-2022 62 Riley, K. March 2018. 90 Years Later,the St. Francis Dam Failure Remains a Vital Safety Lesson.Association of State Dam Safety Officials. https://damsafety.org/sites/default/files/files/StFrancis DecadeAnniv%202018.pdf 63 Association of State Dam Safety Officials. Case Study: Baldwin Hills Dam. https://damfailures_org/case-study/baldwin-hills- dam/
86 Page 481 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland sections of Bastanchury Road were flooded with water, but no lives were lost. The golf course was damaged, and the floodwaters eroded an adjacent storm channel.64 • Oroville Dam. In February 2017, the collapse of concrete in the main spillway caused a 60-foot-deep hole to develop in the lower third of the spillway during normal operations undertaken to lower the reservoir before a moderately large storm. A subsequent storm and the inability to fully use the primary spillway led to the filling of the reservoir and its unlined (natural) emergency spillway for the first time. After two days of usage, erosion of the unlined hillside and head cutting (erosion upstream towards the earthen dam), as well as concerns regarding the stability of the emergency spillway, caused an evacuation of nearly 200,000 people downstream. This prompted immediate repairs and a re- evaluation of this dam facility and many others throughout the State of California.65
RISK OF FUTURE EVENTS
Surface Flooding
Localized instances of ponding occur at least annually or multiple times a year in cities across Southern California. During drought periods, precipitation levels may decrease and lower the likelihood of ponding. In most years, though, it is almost certain that Upland will experience some type of flood event. Larger-scale flood events have been rare in Upland. However, Upland could experience some degree of large-scale flooding with inundation levels greater than one foot in depth during a particularly severe rainstorm or after a dam failure. All expectations are that the probability of floods/storms occurring again in the future is likely.As discussed in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), there's a probability of between 0.1% and 0.01% chance of a flood occurring annually.
Dam and Levee Failure
Due to the presence of several dams and reservoirs near Upland, areas of the City could be at risk of inundation should a significant dam failure occur. The potential consequences of dam failure are death or injury, people being displaced from their homes, damage to existing public and private buildings, damage to infrastructure, loss of services from utilities, loss of government services, and economic losses. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers evaluates, and rates dams based on confirmed or unconfirmed safety issues, the probability of failure, and the potential consequences. Due to embankment erosion, the Army Corps of Engineers Dam Safety Program has given the structure a DSAC II rating, which means it has a high risk of failure without remediation efforts. As depicted in Hazard Scoring Table 3-4 (above), the probability of dam/levee failure occurring is unlikely with an annual chance of occurrence of less than 0.001%. 64 Rancho Santiago Community College District. nd. Part IV-D—Dam Failure. https://rsccd.edu/Departments/Risk- Management/Documents/Risk%20Management/IV-D%20Dam%20Failure.pdf 65 California Office of Emergency Services.2023.California State Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/cal-oes- divisions/hazard-mitigation/hazard-mitigation-planning/state-hazard-mitigation-plan 87 Page 482 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
CLIMATE CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS
Surface Flooding
Climate change is expected to exacerbate the conditions leading to Upland's urban flooding.
Climate change will cause more intense local, regional, and global weather patterns, intensifying atmospheric rivers.At this time, it is unknown exactly how climate change will impact ENSO frequency, but its effects are anticipated to become more intense. Winter storm precipitation amounts in Southern California will increase based on atmospheric rivers and ENSO changes. This increases the likelihood of an exceptional rain event in Upland that could overwhelm the capacity of the region's flood control system to contain and drain all the precipitation.
Due to climate change, droughts are also expected to increase in length and frequency. Soils dried by extensive drought periods are less able to absorb and drain water, likely increasing flood possibility. Overall, climate change is expected to create conditions that will raise the likelihood of flooding in Upland.
Dam and Levee Failure
Climate change could increase the risk of dam failure in the future. More intense rainstorms may increase the likelihood of reservoir infrastructure becoming overwhelmed, including the dams that control floodwaters from inundating Upland and the rest of San Bernardino County.
Indirectly, increased climate change-induced rains may cause more erosion, compromising dams' structural integrity and the foundation on which they sit. 88 Page 483 of 654
CHAPTER 4 -
THREAT AND VULNERABILITY
Each of the hazards discussed in Chapter 3 can have varying effects on different populations and community assets in Upland. For example, while an extreme heat event will be equally severe across all of Upland, some people may be harmed more than others. This chapter analyzes how various hazard conditions may affect Upland, and which populations and community assets face greater threats.
Threat Assessment Process
The threat assessment process looks at the harm that a hazard may cause to three different groups: the physical threat to key facilities, the threat to vulnerable populations, and the threat to any other community assets (noncritical facilities, key services, etc.).
CRITICAL FACILITIES AND FACILITIES OF CONCERN
Critical facilities (CFs) consist of properties and structures that play important roles in government operations and their services to the community. Examples of CFs include:
• Local government offices and yards
• Community centers
• Public safety buildings, such as police and fire stations • Schools
• Any other properties a city deems essential for its operations CFs may also serve dual roles if a city designates them as public assembly points during an emergency. A public entity often owns CFs, but many are owned and operated privately, such as utilities and telecommunication infrastructure. FOCs are facilities that play an important role in a city but aren't critical to its function. These can be city-owned or privately owned facilities, such as senior assisted living homes, parks, and storage facilities, to name a few.
The HMPC identified 87 CFs and 107 FOCs in Upland that fall into three categories based on their function or characteristics. Table 4-1 shows the number of CFs and FOCs in each category, the total estimated value of the facilities in each category, and examples of the facilities in each category.Appendix D has a complete list of the CFs and FOCs. Figure 4-1 displays the location of the CFs and FOCs in Upland.
The potential loss value is the total insured value of the CFs that fall within the hazard zone. It is intended to estimate a replacement cost if the property is completely or severely damaged.
The actual repair costs could be smaller or larger than the provided estimate. The data relies on the City's insured asset values; therefore, information about facilities not owned by the City isn't shown (e.g., bridges, private buildings). In some instances, replacement cost information wasn't made available. Where this occurs, "N/A" is used in the table. 89 Page 484 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland WinIIMIM TABLE 4-1: CRITICAL FACILITIES AND FACILITIES OF CONCERN Number of Facilities
Type Critical Concern Potential Loss
City facility 23 2 $33,997,380
Community Center/Facility 0 6 $11,450,650
Infrastructure 64 0 $76,640,650
Medical Facility 0 5 **
Parks Facility 0 23 $5,811,980
Schools 0 17 **
Transportation Infrastructure 0 4 $1,340,900
Other 0 50 $42,794,320
TOTAL 87 107 $172,035,880
* Based on the City of Upland insured replacement values ** Replacement values are unavailable as they are not City-owned.
Based on the available data provided by the City, there's a minimum of$172,035,880 worth of City-owned assets. The greatest potential for loss among the City-owned assets comes from the "Infrastructure" category. The next category with the greatest loss potential is the "Other Facilities of Concern" category, followed by the "City Facility" category.
To better understand the magnitude of impacts, this Plan identifies representative percentages of potential impact based on the total valuation of City assets. For planning purposes, it's reasonable to assume that impacts wouldn't exceed 50°/0 of the total asset value citywide. The following are parameters to help understand how much a proposed investment/improvement compares to the existing assets within the City:
• 1% Impact: $1,720,359
• 5% Impact: $8,601,794
• 10% Impact: $17,203,588
• 20% Impact: $34,407,176
• 50% Impact: $86,017,940
The likelihood of simultaneous 100% damage to all facilities is extremely remote. Most impacts are anticipated to be isolated to specific locations based on the hazard. This estimate doesn't include the value of the City's underground infrastructure and surface drainage facilities. 90 Page 485 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 4-1. Critical Facilities and Facilities of Concern mounraan Tea .q" �f 3 7 r Yll
li
IY
, - aIi % 41 .S ` aliff f '` rJ Almond St / r.. San Antonio
/ Heights
Ilillsice
1 ' IS ' i 'd / C.)
4o ''Srd St o
o_ u
z Q '^
W 22nd St ,, Bony,
c
V
z
W 21st St
CITY OF
Pomello Dr >
o w St RANCHO
-- CUCAMONGA L`-
aW 19th St
/.-----i-----
a - W 18th St a, ,?
a 4
to
c y _
° 1581 ft o z `149 - o
2 - W 16th St a
z .71 - ¢ -c Upland Hills m
ijc—�: /� rs Country Club
I k {: W 1 5 t h St K2I
W 14th St E 14th St a,
> w
Cable Airport dII
m
a
z
W Foothill Blvd E Ess -
00 11th St E1���f
`/ O
-loot 83 �J
les
W Arrow Rte W Arrow Hwy U p2r� E Arrow Hwy <, n��) �,�IIu�J a,W 9th St (�Q
E 9th St m
1L r
/r 11 Q _y
4. Arrow Hwy `i0 O E 8th S' --- - — Olive St
Moreno St W 7th St �� L/t-i St
tt
p7
CIS W 6th St E 6th St
MONTCLAIR
—7 �` W Sth St CITY OF sth St
Q City Boundary fai City Facility
CITY OF Rail
th Non-Public Facility
.' '' UPLAND Parks
Parks Facility
® Transportation Infrastructure Source;San Bernardino County,ESRI
91 Page 486 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS
Factors such as age (children or elderly residents), physical and/or mental condition, socioeconomic status, access to key services, and many other factors affect the ability of people to prepare for and protect themselves and their property from a hazard event. Even though some hazard events may impact all parts of Upland equally, people may experience the impacts differently. Higher-income households, for instance, are more likely to afford the cost of retrofitting their homes to resist flooding or move to a location that's less prone to flooding than a lower-income household. As a result, a higher-income household is less likely to experience significant damage during a flood event than a lower-income household, even if the same amount of rain falls on both.
A social threat analysis examines how hazard events are likely to impact different demographic populations in Upland and where these different populations live in the City. This includes assessing whether the people in an area of an elevated hazard risk are more likely than the average person to be considered a threatened population. The social threat analysis uses the following criteria to assess the threat to vulnerable populations:
• Disability status: Persons with disabilities may have reduced mobility and experience difficulties living independently. As a result, they may have little or no ability to prepare for and mitigate hazard conditions without assistance from others. • Income levels: Lower-income households are less likely to have the financial resources to implement mitigation activities on their residences. Another challenge may be finding adequate time to research and access educational resources about hazard mitigation strategies. Furthermore, lower-income households are less likely to have the necessary resources to move to safer areas less at risk of being impacted by a hazard. The national poverty limit standard for the U.S. for a four-person family is approximately an income of$35,750 or less. For Orange County, the FY 2022 Low-Income Limit for a four-person family, according to Housing and Urban Development (HUD), is $108,400. • Seniors (individuals at least 65 years of age): Seniors are more likely to have reduced mobility, physical and/or mental disabilities, and lower income levels, all of which may decrease their ability to prepare for and mitigate a hazard event.
Table 4-2 shows the metrics for Upland residents who meet at least one of the criteria for threatened populations.
The social threat analysis also shows the threat other populations may encounter. For example, people experiencing homelessness or people without access to lifelines (vehicles or communication networks) may experience greater hardship in evacuating or recovering from a disaster. Since data for these groups aren't readily available, there's no definitive way to determine the number of people in areas of elevated risk. This assessment will discuss how these other threatened groups may also be affected on a general level. 92 Page 487 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 4-2: UPLAND VULNERABLE POPULATION METRICS
Vulnerable Population Metric Community-Wide Data Population 80,710
Households 28,775
Median household income $108,029
Renter households 43.1%
Percentage of households with at least one person living with a disability 24.7% Percentage of households living under the poverty limit 11.2% Percentage of households with one-member aged 65+ 31.0% Area affected by hazard 15.67 sq miles
Sources: 2018-2022 U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey; 2024 U.S. Census Bureau Estimates
DATA LIMITATIONS AND NOTES ON VULNERABILITY TABLES
Due to data limitations, the data comparing the hazard zone population with the citywide population comes from two separate sources. The citywide data comes from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS); the hazard-zone population data comes from ESRI's Business Analyst reports. As a result, there may be minor discrepancies when comparing the two data sets. The data relies on readily available 2024 U.S. Census Survey Projections and the 2018-2022 U.S. ACS. Chapter 2 identifies additional census-related information, which may differ from the data in this Chapter based on the data available for the analysis.
OTHER ASSETS
In addition to the City's designated inventory of CFs/FOCs and vulnerable populations, hazard events could threaten other important assets to Upland. These assets may include services, artistic or cultural landmarks, or local economic activities. The threat assessment describes the potential harm to these other assets based on available information.
DISASTER DECLARATION CONNECTIONS
FEMA has issued the following major disasters, emergency declarations, and fire management assistance grants (Table 4-3) in San Bernardino County. While none of these events directly affected the City or required the activation of the Emergency Operations Center(EOC), it should be noted that City staff did participate in online meetings with the Regional EOC and regularly updated WebEOC (software platform for emergency management) with new information. Any incident type not listed in the table indicates that there were no declarations in San Bernardino County of that incident type (since 2020). Past events identified in this Plan have been identified in connection with these events in the "Past Events" sections within each Hazard Profile located in Chapter 3 of this Plan.
93 Page 488 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland V TABLE 4-3. DISASTER DECLARATIONS — SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY (2020-2025) Declaration Affected Activated EOC
Year Number Declaration Title Incident Type the City or Requested PA 2024 FM-5537-CA BRIDGE FIRE Fire No No 2024 FM-5535-CA LINE FIRE Fire No No
CALIFORNIA SEVERE
WINTER STORMS,
2024 DR-4769-CA TORNADOES, FLOODING, Severe Storm No No
LANDSLIDES, AND
MUDSLIDES
2023 DR-4750-CA CALIFORNIA TROPICAL Severe Storm No No
STORM HILARY
SEVERE WINTER
STORMS, STRAIGHT-LINE
2023 DR-4699-CA WINDS, FLOODING, Severe Storm No No
LANDSLIDES, AND
MUDSLIDES
SEVERE WINTER
2023 EM-3591-CA STORMS, FLOODING, Flood No No
AND MUDSLIDES
SEVERE WINTER
2023 EM-3592-CA STORMS, FLOODING, Flood No No
LANDSLIDES, AND
MUDSLIDES
2021 DR-4569-CA WILDFIRES Fire No No 2021 FM-5381-CA BLUE RIDGE FIRE Fire No No 2020 DR-4482-CA COVID-19 PANDEMIC Biological Yes Yes 2020 EM-3428-CA COVID-19 Biological Yes Yes 2020 FM-5350-CA EL DORADO FIRE Fire No No 2020 FM-5325-CA APPLE FIRE Fire No No 2020 FM-5301-CA HILLSIDE FIRE Fire No No DR=Major Disaster
EM= Emergency Declaration
FM=Fire Management Assistance Grant
In 2025,Southern California experienced catastrophic wildfires in Los Angeles County(Palisades and Eaton Fires)that were identified in Disaster Declarations, however San Bernardino County was not impacted directly by these incidents. 94 Page 489 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Threat Profile: Seismic Hazards
PHYSICAL THREAT
Fault Rupture
The City has one AP Zone identified by the California Department of Conservation: the Cucamonga Fault, which cuts through San Antonio Heights. Figure 4-2 depicts this hazard zone. No CFs or FOCs are located within the designated 500-ft. AP hazard buffer zone. Any future development in these areas could be at risk of damage from fault rupture should there be a large seismic event within the AP zone.
Seismic Shaking
Many physical assets in the City are estimated to experience the same seismic shaking intensity, ranging from 0.8501 to 1.05g (shaking intensity in relation to earth's gravity).
Therefore, all facilities could be damaged during a significant seismic event, which could be extremely costly for the City. If all facilities were damaged at the same time during a seismic shaking event, it can be assumed that the City would incur a percentage of the maximum potential loss of its physical assets. Assuming 20% of the City's assets are impacted, this potential loss could amount to over $45 million. Underground physical assets, like pipelines or utilities, could be damaged if the intensity of the seismic shaking is severe enough. In such a scenario, natural gas and water delivery service to Upland homes and businesses would not be available until repairs are completed. Table 4-4 and Table 4-5 display the potential scenario and losses incurred should shaking reach the described threshold. Figure 4-3 displays the CFs and FOCs within the City's seismic shaking potential hazard zones.
TABLE 4-4: CRITICAL FACILITIES & FACILITIES OF CONCERN (SEISMIC SHAKING 0.9501G) Critical Facilities Facilities of Concern
Type Number Potential Loss* Number Potential Loss* City facility 21 $24,151,040 2 $8,733,340 Community 0 6 $11,450,650
Center/Facility
Infrastructure 48 $51,159,310 0 **
Medical Facility 0 5 **
Parks Facility 0 17 $5,209,900
Schools 0 16 **
Transportation 0 4 $1,340,900
Infrastructure
Other 0 50 $42,794,320
Total 69 $75,310,350 100 $69,529,110 * Based on the City of Upland insured replacement values **Replacement values are unavailable as they are not City-owned. 95 Page 490 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 4-2. CFs and FOCs Located Near Fault Rupture Zones Mounralll 1 I`/` fr t1tT r
.n a /I .
j h(�g�� r �'. I r..._ - -.imond St 4 cu`
o San Antonio
-401101111111
�p'C.JI Heights Hillside
c ti
qc /
I
67'.d v,
o r U,, rdSt z
GuGaC�� < a j u
I - _,- W 22nd St m S N Easy. c
V
a z
W 21st St a
Somena Dr CITY OF
W j St RANCHO
1 72210
CUCAMONGA-
a W 19th St
=\
ai W 18th St m 0
-toc
17. v 4
0 T58T fr o z •749 ri
m
• C
o N J
2 - W t6th St .. < �.
7— i'� -o Upland Hills
t�1X O W 15th St zO Country Club
W 14th St E 14th St m
Cable Airport O c Y
O 2 �l� 4)
Z
W Foothill Blvd 66 ® ,nd,2
66 �A '6�a�t.
I 00 11th St E 11.�/�t O �e.P�e
font 83
3es
W Arrow Rte W Arrow Hwy U u.� E Arrow Hwy ......,
W 9th St
keep 9th St m
Arrow Hwy � © _ I =} E 8th S
Olive St
Moreno St W 7th St E 7th St
iii
et
�10/ �_ - -
CI W 515 St �\1 E 6th St
M . IR ;
W 5th st CITY OF
E 5th sr
Q City Boundary :fil,; City Facility Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazard Zones
�, CITY OF Rail t Faults
UPLAND Non-Public Facility Q
` Parks
Parks Facility
Source:San Bernardino
County,ESRI,California
Transportation Infrastructure Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey
96 Page 491 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 4-3. CFs and FOCs Located in Potential Seismic Shaking Hazard Zones • n ounra ` ! '` 1
J; ,{
d P-
�f ` � /� ; Almond St
F / 4 ,
/
/ San Antonio
Heights
\ , .ii
I IIIIsICe
a
oz�a`ay�
boo r
a / u
N
Barry
"i CITY OF
Pomello Dr ¢'
‘;' t21 p
-0 -..,AMIONGA t_
0. N
1 -0
Q
N 2
6 0 n
Ea
16th St
Z r^G.
OO1i3, /f/th
03,,v Ii s 1 E,(=t
loot 63 l�_Jf
aes
sd An,nv w., LI _ *
//( 1Z� t
nt//arhhems: I O���
Arrow Hwy ! j© �' �_
/I VV
Moreno St W irh Sr E 7th 5t
et 'Itt
CI W 5th St E 6th St
IR �
W sth st CITY OF
E 5th St
Q City Boundary n City Facility Seismic Shake Potential (2%at 50 years)
Rail
i \ CITY OF * Non-Public Facility 0.95
r ` UPLAND Parks 1.05
O Parks Facility
Source:San Bernardino
De
O Transportation Infrastructure count ESRi,fcaufoConservrnla partment oation,
California Geological Survey
97 Page 492 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland TABLE 4-5: CRITICAL FACILITIES & FACILITIES OF CONCERN (SEISMIC SHAKING 1.05G) Critical Facilities Facilities of Concern
Type Number Potential Loss* Number Potential Loss* City facility 2 $1,113,000 0
Infrastructure 16 $25,481,340 0
Parks Facility 0 6 $602,080
Schools 0 1 **
Total 18 $26,594,340 7 $602,080
* Based on the City of Upland insured replacement values **Replacement values are unavailable as they are not City-owned.
SOCIAL THREAT
The risk of a seismic event is a danger to all Upland households and businesses; however, some populations are at higher risk than others.
Fault Rupture
To analyze the social threat associated with fault rupture, the City identified the populations within the AP Zone, covering approximately 0.55 square miles (3.5%) of the City. These areas include households with higher median household incomes, higher percentages of people living with a disability, and high percentages of households with one-member aged 65+. Table 4-6 profiles this hazard-threatened population.
TABLE 4-6: FAULT RUPTURE (500-FT BUFFER ZONE) THREATENED POPULATIONS Living within Fault
Threatened Population Metric 500-ft. Buffer Zone City of Upland Population 2,079 80,710
Households 789 28,775
Median household income $150,479 $108,029 Renter occupied households 12.7% 43.1%
Percentage of households with at least one person 36.0% 24.7% living with a disability
Percentage of households living under the poverty g 1% 11.2% limit
Percentage of households with one-member aged 46.7% 31.0% 65+
Area affected by hazard 0.55 sq. miles 15.67 sq. miles Sources: 2018-2022 U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey; 2024 U.S. Census Bureau's Estimates 98 Page 493 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Seismic Shaking
Seniors, pregnant women, and persons with disabilities may be at higher risk in a seismic shaking event as they may have limited mobility, which could complicate or prevent safety actions (such as drop-cover-hold on) and delay or prevent safe evacuation. Renters and people with lower incomes are also more threatened by seismic shaking, since they may live in homes that are not properly retrofitted to withstand the stresses of a seismic event. These groups may not have the financial resources (or, if renting, the legal responsibility) to repair their homes or move to new housing if their homes become uninhabitable.
Table 4-7 compares the population within the seismic shaking hazard zones to the citywide population. Approximately 14.6% of Upland residents (14.3% of Upland households) live within the 0.95 to 1.05g seismic shake zones. The households at risk are on the whole richer (with a median income 47.5% higher than that for the City as a whole), far more likely to own their home, and roughly 41% more likely to have a member aged 65 years or older.
TABLE 4-7: SEISMIC SHAKING THREATENED POPULATIONS
Seismic Shaking
Threatened Population Metric (0.9501 to 1.05g) City of Upland Population 11,779 80,710
Households 4,130 28,775
Median household income $159,370 $108,029 Renter occupied households 9.8% 43.1%
Percentage of households with at least one person 28.8% 24.7% living with a disability
Percentage of households living under the poverty 5.4% 11.2% limit
Percentage of households with one-member aged 43.7% 31.0% 65+
Area affected by hazard 4.25 sq. miles 15.67 sq. miles Sources: 2018-2022 U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey; 2024 U.S. Census Bureau's Estimates
OTHER THREATS
Fault Rupture
Seismic events that cause surface fault rupture tend to damage roads and structures in impact areas. The length of rupture is typically a component of the seismic event's magnitude. The stronger the event, the greater the distance that rupture can occur. Strong events can create a larger problem with other identified hazards, such as dam inundations and flooding.
Seismic Shaking
Most earthquake-related property damage is inflicted through seismic shaking. It's the force that damages or destroys buildings, wrecks roads and bridges, disables infrastructure networks, and injures or kills people.All else being equal, the more intense the shaking, the worse the damage. 99 Page 494 of 654
2(
Earthquake early-warning systems afford utility operators additional time to shut off gas, water, and power transmission to try to control potential leaks following a seismic event. Authorities may also have enough warning to halt the use of elevators or bridges, or to safely shelter or evacuate workers from hazardous locations. This allows utility providers to remain inactive, reducing further impact, until authorities determine it's safe to reactivate service. The length of this time will vary depending on the event's magnitude and distance from the City. A significant earthquake would necessitate utilities to remain off for a few hours or several days. The City and the region would lose the economic activity that normally occurs. Structures such as downed telephone poles or power transmission towers may also block roadways and prevent first responders from reaching victims or evacuees who need assistance.
CHANGES IN POPULATION AND LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
Fault Rupture
According to the current Land Use Element, the City's anticipated population growth over the next several years includes targeted development along Mountain Avenue, which reaches north into San Antonio Heights. The Cucamonga Fault trace crosses Mountain Avenue at West 23rd Street. Depending on the nature and location of this development, Upland's vulnerability to earthquake-related hazards may increase.
Seismic Shaking
Based on the current Housing Element data, the City's anticipated residential/commercial growth over the next five years is anticipated to be concentrated in several target areas in the central and southern parts of the City. In that these areas include older buildings and infrastructure likely to be replaced or renovated, this development may modestly decrease Upland's vulnerability to earthquake-related hazards. However, it's also likely that this development may be denser than what exists now, increasing the number of residents and businesses exposed to the seismic shaking hazard.
CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY
Fault Rupture
Climate change is not expected to directly affect the occurrence or magnitude of fault rupture, which is driven by tectonic processes. However, climate change may indirectly increase the consequences of fault rupture events.
More frequent extreme temperatures, drought, and intense precipitation can place additional stress on aging infrastructure, soils, and slopes near fault traces, potentially increasing damage severity and complicating post-earthquake repairs. Climate-related extremes may also reduce emergency response and recovery capacity, particularly if a seismic event occurs concurrently with or immediately following a heat wave, wildfire, or flooding event. These compound emergencies could strain response resources and prolong recovery.
Seismic Shaking
Climate change is not anticipated to influence seismic shaking intensity or frequency but is expected to increase vulnerability to its impacts.
/00 Page 495 of 654
Rising temperatures and extreme heat may accelerate the deterioration of buildings, transportation systems, and underground utilities, increasing the potential for damage during seismic shaking. Climate-related stress on power, water, and communications systems may also extend service disruptions following an earthquake.
Climate change may further exacerbate social vulnerability, particularly for seniors and individuals with disabilities, if seismic events coincide with extreme heat or prolonged utility outages. Additionally, earthquakes occurring during drought or heavy precipitation periods may trigger cascading hazards, such as wildfire ignitions, flooding, or landslides, increasing overall response complexity and losses.
Threat Profile: Fire
PHYSICAL THREAT
Structures and physical assets in Upland that aren't equipped with fire suppression technology or fire mitigation design features are at risk of fire. Generally, these buildings are older, may not be well maintained, and may not meet current code requirements and regulations. While all structures can be affected by wildland or urban fires, older buildings may have increased vulnerability to these hazards.
Wildland Fire
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has mapped Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) within both the City's Local Responsibility Area (LRA) and the State Responsibility Area (SRA). The LRA is a government-designated area where a local agency, city, or county is responsible for fire protection, not the state.An SRA is where the state is responsible for wildland fire protection. Figure 4-4 identifies Upland's wildland-urban interface (WUI) area, including the CFs and FOCs and historic wildfire perimeters in and around the City. Tables 4-8 through 4-10 identify the CFs and FOCs within these zones. While these areas have a high degree of vulnerability to wildfire, other areas of the City may also be susceptible due to ember cast. Sometimes a wildfire ignition may occur due to power lines contacting overgrown trees, causing a spark that ignites the tree or surrounding vegetation.
Wildland/ Urban Interface Fire
Given that the entire northern edge of San Antonio Heights is a VHFHSZ, as is most of the City's western border, a significant amount of Upland's developed land is at heightened risk of fire.
Recent urban conflagrations such as those in Santa Rosa (2017), Lahaina (2023), and Pacific Palisades and Altadena (2025), once rare in the 20th century, are becoming more common as extreme weather events drive wildfires into urban and suburban spaces. These events have destroyed thousands of homes and businesses and killed or injured hundreds of people in a short time.
Upland is especially vulnerable to a WUI fire becoming an urban conflagration in these areas:
1) VHFHSZ along 1-210. The western end of the zone intrudes into built-out suburban housing or the type that has proved to be especially prone to propagating wind-blown fire.
101 Page 496 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland 2) VHFHSZ in San Antonio Heights. A fire beginning in this zone, driven by downslope winds of the sort that supercharged the Palisades and Eaton (Altadena)fires, would find no natural firebreak until the 1-210.
3) Three VHFHSZs in southwest Upland. These zones push into not only the City's industrial area, but also into older, densely developed single-family housing.
TABLE 4-8: CRITICAL FACILITIES & FACILITIES OF CONCERN
(VERY HIGH FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONES)
Critical Facilities Facilities of Concern
Type Number Potential Loss* Number Potential Loss* Infrastructure 18 $18,141,900 0
Transportation 0 1 **
Infrastructure
Total 18 $18,141,900 1 **
* Based on the City of Upland insured replacement values **Replacement values are unavailable as they are not City-owned.
TABLE 4-9: CRITICAL FACILITIES & FACILITIES OF CONCERN (WUI) - Critical Facilities Facilities of Concern
Type Number Potential Loss* Number Potential Loss* City facility 3 $1,113,000 0
Infrastructure 18 $12,774,060 0
Parks Facility 0 4 $405,980
Schools 0 1 **
Total 21 $13,887,060 5 $405,980
* Based on the City of Upland insured replacement values **Replacement values are unavailable as they are not City-owned.
TABLE 4-10: CRITICAL FACILITIES & FACILITIES OF CONCERN (HISTORICAL WILDFIRE PERIMETER)
Critical Facilities Facilities of Concern
Type Number Potential Loss* Number Potential Loss* Infrastructure 6 $15,920,140 0
Total 6 $15,920,140 0
* Based on the City of Upland insured replacement values 102 Page 497 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 4-4. CFs and FOCs Located in the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) and Historical Wildfire Perimeters
, -
iSx..* k . k‘S' .-li- '• 4.04 it. .' V•*. ,,;;;$4-4.;7~M;:r•$:•1•:4;•;•....... . ..n: s\\\ 4 ONWANVASONOONNOW •W-*Z.:A., fr ..4 '.\ .'''', • Al r. .0.. 4,,-......low.t*.V.V.V.*.V.444444.44. 1'•••NVA.,••••••••WWrW ...,N,,,•„. 4;,,. ....; - L. s --,-.— - .4,-,,,,,,-.-4,4............;.1,4-.-................-..........0.-................v."...-40.v. -....,-/ ..... ,-....i. ... ,),...Nvis .., ..., +..4ti.....-:-x+N.:44.:fr:440:4x, v.s.stsmo-.444 IlY I I 10,. I.., .44C.,.*:•:+:4:41:4 I:+:4,:44,7e*• mooloh.....7" . •••4,.0. ;e sOP 110 . ' '4 'VI rk oN -.4„b . .:.„ii.,.._.:,......................, ...• .' \ 4' ,S,a.4.:";n•s'.44 0:44+:..:.ti 44 7:4N A, ' ' .P V 4.41,4:4 ../ . 't' NNS.% / 1'. °'4.1 .....i•V,
wow...
! ,leN,---•4 •,-, .\_. 4. V.: •t:., A al i - ,
.: .,.Y
S s. '•,% N. 1(6. 4 ....•••••.•
••••• 10 W. , ,.
t„ d •.. Ar,l ,(' 4V+:
l', ;7 27,Attlz.‘•.,- 6:444:44
'44444 4•4
V .- .4. /..-, •4 v.,4.••••I mo
NC4!' er A; 'NV' :OMR. ' Af • im et;,„-,, $:we•sk. • 4.1 kk, ..,. ,;$1::::::::::::4 "0.i ih.
In \..„,, OF
' ...:44:44., ," . 'W,-*::44::44:::, ' '''. '..1." HO i :•:+:•:+:+:••••16$ EU—- _.011D 1—U. . N tkl .___ 2 N ***********V. 1 .7414.. \Wk. \*ICC ,ONGA L ;$:**:::`::$...s 1 .- '.c.s+ \ W 19th St 111S• • 4:***0:::::::;'. .-• \ Nv
* -
18th St ''
.z."
- . ,,,••
7 . 16th St
6- a Upland Hills ,
/ Ilk r‘i W 15th Country Club u, ,-,
St KD 4)
a W 14th St E 14th St ..
iliF CD
T!!) c
> <
.. .
,. :.
z
-----1 . , W Foothill Blvd
66 LI La
@
lord
03 11th St E 10
lies 1 ,
W Arrow Hwy U E Arrow Hwy
.-
--_ W 9th St tea V
E 9th St
it ni-
on'
/ 0 CCII
Arrow Hwy t 0-----E-8;b---"*""n"..1 s • .., Olive St
Moreno St W 7th St
• E 7tin Si
:10 ----
10 119 th
W 6th St - , I
,.„ E 6r0 S[
- \
MO '"'r,<1 - ..IR
W 5th St CITY OF N F 5th St
elkITAM,, ,
0 City Boundary 0 City Facility = Very High Fire Hazard Severity *
W Non-Public Facility WAildland Urban Interface
T it...„ . CITY OF
A ' '' UPLAND
ik Rail
Parks
0 Parks Facility Historical Fire Perimeters(2023)
Source:San Bernardino
County,ESRI,California
0 Transportation Infrastructure Department of Forestry and Fire Protection,2011
and 2021
103 Page 498 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland
SOCIAL THREAT
A fire hazard poses an immediate threat to seniors and persons with disabilities. These groups may have limited mobility or diminished environmental awareness. For example, a senior who lives alone may not know if a fire ignites in their house until a room fills with smoke or a flashover occurs, at which point escape may be more difficult or impossible. A fire that starts in or spreads to senior residences in Upland could be highly threatening to those populations. Persons with disabilities may require special mobility devices or caregiver assistance to evacuate, which may not be readily available when a fire occurs.
Wildland Fire
Approximately 3% of Upland's population (2.9% of households) lives within a VHFHSZ, primarily within the City's western and northern portions. Table 4-11 shows that nearly a quarter of these households have at least one person living with a disability, over 13% of these households live under the poverty line, and nearly 30% of these households have one member aged over 65+.
On the other hand, these households have a much higher median income than the City as a whole.
TABLE 4-11: VERY HIGH FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE THREATENED POPULATIONS Threatened Population Metric VHFHSZ City of Upland Population 2,431 80,710
Households 854 28,775
Median household income $162,605 $108,029 Renter occupied households 18.7% 43.1%
Percentage of households with at least one person living 23.7% 24.7% with a disability
Percentage of households living under the poverty limit 13.7% 11.2% Percentage of households with one-member aged 65+ 29.4% 31.0% Area affected by hazard 1.73 sq. miles 15.67 sq. miles Sources: 2018-2022 U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey; 2024 U.S. Census Bureau's Estimates Wildland/ Urban Interface Fire
Approximately 10.2% of Upland's residents live within the WUI. Table 4-12 shows that nearly 30% of these households include at least one person with a disability, and 44.5% of these households have one member aged over 65+.
TABLE 4-12: WILDLAND / URBAN INTERFACE FIRE THREATENED POPULATIONS Threatened Population Metric WUI City of Upland Population 8,258 80,710
Households 3,002 28,775
Median household income $157,213 $108,029
Renter occupied households 6.8% 43.1%
104 Page 499 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Percentage of households with at least one person living 29 5% 24.7% with a disability
Percentage of households living under the poverty limit 4.3% 11.2% Percentage of households with one-member aged 65+ 44.5% 31.0% Area affected by hazard 2.76 sq. miles 15.67 sq. miles Sources: 2018-2022 U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey; 2024 U.S. Census Bureau's Estimates Other groups facing increased threat levels include people with lower incomes and renters.
Renters make up nearly 7% of Upland's WUI households. While WUI households in general enjoy a significantly higher median income than the City as a whole, some 4.3% of these households live under the poverty line. Renters and economically disadvantaged individuals are more likely to live in substandard housing built with outdated materials known to be flammable.
They may also live in housing units with improperly designed or unmaintained electrical or heating systems that could cause a fire. Renters may not possess the financial resources or authority to rebuild their homes or relocate to new homes after a fire incident.
OTHER THREATS
Both wildfires and urban fires can consume power lines and force utility operators to shut off electrical and gas transmission activity, leading to utility outages in Upland homes and businesses. Fires or burning debris may block or surround streets, preventing residents from evacuating, and hindering emergency response crews from reaching the source of the fire.
Anyone living toward the end of a cul-de-sac faces an elevated threat of being trapped if the fire occurs or spreads to the mouth of the street. Fire may use trees or vegetation in parks and open space areas to bridge what otherwise would be natural firebreaks or drive people away from what they might consider areas of refuge.
Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS) are a significant issue for many communities throughout California. Multiple circuits affect the City, and the potential for large-scale events affecting residents and businesses is an ongoing concern. If a PSPS outage hits Upland's neighboring cities, Upland's resources could be strained as residents of affected areas seek refuge in communities with power; if Upland is also hit, it will face a potentially significant care-and-shelter challenge for its own residents. Outreach to residents and businesses to help them understand and prepare for these events will be an important aspect of the City's overall hazard mitigation strategy.
CHANGES IN POPULATION AND LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
Wildland Fire
If a large, damaging wildfire were to occur, it's feasible that population patterns could fluctuate.
Future land use designations, redevelopment, or new development in these areas could be restricted or prohibited, especially in the WUI and the VHFHSZ. Also, the increasing unaffordability and unavailability of fire insurance due to larger, more frequent fire losses may make building or selling homes in the WUI or VHFHSZ economically impossible. 105 Page 500 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Wildland/ Urban Interface Fire
As we're seeing now in the Pacific Palisades and Altadena, a large urban conflagration can destroy thousands of homes and drive thousands more people out of their damaged homes in the span of a few hours. The experience of other mass disaster evacuations shows that people forced to live away from their homes and neighborhoods for more than a year rarely return. This could be Upland's fate: fewer residents, fewer homes, less economic activity, and a protracted recovery from a hugely traumatic event.
CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY
Climate change will likely increase the City's vulnerability to wildfire impacts. Increasing temperatures could alter the moisture content of plant materials, potentially worsening future drought conditions. More volatile climatic conditions may also encourage severe windstorms of the sort that made the Palisades and Eaton fires so difficult to control for so long.
Threat Profile: Human-Caused Hazards
PHYSICAL THREAT
Hazardous Materials Release
Hazardous materials can cause damage to Upland's people and physical assets if they are released into the environment. Corrosive hazardous materials can damage the CF or FOC building exteriors. Flammable hazardous materials can start fires and cause any nearby CFs or FOCs to flash over and ignite. Generally, sites closer to the origin for releasing hazardous materials are at more risk than those further away.
Table 4-13 shows the numbers of Upland facilities threatened by a hazardous materials release within 500 feet of a site storing or using hazardous materials. The total potential loss estimated for these locations is approximately$3.7 million. Figure 4-5 depicts these sites in relation to the City's CFs and FOCs.
TABLE 4-13: CRITICAL FACILITIES AND FACILITIES OF CONCERN (HAZMAT BUFFER 500FT) Critical Facilities Facilities of Concern
Type Number Potential Loss* Number Potential Loss* Infrastructure 3 $1,651,480 0
Parks Facility 1 $767,440 0
Transportation Infrastructure 1 $1,340,900 0
Total 5 $3,759,820 0
* Based on the City of Upland insured replacement values Note that this count includes only fixed-site CFs and FOCs. Hazmat releases are a constant threat along major transportation routes such as 1-10, 1-210, and the railroad right-of-way. Also, upsets at businesses using or storing hazardous materials may not affect CFs or FOCs but may have a significant impact on neighboring businesses or homes. 106 Page 501 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Landfill Subsidence
Subsidence events can result in the damage of buildings and structures causing monetary damages. The loss to owners can range depending on the actual amount of damage caused.
As subsidence is not typically considered to be a sudden event, damages could be mitigated if discovered early, however there are instances of rapid sinking causing damage to building foundations, resulting in sudden collapse. Damages could also affect infrastructure such as natural gas distribution pipelines, sewer and water pipelines, or electric power conveyance lines. The damages experienced from landfill subsidence have primarily involved asphalt cracking and settlement requiring patching and site grading.
Transportation Incidents
Transportation incidents include aircraft and train crashes, high-capacity road transport (read:
tour or school bus) crashes, and bulk pipeline ruptures. • Aircraft crashes can happen anywhere, depending on the local flight paths and nearby airports. Cable Airport, located near Upland's southwest industrial area, oversees mainly general aviation traffic and small turboprop commuter charters. General aviation-related accidents typically happen on approach or departure and usually have the same impact as a bad car crash. However, the San Berardino and San Gabriel valleys are busy approach and departure routes for Ontario, Orange County, and Los Angeles International Airports, as well as business and military traffic. Wide-bodied passenger and cargo airliners regularly fly over and near Upland. Any accident involving these aircraft could end up on Upland's doorstep.
• The former ATSF rail right-of-way runs across southern Upland. Metrolink operates regular commuter rail service along this right-of-way. BNSF freight operations use the same trackway. As happened in Placentia, Upland, and elsewhere, a Metrolink/freight crash could create both a mass-casualty incident and a hazmat release in downtown Upland.
• A Southern California Gas transmission pipeline cuts across the southern edge of Upland just north of 1-10.
• Heavy road traffic uses 1-10 and 1-210 every day. Also, semis and large-capacity buses travel on Euclid Avenue, Foothill Boulevard, and Arrow Highway. Traffic accidents involving truck-borne hazardous materials or 50-passenger buses could create a mass- casualty incident, a hazmat release, or both in crowded parts of the City. 107 Page 502 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 4-5. CFs and FOCs Located Near Hazardous Materials Sites (500ft Buffer) ,--rp; -!"--f-- ,I
-...., i. ' I
-iii , '' L ,
/ , 0, '414 , ' —1 Almond st
r •
San Antonio
Heights Hillside.
1 cPi ? v
'"" rd 5t 'i
,,
z ,n
- W 22nd St n _ eany,
- V Z •
.� W 21st St n }
Pomello Dr < W Q St � CITY OF
J-11; fin. 21a RANCHO
210'—� CUCAMONGA C
a Z---, w 19th St 4
•
t. • W 18th St
a -'�\. • a
=
a , 1581 fr •
¢ z -744 in
oi
4 '
W 16th St = a =
---z� r p f a
-
..0 .2
V Upland Hills
-- - `r • Country Club _,
`
O W 15th St ZlI���=�/II (� l
• '' \TJ
a W 14th St E 14th St
m
C hie Airport® m I
• O
Z
W ayothill Blvd 46J • IF �i •
eJ ��� I
® ©p' •
11th St E 17 ;T
inn: 83 `\T�
W Arrow Hte • W Arrow Hwy Up1,y,1 E Arrowitiv • / �l]4�1W1J y e 4
•• .' •9tr! $ �`�)�)) _..
E 9th St rn
—' .-. row H� - 1 0 -
• Olive St
Moreno St 0. w 7th St ,ir E 7th St
CI W 6th St E•h St
MONT R
_-- ---- W 5th St CITY OF
.�n.rn n•.. E$[h St
Q City Boundary O City Facility • Cal EPA Environmentally Regulated Facilities
CITY OF �1Facility • DTSC Cleanup Sites
t
Rail Non-Public
- UPLAND Parks ac
_. ParksFacility
tY
i Source:San Bernardino County,
ESRI,California Department of
('", Transportation Infrastructure Toxicsubseanceeotecri eatifornia -�' � Environmental Protection Agency
108 Page 503 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Cybercrime Incidents
As mentioned in Chapter 3, cybercrime can affect anyone, even if a particular person doesn't have a computer. Cybercriminals and cyberterrorists have attacked mobile phone networks, water purification plants, traffic control networks, public safety dispatch centers, government offices, hospitals, banks, and schools. The hazard area is the entire populated landscape in every sufficiently advanced economy on Earth.
While cybercrime and cyberterrorism typically don't cause physical damage, they often render digital systems unusable or untrustworthy. Some hacks can cause certain industrial processes to physically damage their host machinery (such as robots, valves, or equipment such as autoclaves and centrifuges). Attacks on ground, rail, or air traffic control systems can cause transportation accidents.
Mass Casualty/Fatality Incidents
There's no way to predict which of Upland's facilities or assets may be impacted by a mass casualty/fatality incident since there are so many common causes for these incidents. As mentioned earlier, MCIs/MFIs can be the result of natural or human-caused disasters, traffic accidents, hazmat releases, mass-shooting incidents, or terrorism.
While mass shooters and terrorists generally have different motives, they tend to be similarly opportunistic: any sufficiently accessible and busy soft target can be their arena. Mass shootings have occurred in any public venue one can think of. While many national security agencies persist in thinking terrorists pick their targets the way western air forces do, history has shown that the vast majority of terrorist targets are more diffuse and prosaic: cafes, theaters, shopping malls, banks, playgrounds, schools, places of worship, nightclubs, and symbols of whatever government or ideology they oppose (McDonalds and Citibank overseas; IRS offices and family-planning clinics in the U.S.).
Whatever the cause of the MCl/MFI, the cost to the City will depend on the nature and destructiveness of the incident, the level of response required, and whether Upland itself is the target or a victim of chance.
• A major airliner crash in the City may cause a large number of fatalities and substantial destruction on the ground. However, much of the response and recovery cost would be borne by the airline and federal agencies, and Upland would be in no way to blame for it.
• A mass shooting at the Colonies Crossroads shopping center, on the other hand, may cause several casualties and fatalities and little physical damage. But public fears of poor security, mistakes in incident response and control, and that in some way Upland should have "done better," could lead to a catastrophic loss of business at the center and reputational loss for the City that may take months or years to repair.
SOCIAL THREAT
Hazardous Materials Release
The threat of a hazardous materials release event affects those closest to a source of hazardous materials, including industrial sites, gas stations, gas transmission lines, or sewer mains. Table 109 Page 504 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland 4-14 shows the City's vulnerable populations living within 500 feet of hazardous materials storage/waste sites. The median household income for these site types is nearly $20,000 lower than the City as a whole. This suggests that more impoverished populations may live near hazardous materials locations, indicating potential environmental justice concerns should be considered. This data also suggests higher percentages of households with at least one person living with a disability, higher percentages living under the poverty limit, and slightly fewer percentages of households compared to the rest of the City living with at least one-member aged 65+.
Groups such as older people, low-income persons, or renters face a greater risk of exposure since they may not have the financial resources necessary to retrofit their homes against infiltration by hazardous materials or move away to a home that is further from the potential sources of hazardous materials release events. Additionally, public, and private schools, preschools, residential care, and skilled nursing facilities in this area are at risk of being impacted.
As discussed previously, Upland residents and businesses situated next to major transportation infrastructures, such as highways or major arterial streets, also face a greater threat of being affected by the release of hazardous materials, since vehicles transporting hazardous materials may release their contents into the environment if involved in a collision.
TABLE 4-14: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS THREATENED POPULATIONS (500FT BUFFER) Hazardous
Threatened Population Metric Materials City of Upland Population 2,006 80,710
Households 688 28,775
Median household income $88,844 $108,029
Renter-occupied households 56.3% 43.1
Percentage of households with at least one person 30.4% 24.7% living with a disability
Percentage of households living under the poverty limit 9.8% 11.2% Percentage of households with one-member aged 65+ 28.0% 31.0% Area affected by hazard 0.87 sq. miles 15.67 sq. miles Sources: 2018-2022 U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey; 2024 U.S. Census Bureau's Estimates Figure 4-6 depicts the overall community health score for the City as derived from the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) tool CalEnviroScreen. This mapping tool helps identify California communities that are most affected by many sources of pollution and where people are often especially vulnerable to pollution's effects. This tool uses environmental, health, and socioeconomic information to produce scores for every census tract in the state. The scores are mapped so that different communities can be compared. An area with a high score experiences a much higher pollution burden than areas with low scores.
Figure 4-7 depicts the FEMA National Risk Index score for Upland. The National Risk Index is a data set and an online tool to help illustrate the United States communities most at risk for 18 natural hazards (including coastal flooding, cold wave, drought, earthquake, hail, heat wave, hurricane, ice storm, landslide, lightning, riverine flooding, strong wind, tornado, tsunami, 110 Page 505 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland volcanic activity, wildfire, and winter weather). The italicized hazards are those that can affect Upland.
Landfill Subsidence
Subsidence can and does threaten human life, both through direct structural failures and by exacerbating other environmental hazards. Sinking ground can rupture gas lines, causing explosions, and break sewage or water pipes, leading to contamination and the sudden formation of sinkholes. Increased flooding in subsiding urban areas often leads to standing water and the potential spread of waterborne diseases and pests. While the location of the former landfill is used as a storage facility for recreational vehicles, it is surrounded by residential uses, which could be affected if exposure to landfill materials occurs or leakage of effluent or gases occurs.
111 Page 506 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 4-6. OEHHA CalEnviroScreen Rating for Upland
Moanraln r.�
Jf, .. mom
)7 I
'� �� i'.' -I Almond St
/
/ San Antonio
/ Heights Hillside
ll
d
11.0 amid mall= „ ..„ u
Early;
‘VARIM11/1%111 MI /V'
So mello Dr ¢ drim CITY OF
jtemrer-TaimaRANCHO
CUCAMONGA C
01�a■� � �Lmei��I 90-100(Highest Score) I I >40-50 CITY OF Non-Public Facility ->BO-90 - >30-40 � Rail O ->70-e0 - >20-30
.
UPLAND Parks O ->60-70 - >10-20
Parks Facility I 1>50-60 -0-10
(Lowest Score)
A Transportation Infrastructure Source:San Bernardino County,ESRI, California Natural Resources Agency
112 Page 507 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 4-7. FEMA National Risk Index Scoring for Upland 66 66rain f° �, -A.11.r I
j
/ .48 � 1 � Almon St
•
San Antonio
/ Heights Hillside
/
d
of ,A„ - z c
ro
in
f
/
na Dr � CITY OF
6ome
a 4 RANCHO
—CUCAMONGA-2
a
2 c .,
y m r (,,,,,,
Q . m
q� j m
7--
�Tid
I1i1111I11 I -1.
_ Imo_ -
-
_ IIIIHIILI s•f�
ae5t �f�I � ii�uiiii�iii��ll8�Ih��JIII it . -- ----i iiimomne•-..., :_1131 ___ J�r�i ,, IIII�•�iiu
Arrow Hwy L. , A' i iI iiii
er ii---- - __
Moreno St " I , uIIIIII:I: j!, L 7th St
•
—_— -_ MMI�� lllllllllllllll— r t
W 6th St `�o
CI E 6th St
' _ _ M IR
_ W 5th St CITY OF
E 5th St
Q City Boundary O City Facility Social Vulnerability-Rating Rail _ Very High
® Non-Public Facility - Relatively High
\ CITY OF Parks
` •, UPLAND O Parks Facility Illlllll� Relatively Moderate I I Relatively Low
OTransportation Infrastructure I Very Low
Source:San Bernardino
County,EBB!,FEMA
113 Page 508 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Transportation Incidents
As previously mentioned, transportation incidents happen on an almost daily basis and generally don't affect large numbers of people. This complicates the process of determining which populations may be more vulnerable to being affected by transportation incidents, either as participants or bystanders.
Some situations make intuitive sense. People who live near a railroad right-of-way are more likely to be affected by a rail accident; people living or working next to major thoroughfares are more likely to feel the effects of a significant truck or bus accident. Beyond that, though, the sureties become fewer. For instance, does proximity to Cable Airport increase the possibility that a Beechcraft might land on one's roof? Only in an extremely limited sense. Buildings that happen to be directly under the final approach or initial departure paths might have a slightly elevated risk, but the overall amount of exposure is low, as aircraft move quickly and spend only a few seconds in proximity to any given place.
One exception is proximity to a major pipeline, especially one carrying a highly reactive or flammable substance. Figure 4-8 shows the approximate path of the SoCalGas transmission pipeline under downtown Upland. Gas pipeline ruptures and explosions aren't unknown in the U.S. and can be caused by any number of conditions. Table 4-15 details the City's vulnerable populations living within 500 feet of that pipeline. As with hazmat exposure in general, these residents have a median income of only four-fifths of the citywide figure and are over half again more likely to be renters.
TABLE 4-15: GAS PIPELINE THREATENED POPULATIONS (500FT BUFFER) Hazardous
Threatened Population Metric Materials City of Upland Population 4,954 80,710
Households 1,715 28,775
Median household income $80,193 $108,029
Renter-occupied households 62.7% 43.1%
Percentage of households with at least one person 22.7% 24.7% living with a disability
Percentage of households living under the poverty limit 12.0% 11.2% Percentage of households with one-member aged 65+ 24.0% 31.0% Area affected by hazard 0.52 sq. miles 15.67 sq. miles Sources: 2018-2022 U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey; 2024 U.S. Census Bureau's Estimates Cybercrime Incidents
Cybercrime is location-independent; it targets functions, not buildings. Neighbors can be affected very differently depending on their choices of bank, phone provider, government service, doctor, or shopping preference.
In general, the most affected populations are those that have fewer choices for services or less ability to flex quickly in the face of sudden changes in service availability. These populations may include people with lower incomes, older people, people with disabilities, and the transit dependent.
114 Page 509 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Figure 4-8. Approximate Route of a Southern Gas Transmission Pipeline in Upland mounrain 71 ! -' '11 ? I I ' i
i (� Almond St
/
/ San Antonio
r Weights I Hillside
\1 ,i
� 71
J�'a a1�d ,A,Id St i r
s.
o so i
m E
W 22nd St c Bony
V
n z
W 21st St
CITY OF
Pomello Dr Z w St
-iq '
VMONGA
0 W 19th St
WtStnst v
4 N N
0 1581 ft o z 149 ' n
C
O G ` a,
o
W loth St ¢ _
z ,r^,0 -zr, 'o Upland Hills o � N Country Club as
\\\ -A O W 15th St VZv ®
a W 14th St E 14th St
i ' a
Cable Airport O o _
O ' E9 (4) a
z
jWW Foothill Blvd 66 66 E©3 13th St E 17.iFt O -writ83 `TJ
aes
W Arrow Rte W Arrow Hwy UV py E Arrow Hwy
W 9th St `�Q `°
E 9th 5t m
_________
Arrow Hwy k j a `
��ii��'' E Sth S
Olive St
Moreno St w�w
CIS W eth St eau,St
MONTCLAIR
W 5th St CITY OF E 5th St
Q City Boundary C City Facility
CITY OF Rail `'�
lk * Non-Public Facility
. UPLAND Parks
OParks Facility
Gas Transmission Source:San Bernardino
Pipeline O Transportation Infrastructure County,ESRI,National Pipeline Mapping System
115 Page 510 of 654
City of Upland
Mass Casualty/Fatality Incidents
Since mass casualty incidents/acts of terrorism could occur anywhere in Upland, all groups are potentially threatened by the impacts of these incidents; however, the extent of the threat would depend upon the type and magnitude of the event. For example, an active shooter situation may be isolated to a single location, whereas a larger-scale incident may affect multiple locations. Some locations are more likely to be targeted than others, including but not limited to medical facilities, government buildings, financial institutions, or businesses that cater to particular ethnic groups. Populations frequently visiting these areas may face a greater threat than the average person. Seniors, pregnant women, and people with disabilities, for instance, are more likely to frequently visit the local medical facilities than other subpopulations in the City. If an incident occurs at a medical facility or within the community (overwhelming medical resources), these groups may face an increased impact from the incident.
An incident at a government building or financial institution may be more likely to threaten seniors or lower-income individuals relying on in-person transactions instead of online options.
As such, their use of these in-person services may place them in harm's way. Seniors and persons with limited income may be challenged if there is a need to shelter in place or evacuate during an incident requiring additional services, assistance, and/or medical treatment.
OTHER THREATS
Hazardous Materials Release
A hazardous materials release could threaten the City's, and potentially the region's, transportation networks. Large parts of the local road network may be closed to keep people away from areas contaminated with hazardous materials as remediation and cleanup activities progress. If a highly corrosive hazardous material is released, it could potentially cause significant damage to the exteriors of any homes or businesses in the area surrounding the release. Hazardous materials could also harm the City's urban forest, resulting in the premature death of vegetation in the affected areas.
Transportation Incidents
A major transportation incident—such as a serious aircraft crash or pipeline explosion—may cause severe damage to a business district or neighborhood. This may cause significant disruption as people struggle to find alternative shelter or temporary business premises. City and county agencies may need to cooperate to provide recovery services even if there's no likelihood of getting reimbursement from the carrier or the state. Also, other infrastructure (roads, water, electricity, communications) may need to be restored quickly to facilitate recovery.
Cybercrime Incidents
A cyberattack on one service or infrastructure sector may create cascading effects for others.
For instance, a successful hack against a telecommunications provider may deprive government, private industry, and the population of internet access, leading to degraded services and organizational shutdowns.
Recovery from a cyberattack may take weeks and may involve losses of data or network functionality. Inconveniences inflicted on customers and system users may decrease foot traffic and revenue. The victim organization may face increased expenses in hiring temporary 116 Page 511 of 654
2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
employees or consultants, buying additional security hardware or software, and paying skyrocketing legal fees and settlements as penalties and lawsuits proliferate.
Mass Casualty/Fatality Incidents
A mass casualty or fatality incident can cause widespread psychological impacts among upland residents, including acute stress, anxiety, grief, and a persistent sense of fear or loss of safety that extends well beyond those directly affected. Over time, these effects may manifest as community-wide trauma—such as post-traumatic stress symptoms, depression, and social withdrawal—particularly if recovery and mental health support are delayed or insufficient.
CHANGES IN POPULATION AND LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
Hazardous Materials Release
A change in population pattern would occur only if a hazardous materials release were severe enough to require people to move. It's unlikely that hazardous materials releases will affect land use and development because the development review process should take steps to mitigate or minimize impacts from hazardous materials release.
Locations that store, produce, and dispose of hazardous materials are highly regulated within the City and monitored regularly. Land use and development patterns may change through this process and the development review process. Based on the current General Plan data, the City's anticipated residential/population growth over the next five years will likely increase Upland's vulnerability to hazardous materials releases.
Landfill Subsidence
In areas of potential susceptibility to subsidence, policies and mitigation actions could be enacted to reduce land use conflicts and ensure development of the closed facility and surrounding properties is safe and secure. Site monitoring after closure also increases safety of surrounding properties and reduces the potential exposure of landfill gases/materials to the populations inhabiting neighboring properties.
Transportation Incidents
Transportation incidents are too transitory and unpredictable to cause any lasting changes in population or land use. The infrastructure that begets these incidents is too permanent to move or eliminate.
Cybercrime Incidents
Cybercrime is unlikely to change development patterns or the size of the City's population. Its effects are short-lived by design; cyber criminals want to make a quick buck, then move on.
Also, because cybercrime is geography-independent, moving people or facilities to avoid it would be pointless exercise.
Cyberterrorism could potentially affect population through repeated, unmitigated attacks against critical infrastructure. Residents and businesses will tolerate having their water, phone, or electrical service interrupted only so many times before they lose confidence in their service providers and move elsewhere. This is a highly unlikely scenario and would require service providers to display extraordinary levels of incompetence or inattention to bring it about. 117 Page 512 of 654