Woodland City Council
June 20, 2023

Table 2: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals without California Public Health Goals Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Water Toxicology Section February 2022 16

Chemical Health Risk Category1 US EPA MCLG2 (mg/L) Cancer Risk3 at the MCLG California MCL4 (mg/L) Cancer Risk at the California MCL Dichloroacetic acid (DCA) Carcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0 0 none NA Trichloroacetic acid (TCA) hepatotoxicity (harms the liver) 0.02 NA none NA Monobromoacetic acid (MBA) NA none NA none NA Dibromoacetic acid (DBA) NA none NA none NA Total haloacetic acids (sum of MCA, DCA, TCA, MBA, and DBA) general toxicity, hepatotoxicity and carcinogenicity (causes body and organ weight changes, harms the liver and causes cancer) none NA 0.06 NA
Radionuclides Gross alpha particles9 carcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0 (210Po included) 0 15 pCi/L10 (includes radium but not radon and uranium) up to 1x10-3 (for 210Po, the most potent alpha emitter) 9 MCLs for gross alpha and beta particles are screening standards for a group of radionuclides. Corresponding PHGs were not developed for gross alpha and beta particles. See the OEHHA memoranda discussing the cancer risks at these MCLs at http://www.oehha.ca.gov/water/reports/grossab.html. 10 pCi/L = picocuries per liter of water.

ATTACHMENT NO. 2 2022 Health Risk Information for Public Health Goal Exceedance Reports Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Water Toxicology Section February 2022 17

Chemical Health Risk Category1 US EPA MCLG2 (mg/L) Cancer Risk3 at the MCLG California MCL4 (mg/L) Cancer Risk at the California MCL Beta particles and photon emitters9 carcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0 (210Pb included) 0 50 pCi/L (judged equiv. to 4 mrem/yr) up to 2x10-3 (for 210Pb, the most potent beta- emitter)

ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Table 1 Reference: 2012 ACWA PHG Survey COST ESTIMATES FOR TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (INCLUDES ANNUALIZED CAPITAL AND O&M COSTS) No. Treatment Technology Source of Information Estimated Unit Cost 2012 ACWA Survey Indexed to 2021* ($/1,000 gallons treated) 1 Ion Exchange Coachella Valley WD, for GW, to reduce Arsenic concentrations. 2011 costs. 2.40 2 Ion Exchange City of Riverside Public Utilities, for GW, for Perchlorate treatment. 1.16 3 Ion Exchange Carollo Engineers, anonymous utility, 2012 costs for treating GW source for Nitrates. Design souce water concentration: 88 mg/L NO3. Design finished water concentration: 45 mg/L NO3. Does not include concentrate disposal or land cost.

0.88 4 Granular Activated Carbon City of Riverside Public Utilities, GW sources, for TCE, DBCP (VOC, SOC) treatment. 0.58 5 Granular Activated Carbon Carollo Engineers, anonymous utility, 2012 costs for treating SW source for TTHMs. Design souce water concentration: 0.135 mg/L. Design finished water concentration: 0.07 mg/L. Does not include concentrate disposal or land cost.

0.42 6 Granular Activated Carbon, Liquid Phase
LADWP, Liquid Phase GAC treatment at Tujunga Well field. Costs for treating 2 wells. Treament for 1,1 DCE (VOC). 2011-2012 costs.

1.78 7 Reverse Osmosis Carollo Engineers, anonymous utility, 2012 costs for treating GW source for Nitrates. Design souce water concentration: 88 mg/L NO3. Design finished water concentration: 45 mg/L NO3. Does not include concentrate disposal or land cost.

0.94 8 Packed Tower Aeration City of Monrovia, treatment to reduce TCE, PCE concentrations. 2011-12 costs. 0.52 9 Ozonation+ Chemical addition SCVWD, STWTP treatment plant includes chemical addition + ozone generation costs to reduce THM/HAAs concentrations. 2009-2012 costs. 0.11

COST ESTIMATES FOR TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (INCLUDES ANNUALIZED CAPITAL AND O&M COSTS) No. Treatment Technology Source of Information Estimated Unit Cost 2012 ACWA Survey Indexed to 2021* ($/1,000 gallons treated) 10 Ozonation+ Chemical addition SCVWD, PWTP treatment plant includes chemical addition + ozone generation costs to reduce THM/HAAs concentrations, 2009-2012 costs. 0.23 11 Coagulation/Filtra tion Soquel WD, treatment to reduce manganese concentrations in GW. 2011 costs. 0.88 12 Coagulation/Filtra tion Optimization San Diego WA, costs to reduce THM/Bromate, Turbidity concentrations, raw SW a blend of State Water Project water and Colorado River water, treated at Twin Oaks Valley WTP.

1.00 13 Blending (Well) Rancho California WD, GW blending well, 1150 gpm, to reduce fluoride concentrations. 0.83 14 Blending (Wells) Rancho California WD, GW blending wells, to reduce arsenic concentrations, 2012 costs. 0.68 15 Blending Rancho California WD, using MWD water to blend with GW to reduce arsenic concentrations. 2012 costs. 0.81 16 Corrosion Inhibition Atascadero Mutual WC, corrosion inhibitor addition to control aggressive water. 2011 costs. 0.10 *Costs were adjusted from date of original estimates to present, where appropriate, using the Engineering News Record (ENR) annual average Construction Cost Index of 12,1332021

ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Table 2 Reference: Other Agencies COST ESTIMATES FOR TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (INCLUDES ANNUALIZED CAPITAL AND O&M COSTS) No. Treatment Technology Source of Information Estimated 2012 Unit Cost Indexed to 2021* ($/1,000 gallons treated) 1 Reduction - Coagulation- Filtration Reference: February 28, 2013, Final Report Chromium Removal Research, City of Glendale, CA. 100-2000 gpm. Reduce Hexavalent Chromium to 1 ppb.

1.91 - 11.96
2 IX - Weak Base Anion Resin Reference: February 28, 2013, Final Report Chromium Removal Research, City of Glendale, CA. 100-2000 gpm. Reduce Hexavalent Chromium to 1 ppb.

1.96 – 8.19
3 IX Golden State Water Co., IX w/disposable resin, 1 MGD, Perchlorate removal, built in 2010. 0.60 4 IX Golden State Water Co., IX w/disposable resin, 1000 gpm, perchlorate removal (Proposed; O&M estimated). 1.31 5 IX Golden State Water Co., IX with brine regeneration, 500 gpm for Selenium removal, built in 2007.

8.57 6 GFO/Adsorption Golden State Water Co., Granular Ferric Oxide Resin, Arsenic removal, 600 gpm, 2 facilities, built in 2006. 2.24 - 2.39 7 RO Reference: Inland Empire Utilities Agency : Chino Basin Desalter. RO cost to reduce 800 ppm TDS, 150 ppm Nitrate (as NO3); approx. 7 mgd.

2.93 8 IX Reference: Inland Empire Utilities Agency : Chino Basin Desalter. IX cost to reduce 150 ppm Nitrate (as NO3); approx. 2.6 mgd.

1.63

9 Packed Tower Aeration Reference: Inland Empire Utilities Agency : Chino Basin Desalter. PTA-VOC air stripping, typical treated flow of approx. 1.6 mgd.

0.49 10 IX Reference: West Valley WD Report, for Water Recycling Funding Program, for 2.88 mgd treatment facility. IX to remove Perchlorate, Perchlorate levels 6-10 ppb. 2008 costs.

0.68 - 0.97
11 Coagulation Filtration
Reference: West Valley WD, includes capital, O&M costs for 2.88 mgd treatment facility- Layne Christensen packaged coagulation Arsenic removal system. 2009-2012 costs.

0.45 12
FBR
Reference: West Valley WD/Envirogen design data for the O&M + actual capitol costs, 2.88 mgd fluidized bed reactor (FBR) treatment system, Perchlorate and Nitrate removal, followed by multimedia filtration & chlorination, 2012. NOTE: The capitol cost for the treatment facility for the first 2,000 gpm is $23 million annualized over 20 years with ability to expand to 4,000 gpm with minimal costs in the future. $17 million funded through state and federal grants with the remainder funded by WVWD and the City of Rialto.

2.02 – 2.13
* Costs were adjusted from date of original estimates to present, where appropriate, using the Engineering News Record (ENR) annual average Construction Cost Index of 12,133 for 2021. .

ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Table 3 Reference: Updated 2012 ACWA Cost of Treatment Table COST ESTIMATES FOR TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (INCLUDES ANNUALIZED CAPITAL AND O&M COSTS) No. Treatment Technology Source of Information Estimated 2012 Unit Cost Indexed to 2021* ($/1,000 gallons treated) 1 Granular Activated Carbon Reference: Malcolm Pirnie estimate for California Urban Water Agencies, large surface water treatment plants treating water from the State Water Project to meet Stage 2 D/DBP and bromate regulation, 1998

0.69 - 1.31
2 Granular Activated Carbon Reference: Carollo Engineers, estimate for VOC treatment (PCE), 95% removal of PCE, Oct. 1994,1900 gpm design capacity 0.32 3 Granular Activated Carbon Reference: Carollo Engineers, est. for a large No. Calif. surf. water treatment plant ( 90 mgd capacity) treating water from the State Water Project, to reduce THM precursors, ENR construction cost index = 6262 (San Francisco area) - 1992

1.51 4 Granular Activated Carbon Reference: CH2M Hill study on San Gabriel Basin, for 135 mgd central treatment facility for VOC and SOC removal by GAC, 1990 0.59 - 0.86 5 Granular Activated Carbon Reference: Southern California Water Co. - actual data for "rented" GAC to remove VOCs (1,1-DCE), 1.5 mgd capacity facility, 1998 2.71 6 Granular Activated Carbon Reference: Southern California Water Co. - actual data for permanent GAC to remove VOCs (TCE), 2.16 mgd plant capacity, 1998 1.75 7 Reverse Osmosis Reference: Malcolm Pirnie estimate for California Urban Water Agencies, large surface water treatment plants treating water from the State Water Project to meet Stage 2 D/DBP and bromate regulation, 1998

2.036 – 3.89 8 Reverse Osmosis Reference: Boyle Engineering, RO cost to reduce 1000 ppm TDS in brackish groundwater in So. Calif., 1.0 mgd plant operated at 40% of design flow, high brine line cost, May 1991

4.80 9 Reverse Osmosis Reference: Boyle Engineering, RO cost to reduce 1000 ppm TDS in brackish groundwater in So. Calif., 1.0 mgd plant operated at 100% of design flow, high brine line cost, May 1991

2.96 10 Reverse Osmosis Reference: Boyle Engineering, RO cost to reduce 1000 ppm TDS in brackish groundwater in So. Calif., 10.0 mgd plant operated at 40% of design flow, high brine line cost, May 1991

3.20

COST ESTIMATES FOR TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (INCLUDES ANNUALIZED CAPITAL AND O&M COSTS)

No. Treatment Technology Source of Information Estimated 2012 Unit Cost Indexed to 2021* ($/1,000 gallons treated) 11 Reverse Osmosis Reference: Boyle Engineering, RO cost to reduce 1000 ppm TDS in brackish groundwater in So. Calif., 10.0 mgd plant operated at 100% of design flow, high brine line cost, May 1991

2.48 12 Reverse Osmosis Reference: Arsenic Removal Study, City of Scottsdale, AZ - CH2M Hill, for a 1.0 mgd plant operated at 40% of design capacity, Oct. 1991 8.04 13 Reverse Osmosis Reference: Arsenic Removal Study, City of Scottsdale, AZ - CH2M Hill, for a 1.0 mgd plant operated at 100% of design capacity, Oct. 1991 4.75 14 Reverse Osmosis Reference: Arsenic Removal Study, City of Scottsdale, AZ - CH2M Hill, for a 10.0 mgd plant operated at 40% of design capacity, Oct. 1991 3.55 15 Reverse Osmosis Reference: Arsenic Removal Study, City of Scottsdale, AZ - CH2M Hill, for a 10.0 mgd plant operated at 100% of design capacity, Oct. 1991 2.20 16 Reverse Osmosis Reference: CH2M Hill study on San Gabriel Basin, for 135 mgd central treatment facility with RO to remove nitrate, 1990 2.22 - 3.89 17 Packed Tower Aeration Reference: Analysis of Costs for Radon Removal... (AWWARF publication), Kennedy/Jenks, for a 1.4 mgd facility operating at 40% of design capacity, Oct. 1991 1.27 18 Packed Tower Aeration Reference: Analysis of Costs for Radon Removal... (AWWARF publication), Kennedy/Jenks, for a 14.0 mgd facility operating at 40% of design capacity, Oct. 1991

0.68 19 Packed Tower Aeration Reference: Carollo Engineers, estimate for VOC treatment (PCE) by packed tower aeration, without off- gas treatment, O&M costs based on operation during 329 days/year at 10% downtime, 16 hr/day air stripping operation, 1900 gpm design capacity, Oct. 1994

0.34 20 Packed Tower Aeration Reference: Carollo Engineers, for PCE treatment by Ecolo-Flo Enviro-Tower air stripping, without off-gas treatment, O&M costs based on operation during 329 days/year at 10% downtime, 16 hr/day air stripping operation, 1900 gpm design capacity, Oct. 1994

0.35 21 Packed Tower Aeration Reference: CH2M Hill study on San Gabriel Basin, for 135 mgd central treatment facility - packed tower aeration for VOC and radon removal, 1990 0.55 - 0.90

COST ESTIMATES FOR TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (INCLUDES ANNUALIZED CAPITAL AND O&M COSTS)

No. Treatment Technology Source of Information Estimated 2012 Unit Cost Indexed to 2021* ($/1,000 gallons treated) 22 Advanced Oxidation Processes Reference: Carollo Engineers, estimate for VOC treatment (PCE) by UV Light, Ozone, Hydrogen Peroxide, O&M costs based on operation during 329 days/year at 10% downtime, 24 hr/day AOP operation, 1900 gpm capacity, Oct. 1994

0.67 23 Ozonation Reference: Malcolm Pirnie estimate for CUWA, large surface water treatment plants using ozone to treat water from the State Water Project to meet Stage 2 D/DBP and bromate regulation, Cryptosporidium inactivation requirements,1998

0.15 - 0.32
24 Ion Exchange Reference: CH2M Hill study on San Gabriel Basin, for 135 mgd central treatment facility - ion exchange to remove nitrate, 1990 0.73 - 0.97 * Costs were adjusted from date of original estimates to present, where appropriate, using the Engineering News Record (ENR) annual average Construction Cost Index of 12,133 for 2021.

ATTACHMENT NO. 4 SAMPLE "HYPOTHETICAL" PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL REPORT AND TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM NOTE: It is suggested that the Report take the form of a communication to the utility's Governing Board or management since the report does not have to be submitted to any government oversight agency. It is suggested that a transmittal memo from staff to the Board should succinctly summarize the report and indicate what action is needed, which as a minimum includes the scheduling of a public hearing and the formal public notice of the hearing. SAMPLE MEMORANDUM TRANSMITTING REPORT TO GOVERN1NG BOARD: TO: Governing Board, SoftWater Public Water Utility District FROM: Betty Bestwater, General Manager SUBJECT: Required Report on Public Health Goals Attached for your approval is the final draft of a report prepared by staff comparing our district's drinking water quality with public health goals (PHGs) adopted by California EPA's Office of Environment al Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and with maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) adopted by the USEPA. PHGs and MCLGs are not enforceable standards and no action to meet them is mandated. SB 1307 (Calderone-Sher; effective 1-1-97) added new provisions to the California Health and Safety Code which mandate that a report be prepared by July 1, 1998, and every three years thereafter. The attached report is intended to provide information to the public in addition to the annual Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) mailed to each customer. Our water system complies with all of the health-based drinking water standards and maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) required by the California Division of Drinking Water and the USEPA. No additional actions are recommended. (If staff plans to recommend any action to further lower constituent levels, these actions should be noted here.) The new law requires that a public hearing be held (which can be part of a regularly scheduled public meeting) for the purpose of accepting and responding to public comment on the report. This public hearing will be scheduled as part of our regular board (or council, etc) meeting scheduled for and will be noticed as required for public hearings. Signed _______________________________ Genera l Manager

SOFTWATER PUBLIC WATER UTILITY DISTRICT REPORT ON DISTRICT'S WATER QUALITY RELATIVE TO PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS (Note: The names, data, and analytical values cited in this sample report are hypothetical and each utility would need to substitute its own data and adjust the comments accordingly. The constituents discussed are only examples of some that water utilities may have to address in this report. This is not the only way the report can be structured) Background: Provisions of the California Health and Safety Code (Reference No. I) specify that larger (> I0,000 service connections) water utilities prepare a special report by July I, 2016 if their water quality measurements have exceeded any Public Health Goals (PHGs). PHGs are non-enforceable goals established by the Cal-EPA's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). The law also requires that where OEHHA has not adopted a PHG for a constituent, the water suppliers are to use the MCLGs adopted by USEPA. Only constituents which have a California primary drinking water standard and for which either a PHG or MCLG has been set are to be addressed. (Reference No. 2 is a list of all regulated constituents with the MCLs and PHGs or MCLGs.) There are a few constituents that are routinely detected in water systems at levels usually well below the drinking water standards for which no PHG nor MCLG has yet been adopted by OEHHA or USEPA including Total Trihalomethanes. These will be addressed in a future required report after a PHG has been adopted. The new law specifies what information is to be provided in the report. (See Reference No. I) If a constituent was detected in the District's water supply between 2013 and 2015 at a level exceeding an applicable PHG or MCLG, this repo11 provides the information required by the law. Included is the numerical public health risk associated with the MCL and the PHG or MCLG, the category or type of risk to health that could be associated with each constituent, the best treatment technology available that could be used to reduce the constituent level, and an estimate of the cost to install that treatment if it is appropriate and feasible. (Note: If "numerical health risk" data is not available from OEHHA, insert the following: "OEHHA is required to provide numerical health risk information, but has not done so in time to include it in this report"). What Are PHGs? PHGs are set by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) which is part of Cal-EPA and are based solely on public health risk considerations. None of the practical risk-management factors that are considered by the USEPA or the California Division of Drinking Water in setting drinking water standards (MCLs) are considered in setting the PHGs. These factors include analytical detection capability, treatment technology available, benefits and costs. The PHGs are not enforceable and are not required to be met by any public water system. MCLGs are the federal equivalent to PHGs. Water Quality Data Considered: All of the water quality data collected by our water system between 2013 and 2015 for purposes of determining compliance with drinking water standards was considered. This data was all summarized in our 2013, 2014, and 2015 Consumer Confidence Reports which were mailed to all of our customers in _ . (Reference No. 3)

Guidelines Followed: The Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) formed a workgroup which prepared guidelines for water utilities to use in preparing these newly required reports. The ACWA guidelines were used in the preparation of our report. No guidance was available from state regulatory agencies. Best Available Treatment Technology and Cost Estimates: Both the USEPA and DDW adopt what are known as BATs or Best Available Technologies which are the best known methods of reducing contaminant levels to the MCL. Costs can be estimated for such technologies. However, since many PHGs and all MCLGs are set much lower than the MCL, it is not always possible nor feasible to determine what treatment is needed to further reduce a constituent downward to or near the PHG or MCLG, many of which are set at zero. Estimating the costs to reduce a constituent to zero is difficult, if not impossible because it is not possible to verify by analytical means that the level has been lowered to zero. In some cases, installing treatment to try and further reduce very low levels of one constituent may have adverse effects on other aspects of water quality. Constituents Detected That Exceed a PHG or a MCLG: The following is a discussion of constituents that were detected in one or more of our drinking water sources at levels above the PHG, or if no PHG, above the MCLG. Trichloroethylene (TCE): There is no PHG for TCE but the MCLG set by the USEPA is zero. The MCL or drinking water standard for TCE is 0.005 mg/I. We have detected TCE in 2 of our 20 wells at a level of 0.002 mg/I in Well No. I and at 0.003 mg/I in Well No. 8. The levels detected were below the MCLs at all times. The category of health risk associated with TCE, and the reason that a drinking water standard was adopted for it, is that people who drink water containing TCE above the MCL throughout their lifetime could experience an increased risk of getting cancer. DDW says that "Drinking water which meets this standard (the MCL) is associated with little to none of this risk and should be considered safe with respect to TCE." (NOTE: This language is taken ji-om the DDW Blue Book of drinking water law and regulations, Section 64468.2, Title 22, CCR.) The numerical health risk for a MCLG of zero is zero. The BAT for TCE to lower the level below the MCL is either Granular Activated Carbon (GAC)or Packed Tower Aeration (PTA). Since the TCE level in these two wells is already below the MCL, GAC with a long empty bed contact time (EBCT) would likely be required to attempt to lower the TCE level to zero. The estimated cost to install and operate such a treatment system on both Wells No. I and No. 8 that would reliably reduce the TCE level to zero would be approximately $ initial construction cost with additional O&M cost of $ of $ , ear. per year. This would result in an assumed increased cost for each customer E. coli: In July 2021, the California Revised Total Coliform Rule became effective. The revisions included the new Coliform Treatment Technique requirement replacing the Total Coliform MCL, and a new E. coli MCL regulatory limit. The purpose for the revisions was to provide the public with increased protection against microbial pathogens in drinking water served by public water systems. A water system is in violation of the E. coli MCL if any of the following trigger levels occur: 1. E. coli-positive repeat sample following total coliform-positive routine sample 2. Total coliform-positive repeat sample following an E. coli routine sample 3. Failure to collect all required repeat samples following an E. coli-positive routine sample 4. Failure to test for E. coli when any repeat sample is total coliform-positive

Coliform bacteria are an indicator organism that are ubiquitous in nature and are not generally considered harmful. They are used because of the ease in monitoring and analysis. However, the presence of E. coli bacteria indicates that the water may be contaminated with human or animal wastes. These bacteria can make people sick and are a particular concern for those with weakened immune systems. In the month of October 2021, we collected 120 samples from our distribution system for coliform analysis. One of these samples had tested positive for total coliform bacteria and was absent for E. coli bacteria. However, the repeat sample we had conducted tested positive for both total coliform bacteria and E. coli bacteria; we had exceeded the E. coli MCL. In coordinating with our local regulating agency, we initiated a Tier 1 public notification (Boil Water Order) and conducted a Level 2 assessment to identify the cause of the E .coli-positive sample. The cause was determined to be (insert cause of contamination) and the following corrective actions were taken…(insert corrective actions taken). Alternative No. 1: "We are working closely with our regional water supplier and have instituted new disinfection procedures to provide for a slightly higher disinfectant residua l. Our disinfectant is chloramines. This increase has been carefully studied before it was implemented. This careful balance of treatment processes used is essential to continue supplying our customers with safe drinking water." Alternative No. 2: "We add chlorine at our sources to assure that the water served is microbiologically safe. The chlorine residual levels are carefully controlled to provide the best health protection without causing the water to have undesirable taste and odor or increasing the disinfection byproduct level. This careful balance of treatment processes is essential to continue supplying our customers with safe drinking water." Other equally important measures that we have implemented include: an effective cross-connection control program, maintenance of a disinfectant residua l throughout our system, an effective monitoring and surveillance program and maintaining positive pressures in our distribution system. Our system has already taken all of the steps described by DDW as "best available technology" for colifom1 bacteria in Section 64447, Title 22, CCR. (Note: Jf a utility is planning to initiate different treatment or new programs, these should be described and cost estimates could be included.) Lead and/or Copper: There is no MCL for Lead or Copper. Instead the 90th percentile value of all samples from house hold taps in the distribution system cannot exceed an Action Level of 0.015 mg/I for lea d and 1.3 mg/I for copper. The PHG for lead is 0.002 mg/I. The PH G for copper is 0.17 mg/I. The category of health risk for lead is damage to the kidneys or nervous system of humans. The category of health risk for copper is gastrointestinal irritation. Numerical health risk data on lead and copper have not yet been provided by OEHHA, the State agency responsible for providing that information. (Note: If OEHHA provides this information prior to completion of a utility's report, it should be inserted here.) All of our source water samples for lead and copper in 200 were less than the PHG. Based on extensive sampling of our distribution system in 200, our 90th percentile value for lead was 0.006 mg/I and for copper was 0.18 mg/ I. Our water system is in full compliance with the Federal and State Lead and Copper Rule. Based on our extensive sampling, it was determined according to State regulatory requirements that we meet the Action Levels for Lead and Copper. Therefore, we are deemed by DDW to have "optimized corrosion control" for our system. In general, optimizing corrosion control is considered to be the best available techno logy to deal with corrosion issues and with any lead or copper findings. We continue to monitor our wa ter quality parameters that relate to corrosivity, such as the pH, hardness, alkalinity, total dissolved solids, and will take action if necessary to maintain our sys tem in an "optimized corrosion control" condition. Alternative No. 1: Since we are meeting the "optimized corrosion control" requirements, it is not prudent to initiate additional corrosion control treatment as it involves the addition of other chemicals and there could be additional water quality issues raised. Therefore, no estimate of cost has been included.

Alternative No. 2: To further reduce the potential that lead (or copper) values at consumer taps would exceed the PHO, corrosion control treatment could be installed at all of our sources at an estimated initial cost of $ and an ongoing annual O&M cost of $_ _ _ _ _ which would be equivalent to $ per service connection. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER ACTION: The drinking water quality of the SoftWater Public Water Utility District meets all State of California, DDW and USEPA drinking water standards set to protect public health. To further reduce the levels of the constituents identified in this report that are already significantly below the health-based Maximum Contaminant Levels established to provide "safe drinking water", additional costly treatment processes would be required. The effectiveness of the treatment processes to provide any significant reductions in constituent levels at these already low values is uncertain. The health protection benefits of these further hypothetical reductions are not at all clear and may not be quantifiable .Therefore, no action is proposed. Optional additional language: "The money that would be required for these additional treatment processes might provide greater public health protection benefits if spent on other water system operation, surveillance, and monitoring programs." REFERENCES: No. I Excerpt from Calif Health & Safety Code: Section 116470 (b) No.2 Table of Regulated Constituents with MCLs, PHGs or MCLGs No.3 SoftWater Public Water Utility District's 2013, 2014 and 2015 Water Quality Reports No.4 Glossary of terms and abbreviations used in report (Optional)

MCLs, DLRs, PHGs, for Regulated Drinking Water Contaminants (Units are in milligrams per liter (mg/L), unless otherwise noted.) Last Update:

January 3, 2023
The following

table
s

includes California’s maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), detection limits for purposes of reporting (DLRs),
public health goals (PHGs) from the
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA).

For comparison, Federal
MCLs and Maximum Contaminant
Level Goals (MCLGs) (USEPA)

are also displayed.

Inorganic Chemicals Table
,
Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64431
State Regulated
Inorganic Chemical
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Aluminum
1 0.05

0.6 2001
--
--
Antimony

0.006

0.006

0.001
2016

0.006
0 .
006
Arsenic

0.010

0.002

0.000004
2004

0.010
zero
Asbestos (MFL =
million fibers per liter;
for fibers >10
microns long)
7 MFL

0.2 MFL
7 MFL
2003
7 MFL
7 MFL
Barium
1 0.1
2 2003
2 2
Beryllium

0.004

0.001

0.001
2003

0.004

0.004
Cadmium

0.005

0.001

0.00004
2006

0.005

0.005
Chromium, Total
-

OEHHA withdrew the

0.0025
-
mg/L PHG

0.05 0.01
withdrawn
Nov. 2001
1999

0.1 0.1
APPENDIX 7

State Regulated
Inorganic Chemical
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Chromium,
Hexavalent - 0.01-
mg/L MCL & 0.001-
mg/L DLR repealed
September 2017
-- -- 0.00002 2011 -- --
Cyanide 0.15 0.1 0.15 1997 0.2 0.2
Fluoride 2 0.1 1 1997 4.0 4.0
Mercury (inorganic) 0.002 0.001 0.0012 1999
(rev2005)*

0.002 0.002
Nickel 0.1 0.01 0.012 2001 -- --
Nitrate (as nitrogen,
N)
10 as N 0.4 45 as NO3
(=10 as N)
2018 10 10
Nitrite (as N) 1 as N 0.4 1 as N 2018 1 1
Nitrate + Nitrite (as
N)
10 as N -- 10 as N 2018 -- --
Perchlorate 0.006 0.002 0.001 2015 -- --
Selenium 0.05 0.005 0.03 2010 0.05 0.05
Thallium 0.002 0.001 0.0001 1999
(rev2004)

0.002 0.0005
Copper and Lead Table, 22 CCR §64672.3

Values referred to as MCLs for lead and copper are not actually MCLs; instead, they are called “Action Levels” under the lead and copper rule.

State Regulated
Copper and Lead
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Copper 1.3 0.05 0.3 2008 1.3 1.3
Lead 0.015 0.005 0.0002 2009 0.015 zero
Radiological Table, Radionuclides with MCLs in 22 CCR §64441 and §64443 [units are picocuries per liter (pCi/L), unless otherwise state; n/a = not applicable] State Regulated
Radionuclides
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Gross alpha particle
activity - OEHHA
concluded in 2003 that
a PHG was not
practical
15 3 none n/a 15 zero
Gross beta particle
activity - OEHHA
concluded in 2003 that
a PHG was not
practical
4 mrem/yr
4 none n/a 4
mrem/yr
zero
Radium-226 -- 1 0.05 2006
Radium-228 -- 1 0.019 2006
Radium-226 + Radium-
228
5 -- -- -- 5 zero

State Regulated
Radionuclides
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Strontium-90 8 2 0.35 2006 -- --
Tritium "20,000" "1,000" 400 2006 -- --
Uranium 20 1 0.43 2001 30 µg/L zero
Organic Chemicals Table, Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64444 Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs)
State Regulated
Volatile Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Benzene 0.001 0.0005 0.00015 2001 0.005 zero
Carbon tetrachloride 0.0005 0.0005 0.0001 2000 0.005 zero 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.6 0.0005 0.6 1997
(rev2009)

0.6 0.6
1,4-Dichlorobenzene (p-
DCB)

0.005 0.0005 0.006 1997 0.075 0.075
1,1-Dichloroethane
(1,1-DCA)

0.005 0.0005 0.003 2003 -- --
1,2-Dichloroethane
(1,2-DCA)

0.0005 0.0005 0.0004 1999
(rev2005)

0.005 zero
1,1-Dichloroethylene
(1,1-DCE)

0.006 0.0005 0.01 1999 0.007 0.007

State Regulated
Volatile Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 0.006 0.0005 0.013 2018 0.07 0.07 trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene

0.01 0.0005 0.05 2018 0.1 0.1
Dichloromethane
(Methylene chloride)

0.005 0.0005 0.004 2000 0.005 zero
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.005 0.0005 0.0005 1999 0.005 zero 1,3-Dichloropropene 0.0005 0.0005 0.0002 1999
(rev2006)
-- --
Ethylbenzene 0.3 0.0005 0.3 1997 0.7 0.7
Methyl tertiary butyl
ether (MTBE)

0.013 0.003 0.013 1999 -- --
Monochlorobenzene 0.07 0.0005 0.07 2014 0.1 0.1
Styrene 0.1 0.0005 0.0005 2010 0.1 0.1
1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethane

0.001 0.0005 0.0001 2003 0.1 0.1
Tetrachloroethylene
(PCE)

0.005 0.0005 0.00006 2001 0.005 zero
Toluene 0.15 0.0005 0.15 1999 1 1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.005 0.0005 0.005 1999 0.07 0.07

State Regulated
Volatile Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
(1,1,1-TCA)

0.200 0.0005 1 2006 0.2 0.2
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
(1,1,2-TCA)

0.005 0.0005 0.0003 2006 0.005 0.003
Trichloroethylene (TCE) 0.005 0.0005 0.0017 2009 0.005 zero Trichlorofluoromethane
(Freon 11)

0.15 0.005 1.3 2014 -- --
"1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-
Trifluoroethane (Freon
113)"

1.2 0.01 4 1997
(rev2011)
-- --
Vinyl chloride 0.0005 0.0005 0.00005 2000 0.002 zero
Xylenes 1.750 0.0005 1.8 1997 10 10
Non-Volatile Synthetic Organic Chemicals (SOCs)
State Regulated
Non-Volatile
Synthetic Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Alachlor 0.002 0.001 0.004 1997 0.002 zero
Atrazine 0.001 0.0005 0.00015 1999 0.003 0.003
Bentazon 0.018 0.002 0.2 1999
(rev2009)
-- --

State Regulated
Non-Volatile
Synthetic Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0002 0.0001 0.000007 2010 0.0002 zero
Carbofuran 0.018 0.005 0.0007 2016 0.04 0.04
Chlordane 0.0001 0.0001 0.00003 1997
(rev2006)

0.002 zero
Dalapon 0.2 0.01 0.79 1997
(rev2009)

0.2 0.2
1,2-Dibromo-3-
chloropropane
(DBCP)

0.0002 0.00001 0.000003 2020 0.0002 zero
2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyaceti
c acid (2,4-D)

0.07 0.01 0.02 2009 0.07 0.07
Di(2-
ethylhexyl)adipate

0.4 0.005 0.2 2003 0.4 0.4
Di(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate
(DEHP)

0.004 0.003 0.012 1997 0.006 zero
Dinoseb 0.007 0.002 0.014 1997
(rev2010)

0.007 0.007
Diquat 0.02 0.004 0.006 2016 0.02 0.02
Endothal 0.1 0.045 0.094 2014 0.1 0.1

State Regulated
Non-Volatile
Synthetic Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Endrin 0.002 0.0001 0.0003 2016 0.002 0.002
Ethylene dibromide
(EDB)

0.00005 0.00002 0.00001 2003 0.0000
5 zero
Glyphosate 0.7 0.025 0.9 2007 0.7 0.7
Heptachlor 0.00001 0.00001 0.000008 1999 0.0004 zero
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00001 0.00001 0.000006 1999 0.0002 zero Hexachlorobenzene 0.001 0.0005 0.00003 2003 0.001 zero
Hexachlorocyclopent
adiene

0.05 0.001 0.002 2014 0.05 0.05
Lindane 0.0002 0.0002 0.000032 1999
(rev2005)

0.0002 0.0002
Methoxychlor 0.03 0.01 0.00009 2010 0.04 0.04
Molinate 0.02 0.002 0.001 2008 -- --
Oxamyl 0.05 0.02 0.026 2009 0.2 0.2
Pentachlorophenol 0.001 0.0002 0.0003 2009 0.001 zero
Picloram 0.5 0.001 0.166 2016 0.5 0.5

State Regulated
Non-Volatile
Synthetic Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs)

0.0005 0.0005 0.00009 2007 0.0005 zero
Simazine 0.004 0.001 0.004 2001 0.004 0.004
Thiobencarb 0.07 0.001 0.042 2016 -- --
Toxaphene 0.003 0.001 0.00003 2003 0.003 zero
1,2,3-
Trichloropropane

0.00000
5 0.00000
5 0.0000007 2009 -- --
2,3,7,8-TCDD
(dioxin)
3x10-8 5x10-9 5x10-11 2010 3x10-8 zero
2,4,5-TP (Silvex) 0.05 0.001 0.003 2014 0.05 0.05
Disinfection Byproducts Table, Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64533 State Regulated
Disinfection
Byproducts
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Total Trihalomethanes 0.080 -- -- -- 0.080 --
Bromodichloromethane -- 0.0010 0.00006 2020 -- zero
Bromoform -- 0.0010 0.0005 2020 -- zero

State Regulated
Disinfection
Byproducts
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Chloroform -- 0.0010 0.0004 2020 -- 0.07
Dibromochloromethane -- 0.0010 0.0001 2020 -- 0.06
Haloacetic Acids (five)
(HAA5)

0.060 -- -- -- 0.060 --
Monochloroacetic Acid -- 0.0020 0.053 2022 -- 0.07
Dichloroacetic Acid -- 0.0010 0.0002 2022 -- zero
Trichloroacetic Acid -- 0.0010 0.0001 2022 -- 0.02
Monobromoacetic Acid -- 0.0010 0.025 2022 -- --
Dibromoacetic Acid -- 0.0010 0.00003 2022 -- --
Bromate 0.010 0.0050** 0.0001 2009 0.01 zero
Chlorite 1.0 0.020 0.05 2009 1 0.8

Chemicals with PHGs established in response to DDW requests. These are not currently regulated drinking water contaminants.

State Regulated
Disinfection
Byproducts
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
(NDMA)
-- -- 0.000003 2006 -- --
*OEHHA's review of this chemical during the year indicated (rev20XX) resulted in no change in the PHG.
**The DLR for Bromate is 0.0010 mg/L for analysis performed using EPA Method 317.0 Revision 2.0, 321.8, or 326.0.

82093.00001\8555510.2
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND TO ACCEPT THE 2023 TRIENNIAL PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Health and Safety Code Section 116470, the City of Woodland is required to prepare a brief written report detailing all the detected contaminants exceeding their applicable public health goal.

WHEREAS, the City has prepared the 2023 Triennial Public Health Goals report covering the years 2020, 2021, and 2022.

WHEREAS, the City has therefore, prepared and circulated for public review a PDF version of the 2023 Triennial Public Health Goals Report, and a properly noticed public hearing regarding said report was held by the City Council on June 20th, 2023, and WHEREAS, the 2023 Triennial Public Health Goals report will be accepted by City Council.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The 2023 Triennial Public Health Goals Report is on file with the City, and is hereby accepted and ordered filed with the City Clerk; and Section 2. A copy of the 2023 Triennial Public Health Goals Report is located at www.cityofwoodland.org/PHG and made a part of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of June 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Vicky Fernandez, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: June 20, 2023
ITEM #: J.23
SUBJECT: Woodland Tourism and Business Improvement
District Annual Report and Resolution of Intention to
Levee Annual Assessment for Fiscal Year 2023/2024

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Annual Report from the Advisory Board for the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement (WTBID) and adopt the attached resolution of intention to levy the annual assessment for Fiscal Year 2023/2024.

Staff Contact:

Ken Hiatt, City Manager, (530) 661-5802, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The purpose of the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District is to increase the occupancy of Woodland hotels, resulting in continued and enhanced transient occupancy tax and other visitor- supported revenues. Other than administrative support and collections, there are no costs to the City of Woodland associated with the renewal of the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District. Increased occupancy will result in a positive impact on the City's general fund revenue through the transient occupancy tax (TOT) collected on each room night.

Background:

Tourism promotion is a specific purpose named in California Business Improvement District (BID) law. A BID is a benefit district where an industry or area assesses itself to spend collective funds on goals for mutually-beneficial purposes. BIDs are frequently used by hotels to fund tourism marketing and promotion efforts. Through BID self-assessment, business owners collectively pay for activities which could not be afforded by any single business and which serve to champion a destination area, as opposed to typical marketing efforts designed to promote an individual business.

The Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 under the California Streets and Highway Code sets forth specific actions to renew Business Improvement Districts annually. State law makes it clear that BID assessments are not taxes.

Since a BID fee is a benefit assessment and not a tax, BIDs are able to pay for programs and activities without relying on public funding. Tourism BIDs (TBID) can provide destination marketing in ways distinctly different from municipal governments or individual businesses. TBIDs are public-private partnerships which benefit both destination cities and businesses located in those cities. BIDs are an effective financial tool available to the business community through cooperation with local government, as outlined in State law.

Prior to 2017, Woodland had a hotel Business Improvement District which leveed a 2% assessment on overnight hotel stays. The proceeds from the assessment were collected by the City and sent to the Yolo County Visitor’s Bureau, who administered the funds. Between 2017 and 2022, Woodland hotels participated in a countywide tourism district including the cities of Woodland, Winters, Davis, and unincorporated areas of Yolo County. In the fall of 2021, Woodland hoteliers sent a letter, signed by the majority of hoteliers, indicating their desire to no longer participate in the countywide district, and instead favored the formation of a Woodland-focused tourism business improvement district. As a result, on June

21, 2022, the City of Woodland’s City Council, pursuant to City of Woodland Ordinance No. 1691, established the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District (WTBID).

Within this structure, prior to the end of each Fiscal Year, the Advisory Board of the WTBID, which is made up of the Woodland Hoteliers Group, a 501(c)6 non-profit organization, shall prepare and submit an annual report to the City Clerk detailing the use of the assessment funds consistent with the allowed activities and proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year. The WTBID will require annual renewals to continue the assessment. Consideration of each annual renewal is subject to the process stipulated in the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989.

Discussion:

The 2023/2024 fiscal year annual assessments to be levied against hotels within the District are based on the benefits they derive from the program of activities. In accordance with Ordinance No. 1691, in addition to any assessments, fees, charges or taxes imposed otherwise in the City, except where funds are otherwise available, the City Council proposes to levy assessments for fiscal year 2023/2024 against hotels in the WTBID for the purpose of funding the programs, activities and services that will promote the City and hotels as a visitor and tourist destination. Each hotel shall pay an assessment of two (2%) percent of the total room rents charged and received from transient hotel guests who do not make the hotel their principal place of residence.

These assessments shall be due and payable and shall be paid at the same time and in the same manner that the transient occupancy tax is due and payable and shall be subject to the same penalties and interest for nonpayment. Assessments will be collected by the City of Woodland, with the funds being remitted to a special fund of the City for expenditure in accordance with its adopted annual budget as presented by the Advisory Board appointed by the City Council.

Annual Report - Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District

On June 1, 2023, the Woodland Hoteliers Group submitted their first Annual Report that describes the improvements and activities for which assessments are to be levied and collected for the 2023/2024 fiscal year. This Annual Report is being presented to the City Council for review and approval.

Representatives of the Woodland Hoteliers Group will be present at the City Council meeting to share highlights of activities over the past year and plans for the coming fiscal year to promote Woodland as a visitor and tourism destination.

Examples of proposed uses of the revenues derived from charges levied against hotels/businesses in the WTBID for fiscal year 2023/2024 as outlined in the Annual Report are:
(a) Promoting the identity of Woodland through financial support of key regional and national events that support tourism and result in an economic impact; and (b) Developing and implementing a destination marketing strategy and promotions targeting potential hotel guests; and
(c) Developing and undertaking an advertising and public relations program focusing on the business and leisure travel trade; and
(d) Subsidization of high quality, high economic impact events; and (e) Annual operation expenses including but not limited to annual district administration functions and expenses, printing, postage and meetings; and

(f) Support and funding of contract services and/or programs that support hotel operations and tourism, including, but not limited to, security, transportation services, vouchers, and special events; and
(g) Attendance at key meetings and consumer trade shows.

Process for adoption
Under the 1989 law, the State requires a series of steps to renew the WTBID. On June 20th, the Annual Report shall be presented to City Council for review and approval. Additionally, City Council shall hold a public hearing to receive public testimony on July 18 regarding the levy of the annual assessment for fiscal year 2023/2024. The following is a synopsis of the activity necessary to renew the WTBID:

Prior to end of fiscal year 2022 – SUBMISSION OF ANNUAL REPORT (COMPLETED) The Woodland Hoteliers Group submitted its first Annual Report on June 1, 2023. This report covers the overall description of the proposed programs and activities to be funded by the assessments, the estimated annual budget of expenses, the method of assessment and estimated revenues for the 2023/2024 fiscal year, commencing July 1 and ending on June 30, 2024.

June 20, 2023 – PRESENTATION OF ANNUAL REPORT AND BUDGET TO CITY COUNCIL AND CITY COUNCIL’S DECLARATION OF INTENTION
The Annual Report shall be presented to City Council for review and approval. Pursuant to the 1989 BID Law, the City Council shall declare its intention to levy and collect assessments on businesses within the WTBID for fiscal year 2023/2024, adopting the Resolution of Intention.

July 11, 2023 – PUBLICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
Seven (7) days before the Public Hearing, the Resolution of Intention shall be published in the local newspaper, informing the general public about the Hearing.

July 18, 2023 – PUBLIC HEARING OF ANNUAL ASSESSMENT
At the public hearing, written and oral protests may be presented to the City Council. The form and manner of protests shall comply with Sections 36524 and 36525 of the 1989 BID Law, which generally establish that if written protests are received from the owners of businesses that will pay 50 percent or more of the assessments to be levied and protests are not withdrawn so as to reduce the protests to less than that 50 percent, no further proceedings to levy the proposed assessment shall be taken for a period of one year from the date of the finding of a majority protest by the City Council. If the majority protest is only against the furnishing of a specified type or types of improvement or activity, those types of improvements or activities shall be eliminated. Every written protest shall be filed with the City Clerk at or before the time fixed for the public hearing. The City Council may waive any irregularity in the form or content of any written protest and at the public hearing and may correct minor defects in the proceedings. A written protest may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the conclusion of the public hearing.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Annual Report from the Advisory Board for the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement (WTBID) and adopt the attached resolution of intention to levy the annual assessment for Fiscal Year 2023/2024.

Attachments:

1. WTBID Intent Resolution

2. Woodland Tourism BID Annual Report FY 23-24

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF WOODLAND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY ANNUAL
ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/2024 WITHIN
THE WOODLAND TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (“WTBID”) WHEREAS, the City of Woodland (the “City”) is a general law City organized and existing under the laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 (Section 36500 et seq. of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California authorizes the City to levy assessments on businesses within a parking and business improvement area which is in addition to any assessments, fees, charges, or taxes imposed in the City and to use such proceeds for the benefit of businesses within such parking and business improvement area pursuant to said Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 (hereafter “1989 BID Law”); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Woodland on June 21, 2022 pursuant to Ordinance No. 1691 established the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District (hereafter “WTBID”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 36533 of the 1989 BID Law, the Advisory Board for the WTBID has caused a report (“Annual Report”) to be prepared and filed with the City Clerk, which describes the improvements and activities for which assessments are to be levied and collected for the 2023/2024fiscal year; and this Annual Report has been presented to the City Council for review and approval; and WHEREAS, the City Council intends to levy and collect assessments within the WTBID for fiscal year 2023/2024 and by this resolution fixes a time and place for a public hearing to be held by the City Council on the levy of the annual assessment for fiscal 2023/2024 pursuant to Section 36535 of the 1989 BID Law.

NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Woodland does hereby resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.

SECTION 2. Declaration of Intention. Pursuant to the 1989 BID Law, the City Council hereby declares its intention to levy and collect assessments on businesses within the WTBID for fiscal year 2023/2024, which commences July 1, 2023 and ends June 30, 2024, to pay for the improvements, services and activities authorized by Ordinance No. 1691 and described in the Annual Report filed with the City Clerk.

SECTION 3. Boundaries. For fiscal year 2023/2024, the boundaries of the WTBID which is inclusive of the hotels now operating in the City and identified and attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and furthermore unchanged from the boundaries established by Ordinance No. 1691.

SECTION 4. Exemption of Newly Established Business. The City Council proposes to annually levy assessments against all hotels/businesses in the WTBID in accordance with the proposed system of assessments as set forth on Exhibit "B" and as such has determined that the assessments on newly established hotels shall commence immediately upon the first day of operation and after the public hearing for inclusion of such property.

SECTION 5. Use of Assessment Revenues. That the proposed uses of the revenues derived from charges levied against hotels/businesses in the WTBID for fiscal year 2023/2024generally include but are not limited to the following:
(a) Promoting the identity of Woodland through financial support of key regional and national events that support tourism and result in an economic impact; and (b) Developing and implementing a destination marketing strategy and promotions targeting potential hotel guests; and
(c) Developing and undertaking an advertising and public relations program focusing on the business and leisure travel trade; and
(d) Subsidization of high quality, high economic impact events; and (e) Annual operation expenses including but not limited to annual district administration functions and expenses, printing, postage and meetings; and (f) Support and funding of contract services and/or programs that support hotel operations and tourism including but not limited to, security, transportation services, vouchers, and special events; and
(g) Attendance at key meetings and consumer trade shows.

SECTION 6. Method of Assessment. In addition to any assessments, fees, charges or taxes imposed otherwise in the City, the City Council proposes to levy assessments against businesses in the WTBID in fiscal year 2023/2024 for the purpose of funding the programs, activities and services that will promote the City and hotels as a tourist destination. A description of the proposed system of assessments is set forth on Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 7. Annual Report. The City Council hereby approves the Annual Report for fiscal year 2023/2024 as submitted to the City Clerk or as amended herein by City Council direction. Said Annual Report as submitted or amended provides a full and sufficient description of the improvements, services, and activities to be funded by the assessments for fiscal year 2023/2024; the boundaries of the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District, and the proposed assessments to be levied upon the businesses within the WTBID for that fiscal year. Said report as submitted or amended is by reference is made part of this resolution.

SECTION 8. Public Hearing. A public hearing concerning the 2023/2024 levy of annual assessments for the WTBID Benefit Zone will be held on July 18, 2023 at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard at the City Council's regularly held meeting, located at 300 First Street, Woodland, California. At the public hearing, written and oral protests may be presented to the City Council. The form and manner of protests shall comply with Sections 36524 and 36525 of the 1989 BID Law, which generally establish that if written protests are received from the owners of businesses that will pay 50 percent or more of the assessments to be levied and protests are not withdrawn so as to reduce the protests to less than that 50 percent, no further proceedings to levy the proposed assessment shall be taken for a period of one year from the date of the finding of a majority protest by the City Council. If the majority protest is only against the furnishing of a specified type or types of improvement or activity, those types of improvements or activities shall be eliminated. Every written protest shall be filed with the City Clerk at or before the time fixed for the public hearing. The City Council may waive any irregularity in the form or content of any written protest and at the public hearing and may correct minor defects in the proceedings. A written protest may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the conclusion of the public hearing.

SECTION 9. Notice of Hearing. Pursuant to Section 36534 of the 1989 BID Law, the City Clerk is hereby directed to give notice of the public hearing by causing the resolution of intention to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than seven days before the public hearing scheduled for July 18, 2023.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Woodland at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 20th day of June, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Vicky Fernandez, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk

EXHIBIT A

WOODLAND TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
FISCAL YEAR 2023/2024
The following is a list of hotels now operating, or proposed to operate in the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District for Fiscal Year 2023/2024 Aura Motel 6 Woodland LLC(Assessor #: 066-040-004-000)
1564 E Main St
Days Inn(Assessor #: 066-040-011-000)
1524 E Main St
Quality Inn & Suites(Assessor #: 066-040-024-000)
1562 E Main St
Hampton Inn & Suites(Assessor #: 027-851-005-000)
2060 Freeway Dr
Holiday Inn Express(Assessor #: 027-851-006-000)
2070 Freeway Dr
Comfort Suites(Assessor #: 027-851-007-000)
2080 Freeway Dr
Marriott Fairfield Inn & Suites(Assessor #: 027-851-009-000) 2100 Freeway Dr
Econo Lodge(Assessor #: 065-250-007-000)
53 W Main St
Shadow Oaks Hospitality(Assessor #: 027-460-009-000)
584 N East St
Valley Oaks Inn(Assessor #: 027-460-010-000)
600 N East St
Journey Inn(Assessor #: 065-250-051-000)
99 W Main St
Staybridge Suites(Assessor #: 066-030-054-000)
1484 E. Main St

Exhibit B

WOODLAND TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
Proposed System of Assessment (Methodology)
In accordance with Ordinance No. 1691 only properties designated as hotels will be assessed.
“Hotel” shall mean any structure, or any portion of any structure, which is occupied or intended or designed for occupancy by transients, including but not limited to dwellings for lodging or sleeping purposes, which includes any hotel, inn, tourist home or house, motel, studio hotel, bachelor hotel, lodging house, rooming house, apartment house, dormitory, public or private club, mobile home or house trailer at a fixed location, or other similar structure or portion thereof, duplex, triplex, single-family dwelling units except any private dwelling house or other individually owned single-family dwelling rented only infrequently and incidental to normal occupancy or any timeshare as set out in Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7280; provided, that the burden of establishing that the facility is not a hotel shall be on the owner or operator thereof.

The proposed system of assessment for the District is designed to generate revenue from hotels in the City to provide a method of funding public programs and activities that will promote the City and hotels as a tourist destination. The City's hotels comprise the WTBID and are the only business proposed to be assessed. The 2023/2024 fiscal year annual assessments to be levied against hotels within the District are based on the benefits they derive from the program of activities. Businesses located within the District (i.e., all non-hotel businesses) will not be assessed as they derive only, at most, an indirect benefit from the program of activities.

In accordance with Ordinance No. 1691, in addition to any assessments, fees, charges or taxes imposed otherwise in the City, except where funds are otherwise available, the City Council proposes to levy assessments for fiscal year 2023/2024 against hotels in the WTBID for the purpose of funding the programs, activities and services that will promote the City and hotels as a tourist destination. Each hotel shall pay an assessment of two (2%) percent of the total room rents charged and received from transient hotel guests who do not make the hotel their principal place of residence.

These assessments shall be due and payable and shall be paid at the same time and in the same manner that the transient occupancy tax is due and payable and shall be subject to the same penalties and interest for nonpayment. Assessments will be collected by the City of Woodland, with the funds being remitted to a special fund of the City for expenditure in accordance with its adopted annual budget as presented by the Advisory Board appointed by the City Council.

Any newly established hotels shall commence immediately upon the first day of operation and following the public hearing conducted for inclusion into the District.

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page i

Woodland Tourism Business
Improvement District

Fiscal Year 2023/2024
Annual Report

Submitted by

Visit Woodland /
Woodland Hoteliers Group

District Advisory Board

27368 Via Industria
Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590
T. 951.587.3500|800.755.6864
F. 951.587.3510|888.326.6864

Property Tax Information Line
T. 866.807.6864

www.willdan.com

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page ii Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 WOODLAND TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD ......................................... 1 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................... 2 SUMMARY OF SERVICES & ACTIVITIES ........................................................................... 3 ADMINISTRATION ................................................................................................................................................... 3 MARKETING & ADVERTISING ............................................................................................................................... 3 EVENTS & PROMOTIONS ....................................................................................................................................... 4 FISCAL YEAR 2023/2024 ESTIMATED BUDGET .............................................................. 5 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................... 6 DISTRICT BOUNDARIES ....................................................................................................... 7 DISTRICT BOUNDARY DIAGRAMS .................................................................................... 8

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 1 Introduction
Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District Advisory Board Pursuant to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 (Section 36500 et seq. of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California), the Advisory Board for the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District (“WTBID”) which is appointed by the City Council of the City of Woodland, annually reviews and makes appropriate recommendations to the City Council by an Annual Report regarding the use of funds collected through the WTBID assessments. The Advisory Board is comprised of representatives from each of the participating hotels within the Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District . The following table lists the various businesses/ hotels currently operating in the City of Woodland.

Business/Hotel N ame Business/Hotel
Address
Aura Motel 6 Woodland LLC 1564 E Main St
Days Inn 1524 E Main St
Quality Inn & Suites 1562 E Main St
Hampton Inn & Suites 2060 Freeway Dr
Holiday Inn Express 2070 Freeway Dr
Comfort Suites 2080 Freeway Dr
Mariott Fairfield Inn & Suites 2100 Freeway Dr
Econo Lodge 53 W Main St
Journey Inn 99 W Main St
Shadow Oaks Hospitality 584 N East St
Valley Oaks Inn 600 N East St

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 2 Overview
In November 2020, the Woodland Hoteliers Group was established as a California Non - Profit Corporation, comprised of Woodland hotel owners. The Group’s goal is “to create tourism by showing off how interesting Woodland can be.” Furthermore, they work in partnership with Visit Woodland, an organization focused on promoting the City and hotels as a tourist destination . The formation of Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District (“WTBID” or “District”) in July 2022 aligns with the goals and efforts of Visit Woodland and the Woodland Hoteliers Group.

The WTBID was established and is levied pursuant to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989, Section 36500 et seq. of the State of California (“1989 Law”) and the provisions of the California Constitution Article XIIID (“Proposition 218”).

Pursuant to the 1989 Law, a resolution of intention to establish the District was approved on April 19, 2022, and a public hearing, which was duly noticed, was held on June 21, 2022. Following the public hearing the City Council determined that majority protest regarding the formation of the District and the proposed assessments did not exist (no protests were submitted) and subsequently on July 5, 2022 , the City Council ad opted Ordinance No. 1691 establishing WTBID.

This report prepared on behalf of the Advisory Board, provides an overall description of the proposed programs and activities to be funded by the assessments, the estimated annual budget of expenses, the method of assessment and estimated revenues for Fiscal Year 2023/2024 (commencing July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024). .

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 3 Summary of Services & Activities
The Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District shall utilize revenue generated to provide the programs, activities, and services that the Advisory Board determines will best promote the City and hotels as a tourist destination . These purposes include but are not limited to the following.
• Promoting the identity of Woodland through financial suppor t of key regional and national events that support tourism and result in an economic impact; • Developing and implementing a destination marketing strategy and promotions targeting potential hotel guests;
• Developing and undertaking an advertising and public relations program focusing on the business and leisure travel trade;
• Subsidization of high quality, high economic impact events; • Annual operation expenses including but not limited to annual district administration functions and expenses, printing, postage, and meetings; • Support and funding of contract services and/or programs that support hotel operations and tourism including but not limited to, security, transportation services, vouchers, and special events; and
• Attendance at key meetings and consumer trade shows.

Assessment fees are dedicated to securing visitors and room nights through a mix of marketing programs, projects, and activities, including special event sponsorships and print advertising.

Administration
In order to provide the marketing a nd public relations services, WTBID will incur various administrative costs, such as staffing, advocacy, insurance, legal, website hosting maintenance, and professional administration services.

Marketing & Advertising
WTBID has budgeted to advertise via social media outlets, as well as in the following print publications:
• Downtown Directory
• Dining Guides for Hotels
• Travel Guide

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 4 Events & Promotions
WTBID is anticipated to sponsor the following annual local events, the majority of which are held in Downtown Woodland.

Planned Events
NorCal Celtic Festival – showcases Celtic music, dance, food, and culture. Kilted Pipe Bands, Solo Pipers and Drummers, Drum Majors and Scottish Highland Dancers will compete throughout the day along Main Street, culminating in the much anticipated gathering of the Massed Pipes and Drums playing “Scotland the Brave.” California Honey Festival – celebrates the importance of bees as the lead pollinator, The California Honey Festival’s mission is to promote honey and honey bees and their products to a broader public.

Woodland Street Cruisers – welcomes automotive enthusiasts from Woodland, Davis, and as far away as Sacramento and Yuba City. For those that love hot rods, classic cars, rat rods, tuner cars, or anything in between.

Stroll Through History – enhances the awareness and appreciation of the unique agricultural, architectural, and social history and resources of the City of Woodland.

C10 Intervention Truck Show – showcases all types of Chevy and GMC trucks from the years of 1908 to 1998, and is geared to the DIY truck guy/gal.

Yolo Brewfest – craft beer sampling held at the Woodland Historic Train Depot.

Dinner On Main – features an incredible meal made from crops grown within Yolo County.

This event supports local growers, ranchers, chefs, servers, student clubs, nonprofit organizations, as well as the local economy.

Holiday Tree Lighting / Elf on the Shelf Scavenger Hunt – bringing the community together to celebrate the holiday season and each other. Activities anticipated to include photos with Santa, Disney Princesses, hay wagon rides, and live music.

Other Possible Events
• Woodland Winefest – Soroptimist International of Woodland has been hosting Winefest for the past several years each spring in Heritage Plaza. The event provides tastings of local wines, local craft beer and features local vendors such as honey, olive oil, and more.
• One Love, One Heart Reggae Festival – held at the Yolo County Fairgrounds • Woodland First Fridays Concerts
• First Friday Art Walk

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 5 Fiscal Year 2023/2024 Estimated Budget

(1) (Santa, Disney Princesses, Tree Lighting, Hay Wagon Rides, Elf on the Shelf Scavenger Hunt, Backdrop for Photos Stage & Live Music)

WTBID Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2023/2024
Administration
Administration Personnel & Indirect Costs (30,000)$
Administration Professional Services (19,160)
Travel & Miscellaneous Administration Expenses -
Sub-total District Administration (49,160)$
Marketing & Advertising
Personnel, Contracted Services (39,600)
Social Media (9,000)
Guides & Directories (14,400)
Advertising & Promotional Materials (12,000)
Sub-total Marketing & Advertising (75,000)$
Events & Promotions
NorCal Celtic Festival (35,000)$
California Honey Festival (40,000)
Woodland Street Cruisers (10,000)
Stroll Through History (3,500)
C10 Truck Show (50,000)
Yolo Brewfest (10,000)
Dinner On Main (15,500)
Other Events Marketing Opportunities (20,000)
(1) Shared Sponsor Portion of Holiday Events (10,000)
Sub-total Events & Promotions (194,000)$
Total Estimated Expenditures (Fiscal Year 2023/2024) (318,160)$ Fund Balances
Estimated Balance Carryover from Prior Fiscal Year 145,303$ Estimated Assessment Revenue (Fiscal Year 2023/2024) 350,000 Projected Available Funds 495,303$
Projected Expenditures from Above (318,160)
Projected Ending Balance 177,143$

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 6 Assessment Methodology
In accordance with Ordinance No. 1691 only properties designated as hotels will be assessed. “Hotel” shall mean any structure, or any portion of any structure, which is occupied or intended or designed for occupancy by transients, including but not limited to dwellings for lodging or sleeping purposes, which includes any hotel, inn, tourist home or house, motel, studio hotel, bachelor hotel, lodging house, rooming house, apartment house, dormitory, public or private club, mobile home or house trailer at a fixed location, or other similar structure or portion thereof, duplex, triplex, single -family dwelling units except any private dwelling house or other individually owned single -family dwelling rented only infrequently and incidental to normal occupancy or any timeshare as set out in Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7280; provided, that the burden of establishing that the facility is not a hotel shall be on the owner or operator thereof.

The proposed system of assessment for the District is designed to generate revenue from hotels in the City to provide a method of funding programs and activities that will promote the City and hotels as a tourist destination. The City's hotels comprise t he WTBID and are the only business es proposed to be assessed. The 2023/2024 fiscal year annual assessments to be levied against hotels within the District are based on the benefits they derive from the program of activities. Businesses located within the District (i.e., all non- hotel businesses) will not be assessed as they derive only, at most, an indirect benefit from the program of activities.

In accordance with Ordinance No. 1691, in addition to any assessments, fees, charges or taxes imposed otherwise in the City, except where funds are otherwise available, the City Council proposes to levy assessments for fiscal year 2023/2024 against hotels in the WTBID for the purpose of funding the programs, activities and services that will promote the City and ho tels as a tourist destination. Each hotel shall pay an assessment of two percent (2%) of the total room rents charged and received from transient hotel guests who do not make the hotel their principal place of residence.

These assessments shall be due and payable and shall be paid at the same time and in the same manner that the transient occupancy tax is due and payable and shall be subject to the same penalties and interest for nonpayment. Assessments will be collected by the City of Woodland, with the funds being remitted to a special fund of the City for expenditure in accordance with its adopted annual budget as presented by the Advisory Board appointed by the City Council.

Assessment revenues are collected quarterly from each of the hoteliers.

Any newly established hotels shall commence immediately upon the first day of operation and following the public hearing conducted for inclusion into the District.

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 7 District Boundaries
The boundaries of the WTBID include all real property within the City of Woodland and are coterminous with the City boundaries, as established by Ordinance No. 1691. Within the boundaries of the WTBID the benefiting properties to be assessed shall include designated hotels now operating in the City and may include hotels hereafter operating in the WTBID pursuant to proceedings for inclusion. The table below identifies the designated hotels now operating in the City as well as those anticipated for inclusion in Fiscal Year 2023/2024.

(1) Anticipated for inclusion mid-year in Fiscal Year 2023/2024

Other than the one hotel identified above for inclusion, no additional property inclusions or modifications to the existing District boundaries are proposed for Fiscal Year 2023/2024. The twelve (12) hotel properties identified above comprise the entire District for Fiscal Year 2023/2024 and are proposed to be assessed in acco rdance with the System of Assessment established by ordinance and described in the “Assessment Methodology” section of this Report.

The general location of each District Hotel being assessed for Fiscal Year 2023/2024 as referenced above are identified in the following District Boundary Diagrams.

Business/Hotel Name Business/Hotel
Address
Assessor's Parcel
Number
Diagram
Number
Map
Reference
Number
Aura Motel 6 Woodland LLC 1564 E Main St 066-040-004-000 1 1 Days Inn 1524 E Main St 066-040-011-000 1 2
Quality Inn & Suites 1562 E Main St 066-040-024-000 1 3 Hampton Inn & Suites 2060 Freeway Dr 027-851-005-000 2 4 Holiday Inn Express 2070 Freeway Dr 027-851-006-000 2 5 Comfort Suites 2080 Freeway Dr 027-851-007-000 2 6
Mariott Fairfield Inn & Suites 2100 Freeway Dr 027-851-009-000 2 7 Econo Lodge 53 W Main St 065-250-007-000 4 8
Shadow Oaks Hospitality 584 N East St 027-460-009-000 3 9 Valley Oaks Inn 600 N East St 027-460-010-000 3 10
Journey Inn 99 W Main St 065-250-051-000 4 11
(1) Staybridge Suites 1484 E Main St 066-030-054-000 1 12

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 8 District Boundary Diagrams

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 9

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 10

Woodland Tourism Business Improvement District | 2023/2024 Annual Report Page 11

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: June 20, 2023
ITEM #: J.24
SUBJECT: New Aquatic Facility Project Update

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive an update on the New Aquatic Center Project and:

1. Approve relocation of the project to the Community and Senior Center pending determination of suitable site conditions and authorize the City Manager to amend contracts as needed with the design consultant to prepare construction drawings for the new project location; and

2. Direct staff to continue working with the Woodland Tennis Club, Woodland Soccer Club, and Go Skate Woodland and bring back an updated Master Plan for the Community and Senior Center and Sports park that accommodates these planned facilities; and

3. Direct staff to work with WJUSD to rescind or replace the Memorandum of Understanding associated with the 2.5 acre site south of Pioneer High School.

Staff Contact:

Ken Hiatt, City Manager (530) 661-5802, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

It is estimated that the cost to mitigate the soil conditions at the current Aquatic Facility location would be close to $1,000,000. Soil analysis is being conducted on the proposed new location for the project and will be completed in the coming weeks. Assuming the soil test results do not show any extraordinary conditions, the construction cost will be unchanged from the existing estimate of just under $14,000,000. There will be added consultant costs to shift the project design to the new location of approximately $245,000, substantially less than the cost to address the soil issues at the current site. Furthermore, the $250,000 paid to the school district for use of the current site will be requested to be refunded, off-setting the consultant cost increase. To date, the City has set aside $11,066,905 and received an additional $780,000 in private funding commitments toward the New Aquatic Facility.

With Council approval of the recommendation, staff will work with the user groups to refine the location and scope of their projects as well as any funding needs to help support their efforts. Funding plans for these projects will be incorporated as part of the future Council item formally amending the Master Plan for the Community & Senior Center and Sports Park.

City Council Priority Goals:

The project is identified as a priority quality of life initiative within the 2023-2024 City Council Priority Goals.

Background:

The City currently operates one municipal pool, the Charles Brooks Community Swim Center, located adjacent to Woodland High School. This facility includes a 50-meter pool and a small youth

pool. In 2017, an aquatics feasibility study was conducted, to include a series of public meetings, and draft design concepts were presented at a public workshop in March of 2018. In September, 2018, the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a Joint Use Agreement with WJUSD to reserve 2.5 acres of property on Pioneer Avenue, adjacent to Pioneer High School, for a future aquatic facility. Execution of the Joint Use Agreement committed the City to an up-front payment of $250,000 (Measure J funds) for the reservation of the land.

In July 2019, the City Council provided feedback and direction on the features to be included with the project. Subsequently, at its April 19, 2022 meeting, the City Council approved a consultant contract with LPA, Inc. to prepare the construction plans and bid documents for the project. As part of the initial phase of work on the construction plans, soil sampling was conducted to inform the structural requirements for the building, pool, and pool deck. The soil analysis revealed that the soil consisted primarily of highly expansive clay with a layer of softer material ranging from 4-8 feet below the surface. Staff requested the consultants present an approach and preliminary cost to address the soil conditions and mitigate against future stress and cracking of the concrete. The consultant's proposal was to excavate the unsuitable soil and recompact the site. The cost to perform and inspect this work was estimated at over $1,000,000.

Discussion:

Concerned with the budget implications, staff evaluated alternative locations to consider moving the project and concluded that the preferred alterative would be at the Community and Senior Center. This location was the primary site considered as an alternative to the Pioneer High School site back in 2018. The Pioneer site was selected due to its convenience for high school athletics use and the shared parking benefits. The proposed relocation would still allow use by the high school teams, albeit not as conveniently. However, the relocation would offer improved convenience for other user groups such as seniors due to adjacency to the Community & Senior Center and Sport Park facilities. Additionally, it has advantages for oversight and maintenance, being proximate to the Community Services Department staff and their main facility.

Since determining that the Community and Senior Center location could serve as the best alternative location, staff has been in contact with the various sports user groups that have had facilities identified on the Master Plan since 2018 to discuss possible relocation of their planned facilities. Attachments 1 and 2 show the proposed alternative locations and configurations of these facilities in comparison to the current Master Plan. Woodland Tennis Club, the Woodland Soccer Club, and SorD Boardshop (Go Skate Woodland) have all provided input on the revised locations shown and expressed support, if not preference toward the changes. Each expressed continued willingness to work collaboratively with the City to evaluate the proposed revisions to the Master Plan needed to accommodate the Aquatic Facility along with each of their uses.

Additionally, staff has informed the school district of the challenges with the planned location for the Aquatic Center and its intention to propose moving the project to the Community and Senior Center. Staff further assured the Superintendent that the City would work with the District to provide use of the pool for Pioneer High School athletics. If the recommendation is approved, staff will engage with the District to discuss rescission or amendment to the current Memorandum of Understanding and return to Council with any actions needed.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive an update on the Southeast Area Aquatic Facility and:

1. Approve relocation of the project to the Community and Senior Center pending determination of suitable site conditions and authorize the City Manager to amend contracts as needed with the design consultant to prepare construction drawings for the new project location; and

2. Direct staff to continue working with the Woodland Tennis Club, Woodland Soccer Club, and Go Skate Woodland Skate Park and bring back an updated Master Plan for the Community and Senior Center and Sports park that accommodates these planned facilities; and

3. Direct staff to work with WJUSD to rescind or replace the Memorandum of Understanding associated with the 2.5 acre site south of Pioneer High School.

Attachments:

1. Com Ctr Master Plan Conceptual - June 20.2023

2. Community Center and Sports Park Master Plan - Existing 2018

POOL SITE AREA

2.0 AC±

SPORTS PARK DRIVE

EAST STREET
FUTURE
SKATE
PARK
FUTURE
SOCCER
FIELDS
FUTURE
TENNIS

COMPLEX
N
S
W
E

COMMUNITY CENTER & SPORTS PARK

CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN UPDATE

Woodland Community Sports Park
Master Plan
02/14/2018

1. Tennis Courts, 11

2. Possible Pickleball Courts, 2 (60’ X
30’ EA)

3. Parking, Typ.

4. Softball Field (200’ Outfield)
1 2
3 4
6 4
8 7
9 10
3 5. Possible Restroom/
Concessions/Storage Building

6. Optional Softball Field
(150’Outfield)

7. Shade Structure

8. Skate Park

9. Geothermal Soccer Field

10. Soccer Field

11. Detention Basin (Top of Slope)

12. Future Parking
SPORTS PARK DR.

EAST STREET

WOODLAND

COMMUNITY

AND SENIOR
CENTER
11 17
13 15
14 16
12 12
Existing
Field E
Existing Yolo
Federal Field
Existing
Field D
Street Tree
Existing Tree
Existing Concessions
Existing Restrooms
Parking Lot Tree
Shade Tree
Small Shade Tree
Existing
Field B
Future Storm Drain
Pond with Sports
Field
Existing
Playground
Sports Park Property
Future Park Site
Existing
Woodland
Healthcare Field
Existing Maintenance Building
Existing Parking
Existing Dog Park
Existing Parking
Existing Sign

RESIDENTIAL

WOODLAND CHRISTIAN SCHOOL
YOLO COUNTY ROAD 24C (FUTURE PARKWAY DRIVE)

FUTURE MATMOR ROAD
5 13. Future Clubhouse (2,350 sf)

14. Mini Tennis Courts/Possible
Pickleball court location

15. Temporary/Mobile Office
(Dashed line)

16. Possible Parking

17. Maintenance Drive FUTURE BIKE TRAIL