Woodland City Council
December 19, 2023

City of Woodland

Meeting Agenda

City Council
City Hall
Council Chambers
300 First Street
Woodland, CA 95695
December 19, 2023
6:00 PM

CITY COUNCIL

JOINT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL/WOODLAND FINANCE AUTHORITY MEETING 6:00 PM

A. CALL TO ORDER

B. ROLL CALL

C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

D. COMMUNICATIONS - PUBLIC COMMENT

This is an opportunity for the public to speak to the Council on any item other than those listed on this agenda.

Speakers are requested to use the microphone in front of the Council and to begin by stating their name, whether they reside in Woodland and the name of the organization they represent if any. The Mayor may impose a time limit on any speaker depending on the number of people wanting to speak and time available for the rest of the agenda. In the event comments are related to an item scheduled on the agenda, speakers may be required to wait to make their comments until that item is considered. The option to submit a public comment via voicemail is no longer available. Written Public Comments Members of the public are welcome to submit written comments prior to the meeting. Comments should be submitted by email to [email protected]. Written Comments received at least two (2) hours prior to the scheduled start time of the City Council meeting will be provided to the City Council and posted to the City website as part of the official record of the meeting but will not be read into the record. Written Comments received within two (2) hours of the scheduled start time of the City Council meeting and during the City Council meeting will be provided to the City Council the day following the City Council meeting. If you are submitting written comments on a particular item on the agenda, please identify the agenda item number and letter. If you are submitting written comments on an item not listed on the agenda, please identify your e- mail/comment as a General Public Comment. Note: Public comments at special meetings are limited to items on the agenda only.

1. SUBJECT: General Public Comments

WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: This section is reserved for "General" Public Comments emailed within two (2) hours prior to the Council Meeting. These comments will be provided to the City Council and incorporated into the meeting minutes. Any other written communications submitted for items specific to this agenda will be attached as a file to the associated agenda item.

E. COMMUNICATIONS - COUNCIL/STAFF STATEMENTS AND REQUESTS

This is an opportunity for the Council Members and Staff to make comments and announcements, to express concerns, or to request Council's consideration of any items a Council Member would like to have discussed at a future Council meeting.

2. SUBJECT: Long Range Calendar

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the Long Range Calendar for informational purposes only.

F. CONSENT CALENDAR

3. SUBJECT: Woodland Christian Football Recognition

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a proclamation in recognition of Woodland Christian High School's recent State Football Division 5-A Championship.

4. SUBJECT: Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of October 23, 2023

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the October 23, 2023 Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes.

5. SUBJECT: Salary Schedule effective January 1, 2024

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the City of Woodland Salary Schedule effective January 1, 2024.

6. SUBJECT: Fire Department Apparatus Maintenance and Repair Service Contracts

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to:

1. Execute the service agreement with Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service, Inc., with a total to not exceed the amount of $150,000 for the ongoing maintenance and repairs of fire apparatus.

2. Execute the service agreement with Riverview International Trucks, LLC, with a total to not exceed the amount of $100,000 for the ongoing maintenance and repairs of fire apparatus.

7. SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2022/23 AB1600 Annual Report

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. ____, accepting the AB1600 Annual Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2023.

8. SUBJECT: Award Contract to Western Extrication Specialists for Battery Powered Extrication Tools and Related Equipment

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute the purchase agreement with Western Extrication Specialists, with a total to not exceed amount of $143,422.68 for the purchase of battery powered extrication tools and related equipment.

9. SUBJECT: Fifth Amendment to the Security Professional Service Agreement with Allied Universal Security Services for Woodland Public Library

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute the fifth

amendment to the Security Professional Service Agreement with Allied Universal Security Services for the Woodland Public Library.

10. SUBJECT: Final Acceptance and Notice of Completion for the 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, CIP 22-04

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, accepting the construction contract for the 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, CIP 22-04, with RJ Gordon Construction, Inc., as complete and authorizing the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion.

11. SUBJECT: County Road 25A (Parkland Ave. to Miekle Ave.) Improvement Project, CIP 24-05, Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Bid Advertisement and Contract Amendment

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, to 1.) approve the project plans & specifications and authorize bid advertisement for the County Road 25A (Parkland Ave to Miekle Ave) Project, CIP 24-05; and 2.) appropriate $50,000 in Spring Lake Infrastructure – Roads funding (Fund 682) for the Project; and 3.) approve a consultant services amendment for design with Cunningham Engineering in the amount of $31,000 for a total agreement amount of $141,100 and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment.

G. REPORTS OF THE CITY MANAGER

12. SUBJECT: Approval of Contract for Retired Annuitant

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, for Exception to the CalPERS 180-Day Wait Period for Retired Annuitant – Principal Planner, Cynthia Norris.

13. SUBJECT: Comprehensive Zoning Code Update and Recommendations Review

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive a presentation on the Comprehensive Zoning Code Regarding Recommended Updates to the Public Review Draft and provide preliminary direction regarding recommended updates.

14. SUBJECT: Measure F Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2023

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Measure F Annual Report for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2023, and direct staff to publish the required excerpts from the report in the Daily Democrat and on the City's website.

15. SUBJECT: Annual Measure J and Measure R Report for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2023

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Annual Reports for Measure J and Measure R for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2023, and direct staff to publish the required excerpt of the report in the Daily Democrat and on the City's website.

16. SUBJECT: Revision to Council Committee Assignments

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the Council amend the attached City Council Assignments for 2024.

17. SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Schedule for 2024

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve its meeting schedule for 2024.

H. ADJOURN

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Agenda for the Joint Regular City Council/Woodland Finance Authority Meeting of the City of Woodland scheduled for Tuesday, December 19, 2023 was posted on Friday, December 15, 2023 in the outside display case at City Hall, 300 First Street, Woodland, CA, and was available to the public during normal business hours.

Upon request, agendas and documents in the agenda packet will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by law. Any such requests must be made in writing to the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Woodland.

Requests will be valid for the calendar year in which the request is received, and must be renewed prior to January 1st.

Persons needing disability-related modifications or accommodations in order to participate in public meetings, including persons requiring auxiliary aids or services, may request such modifications or accommodations by calling the Office of the City Clerk (530-661-5806) at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: D.1
SUBJECT: General Public Comments

WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: This section is reserved for "General" Public Comments emailed within two (2) hours prior to the Council Meeting. These comments will be provided to the City Council and incorporated into the meeting minutes. Any other written communications submitted for items specific to this agenda will be attached as a file to the associated agenda item.

Attachments:

None

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: E.2
SUBJECT: Long Range Calendar

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the Long Range Calendar for informational purposes only.

Staff Contact:

Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk, (530) 661-5806, [email protected]

Background:

This calendar is being provided for planning purposes only and is intended to keep the Council apprised of upcoming agenda items and plan for upcoming Council items.

Attachments:

1. Council Long Range Calendar

CITY COUNCIL LONG RANGE CALENDAR
CITY HALL HOLIDAY CLOSURE – December 25, 2023 thru January 1, 2024 January 16th REGULAR MEETING Fire Department Midyear Report
Police Department Midyear Report
CSD Quarterly Report
Accept CIP 24-07 South Canal Storm Ditch Project as complete Approve plans and specs and authorize bidding, CIP 23-02 2024 Water Main Replacement Project Accept CIP 20-06 YBWL Culvert Replacement Project as complete Police Department 2024-26 Strategic Plan
Equity Action Plan Annual Report
February 6th REGULAR MEETING Bid Award for CR25A Completion
Fire Response / Station Location Analysis
Freeman Court Project Loan Agreement
Future Topics / Study Sessions:

FY23/24 Mid Year Budget (March)
Active Transportation Plan (March)
CUPs for Cannabis Retailers (March/April)
Retail Cannabis License Agreements (TBD)
Sports Park User Agreements (TBD)
Rule 20A Undergrounding (TBD)
Transit Hub Relocation (TBD)
Comprehensive Zoning Adoption (Spring 2024)
Updated 12/15/2023

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: F.3
SUBJECT: Woodland Christian Football Recognition

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a proclamation in recognition of Woodland Christian High School's recent State Football Division 5-A Championship.

Staff Contact:

Spencer Bowen, (530) 661-5808, [email protected]

Discussion:

This December, Woodland Christian Varsity Football won the CIF State Football Division 5-A Championship with a 23-13 win over Banning of Wilmington. The attached proclamation honors the team's accomplishments.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a proclamation in recognition of Woodland Christian High School's recent State Football Division 5-A Championship.

Attachments:

1. Proclamation WC Football December 2023

CITY OF WOODLAND

PROCLAMATION HONORING

WOODLAND CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL
WHEREAS, Woodlanders have long been passionate fans of youth sports in our community; and WHEREAS, Woodland Christian High School has supported hundreds of young student-athletes; and WHEREAS, the Woodland Christian football team earned the CIF State Football Division 5-A Championship with a 23-13 win over Banning of Wilmington at El Camino College in Torrance, CA; and WHEREAS, the team completed an undefeated 15-0 campaign, one of only two high school football teams in the state to do so this year; and
WHEREAS, the team made their friends, families, and community proud with their historic season.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND, CALIFORNIA, hereby asks the community to join us in proudly honoring and celebrating the Woodland Christian Cardinal Varsity Football team for their dedication, hard work, and accomplishments.

DATED: December 19, 2023

Tania Garcia-Cadena, Mayor
Rich Lansburgh, Mayor Pro Tempore Tom Stallard, Council Member Mayra Vega, Council Member Vicky Fernandez, Council Member

TO: THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: F.4
SUBJECT: Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of October 23, 2023

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the October 23, 2023 Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes.

Staff Contact:

Kris Bain, Community Services Program Manager, (530) 661-2002, [email protected]

Discussion:

The Parks & Recreation Commission held its last meeting on November 27, 2023. At this meeting, the Parks & Recreation Commission approved the minutes from the October 23, 2023 Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive the October 23, 2023 Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes.

Prepared by: Kris Bain, Community Services Program Manager

Reviewed by: Christine Engel, Community Services Director

Attachments:

1. P&R Commission October 2023 minutes

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: F.5
SUBJECT: Salary Schedule effective January 1, 2024

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the City of Woodland salary schedule effective January 1, 2024.

Staff Contact:

Sheila McShane, Human Resources Manager, (530) 661 5807, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The action to approve the salary schedule has no direct fiscal impact.

Background:

The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) requires that the City's salary schedule be approved and adopted by the City Council on a quarterly basis. The requested approval by the Council will meet the CalPERS requirement for the quarter effective January 1, 2024.

Discussion:

To ensure accurate payroll reporting and related retirement calculations, CalPERS requires the salary schedule to be reviewed and updated by action of the City Council on a quarterly basis. The following list shows changes to the salary schedule since the last quarter:

1. Reflects an increase to the minimum wage effective January 1, 2024.

2. Reflects the negotiated cost of living (COLA) adjustment of 2% between the Woodland Police Officers Association (WPOA) and Woodland Police Supervisor Association (WPSA) and 1% between the Police Mid-Management Association (PMMA) and the City.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the City of Woodland salary schedule effective January 1, 2024.

Prepared by: Sheila McShane, Human Resources Manager

Reviewed by: Kim McKinney, Director of Administrative Services

Attachments:

1. Jan 1 2024 Salary Schedule

CLASSIFICATION RANGE UNITA STEP B STEP C STEP D STEP E STEP F STEP G STEP H STEP Monthly Accountant I 116 MM $5,493.79 $5,768.48 $6,056.90 $6,359.74 $6,677.73 $7,011.62 Monthly$2,535.60 $2,662.37 $2,795.49 $2,935.26 $3,082.03 $3,236.13 Biweekly$31.70 $33.28 $34.94 $36.69 $38.53 $40.45 HourlyAccountant II 120 MM $6,064.11 $6,367.32 $6,685.67 $7,019.96 $7,370.96 $7,739.50 Monthly$2,798.82 $2,938.76 $3,085.69 $3,239.98 $3,401.98 $3,572.08 Biweekly$34.99 $36.74 $38.57 $40.50 $42.53 $44.65 HourlyAccounting Technician 45 GS $4,686.90 $4,921.24 $5,167.30 $5,425.67 $5,696.95 $5,981.80 Monthly$2,163.18 $2,271.34 $2,384.91 $2,504.16 $2,629.36 $2,760.83 Biweekly$27.04 $28.39 $29.81 $31.30 $32.87 $34.51 HourlyAdministrative Clerk I 28 GS $3,080.20 $3,234.21 $3,395.92 $3,565.73 $3,744.00 $3,931.20 Monthly$1,421.63 $1,492.71 $1,567.35 $1,645.72 $1,728.00 $1,814.40 Biweekly$17.77 $18.66 $19.59 $20.57 $21.60 $22.68 HourlyAdministrative Clerk II 32 GS $3,399.97 $3,569.96 $3,748.47 $3,935.89 $4,132.68 $4,339.31 Monthly$1,569.22 $1,647.67 $1,730.06 $1,816.56 $1,907.39 $2,002.76 Biweekly$41.59 $43.67 $45.85 $48.14 $50.55 $53.08 HourlyAdministrative Clerk III 36 GS $3,752.93 $3,940.58 $4,137.62 $4,344.50 $4,561.73 $4,789.82 Monthly$1,732.12 $1,818.73 $1,909.67 $2,005.15 $2,105.41 $2,210.69 Biweekly$21.65 $22.73 $23.87 $25.06 $26.32 $27.63 HourlyAdministrative Secretary 42 GS $4,352.25 $4,569.87 $4,798.35 $5,038.28 $5,290.18 $5,554.69 Monthly$2,008.73 $2,109.17 $2,214.62 $2,325.36 $2,441.62 $2,563.70 Biweekly$25.11 $26.37 $27.68 $29.07 $30.52 $32.05 HourlyAdministrative Supervisor 47 GS $4,924.17 $5,170.38 $5,428.90 $5,700.34 $5,985.37 $6,284.63 Monthly$2,272.70 $2,386.33 $2,505.65 $2,630.93 $2,762.48 $2,900.60 Biweekly$28.41 $29.83 $31.32 $32.89 $34.53 $36.26 HourlyAquatics Coordinator 32 GS $3,399.97 $3,569.96 $3,748.47 $3,935.89 $4,132.68 $4,339.31 Monthly$1,569.22 $1,647.67 $1,730.06 $1,816.56 $1,907.39 $2,002.76 Biweekly$19.62 $20.60 $21.63 $22.71 $23.84 $25.03 HourlyAquatics Supervisor 48 GS $5,047.27 $5,299.63 $5,564.62 $5,842.85 $6,134.99 $6,441.74 Monthly$2,329.51 $2,445.98 $2,568.29 $2,696.70 $2,831.53 $2,973.11 Biweekly$29.12 $30.58 $32.10 $33.71 $35.39 $37.16 HourlyAssist City Manager/Comm & Econ Dev Dir Contract $12,463.47 $16,001.30 Monthly$5,752.37 $7,385.22 Biweekly$71.91 $92.32 HourlyAssistant Engineer 125 MM $6,860.98 $7,204.03 $7,564.23 $7,942.44 $8,339.56 $8,756.54 Monthly$3,166.60 $3,324.94 $3,491.18 $3,665.74 $3,849.03 $4,041.48 Biweekly$39.58 $41.56 $43.64 $45.82 $48.11 $50.52 HourlyAssistant Planner 118 MM $5,771.90 $6,060.50 $6,363.52 $6,681.71 $7,015.78 $7,366.57 Monthly$2,663.95 $2,797.15 $2,937.01 $3,083.86 $3,238.05 $3,399.96 Biweekly$33.30 $34.97 $36.71 $38.55 $40.48 $42.50 HourlyAssociate Civil Engineer 131 MM $7,956.63 $8,354.46 $8,772.19 $9,210.79 $9,671.34 $10,154.91 Monthly$3,672.29 $3,855.91 $4,048.70 $4,251.13 $4,463.70 $4,686.88 Biweekly$45.90 $48.20 $50.61 $53.14 $55.80 $58.59 HourlyAssociate Engineer 127 MM $7,208.32 $7,568.74 $7,947.16 $8,344.54 $8,761.76 $9,199.85 Monthly$3,326.92 $3,493.26 $3,667.92 $3,851.32 $4,043.89 $4,246.08 Biweekly$41.59 $43.67 $45.85 $48.14 $50.55 $53.08 HourlyAssociate Planner 124 MM $6,693.64 $7,028.32 $7,379.74 $7,748.72 $8,136.17 $8,542.97 Monthly$3,089.37 $3,243.84 $3,406.03 $3,576.33 $3,755.15 $3,942.91 Biweekly$38.62 $40.55 $42.58 $44.71 $46.94 $49.29 HourlyBuilding Inspection Services Manager 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.49 $9,441.07 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.92 $4,357.42 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlyBuilding Inspector I 49 GS $5,173.46 $5,432.13 $5,703.73 $5,988.93 $6,288.36 $6,602.78 Monthly$2,387.75 $2,507.14 $2,632.49 $2,764.12 $2,902.32 $3,047.44 Biweekly$29.85 $31.34 $32.91 $34.55 $36.28 $38.09 HourlyBuilding Inspector II 53 GS $5,710.52 $5,996.05 $6,295.85 $6,610.65 $6,941.18 $7,288.24 Monthly$2,635.63 $2,767.41 $2,905.78 $3,051.07 $3,203.62 $3,363.80 Biweekly$32.95 $34.59 $36.32 $38.14 $40.05 $42.05 HourlyBusiness Engagement/Resource Conservation Program Manager124 MM $6,693.64 $7,028.32 $7,379.74 $7,748.72 $8,136.17 $8,542.97 Monthly

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective January 1, 2024

REGULAR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES - MONTHLY/BIWEEKLY/HOURLY SALARY

$3,089.37 $3,243.84 $3,406.03 $3,576.33 $3,755.15 $3,942.91 Biweekly$38.62 $40.55 $42.58 $44.71 $46.94 $49.29 HourlyChief Building Official 140 MM $9,936.75 $10,433.58$10,955.26 $11,503.02 $12,078.18 $12,682.09 Monthly$4,586.19 $4,815.50 $5,056.27 $5,309.09 $5,574.54 $5,853.27 Biweekly$57.33 $60.19 $63.20 $66.36 $69.68 $73.17 HourlyChief Collection Systems Operator 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.48 $9,441.06 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.92 $4,357.41 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlyChief Information Officer 142 MM $10,439.80 $10,961.77$11,509.87 $12,085.37 $12,689.64 $13,324.12 Monthly$4,818.37 $5,059.28 $5,312.25 $5,577.86 $5,856.76 $6,149.59 Biweekly$60.23 $63.24 $66.40 $69.72 $73.21 $76.87 HourlyChief Plant Operator 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.48 $9,441.06 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.92 $4,357.41 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlyChief Project Engineer 145 MM $11,242.52 $11,804.63$12,394.89 $13,014.62 $13,665.34 $14,348.61 Monthly$5,188.86 $5,448.29 $5,720.72 $6,006.75 $6,307.08 $6,622.44 Biweekly$64.86 $68.10 $71.51 $75.09 $78.84 $82.78 HourlyChief Water Systems Operator 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.49 $9,441.07 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.92 $4,357.42 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlyChildren's Librarian II 118 MM $5,771.90 $6,060.49 $6,363.53 $6,681.71 $7,015.79 $7,366.58 Monthly$2,663.95 $2,797.15 $2,937.01 $3,083.87 $3,238.06 $3,399.96 Biweekly$33.30 $34.97 $36.71 $38.55 $40.48 $42.50 HourlyCity Clerk Contract $7,630.73 $10,598.24 Monthly$3,521.88 $4,891.50 Biweekly$44.02 $61.14 HourlyCity Engineer 145 MM $11,242.52 $11,804.64$12,394.88 $13,014.62 $13,665.35 $14,348.61 Monthly$5,188.85 $5,448.29 $5,720.71 $6,006.75 $6,307.08 $6,622.44 Biweekly$64.86 $68.10 $71.51 $75.09 $78.84 $82.78 HourlyCity Manager Contract $25,266.80 Monthly$11,661.60 Biweekly$145.77 HourlyCode Compliance Officer I 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyCode Compliance Officer II 50 GS $5,302.79 $5,567.93 $5,846.32 $6,138.65 $6,445.57 $6,767.85 Monthly$2,447.44 $2,569.81 $2,698.30 $2,833.22 $2,974.88 $3,123.62 Biweekly$30.59 $32.12 $33.73 $35.42 $37.19 $39.05 HourlyCommunications and Strategic Policy Manager 134 MM $8,563.32 $8,991.49 $9,441.06 $9,913.12 $10,408.78 $10,929.22 Monthly$3,952.30 $4,149.92 $4,357.41 $4,575.28 $4,804.05 $5,044.26 Biweekly$49.40 $51.88 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 $63.05 HourlyCommunity Development Clerk I 32 GS $3,399.97 $3,569.96 $3,748.47 $3,935.89 $4,132.68 $4,339.31 Monthly$1,569.22 $1,647.67 $1,730.06 $1,816.56 $1,907.39 $2,002.76 Biweekly$19.62 $20.60 $21.63 $22.71 $23.84 $25.03 HourlyCommunity Development Clerk II 37 GS $3,846.76 $4,039.10 $4,241.05 $4,453.10 $4,675.75 $4,909.54 Monthly$1,775.43 $1,864.20 $1,957.41 $2,055.28 $2,158.04 $2,265.94 Biweekly$22.19 $23.30 $24.47 $25.69 $26.98 $28.32 HourlyCommunity Development Director Contract $12,851.90 $16,500.00 Monthly$5,931.65 $7,615.38 Biweekly$74.15 $95.19 HourlyCommunity Development Technician I 42 GS $4,352.25 $4,569.87 $4,798.35 $5,038.28 $5,290.18 $5,554.69 Monthly$2,008.73 $2,109.17 $2,214.62 $2,325.36 $2,441.62 $2,563.70 Biweekly$25.11 $26.37 $27.68 $29.07 $30.52 $32.05 HourlyCommunity Development Technician II 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyCommunity Enhancement Specialist 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly46 GS $2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly46 GS $27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyCommunity Risk Reduction Specialist I Base F $5,203.47 $5,463.88 $5,737.06 $6,023.92 $6,325.10 Monthly$2,401.60 $2,521.79 $2,647.87 $2,780.27 $2,919.28 Biweekly$30.02 $31.52 $33.10 $34.75 $36.49 Hourly

Community Risk Reduction Specialist II Base F $5,595.44 $5,875.23 $6,168.98 $6,477.44 $6,801.32 Monthly$2,582.51 $2,711.64 $2,847.22 $2,989.59 $3,139.07 Biweekly$32.28 $33.90 $35.59 $37.37 $39.24 HourlyCommunity Risk Reduction Specialist Senior Base F $6,195.55 $6,505.34 $6,830.61 $7,172.14 $7,530.76 Monthly$2,859.48 $3,002.47 $3,152.59 $3,310.22 $3,475.73 Biweekly$35.74 $37.53 $39.41 $41.38 $43.45 HourlyCommunity Services Director Contract $12,851.90 $16,500.00 Monthly$5,931.65 $7,615.38 Biweekly$74.15 $95.19 HourlyCommunity Services Officer Base P $4,500.75 $4,725.78 $4,962.07 $5,210.19 $5,470.69 $5,744.24 Monthly$2,077.27 $2,181.13 $2,290.18 $2,404.70 $2,524.94 $2,651.19 Biweekly$25.97 $27.26 $28.63 $30.06 $31.56 $33.14 HourlyCommunity Services Program Manager 125 MM $6,860.98 $7,204.03 $7,564.23 $7,942.44 $8,339.56 $8,756.54 Monthly$3,166.60 $3,324.94 $3,491.18 $3,665.74 $3,849.03 $4,041.48 Biweekly$39.58 $41.56 $43.64 $45.82 $48.11 $50.52 HourlyConservation Coordinator 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyConstruction Project Manager 129 MM $7,573.24 $7,951.90 $8,349.49 $8,766.97 $9,205.32 $9,665.59 Monthly$3,495.34 $3,670.11 $3,853.61 $4,046.30 $4,248.61 $4,461.04 Biweekly$43.69 $45.88 $48.17 $50.58 $53.11 $55.76 HourlyCrime Prevention Specialist Base P $4,500.75 $4,725.78 $4,962.07 $5,210.19 $5,470.69 $5,744.24 Monthly$2,077.27 $2,181.13 $2,290.18 $2,404.70 $2,524.94 $2,651.19 Biweekly$25.97 $27.26 $28.63 $30.06 $31.56 $33.14 HourlyData Services Manager 136 MM $9,002.20 $9,452.31 $9,924.93 $10,421.18 $10,942.23 $11,489.34 Monthly$4,154.86 $4,362.61 $4,580.74 $4,809.78 $5,050.26 $5,302.77 Biweekly$51.94 $54.53 $57.26 $60.12 $63.13 $66.29 HourlyDeputy Director of Community Development Contract $10,671.53 $13,681.99 Monthly$4,925.32 $6,314.76 Biweekly$61.57 $78.94 HourlyDeputy Director of Public Works Utilities Contract $10,671.53 $13,681.99 Monthly$4,925.32 $6,314.76 Biweekly$61.57 $78.94 HourlyDeputy Fire Chief Flat FM $11,213.73 $11,774.41$12,363.13 $12,981.27 $13,741.27 Monthly$5,175.57 $5,434.34 $5,706.06 $5,991.36 $6,342.12 Biweekly$64.70 $67.93 $71.33 $74.89 $79.28 HourlyDeputy Police Chief (aka Police Captain) Base PM $11,909.33 $12,504.81$13,130.04 $13,786.56 $14,475.87 $15,199.67 $15,959.66$16,757.65Monthly$5,496.61 $5,771.45 $6,060.02 $6,363.03 $6,681.17 $7,015.23 $7,365.99 $7,734.30Biweekly$68.71 $72.14 $75.75 $79.54 $83.52 $87.69 $92.08 $96.68HourlyDirector of Administrative Services Contract $12,851.90 $16,500.00 Monthly$5,931.65 $7,615.38 Biweekly$74.15 $95.19 HourlyEconomic Development Manager 136 MM $9,002.20 $9,452.31 $9,924.93 $10,421.18 $10,942.23 $11,489.34 Monthly$4,154.86 $4,362.61 $4,580.74 $4,809.78 $5,050.26 $5,302.77 Biweekly$51.94 $54.53 $57.26 $60.12 $63.13 $66.29 HourlyElectrical / Signs & Markings Supervisor 134 MM $8,563.32 $8,991.50 $9,441.06 $9,913.11 $10,408.79 $10,929.22 Monthly$3,952.30 $4,149.92 $4,357.41 $4,575.28 $4,804.06 $5,044.26 Biweekly$49.40 $51.88 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 $63.05 HourlyElectrician's Assistant 43 GS $4,461.05 $4,684.10 $4,918.31 $5,164.23 $5,422.45 $5,693.57 Monthly$2,058.95 $2,161.89 $2,269.99 $2,383.49 $2,502.67 $2,627.80 Biweekly$25.74 $27.02 $28.38 $29.79 $31.28 $32.85 HourlyEngineering Aide I 33 GS $3,484.97 $3,659.21 $3,842.18 $4,034.28 $4,236.00 $4,447.80 Monthly$1,608.45 $1,688.87 $1,773.32 $1,861.98 $1,955.07 $2,052.83 Biweekly$20.11 $21.11 $22.17 $23.28 $24.44 $25.66 HourlyEngineering Aide II 37 GS $3,846.76 $4,039.10 $4,241.05 $4,453.10 $4,675.75 $4,909.54 Monthly$1,775.43 $1,864.20 $1,957.41 $2,055.28 $2,158.04 $2,265.94 Biweekly$22.19 $23.30 $24.47 $25.69 $26.98 $28.32 HourlyEngineering Assistant 56 GS $6,149.62 $6,457.09 $6,779.95 $7,118.95 $7,474.90 $7,848.64 Monthly$2,838.29 $2,980.20 $3,129.21 $3,285.67 $3,449.95 $3,622.45 Biweekly$35.48 $37.25 $39.12 $41.07 $43.13 $45.28 HourlyEngineering Technician I 44 GS $4,572.58 $4,801.21 $5,041.27 $5,293.34 $5,558.01 $5,835.91 Monthly$2,110.42 $2,215.94 $2,326.74 $2,443.08 $2,565.23 $2,693.50 Biweekly

$26.38 $27.70 $29.08 $30.54 $32.07 $33.67 HourlyEngineering Technician II 48 GS $5,047.27 $5,299.63 $5,564.62 $5,842.85 $6,134.99 $6,441.74 Monthly$2,329.51 $2,445.98 $2,568.29 $2,696.70 $2,831.53 $2,973.11 Biweekly$29.12 $30.58 $32.10 $33.71 $35.39 $37.16 HourlyEngineering Technician III 52 GS $5,571.25 $5,849.81 $6,142.30 $6,449.42 $6,771.89 $7,110.48 Monthly$2,571.35 $2,699.91 $2,834.91 $2,976.65 $3,125.49 $3,281.76 Biweekly$32.14 $33.75 $35.44 $37.21 $39.07 $41.02 HourlyEnvironmental Compliance Inspector I 39 GS $4,041.49 $4,243.57 $4,455.75 $4,678.53 $4,912.46 $5,158.09 Monthly$1,865.30 $1,958.57 $2,056.50 $2,159.32 $2,267.29 $2,380.66 Biweekly$23.32 $24.48 $25.71 $26.99 $28.34 $29.76 HourlyEnvironmental Compliance Inspector II 43 GS $4,461.05 $4,684.10 $4,918.31 $5,164.23 $5,422.45 $5,693.57 Monthly$2,058.95 $2,161.89 $2,269.99 $2,383.49 $2,502.67 $2,627.80 Biweekly$25.74 $27.02 $28.38 $29.79 $31.28 $32.85 HourlyEnvironmental Compliance Specialist 49 GS $5,173.46 $5,432.13 $5,703.73 $5,988.93 $6,288.36 $6,602.78 Monthly$2,387.75 $2,507.14 $2,632.49 $2,764.12 $2,902.32 $3,047.44 Biweekly$29.85 $31.34 $32.91 $34.55 $36.28 $38.09 HourlyEnvironmental Resources Analyst 127 MM $7,208.32 $7,568.74 $7,947.16 $8,344.54 $8,761.76 $9,199.84 Monthly$3,326.92 $3,493.26 $3,667.92 $3,851.32 $4,043.89 $4,246.08 Biweekly$41.59 $43.67 $45.85 $48.14 $50.55 $53.08 HourlyEnvironmental Sustainability Manager 131 MM $7,956.63 $8,354.46 $8,772.19 $9,210.79 $9,671.34 $10,154.91 Monthly$3,672.29 $3,855.91 $4,048.70 $4,251.13 $4,463.70 $4,686.88 Biweekly$45.90 $48.20 $50.61 $53.14 $55.80 $58.59 HourlyEquipment Service Clerk 32 GS $3,399.97 $3,569.96 $3,748.47 $3,935.89 $4,132.68 $4,339.31 Monthly$1,569.22 $1,647.67 $1,730.06 $1,816.56 $1,907.39 $2,002.76 Biweekly$19.62 $20.60 $21.63 $22.71 $23.84 $25.03 HourlyEquipment Service Worker 34 GS $3,572.10 $3,750.70 $3,938.23 $4,135.14 $4,341.91 $4,559.00 Monthly$1,648.66 $1,731.09 $1,817.64 $1,908.53 $2,003.96 $2,104.16 Biweekly$20.61 $21.64 $22.72 $23.86 $25.05 $26.30 HourlyExecutive Assistant - Confidential 49 GS $5,173.46 $5,432.13 $5,703.73 $5,988.93 $6,288.36 $6,602.78 Monthly$2,387.75 $2,507.14 $2,632.49 $2,764.12 $2,902.32 $3,047.44 Biweekly$29.85 $31.34 $32.91 $34.55 $36.28 $38.09 HourlyExecutive Assistant to the City Manager 50 GS $5,302.79 $5,567.93 $5,846.32 $6,138.65 $6,445.57 $6,767.85 Monthly$2,447.44 $2,569.81 $2,698.30 $2,833.22 $2,974.88 $3,123.62 Biweekly$30.59 $32.12 $33.73 $35.42 $37.19 $39.05 HourlyFacility Maintenance Worker I 35 GS $3,661.39 $3,844.47 $4,036.69 $4,238.52 $4,450.45 $4,672.98 Monthly$1,689.87 $1,774.37 $1,863.09 $1,956.24 $2,054.06 $2,156.76 Biweekly$21.12 $22.18 $23.29 $24.45 $25.68 $26.96 HourlyFacility Maintenance Worker II 41 GS $4,246.09 $4,458.40 $4,681.32 $4,915.38 $5,161.16 $5,419.21 Monthly$1,959.74 $2,057.72 $2,160.61 $2,268.64 $2,382.07 $2,501.18 Biweekly$24.50 $25.72 $27.01 $28.36 $29.78 $31.27 HourlyFacility Maintenance Worker III 45 GS $4,686.90 $4,921.24 $5,167.30 $5,425.67 $5,696.95 $5,981.80 Monthly$2,163.18 $2,271.34 $2,384.91 $2,504.16 $2,629.36 $2,760.83 Biweekly$27.04 $28.39 $29.81 $31.30 $32.87 $34.51 HourlyFinance Clerk I 32 GS $3,399.97 $3,569.96 $3,748.47 $3,935.89 $4,132.68 $4,339.31 Monthly$1,569.22 $1,647.67 $1,730.06 $1,816.56 $1,907.39 $2,002.76 Biweekly$19.62 $20.60 $21.63 $22.71 $23.84 $25.03 HourlyFinance Clerk II 37 GS $3,846.76 $4,039.10 $4,241.05 $4,453.10 $4,675.75 $4,909.54 Monthly$1,775.43 $1,864.20 $1,957.41 $2,055.28 $2,158.04 $2,265.94 Biweekly$22.19 $23.30 $24.47 $25.69 $26.98 $28.32 HourlyFinance Clerk III 41 GS $4,246.09 $4,458.40 $4,681.32 $4,915.38 $5,161.16 $5,419.21 Monthly$1,959.74 $2,057.72 $2,160.61 $2,268.64 $2,382.07 $2,501.18 Biweekly$24.50 $25.72 $27.01 $28.36 $29.78 $31.27 HourlyFinance Officer 141 MM $10,185.17 $10,694.41$11,229.14 $11,790.61 $12,380.14 $12,999.14 Monthly$4,700.85 $4,935.88 $5,182.68 $5,441.82 $5,713.91 $5,999.60 Biweekly$58.76 $61.70 $64.78 $68.02 $71.43 $75.00 HourlyFinance Specialist 41 GS $4,246.09 $4,458.40 $4,681.32 $4,915.38 $5,161.16 $5,419.21 Monthly$1,959.74 $2,057.72 $2,160.61 $2,268.64 $2,382.07 $2,501.18 Biweekly$24.50 $25.72 $27.01 $28.36 $29.78 $31.27 HourlyFinance Supervisor 54 GS $5,853.29 $6,145.96 $6,453.25 $6,775.92 $7,114.71 $7,470.45 Monthly$2,701.52 $2,836.60 $2,978.42 $3,127.35 $3,283.71 $3,447.90 Biweekly$33.77 $35.46 $37.23 $39.09 $41.05 $43.10 HourlyFinancial Services Manager 136 MM $9,002.20 $9,452.31 $9,924.93 $10,421.18 $10,942.23 $11,489.34 Monthly

$4,154.86 $4,362.61 $4,580.74 $4,809.78 $5,050.26 $5,302.77 Biweekly$51.94 $54.53 $57.26 $60.12 $63.13 $66.29 HourlyFire Battalion Chief Flat $9,830.42 $10,321.93$10,838.03 $11,379.94 $11,948.93 Monthly$4,537.12 $4,763.97 $5,002.17 $5,252.28 $5,514.89 Biweekly$56.72 $59.55 $62.53 $65.65 $68.94 HourlyFire Captain Base F $8,248.38 $8,660.79 $9,093.83 $9,548.53 $10,025.95 Monthly$3,806.94 $3,997.29 $4,197.15 $4,407.01 $4,627.36 Biweekly$47.59 $49.97 $52.47 $55.09 $57.84 HourlyFire Chief Contract $12,950.00 $16,666.67 Monthly$5,976.92 $7,692.31 Biweekly$74.71 $96.16 HourlyFire Engineer Base F $7,158.69 $7,516.63 $7,892.47 $8,287.10 $8,701.43 Monthly$3,304.01 $3,469.21 $3,642.68 $3,824.81 $4,016.04 Biweekly$41.30 $43.37 $45.53 $47.81 $50.20 HourlyFire Marshal Flat FM $9,830.42 $10,321.93$10,838.03 $11,379.94 $11,948.93 Monthly$4,537.12 $4,763.97 $5,002.17 $5,252.28 $5,514.89 Biweekly$56.72 $59.55 $62.53 $65.65 $68.94 HourlyFirefighter Base F $6,307.72 $6,623.10 $6,954.25 $7,301.98 $7,667.06 Monthly$2,911.26 $3,056.82 $3,209.65 $3,370.14 $3,538.64 Biweekly$36.39 $38.21 $40.12 $42.13 $44.23 HourlyFirefighter Recruit Base F $5,676.95 Monthly$2,620.13 Biweekly$32.75 HourlyFleet & Facilities Manager 131 MM $7,956.63 $8,354.47 $8,772.19 $9,210.79 $9,671.35 $10,154.92 Monthly$3,672.29 $3,855.91 $4,048.70 $4,251.13 $4,463.70 $4,686.88 Biweekly$45.90 $48.20 $50.61 $53.14 $55.80 $58.59 HourlyGIS Coordinator 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.49 $9,441.07 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.92 $4,357.42 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlyGIS Technician I 49 GS $5,173.45 $5,432.13 $5,703.73 $5,988.92 $6,288.37 $6,602.79 Monthly$2,387.75 $2,507.14 $2,632.49 $2,764.12 $2,902.32 $3,047.44 Biweekly$29.85 $31.34 $32.91 $34.55 $36.28 $38.09 HourlyGIS Technician II 53 GS $5,710.52 $5,996.05 $6,295.85 $6,610.65 $6,941.18 $7,288.24 Monthly$2,635.63 $2,767.41 $2,905.78 $3,051.07 $3,203.62 $3,363.80 Biweekly$32.95 $34.59 $36.32 $38.14 $40.05 $42.05 HourlyHeavy Equipment Mechanic 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyHousing Analyst I 120 MM $6,064.11 $6,367.32 $6,685.67 $7,019.96 $7,370.96 $7,739.50 Monthly$2,798.82 $2,938.76 $3,085.69 $3,239.98 $3,401.98 $3,572.08 Biweekly$34.99 $36.74 $38.57 $40.50 $42.53 $44.65 HourlyHousing Analyst II 124 MM $6,693.64 $7,028.32 $7,379.74 $7,748.72 $8,136.17 $8,542.97 Monthly$3,089.37 $3,243.84 $3,406.03 $3,576.33 $3,755.15 $3,942.91 Biweekly$38.62 $40.55 $42.58 $44.71 $46.94 $49.29 HourlyHuman Resources Analyst I 121 MM $6,215.71 $6,526.49 $6,852.82 $7,195.46 $7,555.25 $7,933.01 Monthly$2,868.79 $3,012.23 $3,162.84 $3,320.98 $3,487.04 $3,661.39 Biweekly$35.86 $37.65 $39.54 $41.51 $43.59 $45.77 HourlyHuman Resources Analyst II 126 MM $7,032.50 $7,384.12 $7,753.34 $8,141.00 $8,548.05 $8,975.45 Monthly$3,245.77 $3,408.06 $3,578.46 $3,757.38 $3,945.25 $4,142.52 Biweekly$40.57 $42.60 $44.73 $46.97 $49.32 $51.78 HourlyHuman Resources Clerk 39 GS $4,041.49 $4,243.57 $4,455.75 $4,678.53 $4,912.46 $5,158.09 Monthly$1,865.30 $1,958.57 $2,056.50 $2,159.32 $2,267.29 $2,380.66 Biweekly$23.32 $24.48 $25.71 $26.99 $28.34 $29.76 HourlyHuman Resources Manager 140 MM $9,936.75 $10,433.58$10,955.26 $11,503.02 $12,078.18 $12,682.09 Monthly$4,586.19 $4,815.50 $5,056.27 $5,309.09 $5,574.54 $5,853.27 Biweekly$57.33 $60.19 $63.20 $66.36 $69.68 $73.17 HourlyHuman Resources Technician I 45 GS $4,686.90 $4,921.24 $5,167.30 $5,425.67 $5,696.95 $5,981.80 Monthly$2,163.18 $2,271.34 $2,384.91 $2,504.16 $2,629.36 $2,760.83 Biweekly$27.04 $28.39 $29.81 $31.30 $32.87 $34.51 HourlyHuman Resources Technician II 50 GS $5,302.79 $5,567.93 $5,846.32 $6,138.65 $6,445.57 $6,767.85 Monthly$2,447.44 $2,569.81 $2,698.30 $2,833.22 $2,974.88 $3,123.62 Biweekly$30.59 $32.12 $33.73 $35.42 $37.19 $39.05 Hourly

Industrial Electrical/Electronics Technician 58 GS $6,460.94 $6,783.99 $7,123.18 $7,479.35 $7,853.31 $8,245.98 Monthly$2,981.97 $3,131.07 $3,287.62 $3,452.01 $3,624.61 $3,805.84 Biweekly$37.28 $39.14 $41.10 $43.15 $45.31 $47.57 HourlyInformation Technology Technician I 48 GS $5,047.27 $5,299.63 $5,564.62 $5,842.85 $6,134.99 $6,441.74 Monthly$2,329.51 $2,445.98 $2,568.29 $2,696.70 $2,831.53 $2,973.11 Biweekly$29.12 $30.58 $32.10 $33.71 $35.39 $37.16 HourlyInformation Technology Technician II 52 GS $5,571.25 $5,849.81 $6,142.30 $6,449.42 $6,771.89 $7,110.48 Monthly$2,571.35 $2,699.91 $2,834.91 $2,976.65 $3,125.49 $3,281.76 Biweekly$32.14 $33.75 $35.44 $37.21 $39.07 $41.02 HourlyInfrastructure O & M Superintendent 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.48 $9,441.06 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.92 $4,357.41 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlyJunior Engineer 121 MM $6,215.71 $6,526.49 $6,852.82 $7,195.46 $7,555.25 $7,933.01 Monthly$2,868.79 $3,012.23 $3,162.84 $3,320.98 $3,487.04 $3,661.39 Biweekly$35.86 $37.65 $39.54 $41.51 $43.59 $45.77 HourlyJunior Planner 113 MM $5,101.52 $5,356.59 $5,624.42 $5,905.65 $6,200.93 $6,510.98 Monthly$2,354.55 $2,472.27 $2,595.89 $2,725.68 $2,861.97 $3,005.07 Biweekly$29.43 $30.90 $32.45 $34.07 $35.78 $37.56 HourlyLaboratory & Environmental Compliance Mgr. 129 MM $7,573.24 $7,951.90 $8,349.49 $8,766.97 $9,205.32 $9,665.59 Monthly$3,495.34 $3,670.11 $3,853.61 $4,046.30 $4,248.61 $4,461.04 Biweekly$43.69 $45.88 $48.17 $50.58 $53.11 $55.76 HourlyLaboratory Supervisor 127 MM $7,208.32 $7,568.73 $7,947.16 $8,344.54 $8,761.76 $9,199.84 Monthly$3,326.92 $3,493.26 $3,667.92 $3,851.32 $4,043.89 $4,246.08 Biweekly$41.59 $43.67 $45.85 $48.14 $50.55 $53.08 HourlyLaboratory Technician I 43 GS $4,461.05 $4,684.10 $4,918.31 $5,164.23 $5,422.45 $5,693.57 Monthly$2,058.95 $2,161.89 $2,269.99 $2,383.49 $2,502.67 $2,627.80 Biweekly$25.74 $27.02 $28.38 $29.79 $31.28 $32.85 HourlyLaboratory Technician II 47 GS $4,924.17 $5,170.38 $5,428.90 $5,700.34 $5,985.37 $6,284.63 Monthly$2,272.70 $2,386.33 $2,505.65 $2,630.93 $2,762.48 $2,900.60 Biweekly$28.41 $29.83 $31.32 $32.89 $34.53 $36.26 HourlyLibrary Program Manager I 122 MM $6,371.10 $6,689.65 $7,024.15 $7,375.34 $7,744.12 $8,131.33 Monthly$2,940.51 $3,087.53 $3,241.92 $3,404.00 $3,574.21 $3,752.92 Biweekly$36.76 $38.59 $40.52 $42.55 $44.68 $46.91 HourlyLibrary Program Manager II 125 MM $6,860.97 $7,204.04 $7,564.23 $7,942.44 $8,339.56 $8,756.54 Monthly$3,166.60 $3,324.94 $3,491.18 $3,665.74 $3,849.03 $4,041.48 Biweekly$39.58 $41.56 $43.64 $45.82 $48.11 $50.52 HourlyLibrary Services Director Contract $10,410.00 $12,650.00 Monthly$4,804.62 $5,838.46 Biweekly$60.06 $72.98 HourlyLibrary Technical Assistant I 29 GS $3,157.20 $3,315.07 $3,480.83 $3,654.87 $3,837.61 $4,029.49 Monthly$1,457.17 $1,530.03 $1,606.54 $1,686.86 $1,771.21 $1,859.77 Biweekly$18.21 $19.13 $20.08 $21.09 $22.14 $23.25 HourlyLibrary Technical Assistant II 33 GS $3,484.97 $3,659.21 $3,842.18 $4,034.28 $4,236.00 $4,447.80 Monthly$1,608.45 $1,688.87 $1,773.32 $1,861.98 $1,955.07 $2,052.83 Biweekly$20.11 $21.11 $22.17 $23.28 $24.44 $25.66 HourlyLibrary Technical Assistant III 37 GS $3,846.76 $4,039.10 $4,241.05 $4,453.10 $4,675.75 $4,909.54 Monthly$1,775.43 $1,864.20 $1,957.41 $2,055.28 $2,158.04 $2,265.94 Biweekly$22.19 $23.30 $24.47 $25.69 $26.98 $28.32 HourlyLight Equipment Mechanic 41 GS $4,246.09 $4,458.40 $4,681.32 $4,915.38 $5,161.16 $5,419.21 Monthly$1,959.74 $2,057.72 $2,160.61 $2,268.64 $2,382.07 $2,501.18 Biweekly$24.50 $25.72 $27.01 $28.36 $29.78 $31.27 HourlyLiteracy Coordinator 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyMaintenance Supervisor 53 GS $5,710.52 $5,996.05 $6,295.85 $6,610.65 $6,941.18 $7,288.24 Monthly$2,635.63 $2,767.41 $2,905.78 $3,051.07 $3,203.62 $3,363.80 Biweekly$32.95 $34.59 $36.32 $38.14 $40.05 $42.05 HourlyMaintenance Worker I 35 GS $3,661.39 $3,844.47 $4,036.69 $4,238.52 $4,450.45 $4,672.98 Monthly$1,689.87 $1,774.37 $1,863.09 $1,956.24 $2,054.06 $2,156.76 Biweekly$21.12 $22.18 $23.29 $24.45 $25.68 $26.96 HourlyMaintenance Worker II 40 GS $4,142.53 $4,349.67 $4,567.14 $4,795.50 $5,035.28 $5,287.04 Monthly$1,911.94 $2,007.54 $2,107.91 $2,213.31 $2,323.97 $2,440.17 Biweekly

$23.90 $25.09 $26.35 $27.67 $29.05 $30.50 HourlyMaintenance Worker III 44 GS $4,572.58 $4,801.21 $5,041.27 $5,293.34 $5,558.01 $5,835.91 Monthly$2,110.42 $2,215.94 $2,326.74 $2,443.08 $2,565.23 $2,693.50 Biweekly$26.38 $27.70 $29.08 $30.54 $32.07 $33.67 HourlyManagement Analyst I 120 MM $6,064.11 $6,367.31 $6,685.67 $7,019.96 $7,370.96 $7,739.50 Monthly$2,798.82 $2,938.76 $3,085.69 $3,239.98 $3,401.98 $3,572.08 Biweekly$34.99 $36.74 $38.57 $40.50 $42.53 $44.65 HourlyManagement Analyst II 125 MM $6,860.97 $7,204.04 $7,564.23 $7,942.44 $8,339.56 $8,756.54 Monthly$3,166.60 $3,324.94 $3,491.18 $3,665.74 $3,849.03 $4,041.48 Biweekly$39.58 $41.56 $43.64 $45.82 $48.11 $50.52 HourlyMarketing & Business Rel Spec 118 MM $5,771.90 $6,060.49 $6,363.53 $6,681.71 $7,015.79 $7,366.58 Monthly$2,663.95 $2,797.15 $2,937.01 $3,083.87 $3,238.06 $3,399.96 Biweekly$33.30 $34.97 $36.71 $38.55 $40.48 $42.50 HourlyMeter Services Technician 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyOffice Manager 115 MM $5,359.79 $5,627.77 $5,909.16 $6,204.62 $6,514.85 $6,840.60 Monthly$2,473.75 $2,597.43 $2,727.31 $2,863.67 $3,006.86 $3,157.20 Biweekly$30.92 $32.47 $34.09 $35.80 $37.59 $39.47 HourlyOperations and Maintenance Superintendent 137 MM $9,227.27 $9,688.63 $10,173.06 $10,681.71 $11,215.80 $11,776.59 Monthly$4,258.74 $4,471.68 $4,695.26 $4,930.02 $5,176.52 $5,435.35 Biweekly$53.24 $55.90 $58.69 $61.63 $64.71 $67.94 HourlyPark Maintenance Technician 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyPark Maintenance Worker I 35 GS $3,661.39 $3,844.47 $4,036.69 $4,238.52 $4,450.45 $4,672.98 Monthly$1,689.87 $1,774.37 $1,863.09 $1,956.24 $2,054.06 $2,156.76 Biweekly$21.12 $22.18 $23.29 $24.45 $25.68 $26.96 HourlyPark Maintenance Worker II 39 GS $4,041.49 $4,243.57 $4,455.75 $4,678.53 $4,912.46 $5,158.09 Monthly$1,865.30 $1,958.57 $2,056.50 $2,159.32 $2,267.29 $2,380.66 Biweekly$23.32 $24.48 $25.71 $26.99 $28.34 $29.76 HourlyPark Maintenance Worker III 43 GS $4,461.05 $4,684.10 $4,918.31 $5,164.23 $5,422.45 $5,693.57 Monthly$2,058.95 $2,161.89 $2,269.99 $2,383.49 $2,502.67 $2,627.80 Biweekly$25.74 $27.02 $28.38 $29.79 $31.28 $32.85 HourlyPark Planner 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.48 $9,441.06 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.92 $4,357.41 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlyPark Superintendent 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.48 $9,441.06 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.92 $4,357.41 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlyPark Supervisor 51 GS $5,435.37 $5,707.13 $5,992.49 $6,292.12 $6,606.72 $6,937.05 Monthly$2,508.63 $2,634.06 $2,765.77 $2,904.05 $3,049.25 $3,201.72 Biweekly$31.36 $32.93 $34.57 $36.30 $38.12 $40.02 HourlyPlanning Manager 140 MM $9,936.75 $10,433.58$10,955.26 $11,503.02 $12,078.18 $12,682.09 Monthly$4,586.19 $4,815.50 $5,056.27 $5,309.09 $5,574.54 $5,853.27 Biweekly$57.33 $60.19 $63.20 $66.36 $69.68 $73.17 HourlyPolice Chief Contract $16,757.34 $22,049.13 Monthly$7,734.16 $10,176.52 Biweekly$96.68 $127.21 HourlyPolice Crime and Intelligence Analyst Base PS $5,769.97 $6,058.49 $6,361.40 $6,679.47 $7,013.44 Monthly$2,663.06 $2,796.22 $2,936.03 $3,082.83 $3,236.97 Biweekly$33.29 $34.95 $36.70 $38.54 $40.46 HourlyPolice Lieutenant Base PM $10,835.58 $11,377.36$11,946.23 $12,543.55 $13,170.74 $13,829.28 $14,520.74$15,246.78Monthly$5,001.04 $5,251.09 $5,513.64 $5,789.33 $6,078.80 $6,382.74 $6,701.88 $7,036.97Biweekly$62.51 $65.64 $68.92 $72.37 $75.99 $79.79 $83.78 $87.96HourlyPolice Officer Base P $6,837.66 $7,179.54 $7,538.52 $7,915.46 $8,311.22 $8,726.78 $9,163.13 Monthly$3,155.84 $3,313.63 $3,479.32 $3,653.29 $3,835.95 $4,027.75 $4,229.14 Biweekly$39.45 $41.42 $43.49 $45.67 $47.95 $50.35 $52.87 HourlyPolice Officer Recruit (Non-Safety) Base $6,334.89 Monthly$2,923.80 Biweekly$36.55 HourlyPolice Records Manager Base PS $6,185.39 $6,494.66 $6,819.38 $7,160.36 $7,518.38 $7,894.29 Monthly

$2,854.80 $2,997.54 $3,147.41 $3,304.78 $3,470.02 $3,643.52 Biweekly$35.69 $37.47 $39.34 $41.31 $43.38 $45.54 HourlyPolice Records Specialist Base P $3,994.83 $4,194.54 $4,404.28 $4,624.49 $4,855.72 Monthly$1,843.77 $1,935.94 $2,032.74 $2,134.38 $2,241.10 Biweekly$23.05 $24.20 $25.41 $26.68 $28.01 HourlyPolice Records Supervisor Base PS $5,412.61 $5,683.23 $5,967.40 $6,265.80 $6,579.10 Monthly$2,498.13 $2,623.03 $2,754.18 $2,891.91 $3,036.51 Biweekly$31.23 $32.79 $34.43 $36.15 $37.96 HourlyPolice Sergeant Base PS $7,909.66 $8,305.14 $8,720.40 $9,156.42 $9,614.25 $10,094.96 $10,599.71$11,129.69Monthly$3,650.61 $3,833.14 $4,024.80 $4,226.04 $4,437.35 $4,659.21 $4,892.18 $5,136.78Biweekly$45.63 $47.92 $50.31 $52.83 $55.47 $58.24 $61.15 $64.21HourlyPool and Recreation Facility Technician 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyPrincipal Civil Engineer 141 MM $10,185.17 $10,694.41$11,229.14 $11,790.61 $12,380.14 $12,999.14 Monthly$4,700.85 $4,935.88 $5,182.68 $5,441.82 $5,713.91 $5,999.60 Biweekly$58.76 $61.70 $64.78 $68.02 $71.43 $75.00 HourlyPrincipal Planner 136 MM $9,002.20 $9,452.31 $9,924.93 $10,421.18 $10,942.23 $11,489.34 Monthly$4,154.86 $4,362.61 $4,580.74 $4,809.78 $5,050.26 $5,302.77 Biweekly$51.94 $54.53 $57.26 $60.12 $63.13 $66.29 HourlyPrincipal Utilities Civil Engineer 141 MM $10,185.17 $10,694.41$11,229.14 $11,790.61 $12,380.14 $12,999.14 Monthly$4,700.85 $4,935.88 $5,182.68 $5,441.82 $5,713.91 $5,999.60 Biweekly$58.76 $61.70 $64.78 $68.02 $71.43 $75.00 HourlyProgram Analyst 63 GS $7,309.96 $7,675.46 $8,059.23 $8,462.19 $8,885.30 $9,329.57 Monthly$3,373.83 $3,542.52 $3,719.64 $3,905.63 $4,100.91 $4,305.95 Biweekly$42.17 $44.28 $46.50 $48.82 $51.26 $53.83 HourlyPublic Works Director Contract $12,851.90 $16,500.00 Monthly$5,931.65 $7,615.38 Biweekly$74.15 $95.19 HourlyPublic Works O&M Infrastructure Admin 141 MM $10,185.17 $10,694.41$11,229.14 $11,790.61 $12,380.14 $12,999.14 Monthly$4,700.85 $4,935.88 $5,182.68 $5,441.82 $5,713.91 $5,999.60 Biweekly$58.76 $61.70 $64.78 $68.02 $71.43 $75.00 HourlyPurchasing Manager 123 MM $6,530.38 $6,856.89 $7,199.75 $7,559.73 $7,937.71 $8,334.60 Monthly$3,014.02 $3,164.72 $3,322.96 $3,489.11 $3,663.56 $3,846.74 Biweekly$37.68 $39.56 $41.54 $43.61 $45.80 $48.09 HourlyRecreation Coordinator 36 GS $3,752.93 $3,940.58 $4,137.62 $4,344.50 $4,561.73 $4,789.82 Monthly$1,732.12 $1,818.73 $1,909.67 $2,005.15 $2,105.41 $2,210.69 Biweekly$21.65 $22.73 $23.87 $25.06 $26.32 $27.63 HourlyRecreation Superintendent 131 MM $7,956.63 $8,354.46 $8,772.19 $9,210.79 $9,671.34 $10,154.91 Monthly$3,672.29 $3,855.91 $4,048.70 $4,251.13 $4,463.70 $4,686.88 Biweekly$45.90 $48.20 $50.61 $53.14 $55.80 $58.59 HourlyRecreation Supervisor 50 GS $5,302.79 $5,567.93 $5,846.32 $6,138.65 $6,445.57 $6,767.85 Monthly$2,447.44 $2,569.81 $2,698.30 $2,833.22 $2,974.88 $3,123.62 Biweekly$30.59 $32.12 $33.73 $35.42 $37.19 $39.05 HourlyRedevelopment Manager 136 MM $9,002.20 $9,452.31 $9,924.93 $10,421.18 $10,942.23 $11,489.34 Monthly$4,154.86 $4,362.61 $4,580.74 $4,809.78 $5,050.26 $5,302.77 Biweekly$51.94 $54.53 $57.26 $60.12 $63.13 $66.29 HourlySenior Accountant 125 MM $6,860.98 $7,204.03 $7,564.23 $7,942.44 $8,339.56 $8,756.54 Monthly$3,166.60 $3,324.94 $3,491.18 $3,665.74 $3,849.03 $4,041.48 Biweekly$39.58 $41.56 $43.64 $45.82 $48.11 $50.52 HourlySenior Associate Civil Engineer 134 MM $8,568.43 $8,996.85 $9,446.70 $9,919.02 $10,414.98 $10,935.73 Monthly$3,954.66 $4,152.39 $4,360.02 $4,578.01 $4,806.91 $5,047.26 Biweekly$49.43 $51.91 $54.50 $57.23 $60.09 $63.09 HourlySenior Building Inspector 57 GS $6,303.36 $6,618.52 $6,949.45 $7,296.92 $7,661.76 $8,044.85 Monthly$2,909.24 $3,054.70 $3,207.44 $3,367.81 $3,536.20 $3,713.01 Biweekly$36.37 $38.18 $40.09 $42.10 $44.20 $46.41 HourlySenior Building Plans Examiner 58 GS $6,460.94 $6,783.99 $7,123.18 $7,479.35 $7,853.31 $8,245.98 Monthly$2,981.97 $3,131.07 $3,287.62 $3,452.01 $3,624.61 $3,805.84 Biweekly$37.28 $39.14 $41.10 $43.15 $45.31 $47.57 HourlySenior Center Manager 120 MM $6,064.11 $6,367.32 $6,685.67 $7,019.96 $7,370.96 $7,739.50 Monthly$2,798.82 $2,938.76 $3,085.69 $3,239.98 $3,401.98 $3,572.08 Biweekly$34.99 $36.74 $38.57 $40.50 $42.53 $44.65 Hourly

Senior Civil Engineer 138 MM $9,457.94 $9,930.83 $10,427.37 $10,948.73 $11,496.18 $12,070.99 Monthly$4,365.20 $4,583.46 $4,812.63 $5,053.26 $5,305.93 $5,571.23 Biweekly$54.57 $57.29 $60.16 $63.17 $66.33 $69.64 HourlySenior Construction Project Manager 131 MM $7,956.63 $8,354.46 $8,772.19 $9,210.79 $9,671.34 $10,154.91 Monthly$3,672.29 $3,855.91 $4,048.70 $4,251.13 $4,463.70 $4,686.88 Biweekly$45.90 $48.20 $50.61 $53.14 $55.80 $58.59 HourlySenior Engineering Assistant 58 GS $6,460.94 $6,783.99 $7,123.18 $7,479.35 $7,853.31 $8,245.98 Monthly$2,981.97 $3,131.07 $3,287.62 $3,452.01 $3,624.61 $3,805.84 Biweekly$37.28 $39.14 $41.10 $43.15 $45.31 $47.57 HourlySenior Environmental Resources Analyst 131 MM $7,956.63 $8,354.46 $8,772.19 $9,210.79 $9,671.34 $10,154.91 Monthly$3,672.29 $3,855.91 $4,048.70 $4,251.13 $4,463.70 $4,686.88 Biweekly$45.90 $48.20 $50.61 $53.14 $55.80 $58.59 HourlySenior Equipment Mechanic 50 GS $5,302.79 $5,567.93 $5,846.32 $6,138.65 $6,445.57 $6,767.85 Monthly$2,447.44 $2,569.81 $2,698.30 $2,833.22 $2,974.88 $3,123.62 Biweekly$30.59 $32.12 $33.73 $35.42 $37.19 $39.05 HourlySenior Human Resources Analyst 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.48 $9,441.07 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.91 $4,357.42 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlySenior Maintenance Worker 47 GS $4,924.17 $5,170.38 $5,428.90 $5,700.34 $5,985.37 $6,284.63 Monthly$2,272.70 $2,386.33 $2,505.65 $2,630.93 $2,762.48 $2,900.60 Biweekly$28.41 $29.83 $31.32 $32.89 $34.53 $36.26 HourlySenior Management Analyst 131 MM $7,956.63 $8,354.46 $8,772.19 $9,210.79 $9,671.34 $10,154.91 Monthly$3,672.29 $3,855.91 $4,048.70 $4,251.13 $4,463.70 $4,686.88 Biweekly$45.90 $48.20 $50.61 $53.14 $55.80 $58.59 HourlySenior Planner 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.48 $9,441.07 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.91 $4,357.42 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlySenior Police Records Specialist Base P $4,394.29 $4,614.00 $4,844.71 $5,086.96 $5,341.32 Monthly$2,028.14 $2,129.54 $2,236.02 $2,347.83 $2,465.22 Biweekly$25.35 $26.62 $27.95 $29.35 $30.82 HourlySenior Signs and Markings Technician 45 GS $4,686.90 $4,921.24 $5,167.30 $5,425.67 $5,696.95 $5,981.80 Monthly$2,163.18 $2,271.34 $2,384.91 $2,504.16 $2,629.36 $2,760.83 Biweekly$27.04 $28.39 $29.81 $31.30 $32.87 $34.51 HourlySenior Traffic Signal/Street Lighting Tech 60 GS $6,788.02 $7,127.43 $7,483.80 $7,857.99 $8,250.89 $8,663.43 Monthly$3,132.93 $3,289.58 $3,454.06 $3,626.77 $3,808.10 $3,998.51 Biweekly$39.16 $41.12 $43.18 $45.34 $47.60 $49.98 HourlySenior Tree Trimmer 45 GS $4,686.90 $4,921.24 $5,167.30 $5,425.67 $5,696.95 $5,981.80 Monthly$2,163.18 $2,271.34 $2,384.91 $2,504.16 $2,629.36 $2,760.83 Biweekly$27.04 $28.39 $29.81 $31.30 $32.87 $34.51 HourlySenior Utilities Maintenance Worker (Sewer) 54 GS $5,853.29 $6,145.96 $6,453.25 $6,775.92 $7,114.71 $7,470.45 Monthly$2,701.52 $2,836.60 $2,978.42 $3,127.35 $3,283.71 $3,447.90 Biweekly$33.77 $35.46 $37.23 $39.09 $41.05 $43.10 HourlySenior Utilities Maintenance Worker (Water) 54 GS $5,853.29 $6,145.96 $6,453.25 $6,775.92 $7,114.71 $7,470.45 Monthly$2,701.52 $2,836.60 $2,978.42 $3,127.35 $3,283.71 $3,447.90 Biweekly$33.77 $35.46 $37.23 $39.09 $41.05 $43.10 HourlySenior Water Pollution Control Operator 67 GS $8,068.83 $8,472.27 $8,895.88 $9,340.68 $9,807.71 $10,298.10 Monthly$3,724.08 $3,910.28 $4,105.79 $4,311.08 $4,526.64 $4,752.97 Biweekly$46.55 $48.88 $51.32 $53.89 $56.58 $59.41 HourlySenior Water Quality Specialist 58 GS $6,460.94 $6,783.99 $7,123.18 $7,479.35 $7,853.31 $8,245.98 Monthly$2,981.97 $3,131.07 $3,287.62 $3,452.01 $3,624.61 $3,805.84 Biweekly$37.28 $39.14 $41.10 $43.15 $45.31 $47.57 HourlySenior Water System Operator 54 GS $5,853.29 $6,145.96 $6,453.25 $6,775.92 $7,114.71 $7,470.45 Monthly$2,701.52 $2,836.60 $2,978.42 $3,127.35 $3,283.71 $3,447.90 Biweekly$33.77 $35.46 $37.23 $39.09 $41.05 $43.10 HourlySenior Water/Wastewater Instrumentation Tech 66 GS $7,872.02 $8,265.62 $8,678.90 $9,112.84 $9,568.48 $10,046.90 Monthly$3,633.24 $3,814.90 $4,005.65 $4,205.92 $4,416.22 $4,637.03 Biweekly$45.42 $47.69 $50.07 $52.58 $55.20 $57.96 HourlySigns and Markings Tech I 39 GS $4,041.49 $4,243.57 $4,455.75 $4,678.53 $4,912.46 $5,158.09 Monthly$1,865.30 $1,958.57 $2,056.50 $2,159.32 $2,267.29 $2,380.66 Biweekly$23.32 $24.48 $25.71 $26.99 $28.34 $29.76 HourlySigns and Markings Tech II 43 GS $4,461.05 $4,684.10 $4,918.31 $5,164.23 $5,422.45 $5,693.57 Monthly$2,058.95 $2,161.89 $2,269.99 $2,383.49 $2,502.67 $2,627.80 Biweekly

$25.74 $27.02 $28.38 $29.79 $31.28 $32.85 HourlySocial Services Manager 132 MM $8,155.55 $8,563.33 $8,991.48 $9,441.07 $9,913.13 $10,408.78 Monthly$3,764.10 $3,952.31 $4,149.91 $4,357.42 $4,575.29 $4,804.05 Biweekly$47.05 $49.40 $51.87 $54.47 $57.19 $60.05 HourlySports Manager 125 MM $6,860.98 $7,204.03 $7,564.23 $7,942.44 $8,339.56 $8,756.54 Monthly$3,166.60 $3,324.94 $3,491.18 $3,665.74 $3,849.03 $4,041.48 Biweekly$39.58 $41.56 $43.64 $45.82 $48.11 $50.52 HourlyStock Clerk 32 GS $3,399.97 $3,569.96 $3,748.47 $3,935.89 $4,132.68 $4,339.31 Monthly$1,569.22 $1,647.67 $1,730.06 $1,816.56 $1,907.39 $2,002.76 Biweekly$19.62 $20.60 $21.63 $22.71 $23.84 $25.03 HourlyStorekeeper 35 GS $3,661.39 $3,844.47 $4,036.69 $4,238.52 $4,450.45 $4,672.98 Monthly$1,689.87 $1,774.37 $1,863.09 $1,956.24 $2,054.06 $2,156.76 Biweekly$21.12 $22.18 $23.29 $24.45 $25.68 $26.96 HourlyTechnical Services Manager 136 MM $9,002.20 $9,452.31 $9,924.93 $10,421.18 $10,942.23 $11,489.34 Monthly$4,154.86 $4,362.61 $4,580.74 $4,809.78 $5,050.26 $5,302.77 Biweekly$51.94 $54.53 $57.26 $60.12 $63.13 $66.29 HourlyTraffic Signal / Street Lighting Technician 56 GS $6,149.62 $6,457.09 $6,779.95 $7,118.95 $7,474.90 $7,848.64 Monthly$2,838.29 $2,980.20 $3,129.21 $3,285.67 $3,449.95 $3,622.45 Biweekly$35.48 $37.25 $39.12 $41.07 $43.13 $45.28 HourlyTransportation Engineer 134 MM $8,568.43 $8,996.85 $9,446.70 $9,919.02 $10,414.98 $10,935.73 Monthly$3,954.66 $4,152.39 $4,360.02 $4,578.01 $4,806.91 $5,047.26 Biweekly$49.43 $51.91 $54.50 $57.23 $60.09 $63.09 HourlyTreatment Plant Mechanic 54 GS $5,853.29 $6,145.96 $6,453.25 $6,775.92 $7,114.71 $7,470.45 Monthly$2,701.52 $2,836.60 $2,978.42 $3,127.35 $3,283.71 $3,447.90 Biweekly$33.77 $35.46 $37.23 $39.09 $41.05 $43.10 HourlyTreatment Plant Superintendent 137 MM $9,227.27 $9,688.63 $10,173.06 $10,681.71 $11,215.80 $11,776.59 Monthly$4,258.74 $4,471.68 $4,695.26 $4,930.02 $5,176.52 $5,435.35 Biweekly$53.24 $55.90 $58.69 $61.63 $64.71 $67.94 HourlyTree Trimmer I 39 GS $4,041.49 $4,243.57 $4,455.75 $4,678.53 $4,912.46 $5,158.09 Monthly$1,865.30 $1,958.57 $2,056.50 $2,159.32 $2,267.29 $2,380.66 Biweekly$23.32 $24.48 $25.71 $26.99 $28.34 $29.76 HourlyTree Trimmer II 43 GS $4,461.05 $4,684.10 $4,918.31 $5,164.23 $5,422.45 $5,693.57 Monthly$2,058.95 $2,161.89 $2,269.99 $2,383.49 $2,502.67 $2,627.80 Biweekly$25.74 $27.02 $28.38 $29.79 $31.28 $32.85 HourlyUnderground Utility Service Locator 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyUtilities Administrator 141 MM $10,185.17 $10,694.41$11,229.14 $11,790.61 $12,380.14 $12,999.14 Monthly$4,700.85 $4,935.88 $5,182.68 $5,441.82 $5,713.91 $5,999.60 Biweekly$58.76 $61.70 $64.78 $68.02 $71.43 $75.00 HourlyUtilities Maintenance Supervisor 53 GS $5,710.52 $5,996.05 $6,295.85 $6,610.65 $6,941.18 $7,288.24 Monthly$2,635.63 $2,767.41 $2,905.78 $3,051.07 $3,203.62 $3,363.80 Biweekly$32.95 $34.59 $36.32 $38.14 $40.05 $42.05 HourlyUtilities Maintenance Worker I 37 GS $3,846.76 $4,039.10 $4,241.05 $4,453.10 $4,675.75 $4,909.54 Monthly$1,775.43 $1,864.20 $1,957.41 $2,055.28 $2,158.04 $2,265.94 Biweekly$22.19 $23.30 $24.47 $25.69 $26.98 $28.32 HourlyUtilities Maintenance Worker II 42 GS $4,352.25 $4,569.87 $4,798.35 $5,038.28 $5,290.18 $5,554.69 Monthly$2,008.73 $2,109.17 $2,214.62 $2,325.36 $2,441.62 $2,563.70 Biweekly$25.11 $26.37 $27.68 $29.07 $30.52 $32.05 HourlyUtilities Maintenance Worker III (Sewer) 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyUtilities Maintenance Worker III (Water) 46 GS $4,804.06 $5,044.27 $5,296.49 $5,561.31 $5,839.37 $6,131.34 Monthly$2,217.26 $2,328.13 $2,444.53 $2,566.76 $2,695.09 $2,829.85 Biweekly$27.72 $29.10 $30.56 $32.09 $33.69 $35.37 HourlyUtilities Maintenance Worker IV (Sewer) 50 GS $5,302.79 $5,567.93 $5,846.32 $6,138.65 $6,445.57 $6,767.85 Monthly$2,447.44 $2,569.81 $2,698.30 $2,833.22 $2,974.88 $3,123.62 Biweekly$30.59 $32.12 $33.73 $35.42 $37.19 $39.05 HourlyUtilities Maintenance Worker IV (Water) 50 GS $5,302.79 $5,567.93 $5,846.32 $6,138.65 $6,445.57 $6,767.85 Monthly$2,447.44 $2,569.81 $2,698.30 $2,833.22 $2,974.88 $3,123.62 Biweekly$30.59 $32.12 $33.73 $35.42 $37.19 $39.05 HourlyWastewater Systems Administrator 141 MM $10,185.17 $10,694.41$11,229.14 $11,790.61 $12,380.14 $12,999.14 Monthly

$4,700.85 $4,935.88 $5,182.68 $5,441.82 $5,713.91 $5,999.60 Biweekly$58.76 $61.70 $64.78 $68.02 $71.43 $75.00 HourlyWater Pollution Control Facility Superintendent 141 MM $10,185.17 $10,694.41$11,229.14 $11,790.61 $12,380.14 $12,999.14 Monthly$4,700.85 $4,935.88 $5,182.68 $5,441.82 $5,713.91 $5,999.60 Biweekly$58.76 $61.70 $64.78 $68.02 $71.43 $75.00 HourlyWater Pollution Control O-I-T 40 GS $4,142.53 $4,349.67 $4,567.14 $4,795.50 $5,035.28 $5,287.04 Monthly$1,911.94 $2,007.54 $2,107.91 $2,213.31 $2,323.97 $2,440.17 Biweekly$23.90 $25.09 $26.35 $27.67 $29.05 $30.50 HourlyWater Pollution Control Operator I 51 GS $5,435.37 $5,707.13 $5,992.49 $6,292.12 $6,606.72 $6,937.05 Monthly$2,508.63 $2,634.06 $2,765.77 $2,904.05 $3,049.25 $3,201.72 Biweekly$31.36 $32.93 $34.57 $36.30 $38.12 $40.02 HourlyWater Pollution Control Operator II 55 GS $5,999.62 $6,299.61 $6,614.58 $6,945.31 $7,292.57 $7,657.20 Monthly$2,769.05 $2,907.51 $3,052.89 $3,205.53 $3,365.80 $3,534.09 Biweekly$34.61 $36.34 $38.16 $40.07 $42.07 $44.18 HourlyWater Pollution Control Operator III 59 GS $6,622.46 $6,953.58 $7,301.26 $7,666.32 $8,049.65 $8,452.13 Monthly$3,056.52 $3,209.34 $3,369.81 $3,538.30 $3,715.22 $3,900.98 Biweekly$38.21 $40.12 $42.12 $44.23 $46.44 $48.76 HourlyWater Pollution Control Operator IV 63 GS $7,309.96 $7,675.45 $8,059.22 $8,462.18 $8,885.29 $9,329.55 Monthly$3,373.83 $3,542.52 $3,719.64 $3,905.62 $4,100.90 $4,305.95 Biweekly$42.17 $44.28 $46.50 $48.82 $51.26 $53.83 HourlyWater Quality Specialist I 48 GS $5,047.27 $5,299.63 $5,564.62 $5,842.85 $6,134.99 $6,441.74 Monthly$2,329.51 $2,445.98 $2,568.29 $2,696.70 $2,831.53 $2,973.11 Biweekly$29.12 $30.58 $32.10 $33.71 $35.39 $37.16 HourlyWater Quality Specialist II 52 GS $5,571.25 $5,849.81 $6,142.30 $6,449.42 $6,771.89 $7,110.48 Monthly$2,571.35 $2,699.91 $2,834.91 $2,976.65 $3,125.49 $3,281.76 Biweekly$32.14 $33.75 $35.44 $37.21 $39.07 $41.02 HourlyWater Systems Administrator 141 MM $10,185.17 $10,694.41$11,229.14 $11,790.61 $12,380.14 $12,999.14 Monthly$4,700.85 $4,935.88 $5,182.68 $5,441.82 $5,713.91 $5,999.60 Biweekly$58.76 $61.70 $64.78 $68.02 $71.43 $75.00 HourlyWater Systems Operator I 42 GS $4,352.25 $4,569.87 $4,798.35 $5,038.28 $5,290.18 $5,554.69 Monthly$2,008.73 $2,109.17 $2,214.62 $2,325.36 $2,441.62 $2,563.70 Biweekly$25.11 $26.37 $27.68 $29.07 $30.52 $32.05 HourlyWater Systems Operator II 50 GS $5,302.79 $5,567.93 $5,846.32 $6,138.65 $6,445.57 $6,767.85 Monthly$2,447.44 $2,569.81 $2,698.30 $2,833.22 $2,974.88 $3,123.62 Biweekly$30.59 $32.12 $33.73 $35.42 $37.19 $39.05 HourlyWater/Wastewater Instrumental Technician 62 GS $7,131.67 $7,488.25 $7,862.66 $8,255.80 $8,668.59 $9,102.02 Monthly$3,291.54 $3,456.12 $3,628.92 $3,810.37 $4,000.89 $4,200.93 Biweekly$41.15 $43.20 $45.36 $47.63 $50.01 $52.51 Hourly CLASSIFICATION A STEP B STEP C STEP D STEP E STEPActivity Leader I $16.00 $16.25 $16.50 $16.75 $17.00Activity Leader II $16.50 $16.75 $17.00 $17.25 $17.50Activity Manager $17.50 $17.75 $18.00 $18.25 $18.50Cashier $16.00 $16.25 $16.50 $16.75 $17.00Civic Fellow $19.50 $24.50Counselor $16.00 $16.25 $16.50 $16.75 $17.00Intern $16.50 $17.50 $18.50 $19.50 $20.50Library Page $16.00 $16.25 $16.50 $16.75 $17.00Lifeguard / Aide $17.50 $17.75 $18.00 $18.25 $18.50Lifeguard / Instructor $18.50 $18.75 $19.00 $19.25 $19.50Pool Manager $21.00 $21.25 $21.50 $21.75 $22.00Recreation Facility Aide $18.75 $19.00 $19.25 $19.50 $19.75Special Program Coordinator $20.00 $20.25 $20.50 $20.75 $21.00Swim Instructor Aide $16.00 $16.25 $16.50 $16.75 $17.00presented to City Council on December 19, 2023

TEMPORARY PART-TIME EMPLOYEES - HOURLY WAGES

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: F.6
SUBJECT: Fire Department Apparatus Maintenance and Repair Service Contracts

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to:

1. Execute the service agreement with Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service, Inc., with a total to not exceed the amount of $150,000 for the ongoing maintenance and repairs of fire apparatus.

2. Execute the service agreement with Riverview International Trucks, LLC, with a total to not exceed the amount of $100,000 for the ongoing maintenance and repairs of fire apparatus.

Staff Contact:

Eric Zane, Fire Chief- (530) 661-5861, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The cost of the proposed service contracts totals $250,000 and has been included in the FY2023/24 Fire Department’s Equipment Maintenance fund (Fund 2010) budget.

Background:

Beginning in fiscal year 2023, the Fire Department assumed responsibility for all apparatus maintenance and repairs from the City’s Fleet Division.

Due to staffing issues within the City’s Fleet Division, it was unable to adequately service the Fire Apparatus for some time. The Public Works Director and Fire Chief, along with the City Manager and Finance Department, agreed that the best and most cost-effective course of action given the situation was to outsource all maintenance and repair to fire apparatus. As such, the Fire Department needs to enter into a contractual agreement with apparatus repair facilities to allow for timely and efficient repairs of apparatus.

The Fire Department primarily utilizes Golden State Emergency Vehicle Services, Inc., and Riverview International Trucks, LLC for maintenance and repair of apparatus. Pierce Manufacturing, the builder of all the Fire Department’s frontline apparatus, has few Pierce approved and certified repair facilities on the West Coast, the closest being Golden State Emergency Vehicle Services, Inc. in Sacramento.

Because of this, all Pierce frontline apparatus are sent to Golden State Emergency Vehicle Services, Inc. under the sole source option allowed under the City’s purchasing ordinance.

The Fire Department does still operate and maintain several reserve or back-up apparatus that were manufactured by other companies. Over the last year, due to extended lead time for parts and supplies, Golden State has become inundated, leading to a decrease in availability for repairs and maintenance. Because of this, the Department also utilizes Riverview International Trucks, LLC for non-Pierce manufactured apparatus or repairs that do not require a Pierce certified repair facility. The Department does utilize other vendors for some repairs and has therefore received proposals meeting the informal bid process. Riverview International Trucks, LLC has continually been found to

offer competitive rates, prompt customer service, and short turnaround times, making them a preferred vendor.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to:

1. Execute the service agreement with Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service, Inc., with a total to not exceed the amount of $150,000 for the ongoing maintenance and repairs of fire apparatus.

2. Execute the service agreement with Riverview International Trucks, LLC, with a total to not exceed the amount of $100,000 for the ongoing maintenance and repairs of fire apparatus.

Prepared by: Jeran Scruggs, Management Analyst

Approved by: Eric Zane, Fire Chief

Attachments:

1. Resolution- Golden State & Riverview

82093.00001\8555510.2
RESOLUTION NO. ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF FIRE APPARATUS TO GODLEN STATE EMERGENCY VEHICLE SERVICE INC,. IN THE AMOUNT OF $150,000 AND RIVERVIEW INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS, LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000
WHEREAS, the City of Woodland wishes to enter into an agreement with Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service, Inc. for maintenance and repair services for fire apparatus; and WHEREAS, the City of Woodland also wishes to enter into an agreement with Riverview International Trucks, LLC for maintenance and repair services for fire apparatus; and WHEREAS, the required funds have already been appropriated in the FY2023-24 budget.

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

The City Council hereby approves and awards the service contracts with Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service Inc. and Riverview International Trucks, LLC. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Agreements, subject to City Attorney approval. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to make clarifying and confirming changes so long as the total dollar amount authorized in the Agreements do not exceed $150,000 and $100,000 respectively. A copy of the Agreements is available and on file in the City Clerk’s office, and is incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Tania Garcia-Cadena, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: F.7
SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2022/23 AB1600 Annual Report

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, accepting the AB1600 Annual Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2023.

Staff Contact:

Kim McKinney, Administrative Services Director, (530) 661-5849, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

There is no fiscal impact associated with the acceptance of the AB1600 Annual Report. The attached annual report details the collection of $11,680,821 in revenues and expenditures of $8,678,942 for citywide development impact fees. Also included in the report are the details for the Spring Lake Infrastructure Fees (SLIF) showing collection of revenues of $7,918,446 and expenditures of $3,542,804. SLIF revenues are generally "collected" via credits that developers have on-account with the City that were allocated from sales of bonds.

Although activity in FY2022/23 resulted in positive growth in the impact fee program, the impact fee funds continue to reflect an overall negative fund balance at June 30, 2023, of ($6,027,092).

Report in Brief:

Government Code Section 66006 requires local agencies to submit an annual report detailing the status of development impact fees. The annual report must be made available to the public and presented to the public agency (City Council) within 180 days of the close of a fiscal year.

Background:

In 1978, following the passage of Proposition 13, many cities began charging fees on new development to fund public improvements and services such as streets, park facilities, sewers and storm drains. These fees are commonly known as development impact fees. In order to ensure that these fees are spent in a timely manner and on projects for which they were collected, the State Legislature passed a bill known as AB1600 (Mitigation Fee Act). This bill applies to developer fees which were increased or imposed on or after January 1, 1989.

AB1600 enacts Government Code Sections 66000-66008 which generally contain four requirements:

1. A local jurisdiction must follow the process set forth in the bill and make certain determinations regarding the purpose and use of the fees, and establish a “nexus” or connection between a development project or class of projects and the public improvement that will be financed with the fee.

2. The fee revenue must be segregated from the general fund in order to avoid commingling of public improvement fees and the general fund.

3. If a jurisdiction has had possession of a developer fee for five or more years and has not committed the money to a project or spent the money, then it must make findings describing the continuing need for that money. In addition, an annual report must be made of fees collected, interest earned, projects on which fees were expended, and any transfers for loans from the fee account. This report is to be reviewed by the local agency assessing the fees.

4. If a local jurisdiction cannot provide the findings required under paragraph three (3), the City must refund the fees collected.

Discussion:

The City of Woodland development fees covered by AB1600, and documented in the attached report, include the following:
• General City impact fee
• Parks and Recreation impact fee
• Police impact fee
• Fire protection impact fee
• Library impact fee
• Water impact fee
• Storm Drainage impact fee
• Road impact fee
• Water impact fee
• Wastewater impact fee

Spring Lake Infrastructure Fees (SLIF) are also fees subject to AB1600 and include the following categories:
• Parks
• Storm Drainage
• Roads
• Water
• Sewer
• Fire

Staff examined each of the funds for the impact fees listed above to determine if any development fees remain unexpended five years or more after receipt and are subject to refund. Based on our analysis, no refunds are due. Many of the funds reflect negative fund balances, and therefore no unexpended fees exist; other fund balances represent unexpended fees collected for respective Council approved projects which will be financed and implemented when financially feasible or practical.

The nature of AB1600 funds is such that the timing of receipt of revenues and construction of the related capital projects rarely coincide. Ideally, revenues will be collected over time and accumulated until a development related project is needed; in years of construction, accumulated reserves will be used up. For many years, it was the City’s practice to construct projects in advance of collecting sufficient funds through borrowing from other city funds, or by issuing long-term external debt. This practice has resulted in many of the AB1600 funds operating with very large deficit balances. In response to the financial imbalances, the City adopted a Budget & Fiscal Policy in 2009 that aimed to improve these balances through the following:
• Discontinue the practice of internal borrowing between enterprise and categorical funds; funding for capital projects must be determined based on the available resources within each fund to meet its cash payment or debt service requirements and strategies to balance each fund and implement fund integrity should be continued.

• Discontinue the practice of issuing bonds or desired capital improvements based on projected development and the collection of impact fees associated with development. This source of revenue is dependent on the level of economic activity within the region and is uncertain and unstable.

While expenditures on major capital projects have been delayed, reduced, limited or altogether cancelled in the Capital Improvement Plan since 2008, the City must continue to pay ongoing annual debt service for debt that was secured by impact fee revenues. In addition, the City’s AB1600 impact fee revenues have been very volatile due to the unpredictability in residential and commercial development over the past ten years, although the last five years have seen healthy revenues resulting from increased development activity.

For FY 2022/23, total revenues from the AB1600 funds exceeded expenditures by $3,001,879. Despite the strong residential development and related revenues, and the very conservative programming of capital improvement projects that utilize development impact fees, the burden of ongoing debt service payments is very high. Two impact fee funds continue to run large deficit balances: the wastewater and park development fee funds. To date, Measures E and F have loaned the park impact fee fund $9.35 million to cover debt service related to the construction of the Community & Senior Center and Sports Park facilities. These bond payments will continue until 2026 and will likely require assistance from Measure F to meet the obligation through that time. Eventually, as development continues and the bonds are paid off, the park development fee fund will need to reimburse Measure E/F for the long-term loan. In FY22/23, the park development fund did not need to borrow any money to meet the debt service obligation, instead generating an excess that resulted in a repayment of loan money to Measure E totaling $636,398.

The other fund with a large imbalance is the wastewater development fund, which also has significant ongoing obligations related to debt service payments. Although the debt service owed by the wastewater development fund continues to be tracked within the development fund, the sewer rates approved by the Council beginning in 2013 are sufficient to cover this ongoing debt service requirement until such time as the wastewater development fund can pay its share of debt service and begin repayment to the sewer enterprise fund. With the adopted sewer rates in place, the City has refunded the outstanding debt to achieve a lower interest rate, thus reducing the overall cost of debt service. To date, this fund has accumulated a deficit owed to the wastewater enterprise fund of $13.4 million. It is unlikely that the development fund will be able to repay this loan until after the existing debt is paid off, which will occur in fiscal year 2035.

The other funds with deficit balances are the police and storm drainage development fee funds. These funds did improve slightly in FY2022/23. Unlike the other development fee related funds, the storm drain development fund does not receive revenue when new development occurs in Spring Lake (there is a specific Spring Lake Infrastructure Fee instead), which is the majority of the development occurring within the City. The overall deficit balance will improve when other, mostly non-residential, development occurs in the City. With continued new development and contained spending, progress towards bringing these funds into balance will continue.

The SLIF funds provide an accounting of the expenditures of Spring Lake specific projects. The funding of these projects has occurred primarily through advancement of cash either through issuance of bonds or developer payments. The advancement of this cash generates fee credits for developers in Spring Lake, and the "revenues" detailed in the Annual Report reflect primarily the use of those fee credits. The balances in the SLIF funds may not necessarily coincide with cash available for projects, since the cash flow is generally provided through issuance of bonds, which is tracked separately.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, accepting the AB1600 Annual Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2023.

Prepared by: Kim McKinney, Administrative Services Director

Attachments:

1. Resolution- AB1600 Annual Report FY23

2. Attachment A - FY23 AB1600 Annual Report

RESOLUTION NO __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND ACCEPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 ANNUAL REPORT OF DEVELOPMENT FEES (AB1600 REPORT) WHEREAS, the City of Woodland imposes fees to mitigate the impact of development pursuant to Government Code sections 66000 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, said fees collected are deposited into a special and separate capital fund for each type of improvement funded by development fees; and
WHEREAS, the City maintains separate funds for general city, parks and recreation, police, fire, library, water, storm drainage, roads, and wastewater; and WHEREAS, the City maintains separate funds for Spring Lake Infrastructure Fees for parks and recreation, storm drainage, roads, water, fire and wastewater; and WHEREAS, the City is required within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year to make available to the public information for the fiscal year regarding these fees under Government Code section 66006; and
WHEREAS, City staff has prepared a report (“AB1600 Report”) that contains the information required by Government Code section 66006, a copy which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, no interfund transfers or loans were made from any of the accounts identified in the AB1600 Report; and
WHEREAS, there were no refunds of development impact fees collected pursuant to Government Code §66001(e), nor were there any allocations of unexpended revenues collected pursuant to Government Code §66001(f); and
WHEREAS, no interested persons have requested notice of the AB1600 Report; consequently, no notices of the availability of the AB1600 Report were mailed.

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Findings. The City Council of the City of Woodland hereby finds and adopts as follows:

A. In accordance with Government Code section 66006, the City has conducted an annual review of its development impact fees and capital improvement program and the City Council has reviewed the AB1600 Report attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference.

B. The funds have been and shall be used for the purposes stated in said reports and are necessary to mitigate impacts resulting from development in the City and further finds that there is a reasonable relationship between the use of the fees and type of development project upon which the fee is imposed.

C. The City Council hereby approves, accepts and adopts the AB1600 Report.

D. The AB1600 Report is available for public review on the City’s website, at the City Clerk’s office and upon request.

Section 2. Effective Date. The resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption.

Section 3. Severability. If a section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution.

The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Resolution and each section, subsection, phrase or clause thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, phrases or clauses by declared unconstitutional on their face or as applied.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of December 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Tania Garcia-Cadena, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk Ethan Walsh, City Attorney

Attachment 1
AB1600 Annual Report
Development Impact Fees
City of Woodland
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023
This report summarizes the following information for each of the development fee programs:

1. A brief description of the fee program.

2. Schedule of fees.

3. Beginning and ending balances of the fee program.

4. Disbursement information.

5. Findings regarding the continuing need for unexpended funds, if any.

Citywide Major Project Financing Plan (MPFP) Impact Fees The table below summarizes annual fee revenues directly relating to impact fees and related project expenditures, and related fund balances:

Category
Beginning Fund
Balance (Deficit)
Development
Fee Revenues
Other
Revenues
Total
RevenuesExpenditures
Net
Difference
Ending Fund
Balance (Deficit)
General City 2,076,109$ 335,079$ -$ 335,079$ 176,698$ 158,381$ 2,234,490$ Parks & Recreation (9,981,822)$ 2,051,020$ -$ 2,051,020$ 1,414,622$ 636,398$ (9,345,424)$ Police (2,168,418)$ 273,066$ -$ 273,066$ 64,804$ 208,262$ (1,960,156)$ Fire 2,144,382$ 1,082,287$ -$ 1,082,287$ 133,256$ 949,031$ 3,093,413$ Library 589,212$ 182,556$ -$ 182,556$ 85,167$ 97,389$ 686,601$ Surface Water 10,162,772$ 1,701,493$ -$ 1,701,493$ 3,000,230$ (1,298,737)$ 8,864,035$ Storm Drainage (2,310,931)$ 124,846$ -$ 124,846$ -$ 124,846$ (2,186,085)$ Roads 4,300,628$ 3,534,457$ -$ 3,534,457$ 1,885,038$ 1,649,419$ 5,950,047$ Wastewater (13,840,903)$ 2,396,017$ -$ 2,396,017$ 1,919,127$ 476,890$ (13,364,013)$ Total (9,028,971)$ 11,680,821$ -$ 11,680,821$ 8,678,942$ 3,001,879$ (6,027,092)$ Spring Lake Infrastructure Fees (SLIF)
Category
Beginning Fund
Balance (Deficit)
Development
Fee Revenues
Other
Revenues
Total
RevenuesExpenditures
Net
Difference
Ending Fund
Balance (Deficit)
Parks 4,368,258$ 1,389,032$ -$ 1,389,032$ 1,859,349$ (470,316)$ 3,897,942$ Storm Drain 1,231,009$ 1,864,731$ -$ 1,864,731$ 72,384$ 1,792,347$ 3,023,356$ Roads 6,773,837$ 3,574,184$ -$ 3,574,184$ 1,611,072$ 1,963,112$ 8,736,949$ Water 3,520,148$ 402,369$ -$ 402,369$ -$ 402,369$ 3,922,517$ Sewer 358,217$ 547,481$ -$ 547,481$ -$ 547,481$ 905,698$ Fire 967,301$ 140,648$ -$ 140,648$ -$ 140,648$ 1,107,949$ 17,218,770$ 7,918,446$ -$ 7,918,446$ 3,542,804$ 4,375,642$ 21,594,412$ Government Code Section 66006 requires local agencies to submit an annual report detailing the status of development impact fees. The annual report must be made available to the public and presented to the public agency (City Council) within 180 days of the close of a fiscal year.

For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, fund revenues (development fees, interest income, bond proceeds, etc.) totaled $11,680,821, while expenditures totaled $8,678,942.

The majority of SLIF revenues are "paid" through use of fee credits allocated to developers either through issuance of Community Facilities District (CFD) Debt, cash advanced by developers, or from construction of infrastructure. "Fund Balances" do not necessarily reflect cash available in each of these funds, but rather an accounting of fees "collected" and projects built. As of June 30, 2023 $10,714,931 in unused fee credits remained in developer accounts with the City

General City Development Fee Description
General City Development Fee Schedule
Category Basis Fee
Single Family Residential - Greenfield Unit 1,005.00$
Single Family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 1,005.00$
Single Family Residential- Infill Unit 1,005.00$
Multi-family Residential - Greenfield Unit 755.00$
Multi-family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 755.00$
Multi-family Residential - Infill Unit 721.00$
Multi-family Residential - Corridor Unit 721.00$
Multi-family Residential - Downtown Unit 721.00$
Small Multi-family- Greenfield Unit 504.00$
Small Multi-family- Spring Lake Unit 504.00$
Small Multi-family- Infill Unit 504.00$
Small Multi-family- Corridor Unit 504.00$
Small Multi-family- Downtown Unit 504.00$
Retail 1,000Sq Ft 671.00$
Service 1,000Sq Ft 671.00$
Office 1,000Sq Ft 838.00$
Industrial 1,000Sq Ft 279.00$
General City Development Fund Collections & Expenditures 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance 1,125,279$ 1,389,946$ 1,695,092$ 1,956,971$ 2,076,109$

REVENUES
Development Fees 348,358 292,860 262,637 233,997 335,079 Interest Earnings 20,517 32,154 19,949 12,881 - Other Revenue - - - - - Total Revenue 368,874 325,014 282,587 246,878 335,079

EXPENDITURES
MPFP #Program Title
CITY-106 0845 Enterprise GIS Database - - - - - CITY-6 0857 MPFP Update 94,355 - - - - CITY-102 7849 Debt Service on VOIP - - - - - 2109 Enterprise System Replacement - - 11 123,957 171,240 9000 Force Account 9,852 19,868 20,696 3,783 5,458 Total Expenditures 104,208 19,868 20,708 127,740 176,698 Excess(deficiency) revenues 264,667 305,146 261,879 119,138 158,381 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 1,389,946$ 1,695,092$ 1,956,971$ 2,076,109$ 2,234,490$ Conclusion: No fees have been held unexpended for more than five years; no refunds required The fund equity as of June 30, 2023 represents collected fees earmarked for future technology enhancement projects and completion of various studies.

Prior year numbers have been adjusted to tie to audited financials. Often timing of the reporting and receipt of final audit will differ.

FUND 1510 - GENERAL CITY DEVELOPMENT
Fiscal Year
General City development fees are used to expand/construct City Hall and other general City facilities (including technology improvements/updates) to meet the needs of the increased residential population and increase in commercial enterprises. Completion of studies including the General Plan and Zoning Updates also belong to this fee category.

FUND 1540 - PARK & RECREATION DEVELOPMENT
Park Development Fee Description
Park Development Fee Schedule
Category Fee
Single Family Residential - Greenfield 9,279$
Single Family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 5,105$
Single Family Residential- Infill 9,279$
Multi-family Residential - Greenfield 6,959$
Multi-family Residential - Spring Lake Unit 3,828$
Multi-family Residential - Infill 6,652$
Multi-family Residential - Corridor 6,652$
Multi-family Residential - Downtown 6,652$
Small Multi-family- Greenfield 4,640$
Small Multi-family- Spring Lake Unit 2,552$
Small Multi-family- Infill 4,640$
Small Multi-family- Corridor 4,640$
Small Multi-family- Downtown 4,640$
Park Development Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance (9,799,564)$ (9,806,109)$ (9,832,232)$ (9,830,293)$ (9,981,822)$

REVENUES
Development Fees 1,458,770 1,420,753 1,434,975 1,263,093 2,051,020 Interest Earnings - - - - - Other Revenue - 25 - - - Total Revenue 1,458,770 1,420,778 1,434,975 1,263,093 2,051,020

EXPENDITURES
MPFP # Program Title
7931 2014 Refunding Lease Rev 1,410,073 1,410,073 1,414,622 1,414,622 1,414,622 9000 Force Account 55,242 36,828 18,414 - - Total Expenditures 1,465,315 1,446,901 1,433,036 1,414,622 1,414,622 Excess(deficiency) revenues (6,545) (26,123) 1,939 (151,529) 636,398 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 (9,806,109)$ (9,832,232)$ (9,830,293)$ (9,981,822)$ (9,345,424)$ Conclusion:

MSE Loan 2012 4,646,458$ MSF Loan 2013 1,646,063$
2014 (477,157)$
2015 1,363,398$
2016 1,000,834$
2017 633,603$
2018 986,365$
2019 6,545$
2021 -$ 24,184$
2022 -$ 151,529$
2023 (636,398)$ -$
Prior year numbers have been adjusted to tie to audited financials. Often timing of the reporting and receipt of final audit will differ.

Unit
Unit
Unit
Unit
Fiscal Year
Park development fees are used to acquire park land, equipment and to construct or expand a variety of recreational facilities such as sports parks, Community Senior Center, tennis courts and swimming pools as related to the impact of growth on the City.

Council approved loaning of Measure E (MSE) and, subsequently, Measure F (MSF) revenues to this fund, up to $2M per year, to pay debt service on the bonds since the fund's revenue has not been sufficient to cover debt service. Only the amount needed to supplement annual fee revenue is loaned. To date, a toal of $9,169,711 has been loaned from MSE to Park Development. MSF has loaned $175,713 to date Basis
Unit
Unit
Unit
Unit
Unit
Unit
No fees have been held unexpended for more than five years. Funding requirements continue for existing debt obligations. No refunds required.

Police Development Fee Description
Police Development Fee Schedule
Category Fee
Single Family Residential - Greenfield Unit 823$
Single Family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 823$
Single Family Residential- Infill Unit 823$
Multi-family Residential - Greenfield Unit 616$
Multi-family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 616$
Multi-family Residential - Infill Unit 589$
Multi-family Residential - Corridor Unit 589$
Multi-family Residential - Downtown Unit 589$
Small Multi-family- Greenfield Unit 411$
Small Multi-family- Spring Lake Unit 411$
Small Multi-family- Infill Unit 411$
Small Multi-family- Corridor Unit 411$
Small Multi-family- Downtown Unit 411$
Retail 1,000 Sq Ft 548$
Service 1,000 Sq Ft 548$
Office 1,000 Sq Ft 684$
Industrial 1,000 Sq Ft 228$
Police Development Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance (2,999,536)$ (2,621,326)$ (2,446,253)$ (2,294,342)$ (2,168,418)$

REVENUES
Development Fees 447,351 239,178 218,408 191,132 273,066 Interest Earnings - 3,360 - - - Total Revenue 447,351$ 242,538$ 218,408$ 191,132$ 273,066$

EXPENDITURES
MPFP # Program Title
0624 Vehicle Purchase
0841 Computer Aided Dispatch 64,953 64,487 64,729 64,649 64,245 9000 Force Account 4,188 2,978 1,769 559 559 Total Expenditures 69,141$ 67,465$ 66,498$ 65,208$ 64,804$ Excess(deficiency) revenues 378,210$ 175,073$ 151,910$ 125,924$ 208,262$ Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 (2,621,326)$ (2,446,253)$ (2,294,342)$ (2,168,418)$ (1,960,156)$ Conclusion: No fees have been held unexpended for more than five years; no refunds required Prior year numbers have been adjusted to tie to audited financials. Often timing of the reporting and receipt of final audit will differ.

FUND 1550 - POLICE DEVELOPMENT FUND
Basis
Fiscal Year
Note: Beginning in FY2012, the Total Fund Equity will not match the City's published annual financial statements due to a large transfer in from another fund ($1,925,837). This transfer was done for financial accounting puposes and is considered a long term loan to the Police Development Fund that is repaid over time from available cash balances.

Police development fees are used to expand/construct police service facilities and to acquire equipment related to the impact of growth on the City.

Fire Development Fee Description
Fire Development Fee Schedule
Category Fee
Single Family Residential - Greenfield Unit 3,406$
Single Family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 3,406$
Single Family Residential- Infill Unit 3,406$
Multi-family Residential - Greenfield Unit 2,042$
Multi-family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 2,042$
Multi-family Residential - Infill Unit 1,986$
Multi-family Residential - Corridor Unit 1,986$
Multi-family Residential - Downtown Unit 1,986$
Small Multi-family- Greenfield Unit 1,362$
Small Multi-family- Spring Lake Unit 1,362$
Small Multi-family- Infill Unit 1,362$
Small Multi-family- Corridor Unit 1,362$
Small Multi-family- Downtown Unit 1,362$
Retail 1,000 Sq Ft 1,986$
Service 1,000 Sq Ft 1,986$
Office 1,000 Sq Ft 2,270$
Industrial 1,000 Sq Ft 1,323$
Fire Development Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance (447,055)$ (59,468)$ 747,667$ 1,500,395$ 2,144,382$

REVENUES
Development Fees 578,975 964,523 887,070 763,939 1,082,287 Interest Earnings 14,176 15,293 13,304 - Total Revenue 578,975 978,699 902,363 777,243 1,082,287

EXPENDITURES
MPFP # Program Title
9000 Force Account 50,518 33,849 - - 7931 2014 Refunding of Lease Revenue Bonds132,803 132,803 133,232 133,232 133,232 1610 Fire Station #3 Relocation 8,067 4,912 16,403 24 24 Total Expenditures 191,388 171,564 149,635 133,256 133,256 Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 387,587 807,135 752,728 643,987 949,031 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 (59,468)$ 747,667$ 1,500,395$ 2,144,382$ 3,093,413$ Conclusion:

Prior year numbers have been adjusted to tie to audited financials. Often timing of the reporting and receipt of final audit will differ.

FUND 1560 - FIRE DEVELOPMENT FUND
Basis
Fiscal Year
No fees have been held unexpended for more than five years. Ongoing collection of fees is necessary to pay for existing debt obligations and for future development of new fire facilities included in the fee study. No refunds required Fire development fees are used to expand/construct fire service facilities and to acquire equipment related to the impact of growth on the City.

Library Development Fee Description
Library Development Fee Schedule
Category Fee
Single Family Residential - Greenfield Unit 628$
Single Family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 628$
Single Family Residential- Infill Unit 628$
Multi-family Residential - Greenfield Unit 471$
Multi-family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 471$
Multi-family Residential - Infill Unit 450$
Multi-family Residential - Corridor Unit 450$
Multi-family Residential - Downtown Unit 450$
Small Multi-family- Greenfield Unit 314$
Small Multi-family- Spring Lake Unit 314$
Small Multi-family- Infill Unit 314$
Small Multi-family- Corridor Unit 314$
Small Multi-family- Downtown Unit 314$
Retail Sq Ft -$
Service Sq Ft -$
Office Sq Ft -$
Industrial Sq Ft -$
Library Development Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance 456,919$ 409,504$ 498,104$ 560,526$ 589,212$

REVENUES
Development Fees 34,071 165,126 160,999 113,415 182,556 Interest Earnings 6,045 9,552 5,704 3,649 Total Revenue 40,116 174,678 166,702 117,065 182,556

EXPENDITURES
MPFP # Program Title
9000 Force Account 2,587 2,282 19,279 3,379 1,672 LIB-3 9445 Library Collection Material 84,943 83,797 85,000 85,000 83,495 Total Expenditures 87,530 86,079 104,279 88,379 85,167 Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures (47,414) 88,599 62,423 28,686 97,389 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 409,504$ 498,104$ 560,526$ 589,212$ 686,601$ Conclusion: No fees have been held unexpended for more than five years; no refunds required.

The fund equity as of June 30, 2022 represents collected fees that are earmarked for future library projects Prior year numbers have been adjusted to tie to audited financials. Often timing of the reporting and receipt of final audit will differ.

FUND 1570 - LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT FUND
Basis
Fiscal Year
Library development fees are used to expand/construct library facilities and to acquire equipment related to the impact of growth on the City.

FUND 1580 - WATER DEVELOPMENT FUND
Water Development Fee Description
Water Development Fee Schedule
All Users (by meter size)
Meter Size Weight Factor Calculated Fee Admin Fee
Total Water
Capacity
Fee
1" 1.0 6,174 $ 46 $ 6,220$
1 1/2" 2.0 12,348 $ 93 $ 12,441$ 2" 3.2 19,757 $ 148 $ 19,905$
3" 6.0 37,044 $ 278 $ 37,322$
4" 10.0 61,739 $ 463 $ 62,202$
6" 20.0 123,479 $ 926 $ 124,405$
8" 32.0 197,566 $ 1,482$ 199,048 $
Surface Water Development Fund Collections & Expenditures 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance** 2,927,286$ 5,880,808$ 7,472,189$ 9,123,085$ 10,162,772$

REVENUES
Development Fees 1,067,916 1,522,703 1,596,530 985,531 1,701,493 Interest Earnings 59,863 115,298 77,803 54,413 - Total Revenue 1,127,779 1,638,001 1,674,333 1,039,944 1,701,493

EXPENDITURES
MPFP # Program Title
9000 Force Account 46,619 23,437 257 230 79990 Debt Service Contribution 3,000,000
Total Expenditures - 46,619 23,437 257 3,000,230 Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 1,127,779 1,591,382 1,650,896 1,039,687 (1,298,737) Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 4,055,065$ 7,472,189$ 9,123,085$ 10,162,772$ 8,864,035$ Prior year numbers have been adjusted to tie to audited financials. Often timing of the reporting and receipt of final audit will differ.

Fiscal Year
Conclusion: The funds being held in this account are used to assist with debt service payments on the water treatment facility. Although the debt was secured in 2013, debt payments do not begin until the project has been fully constructed. Debt payments began in FY2017/18 and transfers from this fund have been factored into the user rates for water and will begin following full incursion of debt payments. No refunds required.

Note: The Water Development Fee was eliminated as a separate fee in April 2019. The accumulated funds and future water related development costs are reflected in the Surface Water connection fee. Fund balance was moved at the beginning of FY2019/20.

Note: Residental Water Fees for Single Family and individually metered Multi-family units are based on a 1" meter fee, the fee for Multi-family is 75% of the Single Family rate, and 50% of the rate for Small Multi-Family. Water fees for Commercial and Muti- family with a single meter are based on meter size per chart above.

Water Development fees are used to finance part of the capital improvements including surface water rights and treatment facilities needed to provide treated water to the new customer growth in the City.

FUND 1581 - STORM DRAIN DEVELOPMENT FUND
Storm Drain Development Fee Description
Storm Drain Development Fee Schedule
Non-Residential
Single-Family Multifamily Commercial Schools
Area E1 $11,945 $17,920 $19,113 $14,992
Area E2 $10,236 $15,353 $16,376 $12,845
Area E3 $7,537 $11,306 $12,060 $9,460
Area E4 $7,858 $11,787 $12,574 $9,864
Area E5 $2,941 $4,412 $4,705 $3,691
Area E6 $2,129 $3,192 $3,405 $2,671
Area N1 $57,934 $86,901 $92,694 $72,706
Area N2 $49,894 $74,841 $79,828 $62,616
Area S6a $15,382 $23,072 $24,612 $19,303
Area S6b $15,202 $22,805 $24,326 $19,080
Storm Drain Development Fund Collections & Expenditures 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance** (2,101,638)$ (2,307,010)$ (2,469,491)$ (2,671,959)$ (2,310,931)$

REVENUES
Development Fees 2,957 246,757 240,177 475,244 124,846 Interest Earnings - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - Developer In Lieu 2,155 - - 16,560 - Total Revenue 5,112 246,757 240,177 491,804 124,846

EXPENDITURES
MPFP # Program Title
0915 Floodsafe Yolo - 154,776 155,354 118,870 - 0931 Storz Pond 7,014 7,821 13,527 8,873 - 1603 Stormwater Quality Design Manual Update6,786 - - - - 2006 Storm Drain Outfall Channel Outlet Structure- 111,388 188,612 - - 9000 Force Account 196,684 135,253 85,151 3,034 - Total Expenditures 210,484 409,238 442,645 130,777 - Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures (205,372) (162,481) (202,468) 361,027 124,846 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 (2,307,010)$ (2,469,491)$ (2,671,959)$ (2,310,931)$ (2,186,085)$ Conclusion:

Prior year numbers have been adjusted to tie to audited financials. Often timing of the reporting and receipt of final audit will differ.

Residential fee per acre
Fiscal Year
** Beginning balance does not include long-term advance of pre-1991 fungible monies to the Storm Drain Enterprise Fund ($2,101,099). These monies are not subject to the requirements of AB1600 and are not available for spending.

Storm Drain development fees are used to expand/construct drainage facilities to maintain adequate drainage throughout the City by reducing the impacts of new development. The impact fee for Storm Drain is calculated by "fee area" so that each part of the City will be responsible for the fees specifically required to meet the expansion needs in that area.

No fees have been held unexpended for more than five years. Ongoing fee collections are necessary for large projects included in the fee study. No refunds required

Road Development Fee Description
Road Development Fee Schedule
Category Fee
Single Family Residential - Greenfield Unit 9,915 $
Single Family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 9,915 $
Single Family Residential- Infill Unit 6,610 $
Multi-family Residential - Greenfield Unit 4,063 $
Multi-family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 4,063 $
Multi-family Residential - Infill Unit 2,709 $
Multi-family Residential - Corridor Unit 2,437 $
Multi-family Residential - Downtown Unit 2,166 $
Small Multi-family- Greenfield Unit 4,063 $
Small Multi-family- Spring Lake Unit 4,063 $
Small Multi-family- Infill Unit 2,709 $
Small Multi-family- Corridor Unit 2,437 $
Small Multi-family- Downtown Unit 2,166 $
Retail 1,000 Sq Ft 12,312 $
Service 1,000 Sq Ft 8,757 $
Office 1,000 Sq Ft 6,574 $
Industrial 1,000 Sq Ft 5,065 $
Road Development Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance (259,655)$ 1,612,181$ 3,921,221$ 3,901,578$ 4,300,628$

REVENUES
Development Fees 2,397,554 2,783,155 2,593,681 2,162,172 3,534,457 Interest Earnings 74340.28 38,573 26,669
Other Revenue
Total Revenue 2,397,554 2,857,495 2,632,255 2,188,841 3,534,457

EXPENDITURES
MPFP # Program Title
IGS-100 0006 1-5/113 Phase 2 15,967 - 140 935 86,088 TES-100 0228 Traffic Engineering Serv 1,018 - 3,032 8,496 650 SW-1A/B 0407 Widening & Recon Kentucky - 209,518 2,350,000 1,715,738 4,121 1124 I5/Rd 102 Interchange Landscape 78,302 56,339 114,609 - - 1702 New Traffic Signal - Kentucky/Cottonwood - 273 - - - 1722 Sports Park Pedestrian Overcrossing - - - 57,030 1,691,198 1913 Gibson Road Interchange Modification - 5,327 29,673 - 2114 SR113/I-5 Ultimate Interchange Modifications - - - 2,274 26,110 2215 Pedestrian Crossing Improvements - - - - 10,237 2217 Active Transportation Plan - - - 712 28,205 2406 I-5/SR113 Freeway to Freeway - - - - 2,090 9000 Force Account 418,102 276,998 148,819 4,606 36,339 TP-3 9524 Planning/Analysis Studies 12,329 - 5,625 - - Total Expenditures 525,718 548,455 2,651,897 1,789,792 1,885,038 Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 1,871,836 2,309,040 (19,643) 399,050 1,649,419 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 1,612,181$ 3,921,221$ 3,901,578$ 4,300,628$ 5,950,047$ Conclusion:

Prior year numbers have been adjusted to tie to audited financials. Often timing of the reporting and receipt of final audit will differ.

FUND 1582 - ROAD DEVELOPMENT FUND
Basis
Fiscal Year
Road Development fees are used to expand/construct streets, roads, interchanges, studies, signals and other projects related to the impact of expansion on the City.

No fees have been held unexpended for more than five years, ongoing fee collection required for projects required in the fee study but not yet funded due to lack of available funding. No refunds required.

FUND 1585 - WASTEWATER DEVELOPMENT FUND
Wastewater Development Fee Description
Wastewater Development Fee Schedule
Category Fee
Single Family Residential - Greenfield 7,524$
Single Family Residential- Spring Lake 7,524$
Single Family Residential- Infill Unit 7,524$
Multi-family Residential - Greenfield 5,642$
Multi-family Residential- Spring Lake Unit 5,642$
Multi-family Residential - Infill Unit 5,393$
Multi-family Residential - Corridor Unit 5,393$
Multi-family Residential - Downtown Unit 5,393$
Small Multi-family- Greenfield Unit 3,761$
Small Multi-family- Spring Lake Unit 3,761$
Small Multi-family- Infill Unit 3,761$
Small Multi-family- Corridor Unit 3,761$
Small Multi-family- Downtown Unit 3,761$
Retail 3,071$
Service 3,071$
Office 1,842$
Industrial 3,455$
Wastewater Development Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance** (14,608,608)$ (13,957,076)$ (13,837,804)$ (13,770,515)$ (13,840,903)$

REVENUES
Development Fees 2,625,781 2,078,027 2,008,840 1,849,176 2,396,017 Interest Earnings 9,574 2,896 - (437) Total Revenue 2,635,355 2,080,923 2,008,840 1,848,739 2,396,017

EXPENDITURES
MPFP # Program Title
2014 Refunding Wastewater Bond 1,916,382 1,916,635 1,918,957 1,918,957 1,918,957 9000 Force Account 67,441 45,017 22,594 170 170 Total Expenditures 1,983,823 1,961,652 1,941,551 1,919,127 1,919,127 Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 651,532 119,271 67,289 (70,388) 476,890 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 (13,957,076)$ (13,837,804)$ (13,770,515)$ (13,840,903)$ (13,364,013)$ Conclusion:

Note:

Prior year numbers have been adjusted to tie to audited financials. Often timing of the reporting and receipt of final audit will differ.

Beginning in FY2012, the Total Fund Equity will not match the City's published annual financial statements due to a large transfers from another fund. These transfers are done for finacial reporting requirements, but are considered a long-term loan to assist with payment of debt service not covered by development impact fees.

Basis
Unit
Unit
1,000 Sq Ft
1,000 Sq Ft
** Beginning balance does not include long-term advance of pre-1991 fungible monies to the Storm Drain Enterprise Fund($2,427,320).

These monies are not subject to the requirements of AB1600 and are not available for spending.

Wastewater Development fees are used to expand/construct wastewater facilities and to acquire equipment related to the impact of growth on the City.
1,000 Sq Ft
1,000 Sq Ft
Fiscal Year
Unit
No fees have been held unexpended for more than five years, ongoing fee collection is necessary to pay existing debt obligations. No refunds required.

Park SLIF Fee Description
Park SLIF Development Fee Schedule
Category Basis Fee
Single Family Residential Unit 10,084$
Multi-family Residential Unit 6,656$
Non-Residential Sq Ft 7.70$
Park SLIF Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance 479,086$ 1,249,802$ 1,579,485$ 3,466,256$ 4,368,258$

REVENUES
SLIF Fees 2,912,670 2,476,083 2,403,488 874,914 1,389,032 Interest Earnings 18,450 29,910 35,311 27,088 Other Revenues - - - - - Total Revenue 2,931,120 2,505,993 2,438,799 902,003 1,389,032

EXPENDITURES
Program Title
7925 2012 Lease Rev Bond Debt Service - - - - - 1505 SLSP Neighborhood Park N3 1,623,720 13,771 26,902 - - 1710 SLSP Neighborhood Park N1 536,684 2,162,539 20,408 - - 1911 Spring Lake Central Park - - 504,718 - - 2003 Spring Lake Park N1 Phase 2 1,829,616
9000 Force Account 29,733
Total Expenditures 2,160,404 2,176,310 552,028 - 1,859,349 Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 770,715 329,683 1,886,771 902,003 (470,316) Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 1,249,802$ 1,579,485$ 3,466,256$ 4,368,258$ 3,897,942$ Conclusion:

FUND 1640 - PARK SLIF FUND
Fiscal Year
Unexpended fund balance is accumulated for large projects included in the fee study that continue to be required. No refunds required.

Park SLIF development fees are used to acquire land and construct the parks required by the Spring Lake Specific Plan. These parks include the neighborhood parks, central park and the Spring Lake share of the Community Sports Park.

Storm Drain SLIF Fee Description
Storm Drain SLIF Development Fee Schedule
Category Basis Fee
Single Family Residential Unit 12,702 $
Multi-family Residential Unit 8,383 $
Non-Residential Sq Ft 9.69 $
Storm Drain SLIF Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance (67,952)$ 3,124,690$ (226,970)$ 452,718$ 1,231,009$

REVENUES
SLIF Fees 3,941,616 3,140,159 2,571,586 1,098,060 1,864,731 Interest Earnings (125,570) (275,973) (162,228) (93,913) Other Revenues
Total Revenue 3,816,045 2,864,186 2,409,358 1,004,148 1,864,731

EXPENDITURES
Program Title
0612 Spring Lake East Regional Pond Phase I 24,576 - 45,761 20,115 667 1113 North Gibson Ponds Detention 1,624 31,069 - - 1721 North Regional Ponds and Pump Station 575,381 6,118,502 1,680,519 185,628 1914 South Area Flowage Easement - - - 15,318 68,373 9000 Force Account 21,821 66,275 3,391 4,795 3,344 - - - - Total Expenditures 623,403 6,215,846 1,729,671 225,856 72,384 Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 3,192,642 (3,351,660) 679,687 778,292 1,792,347 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 3,124,690$ (226,970)$ 452,718$ 1,231,009$ 3,023,356$ Revenues paid through Fee Credit use 3,224,911 $ 2,688,092 $ 2,046,135 $ 945,930 $ 1,578,545$ Conclusion:

Note:
*Prior year numbers have been adusted to correct for beginning balances of fund equity and for investment earning not allocated before report was complete FUND 1681 - STORM DRAINAGE SLIF FUND
Fiscal Year
Unexpended fund balance is accumulated for large projects included in the fee study that continue to be required. No refunds required.

Advance funding of infrastructure through issuance of bonds and developer advances have paid for construction of most facilities funded in this category. Collection of "revenues" in this fund represent the use of fee credits earned from the previous advancement of cash.

Storm Drain SLIF development fees are used to purchase land and construct/improve drainage facilities required by and to accommodate growth in the Spring Lake Specific Plan.

Road SLIF Fee Description
Road SLIF Development Fee Schedule
Category Basis Fee
Single Family Residential Unit 24,503$
Multi-family Residential Unit 16,173$
Non-Residential Sq Ft 18.68$
Road SLIF Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance 1,960,977$ 9,252,850$ 13,102,099$ 5,336,217$ 6,773,837$

REVENUES
SLIF Fees 7,602,499 6,057,907 4,961,019 2,134,765 3,574,184 Interest Earnings (224,926) (259,162) (142,401) (77,349) Other Revenues
Total Revenue 7,377,572 5,798,745 4,818,618 2,057,416 3,574,184

EXPENDITURES
ProgramTitle
9000 Force Account 5,508 3,906 22,857 3,235 2,878 1909 CR25A (Meikle to Promenade) 5,620 115,064 1,716,359 - - 1910 Heritage Parkway Pedestrian Crossing 16,488 - 161,811 - - 1913 Gibson Road Interchange Modification 275 - 76,789 3,896 38,028 2005 SR113/CR25A Interchange Modifications57,808 73,185 104,622 147,665 - 2405 CR25A (Parkland to Meikle) - - - - 364 Developer Reimburseable Projects - 1,757,341 10,502,062 465,000 1,569,802 Total Expenditures 85,699 1,949,496 12,584,501 619,796 1,611,072 Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 7,291,873 3,849,249 (7,765,882) 1,437,620 1,963,112 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 9,252,850$ 13,102,099$ 5,336,217$ 6,773,837$ 8,736,949$ Revenues paid through Fee Credit use 4,953,853$ 4,129,234$ 3,143,112$ 1,453,062$ 2,424,835$ Conclusion:

Note:
*Prior year numbers have been adusted to correct for beginning balances of fund equity and for investment earning not allocated before report was complete FUND 1682 - ROADS SLIF FUND
Fiscal Year
Advance funding of infrastructure through issuance of bonds and developer advances have paid for construction of most facilities funded in this category. Collection of "revenues" in this fund represent the use of fee credits earned from the previous advancement of cash.

Unexpended fund balance is accumulated for large projects included in the fee study that continue to be required.

No refunds required.

Road SLIF development fees are used to construct/improve roadways required by and to accommodate growth in the Spring Lake Specific Plan.

Water SLIF Fee Description
Water SLIF Development Fee Schedule
Category Basis Fee
Single Family Residential- Infill Unit 2,777$
Multi-family Residential Unit 1,794 $
Non-Residential Sq Ft 2.08 $
Water SLIF Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance 1,149,262$ 2,111,655$ 2,754,011$ 3,289,594$ 3,520,148$

REVENUES
SLIF Fees 986,795 672,358 550,674 238,309 402,369 Interest Earnings (24,401) (30,002) (15,092) (7,755) Other Revenues
Total Revenue 962,394 642,356 535,582 230,554 402,369

EXPENDITURES
Program Title
Total Expenditures - - - - - Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 962,394 642,356 535,582 230,554 402,369 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 2,111,655$ 2,754,011$ 3,289,594$ 3,520,148$ 3,922,517$ Revenues paid through Fee Credit use 684,756 $ 570,771 $ 434,463 $ 200,852 $ 335,177 $ Conclusion:

Note:
*Prior year numbers have been adusted to correct for beginning balances of fund equity and for investment earning not allocated before report was complete FUND 1684 - WATER SLIF FUND
Fiscal Year
Unexpended fund balance is accumulated for large projects included in the fee study that continue to be required. No refunds required.

Advance funding of infrastructure through issuance of bonds and developer advances have paid for construction of most facilities funded in this category. Collection of "revenues" in this fund represent the use of fee credits earned from the previous advancement of cash.

Water SLIF development fees are used to construct/improve water related facilities required by and to accommodate growth in the Spring Lake Specific Plan.

Sewer SLIF Fee Description
Sewer SLIF Development Fee Schedule
Category Basis Fee
Single Family Residential- Infill Unit 3,579$
Multi-family Residential Unit 2,739$
Non-Residential Sq Ft 2.67$
Sewer SLIF Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance (2,483,778)$ (1,425,915)$ (598,758)$ 40,379$ 358,217$

REVENUES
SLIF Fees 1,087,542 866,478 709,714 328,960 547,481 Interest Earnings (29,679) (39,320) (21,515) (11,122) Other Revenues
Total Revenue 1,057,863 827,158 688,200 317,838 547,481

EXPENDITURES
Program Title
9000 Force Account - - 21,222 2110 Spring Lake Sewer Pump Station - - 27,840 Total Expenditures - - 49,063 - - Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 1,057,863 827,158 639,137 317,838 547,481 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 (1,425,915)$ (598,758)$ 40,379$ 358,217$ 905,698$ Revenues paid through Fee Credit use 1,066,750$ 889,178$ 676,829$ 312,899$ 522,158$ Conclusion:

Note:
*Prior year numbers have been adusted to correct for beginning balances of fund equity and for investment earning not allocated before report was complete FUND 1685 - SEWER SLIF FUND
Fiscal Year
Unexpended fund balance is accumulated for large projects included in the fee study that continue to be required. No refunds required.

Wastewater SLIF development fees are used to construct/improve sewer related facilities required by and to accommodate growth in the Spring Lake Specific Plan.

Advance funding of infrastructure through issuance of bonds and developer advances have paid for construction of most facilities funded in this category. Collection of "revenues" in this fund represent the use of fee credits earned from the previous advancement of cash.

Fire SLIF Fee Description
Fire SLIF Development Fee Schedule
Category Basis Fee
Single Family Residential- Infill Unit 1,021$
Multi-family Residential Unit 674$
Non-Residential Sq Ft 0.78$
Fire SLIF Fund Collections & Expenditures
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Beginning Balance 61,063$ 358,446$ 620,640$ 872,728$ 967,301$

REVENUES
SLIF Fees 292,091 250,419 243,190 88,570 140,648 Interest Earnings 5,292 11,775 8,898 6,003 Other Revenues
Total Revenue 297,383 262,194 252,088 94,572 140,648

EXPENDITURES
Program Title
Total Expenditures - - - - - Excess(deficiency) revenues over expenditures 297,383 262,194 252,088 94,572 140,648 Total Available Fund Equity at June 30 358,446$ 620,640$ 872,728$ 967,301$ 1,107,949$ Conclusion:

FUND 1660 - FIRE SLIF FUND
Fire SLIF development fees are used to construct additional fire station facilities needed to provide service to the new growth area.

Unexpended fund balance is accumulated for large projects included in the fee study that continue to be required. No refunds required.

Fiscal Year

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: F.8
SUBJECT: Award Contract to Western Extrication Specialists for Battery Powered Extrication Tools and Related
Equipment

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute the purchase agreement with Western Extrication Specialists, with a total to not exceed amount of $143,422.68 for the purchase of battery powered extrication tools and related equipment.

Staff Contact:

Eric Zane, Fire Chief- (530) 661-5861, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

This purchase is being funded by an Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) award, which reimburses 90% of costs, requiring a 10% recipient match. The Woodland Fire Department will be responsible for the initial purchase of $143,422.68. Of this, 90% will be reimbursed by FEMA and the Woodland Fire Department will match 10% as required by FEMA. The total FEMA approved budget for this project is $149,646.48, of which $136,042.25 is Federal funding and $13,604.23 is the required 10% match.

The Woodland Fire Department’s share of this match shall not exceed $14,000. The required matching funds ($14,000) were approved as one-time funding from Measure F during the FY2023/24 budget adoption.

Background:

In February 2023, the Woodland Fire Department submitted an AFG application for battery powered extrication tools and related equipment to replace aging, gas powered equipment. Extrication tools are used by emergency responders to create greater access to persons trapped within vehicles by spreading or removing areas of damaged vehicle from around them.

In August 2023, the Woodland Fire Department was awarded a grant in the amount of $149,646.48 to purchase two sets of battery powered extrication tools and related equipment. This contract is for the purchase of the awarded equipment.

Discussion:

The Fire Department has some existing battery powered rescue equipment, which necessitated the purchase of the same brand (Holmatro Rescue Tools) for the new equipment in order to maintain operational compatibility. The Fire Department received a quote for the battery powered extrication equipment from Western Extrication Specialists Inc., the regional distributor of Holmatro Rescue Tools, for the amount of $143,422.68.

Western Extrication Specialists, Inc. is a member of the National Purchasing Partners Government (NPPGov) program. NPPGov is a national cooperative procurement organization offering publicly solicited contracts to government entities nationwide. With Western Extrication Specialists, Inc. membership in the NPPGov system, the bidding requirement is fulfilled, and the Woodland Fire Department is guaranteed to receive the lowest possible price for the extrication equipment.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute the purchase agreement with Western Extrication Specialists, with a total to not exceed amount of $143,422.68 for the purchase of battery powered extrication tools and related equipment.

Prepared by: Erik Komula, Battalion Chief

Reviewed by: Eric Zane, Fire Chief

Attachments:

1. Resolution- 2022 AFG Extrication Tools

2. Estimate 2608- Western Extrication Specialists Inc

RESOLUTION NO. ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

AWARDING THE PURCHASE CONTRACT FOR BATTERY POWERED

EXTRICATION TOOLS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT TO WESTERN
EXTRICATION SPECIALISTS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $143,422.68 WHEREAS, the City of Woodland Fire Department applied for and has accepted award of a 2022 FEMA Assistance to Firefighters grant for battery powered extrication tools and related equipment in the amount of $149,646.48; and
WHEREAS, the Woodland Fire Department wishes to enter into a purchase contact with Western Extrication Specialists, Inc. for the purchase of the battery powered extrication tools and related equipment; and
WHEREAS, the Western Extrication Specialists, Inc, is a member of the National Purchasing Partners Government (NPPGov) Program which satisfies the bidding requirement and guarantees the lowest pricing available; and
WHEREAS, the City of Woodland will be reimbursed by FEMA for 90% of the purchase total; and
WHEREAS, the required matching funds for the Woodland Fire Department have already been appropriated by City Council;

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

The City Council hereby approves and awards the purchase contract with Western Extrication Specialists, Inc. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Agreement, subject to City Attorney approval. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to make clarifying and confirming changes so long as the total dollar amount authorized in the Agreement does not exceed $143,422.68. A copy of the Agreement is available and on file in the City Clerk’s office, and is incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of December 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Tania Garcia-Cadena, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk

Note: Western Extrication Specialists, Inc is not responsible for outside parties that may request payments via email scams. Any requests to change the normal payment means previously agreed upon should be scrutinized. If there is any suspicious activity involving such requests, please notify us by phone.

Western Extrication Specialists, Inc.

P.O. Box 1065
Simi Valley, CA 93062
+1 8056247475
[email protected]
www.holmatro-westx.com
Price Quote

ADDRESS
Trevor Moureaux
Woodland Fire Department
532 Court Street
Woodland, Ca. 95695

SHIP TO
Trevor Moureaux
Woodland Fire Department
532 Court Street
Woodland, Ca. 95695
PRICE QUOTE # 2608
DATE 09/01/2023
EXPIRATION DATE 12/22/2023

TECH/SALES REP.

John Jurado

DATE ARTICLE NUMBER DESCRIPTION QTY RATE AMOUNT
159.000.179 PCU60 CUTTER 2 15,111.00 30,222.00T
159.000.181 PSP50 SPREADER 2 15,843.00 31,686.00T
159.000.207 PTR50 TELESCOPIC RAM 2 11,597.00 23,194.00T 159.000.185 PTR40 TELESCOPIC RAM 2 11,258.00 22,516.00T 151.001.771 TRE04 EXTENSION PIPE 2 887.00 1,774.00T
151.001.902 TRE05 EXTENSION PIPE 2 1,073.00 2,146.00T
151.000.583 PBPA287 BATTERY 18 948.00 17,064.00T
151.000.742 PBCH2 BATTERY CHARGER
120VAC
8 628.00 5,024.00T
151.000.499 POTC1 ON-TOOL CHARGING
CORD
8 112.00 896.00T
151.000.503 DCPC1 DAISY CHAIN POWER
CORD
4 14.00 56.00T
151.000.743 PMC2 MAINS POWER
CONNECTOR 120VAC
2 1,443.00 2,886.00T

NPPGov.com Contract number PS20035. GPO Member #M-
5728117. 4% discount reflected on the quote.

SUBTOTAL 137,464.00
DISCOUNT 4% -5,498.56
TAX 10,557.24
SHIPPING 900.00
TOTAL $143,422.68
Accepted By Accepted Date

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: F.9
SUBJECT: Fifth Amendment to the Security Professional Service Agreement with Allied Universal Security Services for
Woodland Public Library

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute the fifth amendment to the Security Professional Service Agreement with Allied Universal Security Services for the Woodland Public Library.

Staff Contact:

Greta Galindo, Library Services Director, (530) 661-5980, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The Security Professional Service Agreement with Allied Universal is for the amount of $66,453 for November 2023 through October 2024. The cost of executing this annual amendment for security services would increase the total multi-year contract by $66,453, bringing the total to $294,824.

Funds to provide security services for the library were anticipated and can be accommodated within the current approved budget.

Background:

The Library entered into a Professional Services Agreement for Security at the Woodland Public Library with Allied Universal Security Services on November 1, 2017. The agreement is for a period of 3 years which would automatically continue thereafter on a month-to-month basis until terminated by either party.

The agreement is to provide professional security services at the Woodland Public Library.

Discussion:

Allied Security Services provides a necessary service to the community to ensure the safety of City assets and community members who are using the Library facility and services. The services were reviewed and vetted by City staff at the Library and found to be of high quality, and the company to be both responsive and responsible.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute the fifth amendment to the Security Professional Service Agreement with Allied Universal Security Services for the Woodland Public Library.

Prepared by: Greta Galindo, Library Services Director

Reviewed by: Ken Hiatt, City Manager

Attachments:

1. Resolution authorizing amendment to library security agreement

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FIFTH AMENDMENT TO

THE SECURITY PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH ALLIED

UNIVERSAL SECURITY SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City of Woodland requires security services at the Woodland Public Library and;
WHEREAS, Allied Universal Security Services provides security services as required by Woodland Public Library.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND authorizes the City Manager to execute the Fifth Amendment prepared by the City Attorney to contract with Allied Universal Security Services, increasing the amount of the contract by $66,453 for a total contract amount of $294,824.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Woodland at a regular meeting held on the 19th day of December 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Tania Garcia-Cadena, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: F.10
SUBJECT: Final Acceptance and Notice of Completion of the 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, CIP 22-04

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, accepting the construction contract for the 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, CIP 22-04, with RJ Gordon Construction, Inc., as complete and authorizing the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion.

Staff Contact:

Mark Miller, Associate Engineer - (530) 661-5968; [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The authorized construction contract amount with RJ Gordon Construction, Inc., for the 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, CIP 22-04, (hereafter “Project”) is $2,522,593 with an approved contingency amount of $902,259. Three change orders have been executed for a total amount of $769,429.50, which results in a total construction contract of $3,292,022.50.

The Project has an authorized total budget of $3,920,000 funded through Water Enterprise ($3,820,000) and Sewer Enterprise ($100,000) Funds. All work was completed within the authorized project budget.

There is no impact on the City’s General Fund.

Background:

CIP 22-04 was scoped as the seventh project in a multi-year program where Engineering and Operations staff identify locations where the City’s utilities have the greatest occurrence of defects, breaks and leaks, and prioritize these locations for replacement. The 2023 project replaced the existing water distribution system in the vicinity of Sixth Street and Archer Drive, south of Gibson Road, as well as repaired two spot defects in the sewer collection system.

Approximately 6,950 linear feet of mainline water pipe were replaced by the Project, thereby eliminating a portion of the antiquated system of 2-inch diameter cast iron water mains which are buried just beyond the city sidewalks. These 2-inch mains are notorious for problems such as breaks and leaks as they are located shallow enough to be subject to diurnal fluctuations in temperature and can be disturbed by homeowner’s yard improvements. The Project constructed a new 8-inch and 12- inch diameter main in the street and connected adjacent residences with new polyethylene services that deliver more reliable water pressure for 159 residences. The Project also constructed new 4- inch diameter water services for two apartment complexes on Sixth Street. Concurrent with this water work, the Project repaired two defects in the sewer mains buried 13-feet below Sixth Street.

Discussion:

Three change orders for CIP 22-04 have been executed to date in the amount of $769,429.50. The first change order compensated the contractor for scope changes that extended the water system improvements onto a portion of Archer Drive that had been removed from the project during design. The second change order was for scope changes to the water main depths as it was

discovered that elevations of existing sewer laterals in the vicinity were in conflict with the proposed water main elevations. The contractor had to install new water mains deeper than shown on the as- bid plans and thus was compensated for the increased level of effort. The last change order accounts for the final contract quantities that were measured at the end of the Project to be below or above the originally bid amounts. The final change order amount of $769,429.50 is $132,890.50 less than the authorized construction contract contingency. A breakdown of project expenditures is enumerated in the table below:

Construction Contract $2,522,593
Project Design $139,320
Change Orders $769,430
Construction Inspection $209,016
Total Construction Cost $3,640,359
Project Management Staff Time $53,785
Total Project Cost $3,694,144
Total Project Budget $3,920,000

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, accepting the construction contract for the 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, CIP 22-04, with RJ Gordon Construction, Inc., as complete and authorizing the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion.

Prepared by: Mark Miller, Associate Engineer

Reviewed by: Tim Busch, Principal Utilities Civil Engineer Brent Meyer, Community Development Director / City Engineer

Attachments:

1. Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND TO ACCEPT THE 2023 WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT, CIP 22-04, CONSTRUCTION

CONTRACT AS COMPLETE AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK TO FILE A NOTICE

OF COMPLETION
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the plans and specifications for the 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, CIP 22-04, (the “Project”) and authorized advertisement for bids on December 6, 2022; and the City of Woodland advertised for bids on January 4, 2023; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved Resolution 8047 on February 21, 2023, to execute a construction contract with RJ Gordon Construction, Inc., in the amount of $2,522,593 and approved a 10% construction contingency ($252,259) for the Project with a total project budget of $3,200,000; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved Resolution 8091 on June 6, 2023, to increase the available construction contingency to $902,259 for a total contract amount of up to $3,424,852; and WHEREAS, the construction of the Project began on April 6, 2023 and was completed on November 15, 2023.

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

Section 1. The City Council hereby accepts the 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, CIP 22-04, as complete.

Section 2. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, CIP 22-04.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Woodland at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Tania Garcia-Cadena, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: F.11
SUBJECT: County Road 25A (Parkland Ave. to Miekle Ave.) Improvement Project, CIP 24-05, Approve Plans and
Specifications and Authorize Bid Advertisement and
Contract Amendment

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, to 1.) approve the project plans & specifications and authorize bid advertisement for the County Road 25A (Parkland Ave to Miekle Ave) Project, CIP 24-05; and 2.) appropriate $50,000 in Spring Lake Infrastructure – Roads funding (Fund 682) for the Project; and 3.) approve a consultant services amendment for design with Cunningham Engineering in the amount of $31,000 for a total agreement amount of $141,100 and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment.

Staff Contact:

Miguel Chavez, Sr. Construction Project Manager, (530) 661-5952, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

At the May 16, 2023, City Council meeting, an update regarding the Spring Lake Infrastructure Fee (SLIF) fund balances was presented to the Council and concluded that there are sufficient funds available to pay for certain projects that have been desired by Spring Lake residents. The most notable project is the CR 25A segment that completes the existing gap between Parkland Avenue and Meikle Avenue. The total project cost was estimated at $3,644,000 and includes signalization of the intersection of CR-25A & CR-102. The project is currently funded in the Capital Budget with $135,000 in SLIF Roads (fund 682) funding. The current action includes the appropriation of $50,000 in SLIF Roads funding to cover a design contract amendment and project management costs. The Construction Contract Award will be presented to Council for approval at a future date, at which time staff will make a request to allocate additional SLIF funds to fund construction of the project.

There is no impact on the General Fund.

Background:

This project includes the construction of CR25A, from Parkland Avenue to Miekle Avenue. This project is included in the Spring Lake CIP and is needed to provide adequate traffic circulation. CR25A will be a 2-lane road and the project includes storm drain utilities, street lighting and other improvements necessary for the complete roadway. This project also includes the construction of signal improvements at the CR 102/CR 25A intersection.

When the Spring Lake Capital Improvement Plan (SL CIP) was originally approved in 2004, the full length of CR 25A was included in the project funding. When the SL CIP was updated in 2009, the segment from Promenade Drive to Parkland Avenue was removed from the plan in order to reduce developer impact fees during the great recession. When the SL CIP was updated in 2017, the segment from Promenade Drive to Meikle Avenue was added to the plan along with the green belt improvements on the north side of the road for the entire width of Spring Lake. With the project authorization granted at the May 16, 2023, council meeting, the entire length of CR 25A will be completed between SR 113 and CR 102. Completion of the gap in CR-25A will increase traffic at the

CR 102/CR 25A intersection. Therefore, the ultimate signal improvements have been included in the project plans and specifications.

Discussion:

Plans and specs are now complete, and staff is requesting City Council approval of the construction documents and authorization to advertise the project for bids. Staff anticipates that the construction contract award will be presented to Council for approval in the February/March timeframe.

Construction is anticipated to take approximately 6 months, with project completion estimated by December 2024, weather permitting.

Staff is also requesting that Council approve an amendment to the consultant service agreement with Cunningham Engineering in the amount of $31,000 for a total contract of $141,100. The amendment is necessary to cover certain design elements not originally included in the original scope of the design contract, including some grading and drainage design features and additional coordination with the entry to the Woodland Regional Park Preserve at the eastern leg of the County Road 25A/County Road 102 intersection.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, to 1.) approve the project plans & specifications and authorize bid advertisement for the County Road 25A (Parkland Ave to Miekle Ave) Project, CIP 24-05; and 2.) appropriate $50,000 in Spring Lake Infrastructure – Roads funding (Fund 682) for the Project; and 3.) approve a consultant services amendment for design with Cunningham Engineering in the amount of $31,000 for a total agreement amount of $141,100 and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment.

Prepared by: Miguel Chavez, Sr. Construction Project Manager

Reviewed by: Brent Meyer, Community Development Director / City Engineer

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. CEC Contract Amendment #1

3. Project Exhibit

82093.00001\8555510.2
RESOLUTION NO. ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING BID ADVERTISEMENT FOR THE COUNTY ROAD 25A (PARKLAND AVE. TO MIEKLE AVE.) IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, CIP 24-05
WHEREAS, the Project is identified in the current capital budget as the CR-25A (Parkland Ave. to Miekle Ave.) Improvement Project (CIP #24-05); and WHEREAS, the Project is currently funded with $135,000 in SLIF Roads (Fund 682) funding, and an additional $50,000 appropriation is required to cover design changes, engineering services during construction, and project management costs. Additional appropriation of funds will be requested at award of construction contract to cover total project costs; and
WHEREAS, the project will construct CR25A (Parkland Ave. to Miekle Ave.) which includes a new road, storm drain utilities, street lighting, landscaping, and signal improvements at the CR 102/CR 25A intersection necessary for the complete roadway and to provide adequate bicycle/pedestrian and traffic circulation; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Section 15162, the project improvements are consistent with the prior approved Environmental Impact Report (SCH #99022069, Turn of the Century EIR) for the Spring Lake Specific Plan certified on August 15, 2000, and no additional environmental analysis is required for the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority to approve projects for bid; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to approve the plans and specifications for the project through the adoption of this Resolution.

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

Section 1. The City Council hereby approves the plans and specifications for the CR25A (Parkland Ave. to Miekle Ave.) Improvement Project, CIP 24-05, which are available on file with the City Clerk.

Section 2. The City Council authorizes staff to advertise the CR25A (Parkland Ave. to Miekle Ave.) Improvement Project, CIP 24-05, for bids.

Section 3. The City Council hereby authorizes the appropriation of $50,000 of SLIF Roads Funding (Fund 682) to the CR25A (Parkland Ave. to Miekle Ave.) Improvement Project, CIP 24-05.

82093.00001\8555510.2
Section 4. The City Council hereby approves Contract Amendment #1 with Cunningham Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $31,000. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Amendment, subject to City Attorney approval. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to make clarifying and confirming changes so long as the total dollar amount authorized in the Amendment does not change.

Section 5. Copies of the Contract Amendment are available and on file in the City Clerk’s office, and are incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Woodland at a regular City Council meeting held the 19th day of December 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Tania Garcia-Cadena, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk

First Amendment To Professional Services Agreement Between The City Of Woodland And Cunningham Engineering Corporation CM# 200093
City of Woodland 1 December 12, 2023
CR25A(Parkland to Miekle), CIP 24-05 24-05_FIRST AM ENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT.docx
ARTICLE 1. PARTIES AND DATE
This First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement (“First Amendment”) dated as of the ___day of________, 2023_ is entered into by and between the City of Woodland (“City”) and Cunningham Engineering Corporation(“Consultant”).

ARTICLE 2. RECITALS

2.1 City and Consultant entered into that certain Prof essional Services Agreement dated June 5 th 2023 (“Agreement”), whereby Consultant agreed to p rovide professional Civil Engineering consultant services for this Project.

2.2 City and Consultant now desire to amend the Agreem ent to revise the Scope of Services in accordance with the Consultant’s propo sal dated 11/6/23 attached hereto. The total compensation for the 1st Amendment shall not exceed Thirty-One-Thousand ($31,000.00) for a new contract total not to exceed One-Hundred-Forty-One-Thousand-And-One- Hundred-Dollars ($141,100.00).

ARTICLE 3. TERMS

3.1 Continuing Effect of Agreement. Except as amended by this Amendment, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. From and after the date of this Amendment, whenever the term “Agreement” appears in the Agreement, it shall mean the Agreement as amended by this Amendment.

3.2 Adequate Consideration. The Parties hereto irrevocably stipulate and agre e that they have each received adequate and independent co nsideration for the performance of the obligations they have undertaken pursuant to this Amendment.

3.3 Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in duplicate origi nals, each of which is deemed to be an original, but when taken together shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

First Amendment To Professional Services Agreement Between The City Of Woodland And Cunningham Engineering Corporation CM# 200093
City of Woodland 2 December 12, 2023
CR25A(Parkland to Miekle), CIP 24-05 24-05_FIRST AM ENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT.docx
City Of Woodland Cunningham Engineering
By: ___________________________ By: _______________ ____________ Ken Hiatt Steven J. Greenfield

ATTEST:
_______________________________
Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk

First Amendment To Professional Services Agreement Between The City Of Woodland And Cunningham Engineering Corporation CM# 200093
City of Woodland 3 December 12, 2023
CR25A(Parkland to Miekle), CIP 24-05 24-05_FIRST AM ENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT.docx

CONSULTANT PROPOSAL FOR ADDITIONAL WORK

COUNTY ROAD 25A

BANKS DRIVE

CHRISTIANSENCIRCLE

PARKLAND AVENUE

MIEKLE AVENUE

MARSTON DRIVE
CR-102
COUNTY ROAD 25A
NSWECOUNTY ROAD 25A GAP PROJECT(CIP 24-05)

PROJECT LIMITS
INCLUDES SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS ATINTERSECTION OF CR-25A & CR-102

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: G.12
SUBJECT: Approval of Contract for Retired Annuitant

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, for Exception to the CalPERS 180-Day Wait Period for Retired Annuitant – Principal Planner, Cynthia Norris.

Staff Contact:

Sheila McShane, Human Resources Manager, 530 661 5807, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The costs associated with hiring a retired annuitant are accounted for in the FY2023/24 budget, and no additional funds will be allocated.

Discussion:

After 18 years of service with the City, Principal Planner, Cynthia Norris, is retiring effective December 30, 2023. Norris has worked in several positions within the Community Development Department (CDD) and has served as the lead on several critical projects. The City is in the process of hiring a Junior Planner in order to accommodate the vacancy. However, Norris has been the main City employee on the Comprehensive Zoning Code Update, Housing Element, and cannabis regulations. These projects are nearing completion, and it is critical that Norris provides guidance on the implementation and transition of these updated regulations/ordinances. Additionally, the City anticipates a future special project in which Norris can assist the City in the implementation and training of staff. Norris's breadth of knowledge regarding the City’s planning regulations is beneficial in helping new staff manage the process. The City is requesting Norris to return to work as a retired annuitant so that the City can seamlessly implement/update the regulations and ordinances.

The California Public Employee Retirement System (CalPERS) has specific rules that public agencies must follow when allowing employees who have retired to return to work. Typically, once an employee retires from an agency, they are required to wait 180 days before they can return to work. However, there are rules (Gov. Code 7522.56 & 21224) that allow a contracting public agency to request a waiver of its 180-day waiting period for retired annuitants to perform work of limited duration, such as elimination of a backlog, special project work, or to perform work exceeding regular staff work.

This report seeks Council action on a resolution, as required by CalPERS, to allow the City to employ Cynthia Norris as a retired annuitant for this specific purpose. Upon completion of the special projects which include transitions, implementation of projects and regulations, the agreement with Cynthia Norris will automatically terminate upon completion of the projects or January 16, 2026, whichever is sooner.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, for Exception to the CalPERS 180-Day Wait Period for Retired Annuitant – Principal Planner Cynthia Norris.

Prepared by: Sheila McShane, Human Resources Manager

Reviewed by: Kim McKinney, Director of Administrative Services

Attachments:

1. C Norris Reso

2. C Norris Retired Annuitant Agreement

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

APPROVING THE HIRING OF CYNTHIA NORRIS AS A RETIRED ANNUITANT UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE 7522.56 & 21224
WHEREAS, in compliance with Government (Gov.) Code section 7522.56 & 21224 of the Public Employees’ Retirement Law, the City of Woodland must provide CalPERS this certification resolution when hiring a retiree before 180 days has passed since their retirement date; and
WHEREAS, Cynthia Norris, CalPERS 1368781702 retired from the City of Woodland in the position of Principal Planner, effective December 30, 2023; and WHEREAS, Gov. Code section 7522.56 requires that post-retirement employment commence no earlier than 180 days after the retirement date, which is July 1, 2024 without this certification resolution; and
WHEREAS, Gov. Code section 7522.56 provides that this exception to the 180-day wait period shall not apply if the retiree accepts any retirement-related incentive; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Woodland, the City of Woodland, Community Development Department and Cynthia Norris certify that Cynthia Norris has not and will not receive a Golden Handshake or any other retirement-related incentive; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Woodland hereby appoints Cynthia Norris as an extra help retired annuitant to perform the duties of the Principal Planner for the City of Woodland under Gov. Code section 21224 effective, January 16, 2024; and WHEREAS, the entire employment agreement, contract or appointment document between Cynthia Norris and the City of Woodland has been reviewed by this body and is attached herein; and
WHEREAS, no matters, issues, terms or conditions related to this employment and appointment; and
WHEREAS, the employment shall be limited to 960 hours per fiscal year for all CalPERS employers; and
WHEREAS, the compensation paid to retirees cannot be less than the minimum nor exceed the maximum monthly base salary paid to other employees performing comparable duties, divided by 173.333 to equal the hourly rate; and WHEREAS, the maximum base salary for this position is $11,489.34 and the hourly equivalent is $66.29, and the minimum base salary for this position is $9,002.20 and the hourly equivalent is $51.94; and
WHEREAS, the hourly rate paid to Cynthia Norris will be $66.29; and

WHEREAS, Cynthia Norris has not and will not receive any other benefit, incentive, compensation in lieu of benefit or other form of compensation in addition to this hourly pay rate; and
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Woodland hereby certifies the nature of the employment of Cynthia Norris as described herein and detailed in the attached employment agreement / contract / appointment document and that this appointment is necessary to fill the critically needed position of Principal Planner for the City of Woodland by January 16, 2024 because Cynthia Norris has to assist with the implementation of Cannabis Business Regulations, finalization of the Comprehensive Zoning Update, Housing Element and other anticipated potential Special Project.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND HEREBY RESOLVES:

THAT, the City of Woodland approves the hire of Cynthia Norris as a retired annuitant under Government Code 21224 and
THAT, the City Manager on behalf of the City of Woodland is hereby authorized to take any and all actions necessary to implement the foregoing resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of December 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Tania Garcia-Cadena, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Ana B. Gonzalez, City Clerk Ethan Walsh, City Attorney

1 AGREEMENT FOR TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is between the CITY OF WOODLAND, State of California, a municipal corporation (“City”), and Cynthia Norris, an individual (“Employee”) (collectively, the “Parties”) and is effective at 12:00 a.m. on January 16, 2024.

Recitals
WHEREAS, as of 12:00am on January 16, 2024, the City will have a need for assistance in the City of Woodland, Community Development Department. The City needs assistance at the level of a Principal Planner to support Special Projects as the City adopts, transitions and implement the City’s regulations on Cannabis, Comprehensive Zoning Code Update and Housing Element; and a future probable Special Project that should come to fruition in the next several months. Ms.

Norris is the subject matter expert on these projects, and is able to prepared the regulations/projects for City employees to take control.

WHEREAS, the City has an immediate need for an employee to temporarily assist the City of Woodland as the subject matter expert as the City implements and adopts the Cannabis Business regulations. Also, Ms. Norris has been updating the Comprehensive Zoning Update and Housing Element regulations which is nearing completion, and for continuity it is beneficial to have consistency with this project. The City anticipates a new planning project within the next six (6) months, which Ms. Norris can prepare and provide guidance to City employees on implementation; WHEREAS, Employee is competent and qualified to perform the services required by this Agreement, and City wishes to have Employee perform the Principal Planner duties on an interim basis as it relates to Cannabis Regulations, Comprehensive Zoning Update and Housing Element and a probable Special Project; and
WHEREAS, Employee’s employment is authorized by Government Code section 21224, which permits the City to appoint a CalPERS retired annuitant to perform work of a limited duration, of Special Projects, and work exceeding regular staff work, and duties requiring specialized skills, such as a subject matter expert as the City transitions and implementation Cannabis regulations, Comprehensive Zoning Update and Housing Element, and development of the planning aspects of a probable Special Project.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree as follows:

Agreement

1. Appointment and Scope of Services: Pursuant to this Agreement, Employee is appointed as interim Principal Planner, and shall temporarily perform the functions of this position, which is a position involving highly-specialized and critically-needed skills set forth in the attached job description, in the Woodland Municipal Code and as provided by law. Such employment is “at will,” subject to the terms of this Agreement, and Employee shall perform said duties at the pleasure of and under the direct supervision of the City Manager.

2. Compensation and Work Schedule:

2 Rate of Pay: Employee shall be paid at the rate of $66.29 per hour. The City has confirmed that this rate is not less than the minimum, nor in excess of the maximum, paid by the City to other employees performing comparable duties (divided by 173.333 to equal an hourly rate) as listed on the City’s publicly-available pay schedule and publicly-available employment agreements. Payments will be made on regularly scheduled City payroll dates, and shall be subject to all applicable payroll taxes and withholdings. Such compensation shall be the sole compensation for Employee’s services under this Agreement.

Work Schedule and 960-hour Limitation: Employee is expected to devote necessary time, within and outside normal business hours, to the business of the City. Pursuant to Government Code section 21224 and section 7522.56(d), however, Employee is allowed to work a maximum of 960 hours per fiscal year for all public employers that contract with CalPERS for retirement benefits. The City retains the right to designate, reduce, change, or amend the number of hours assigned to Employee consistent with the City’s workload and other needs. If Employee’s annual hours are approaching 960, then the City retains the right to summarily suspend Employee’s duties under this Agreement and to reassign any scheduled hours, as needed, to ensure that Employee does not exceed the maximum hours allowed by this Agreement. Employee will be responsible for keeping track of the number of hours worked on a daily time sheet form provided by the City and submitting them at least every month.

The position is a temporary, hourly assignment which is generally not expected to exceed 40 hours per week. The City, through the City Manager, will assign Employee hours to work. Due to the nature of the position, it is understood that the work day and work week hours may vary, however Employee shall not work overtime (i.e. in excess of 40 hours per week) without express permission from the City Manager.

3. Employment Status:

A. Benefits: Other than the compensation described above in Section 2, Employee will receive no other benefits, incentives, compensation in lieu of benefits, or any other form of compensation. Employee understands and agrees that she is not, and will not be, eligible to receive any benefits from the City, including any City group plan for hospital, surgical, or medical insurance, any City retirement program, or any paid holidays, vacation, sick leave, or other leave, with or without pay, or any other job benefits available to an employee in the regular service of the City, except for Worker’s Compensation Insurance coverage or similar benefits required by law.

B. No Membership in Bargaining Unit: Employee understands that she is not a member of any bargaining unit and is not covered by the terms of any Memorandum of Understanding with any represented or unrepresented group of City employees.

C. No Property Right in Employment: Employee understands and agrees that the terms of her employment are governed only by this Agreement and that no right of regular employment for any specific term is created by this Agreement. Employee further understands that she acquires no property interest in her employment by virtue of this agreement, that the employment is “at will” as defined by the laws of the State of California (meaning that she can be terminated at any time for any reason or for no reason), and that

3 she is not entitled to any pre- or post-deprivation administrative hearing or other due process upon termination or any disciplinary action except as otherwise provided by law.

D. Employment of a Retiree: Employee understands that CalPERS retired annuitants may be employed by a CalPERS public agency employer, by temporary appointment to a position not to exceed 960 hours in any fiscal year for all such employers; either (1) during an emergency to prevent stoppage of public business or (2) because the retired employee has skills needed in performing the work of limited duration. As of the time of entering this Agreement, Employee represents that she is not performing services for any other CalPERS public agency employer. In the event Employee begins providing service to any other CalPERS public agency employer during the term of this Agreement, Employee must immediately notify the City of accepting such employment and disclose on a periodic basis (at a frequency determined by the City) the number of hours Employee is performing for that other public agency to ensure that the maximum number of hours is not exceeded.

4. Representation of Employee: Employee represents that she is properly trained and certified to perform the duties required of the position and this Agreement.

5. Effective Date and Term of Agreement: This Agreement shall be effective on January 16, 2024 (“Effective Date”), and unless terminated earlier, shall terminate automatically at midnight on January 22, 2026 or when the work is completed, whichever is sooner.

Employment is temporary, at-will and may be terminated with or without cause and with or without notice at any time by the Employee or the City. Employee is not eligible for any severance payment or benefit relating to or arising out of the termination of this Agreement.

6. Non-Assignment of Agreement: This Agreement is intended to secure the individual services of the Employee and is not assignable or transferable by employee to any third party.

7. Governing Law/Venue: This Agreement shall be interpreted according to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action or proceeding regarding this contract shall be in Yolo County.

8. Enforceability: If any term, covenant, condition, or provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated thereby.

9. Conflict of Interest: Employee agrees that during the term of this Agreement, she will not maintain any financial interest or engage in any other contract employment, occupation, work, endeavor or association, whether compensated or not, that would in any way conflict with, or impair Employee’s ability to perform the duties described in this Agreement. Any work performed for the City outside the terms of this Agreement must be approved in advance in writing by the City Manager. Employee agrees to disclose whether she is performing work for any other CalPERS public agency employer as required by section

3.D. of this Agreement.

4 10. Entire Agreement and Modification: This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding of the parties hereto. This Agreement supersedes any previous contracts, agreements, negotiations or understandings, whether written or oral, between the parties. Employee shall be entitled to no other compensation or benefits than those specified herein, and Employee acknowledges that no representation, inducements or promises not contained in this Agreement have been made to Employee to induce Employee to enter into this Agreement.

No changes, amendments, or alterations hereto shall be effective unless in writing and signed by both parties. Employee understands that no oral modification of this Agreement made by any officer, agent, or employee of the City is effective. Employee specifically acknowledges that in entering into and executing this Agreement, she relies solely upon the provisions contained herein and no others.

11. Support Services and Equipment: Employee shall be provided office space and the equipment needed to perform her duties and sufficient to fulfill obligations under this Agreement, as determined by the City Manager, at no cost to employee. Such equipment shall include a City-owned computer, typical office equipment. In accordance with Government Code Section 21224, personal use of such equipment is not permitted.

12. Reimbursement for Expenses: Employee shall be reimbursed by City in accordance with standard City travel policy (as well as federal and state law) for all authorized and necessary travel undertaken by Employee in performance of services pursuant to this Agreement.

Employee shall document and claim said reimbursement for such travel in the manner and forms required by the City. Other than as specifically provided herein, Employee shall receive no other compensation or reimbursements for expenses incurred by him in performance of this Agreement.

13. Notices: All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties by hand-delivery or by mail at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose, by deposit in the U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid, addressed as follows:

CITY: City of Woodland
300 First Street
Woodland, CA 95695
Attn: City Manager
EMPLOYEE: Cynthia Norris
On file with the City

14. Indemnification: In accordance with and subject to the limitations of the California Government Claims Act and California Labor Code, the City shall defend, save harmless and indemnify Employee against any tort, professional liability, claim or demand or other legal action, arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of Employee’s services as Principal Planner, except that this provision shall not apply with respect to any intentional tort or crime committee by Employee, or any actions outside the course and scope of her employment as Principal Planner.

5 15. No Presumption of Drafter: The Parties acknowledge and agree that the terms and provisions of this Agreement have been negotiated and discussed between the Parties, and this Agreement reflects their mutual agreement regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. Because of the nature of such negotiations and discussions, it would be inappropriate to deem any Party to be the drafter of this Agreement and, therefore, no presumption for or against validity or as to any interpretation hereof, based upon the identity of the drafter shall be applicable in interpreting or enforcing this Agreement.

16. Assistance of Counsel: Each party to this Agreement warrants to the other party that the party has either had the assistance of counsel in negotiation for, and preparation of, this Agreement or could have had such assistance and voluntarily declined to obtain such assistance.

Dated: EMPLOYEE:
_____________
Dated: CITY:

CITY MANAGER

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: G.13
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Zoning Code Update and
Recommendations Review

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive a presentation on the Comprehensive Zoning Code Regarding Recommended Updates to the Public Review Draft and provide preliminary direction regarding recommended updates.

Staff Contact:

Cindy Norris, Principal Planner (530) 661-5911, [email protected]; and [email protected]; Erika Bumgardner, Deputy Community Development Director, (530) 661-5886, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The Zoning Code and CEQA Update Project (CIP#07-07) was established in 2007 with $100,000 to fund Zoning Code and CEQA updates. Since 2007, limited code updates and preparation of the Interim Zoning Update have utilized project funds (CIP#07-07). In 2017, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) initiated the Planning Grants Program intended for the preparation, adoption and implementation of plans to streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production. The City of Woodland received two Planning Grants from HCD, SB2 funds in 2019, for $310,000, and LEAP grant funds in 2020, for $300,000. Additionally, the City received $85,000 in REAP grant funds from SACOG. Total funds allocated to the CZC project are $655,624.

On September 3, 2019, the City entered into a professional services contract with Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc. for $358,610 to prepare the CZC update. On October 15, 2020, a Second Amendment to the contract was approved to add $36,160 to the original contract for an overall contract amount of $394,770. A fourth amendment reallocated grant funds in the amount of $130,830 to the contract with Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc., resulting in an overall contract amount of $525,600 to complete the CZC project. A fifth amendment was approved to extend the contract term and reallocate funds.

Report in Brief:

The public review draft of the Comprehensive Zoning Code was officially released at the September 19, 2023, City Council meeting. (Attachment 1: 9/19/2023 Staff Report). The city held a series of public meetings with community members and stakeholders to present the draft Code, respond to questions, and collect important feedback to be considered in the preparation of the final CZC.

The purpose of the December 19 City Council meeting is to review the public comments received to date regarding the draft CZC and to review proposed recommended updates with the City Council. Resulting direction from the City Council will assist staff in preparing the final draft zoning code. Upon completion of the final draft, staff will schedule adoption hearings with the Planning Commission and City Council.

The goal of the CZC update is to facilitate new desired development through the provision of clear and understandable standards, guidelines, and procedures. The CZC includes an updated development review process to assist residents, development interests, staff and decision makers to

allow qualified development proposals expedited review, thereby helping to reduce the front-end design/development costs particularly for new housing projects.

Grant funding for the Code update from the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) was provided with the intended purpose of accelerating housing production and streamlining approval of housing development, and to prepare a code that utilizes best practices to facilitate livability, sustainability, increased density, and multi-modal access. A well-designed city that incorporates appropriate development standards into its regulations will directly improve the quality of life and appearance of the community, attract investment, and increase community pride.

Background:

Public Outreach
Public Notification:

The city provided an extensive amount of notification utilizing multiple methods in order to inform the public about the availability of the draft CZC and the public workshops. Notification was sent out utilizing direct mail, email, listservs, press releases, display ads in the newspaper, and posting on various social media platforms. The city prepared a mailed information notice that was sent to all owners of properties with a proposed land use zone change (Attachment 2: Copy of mailed notice). The notice identified the anticipated zone change and provided dates for all workshops in September and October. In addition, workshop information was sent via email to all known interested stakeholders. Contact information from prior city projects was incorporated into the contact list. Notice was sent out through various city listservs including City of Woodland News, City of Woodland Weekly, and to other special groups such as the Downtown. Other social media platforms were used, including Facebook and Instagram. Below is a summary of the email and social media "open rates" and subscriber accounts.

Email
• Woodland Weekly 9/15: 7,432 subscribers, 2,915 opens • Council Agenda Notice 9/19: 653 subscribers, 233 opens • Planning Commission Agenda Notice 9/21: 272 subscribers, 147 opens • News Flashes 9/12 and 10/17: 676 subscribers (for some reason, this one doesn’t have an open rate) Sept 12 | Oct 17

Social Media
• Facebook post 9/12: 1,800-account reach
• Facebook post 10/5: 721-account reach

This is in addition to traditional noticing with display ads in the newspaper, Council and Planning Commission presentations with TV/streaming and posting on the Comprehensive Zoning web page, and presentation to the Sustainability Committee.

Public Meetings:

Upon release of the draft CZC, multiple public meetings were held. All meetings were recorded and posted on the CZC website. Meetings were held at different times of the day to facilitate participation and had a focused subject matter:
• September 19 & 21 – Code release and Overview at City Council and Planning Commission (evening)
• October 5 – Planning Commission Workshop – Development Standards Focus (6:30 PM)) • October 18 – Commercial and Mixed-Use Focused Workshop (6:00 PM) • October 19 – Planning Commission Workshop – Housing Focus (6:30 PM) • October 24 – General and Industrial Focused Workshop (11:30 AM) • October 25 - Downtown Focused Workshop (9:00 AM)

All meetings were held in the City Council chambers to allow recording, and posted on the CZC web page at: https://cityofwoodland.org/1167/Community-Outreach. Additional informational videos and informational tools were provided, including an interactive GIS Zoning Comparison Map to allow independent search of properties regarding proposed zone changes, https://gis.cityofwoodland.org/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=cb4b68513a014770bdf2ba1d cbe4c686

Public Comments: Staff have recorded and identified public comments on the public review draft which are included in a table for reference purposes (Attachment 3). Responses to comments have been provided. In some cases, the response includes a recommended modification to the draft CZC. The purpose for review before the City Council is to highlight and provide an opportunity for discussion regarding key changes and/or issues that were identified prior to preparation of the final draft plan.

Discussion:

The following are key issues or discussion topics that were raised during the initial public review phase of the draft CZC. The discussion will identify the topic, provide background analysis, and the proposed recommendation from staff. Staff is requesting direction from the City Council regarding the proposed amendments to allow preparation of the final CZC. Upon receiving direction from the City Council, staff will prepare a final draft CZC and schedule adoption hearings.

Please note that not all recommendations or feedback provided throughout the course of public outreach is summarized below. Attachment 3 includes additional comments received and preliminary responses. All comments provided by the public have been taken into consideration and many will be reflected in the final draft plan but were considered minor in nature and therefore not highlighted for discussion in this report.

Zone Change from Residential Duplex (R-2) to Low Medium (R-LM) Issue: Concern that the proposed change of the R-2 Duplex zone to R-LM Residential Low Medium will result in loss of neighborhood character.

Discussion: The CZC proposes to add back the Low Medium Zone to further facilitate missing middle housing (i.e. more affordable housing types that were common pre-WWII, such as duplexes, rowhouses, and courtyard apartments but are now less common). The 1996 and 2002 General Plans had a land use called Medium Low Density Residential (MLDR) with a density between 5 - 12 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). These areas are shown as a duplex zone (R2) on the existing zoning map. The 2035 General Plan EIR studied all of these areas as Medium density (8.1-19.9 du/ac), but they were ultimately approved as Low density (1-8 du/ac) in 2017. The CZC proposes to add back in the R-LM zone and General Plan land use at a density of 5-15 dwelling units per acre, a middle range between low and medium densities.

Zoning standards for the proposed R-LM zone, including height and setbacks, lot coverage and lot size, are the same as provided for the Residential Low zone, which will ensure overall neighborhood character is retained. Objective Design Standards have been provided to help ensure appropriate, attractive and sensitively designed infill and additions. Upon closer examination of the existing development fabric, a mix of unit types is found within both the existing R-2 and NP zones, including duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes, cottage courts and small apartments, especially closer to downtown. Further, recent state legislation, including SB9 and ADU laws allow for up to 4 units on a single-family property.

The existing R-2 zoning currently allows a duplex unit and ADUs on a lot. When considering a theoretical maximum density of 15 du/ac, a typical 6,000 square foot lot would allow a maximum of 2 primary units, and would include the potential for additional ADUs. A site that is a half-acre in size would allow up to 7 du/ac. The site would still be required to meet all height, setback, lot coverage, and design standards for the primary units. Staff believes that results will be generally consistent with the existing pattern of development with some additional occasional infill most likely on existing vacant, larger lots.

Objective design standards have been included which provide clear guidance on topics such as building placement, façade articulation, building materials, roof design, entry location and on-site access and circulation. In the case of a larger lot where a town home or cottage court style development may be possible, exterior entrances shall face a street and incorporate either a porch or recessed entry, similar to existing single family development in this area. The City Council may also wish to consider limiting the residential product types to not more than 4 units in any one building (such as a fourplex, or in line rowhouse design), which would prohibit larger multi-unit projects.

The proposed return to a zone and density that is consistent with the prior land use designation is in keeping with the goals and intent of the 2035 General Plan and objectives for the CZC.

The proposal is consistent with two key objectives of the CZC:
• Allow increased intensity of development and compact form while retaining the character and scale of the community’s neighborhoods, and
• Facilitate increased housing opportunities and variety. Encourage Multi-family, Missing Middle, and Lifestyle Housing.

The proposal is consistent with the following General Plan Policies:
• Policy 2.A.1: Urban Limit Line. […] The City shall continually reevaluate residential land use densities, housing policies, and zoning to determine the potential for increased residential densities for both infill sites and undeveloped land within the Urban Limit Line. The City shall continually review existing non-residential zoning to determine the potential for conversion to higher density residential uses within the permanent Urban Limit Line. • Policy 2.A.5: Complete and Well Designed Neighborhoods. Promote the development of complete neighborhoods with a physical layout and land use mix that allows for a diversity of incomes; puts residents in proximity to services and amenities; promotes walking, biking, and transit use; fosters community pride; enhances neighborhood identity; ensures public safety; and meets the needs of all ages and abilities.
• Policy 2.A.6: Infill Development. Encourage infill, redevelopment of and development on underutilized sites, adaptive reuse, and the restoration of historic buildings in existing urbanized areas to enhance community character, promote pedestrian- and bicycle friendly neighborhoods, increase housing diversity, ensure integrity of historic districts, optimize city investment in infrastructure, support increased transit use, and enhance economic vitality • Policy 2.C.1. Compact Form. Promote compact development patterns, mixed land use, and higher-development intensities that conserve land resources, reduce vehicle trips, improve air quality, and facilitate walking, bicycling, and transit use. Achieving the benefits of compact development as supported in this General Plan may result in potential trade-offs related to traffic, noise, open space, and privacy. Sensitive design and appropriate performance standards may assist in mitigating these concerns. Where growth and increased density is allowed pursuant to this General Plan, these issues are acknowledged and accepted.
• Policy 2.E.2: Responsiveness to Context. Encourage high-quality new development that enhances and blends with the established fabric of the natural, social and built environment, while allowing for innovative architectural styles.
• Policy 2.G.2: Sensitive New Development. Require new construction, additions, renovations, and infill to be physically compatible with neighborhood context, historic development patterns, and building form and scale.

Recommendation: Continued inclusion of the R-LM land use and zone in place of the R-2 zone, with additional direction to staff to continue to evaluate standards to ensure sensitively designed infill that allows higher intensity of development while respecting existing building form and scale.

Allowing triplex and fourplex buildings in the Residential Low (RL) and Neighborhood Preservation Zones (NP)

Issue: Consider distinguishing triplex and fourplex buildings as separate from multi-unit dwellings and specifically allowing triplex and fourplex buildings in the RL and NP zones, provided they do not exceed the zone's maximum density (i.e. a fourplex would require a minimum half acre lot).

Discussion: As stated in the General Plan Low Density Residential land use district, consideration of fourplex buildings may be allowed subject to conditional review. Current low density residential zones (R-L and NP) allow only single family and duplex product types, and nothing over 2 units on a single lot. A fourplex is a multifamily property made up of four individual units connected under one roof and on one lot in this context. A fourplex is the largest property type that an owner can invest in

using a residential mortgage. A fourplex can offer benefit if the owner lives on site and uses the three other units as rental income. In addition, a fourplex can offer renters a less intensive experience than a commercial multifamily property. It allows the integration of potential rental units within more traditional single-family neighborhoods.

In order to facilitate the allowance of these small multi-unit buildings into typical single family neighborhoods, consideration must be provided regarding the form and massing of the building as well as parking considerations.

These small multi-unit buildings were traditionally found in more historic neighborhoods where a variety of building types was often the norm. There are examples of small multi-unit buildings in the residential districts adjacent to the Downtown. In addition, as a result of SB9 and ADU laws, up to four units may be provided on single family properties. Under SB9, the state requires the city to allow by-right, single family properties to subdivide into two lots (minimum 1,200sf) and build up to four housing units in total (two per lot), plus additional Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Therefore, if it is determined that triplexes and fourplexes should not be permitted in the Residential Low and Neighborhood Preservation Zones, owners will still have the opportunity to add addition units by way of ADUs or utilizing SB9 regulations.

The proposal is consistent with the following objectives of the CZC:
• Allow increased intensity of development and compact form while retaining the character and scale of the community’s neighborhoods, and
• Facilitate increased housing opportunities and variety. Encourage Multi-family, Missing Middle, and Lifestyle Housing.

The proposal is consistent with the General Plan language for Low-Density Residential land use, which states:
• “With conditional review, allow for the consideration of up to four (4) units on a lot in appropriate locations, based on density, exemplary design, and site compatibility assessment (in no case to exceed 8 dwelling units per acre)”.

Recommendation: Either that fourplex buildings be allowed in the RL and NP zones subject to a staff level discretionary review with direction that staff provide additional objective design standards to address the proposed building appearance, site design, and parking. Or, continue to limit multi-unit dwellings (fourplexes and triplexes) to higher density residential zones (R-Low Medium, R-Medium and R-High), but encourage and continue to look for ways to streamline ADU permitting and SB9 allowances.

Recreational Vehicle Storage and Parking on Residential Properties.

Issue: The Public Review Draft CZC included a new section 17.64.100(C)(2) regarding the parking of recreational vehicles, boats and trailers in residential zones. Public comments were received expressing concern that the new language is too restrictive.

The current zoning code language states that:
“One mobile home, camper, motor home, or trailer may be stored off the street and, on a property, as long as it is parked on an impervious surface.” Section 9.04.030.10 of the Municipal Code provides requirements regarding the parking of vehicles on an impervious surface.

The proposed updates to the CZC regarding the parking of RVs, boats, and trailers are intended to provide standards to minimize nuisance considerations when such vehicles are parked in a manner that creates unsightly conditions, blocks public access, results in illegal encroachment and damage to utilities, curbs, and vegetation.

The current proposed language states the following:
• On a single-family site, recreational vehicles shall be parked on a non-permeable surface, in a fenced area, or in the rear yard or side yard, screened by a wall or solid fence not less than six feet in height.
• Recreational vehicles shall not project beyond the front limits of the home. (This would no longer allow these vehicles or trailers to be parked on the front driveway.)

The staff have reviewed considerations, should the restrictions as proposed be considered too onerous, modified language that may be incorporated includes the following:

• One mobile home, camper, motor home, or trailer (RV refers to all such vehicles) may be stored off the street and, on a residential property in the RL, NP, or RLM zone, as long as it is parked on an impervious surface. (Similar language to the existing code) • RV parking may only be accessed by an approved driveway approach. Access to RV parking shall not require driving a vehicle over a curb, parkway landscaping, or utility infrastructure and shall not require the removal of any required protected trees as outlined in the City Tree Ordinance, including street trees, unless mitigation is approved by the City. • Second driveways shall only be allowed in accordance with Section 17.68.090(F). (To minimize driveway cuts for safety purposes for bikes and pedestrians) • RVs shall not be parked in a manner that is highly visible or unsightly, such as parallel to a front home.
• RVs must be parked a minimum of 5-feet back of a sidewalk in order to ensure adequate sight visibility. Additional setbacks may be required to ensure consistency with the Sight Visibility requirements (Section 17.64.110).
• RVs shall be subject to the same side and rear setback standards as required for accessory structures, Section 17.64.020. D-1. (RVs in some cases can be taller than allowed accessory structures)
• RVs shall be operational. Flat tires, broken windows, tarp covering not made specifically for the vehicle shall not be permitted.

The proposal is consistent with the following CZC objective:
• Address citywide and special case situations that occur repeatedly.

The proposal is consistent with the following General Plan Policies:
• Policy 2.F.1: Development Regulations. Promote design excellence by ensuring that development regulations clearly express both desired and intended outcomes, in addition to those that may be prohibited or undesired.
• Policy 2.G.5: Maintenance. Foster community pride and promote neighborhood enhancement and conservation through code enforcement as well as incentivized improvement programs to facilitate ongoing repair and property improvement.

Recommendation: That additional criterion be added to the CZC regarding the parking of recreational vehicles, boats, and trailers in residential zones based on direction provided to staff regarding the proposed CZC standards relating to RV parking.

Include Business Park and Corridor Mixed Use-Gateway Zones Issue: Incorporate Zone Categories for land uses that are in the General Plan, but not on incorporated lands within city boundaries.

Discussion: There are land use categories in the General Plan, Business Park and Corridor Mixed Use-Gateway, that occur on lands that have not yet been annexed into the city. In order to provide

future development expectations in advance of annexation, staff are recommending incorporating pre-annexation zones into the CZC. The pre-zones will be somewhat generalized in nature and provide baseline development standards, possible allowed uses, and objective design standards. Doing so will assist city review and facilitate potential development interests in understanding how lands that are outside the city are expected to develop. At the time of future annexation review, final detailed zone requirements and any potential amendments can be considered.

These two zones are not currently included in the public review draft. It is recommended that they be added to the final review draft.

The proposal is consistent with the following objectives of the CZC:
• Implement the 2035 General Plan and 2021-2029 Housing Element • Ensure that the code is clear, concise, intuitive, and easy to use by the community, businesses, and development partners.
• Provide clear standards and requirements, but incorporate flexibility in order to adapt to new or unusual circumstances.
• Add to the economic vitality of Woodland and allow appropriate adaptive reuse and reinvestment of properties.
• Encourage mixed-use nodes, districts and corridors. Allow the integration of commercial uses within residential districts as well as residential into commercial districts.

The proposal is consistent with General Plan Policies:
• Policy 2.D.2: Jobs/Housing Relationship. Promote and support the development of a balance of residential, commercial, and industrial development within the city. Encourage a variety of job and housing types to provide a range of employment and housing opportunities for all city residents.

Maintain a jobs to housing ratio citywide of at least 1:1 to optimize the supply and demand for both, reduce commute trips and overall vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and make communities less dependent on single-occupancy vehicle trips.

• Policy 2.D.3: Technology Sector. Grow the technology sector in Woodland by leveraging the research strength at UC Davis. Establish business parks in the Southern Gateway at CR 25 and SR 113 and along CR 102. Encourage smaller companies and start-ups to locate in incubator spaces Downtown and in areas with the Light Industrial Overlay designation.

• Policy 2.E.1: Land Use Designations. Enact the land use designations as shown in Figure 2-5 and detailed in Section 2.3 for the purposes of this General Plan.

• Policy 2.F.1: Development Regulations. Promote design excellence by ensuring that development regulations clearly express both desired and intended outcomes, in addition to those that may be prohibited or undesired.

• Policy 2.I.9: CR 102. Develop CR 102 south of East Main Street as an attractive corridor with a mix of commercial, office, and residential uses that support employment growth targets. Incorporate new job generating uses into the corridor, including medical services, offices, and business park development.

• Policy 2.K.2: Business Parks. Promote the development of master-planned business parks that bolster Woodland’s established agricultural and emerging technology industries and promote the city’s prominence as a major center of economic activity in Yolo County.

Recommendation: That the City Council provide direction to staff to draft and provide zone

standards in the CZC for the Business Park and Corridor Mixed Use-Gateway pre-annexation zones.

Commercial Cannabis in the Downtown
Issue: Consideration regarding retail cannabis (dispensaries), and the impact of proposed Downtown Zone changes.

Discussion: The Current zoning code allows for the possible consideration of retail cannabis in District A of the Downtown. District A parallels Main Street only. Available cannabis sites were significantly limited by the requirement that they shall not be located within 600-feet of a youth- oriented use. However, with the proposed amendment to the Downtown zoning, the DX-1 zone will replace District A and will cover a larger area.

It is recommended, at this time, that the possibility for retail cannabis use be removed from the Downtown. Should there be a desire to consider retail cannabis in the Downtown in the future, the matter can be considered by the City Council at that time.

Recommendation: That retail cannabis be removed as a possible use in the Downtown.

Summary of Recommendations for Requested Direction:

• Recommendation: Continued inclusion of the R-LM land use and zone in place of the R-2 zone, with additional direction to staff to continue to evaluate standards to ensure sensitively designed infill that allows higher intensity of development while respecting existing building form and scale.

• Recommendation: Either that fourplex buildings be allowed in the RL and NP zones subject to a staff level discretionary review with direction that staff provide additional objective design standards to address the proposed building appearance, site design, and parking. Or, continue to limit multi- unit dwellings (fourplexes and triplexes) to higher density residential zones (R-Low Medium, R- Medium and R-High), but encourage and continue to look for ways to streamline ADU permitting and SB9 allowances.

• Recommendation: That additional criterion be added to the CZC regarding the parking of recreational vehicles, boats, and trailers in residential zones based on direction provided to staff

regarding the proposed CZC standards relating to RV parking.

• Recommendation: That the City Council provide direction to staff to draft and provide zone standards in the CZC for the Business Park and Corridor Mixed Use-Gateway pre-annexation zones.

• Recommendation: That retail cannabis be removed as a possible use in the Downtown.

The Zoning Code is considered a living document and represents the goals and policies of the General Plan as translated into regulatory requirements. It is anticipated that as the city begins to actively utilize the code, there may be fine-tuning required moving forward.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive a presentation on the Comprehensive Zoning Code Regarding Recommended Updates to the Public Review Draft and provide preliminary direction regarding recommended updates.

Prepared by: Cindy A. Norris, Principal Planner

Reviewed by: Brent Meyer, Community Development Director / City Engineer

Attachments:

1. September 19, 2023 Council Report

2. Notification Mailer to Owners Example

3. Public Comment Tracker

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: September 19, 2023
ITEM #: J.16
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Zoning Code Public Release

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive a presentation on the Public Review Draft of the Comprehensive Zoning Code and an outline of the public review process

Staff Contact:

Cindy Norris, Principal Planner (530) 661-5911, [email protected]; and [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The Zoning Code and CEQA Update Project (CIP#07-07) was established in 2007 with $100,000 to fund Zoning Code and CEQA updates. Since 2007, limited code updates and preparation of the Interim Zoning Update have utilized project funds (CIP#07-07). In 2017, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) initiated the Planning Grants Program intended for the preparation, adoption and implementation of plans to streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production. The City of Woodland received two Planning Grants from HCD, SB2 funds in 2019, for $310,000, and LEAP grant funds in 2020, for $300,000. Additionally, the City received $85,000 in REAP grant funds from SACOG. Total funds allocated to the CZC project are $655,624.

On September 3, 2019, the City entered into a professional services contract with Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc. for $358,610 to prepare the CZC update. On October 15, 2020, a second amendment to the contract was approved to add $36,160 to the original contract for an overall contract amount of $394,770. A fourth amendment reallocated grant funds in the amount of $130,830 to the contract with Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc., resulting in an overall contract amount of $525,600 to complete the CZC project.

Report in Brief:

The September 19, 2023 City Council meeting will officially launch the public review process for the CZC Project with the availability of the Public Review Draft document now online at the following link https://cityofwoodland.org/1165/Comprehensive-Zoning-Update, and in hard copy at City Hall, Library and Community and Senior Center. Over the coming months, city staff will hold a series of public meetings with community members and stakeholders to formally present the draft Code, respond to questions, and collect important feedback that will be considered in the preparation of the final CZC. At the September 19, 2023 meeting it is not anticipated that the City Council will provide formal comments on the draft document, but rather receive a project update and provide input concerning key areas of interest or concern. This staff report outlines the community engagement process and anticipated timeline, provides a high-level overview of the CZC including a review of the guiding principals for development of the Code update, the code framework, and a summary of key changes.

The goal of the CZC update is to facilitate new desired development through the provision of clear and understandable standards, guidelines, and procedures. An updated development review process will assist staff and decision makers to allow qualified development with expedited review, thereby helping to reduce the front-end design/development costs particularly for new housing projects.

Grant funding for the Code update from HCD was provided with the intended purpose of accelerating

housing production and streamlining approval of housing development, as well as to prepare a code that utilizes best practices to facilitate livability, sustainability, increased density, and multi-modal access. A well-designed city that incorporates appropriate development standards into its regulations will directly improve the quality of life and appearance of the community, attract investment, and increase community pride.

Background:

Once the draft is released, staff is recommending an ambitious schedule for public review with the goal of completing the draft document by the end of 2023. The goal will be to begin working and utilizing the new code at the start of the year. This will also allow the city to submit for final grant funding reimbursements.

Below is a listing of key milestones and important dates for the CZC project:

May 16, 2017 2035 General Plan Approved May 1, 2018 Interim Zoning Ordinance Approved August 20, 2019 Lisa Wise Consulting (LWC) was selected to prepare the Code update.

October 2019 Stakeholder Interviews December 17, 2019 Joint PC and CC Workshop December 2019 Recommendations Memo April 7, 2020 Interim Zoning Ordinance Updated March 1, 2022 City Council Update Report March 17, 2022 Admin Draft Review and recommendation for a hybrid code September 2022 Updated Admin Draft Code September 2022 – July 2023 Staff Review of CZC Drafts March 21, 2023 6th Cycle Housing Element Adopted with program requirements for specific code updates
Discussion:

Relationship Between General Plan and Zoning Code
The General Plan outlines a vision for Woodland’s long term physical and economic development and community enhancement. It also provides goals and policies that will allow this vision to be accomplished. The General Plan, inclusive of the Housing Element, provides the basis for establishing priorities for implementing plans and programs, such as the Zoning Ordinance. It sets broad general land use locations and densities and intensity for development. Residential development capacity is usually provided as density of development, expressed as dwelling units per acre (du/ac), whereas non-residential development capacity is provided as intensity of development, expressed as floor area ratio (FAR).

The Zoning Ordinance is one of the most important tools for implementing the General Plan. While the General Plan provides broad land use classifications, zoning is more specific and may allow multiple zones per single general plan land use category as long as the intensity and density of development are consistent with the General Plan. Zoning translates general policies into more specific regulations and standards.

For the period immediately following adoption of the General Plan, the city adopted a stand-alone Interim Zoning Ordinance (IZO) to address areas of land use inconsistency between the newly adopted General Plan and Zoning for the commercial, industrial and mixed-use zones. The IZO incorporates new standards and practices that have guided much of the new development that has occurred since 2018. The IZO has generally been considered successful and the CZC has built upon the best elements and lessons learned through use of the IZO.

Legislative Updates and Requirements
A critical purpose for the update is to ensure that the CZC addresses the numerous legislative updates and requirements. Since 2017, the state has passed a significant amount of legislation relating to housing with a primary emphasis on streamlining the production of new housing and removing barriers. The grants from HCD that have assisted in funding the CZC update require the new code to utilize objective design standards and minimize the review process for housing projects.

Objective standards have also been provided for commercial, mixed use and industrial developments as well.

In addition to housing, legislative updates have affected other areas of the code. As example, cities are limited in the regulation of content for signs. Below are summarized some of the most critical updates affecting the Code update:
• SB330 (Housing Crisis Act of 2019) and SB 8 (2021), which prohibits the City from adopting new non-objective standards for residential or residential mixed-use projects; from reducing allowed housing capacity through regulatory or administrative barriers; and from denying residential or residential mixed-use projects based on subjective standards. • AB 2011 (Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022), which allows housing development in areas currently zoned for parking, retail, or office buildings and exempts some projects from local approval processes and CEQA review. • SB 6 (Middle Class Housing Act of 2022), which allows residential uses on commercially zoned property without requiring rezoning if they meet or exceed the default density under Housing Element law for the jurisdiction.
• AB 2162 (2018), which requires that supportive housing be permitted by-right in zones where multifamily and mixed-use development is permitted.
• AB 2345, (2020), which amends the Density Bonus law to expand incentives for projects with affordable and senior housing components, including reduced maximum parking requirements. • Reed v. Town of Gilbert (2015), which affirmed that signs regulations must be content-neutral.

The City has already prepared zoning updates where legislative changes require limited timeframes for compliance, such as accessory dwelling units, SB9 (allowing additional units in single family zones), and emergency shelters.

Guiding Principles and Objectives for the Comprehensive Code Update:

The following are the key guiding principles and objectives for the CZC update:

1. Implement the 2035 General Plan and the 2021-2029 Housing Element.

2. Ensure compliance with state and federal requirements.

3. Build upon the Interim Zoning Ordinance (IZO). Utilize lessons learned to strengthen, clarify, and expand the Comprehensive code.

4. Ensure that the code is clear, concise, intuitive, and easy to use by the community, businesses, and development partners.

5. Provide clear decision protocols and a streamlined review process.

6. Allow increased intensity of development and compact form while retaining the character and scale of the community’s neighborhoods.

7. Facilitate increased housing opportunities and variety. Encourage Multi-family, Missing Middle, and Lifestyle Housing

8. Address sustainability concerns including the heat island effect. Facilitate appropriate and increased tree planting and preservation.

9. Respect the existing community fabric and groundwork while reflecting current best practices in evaluation of uses, activities, and development patterns.

10. Incorporate historic and downtown design requirements, thereby incorporating the Downtown Specific Plan into the code.

11. Address citywide and special case situations that occur repeatedly.

12. Provide clear standards and requirements, but incorporate flexibility in order to adapt to new or unusual circumstances.

13. Add to the economic vitality of Woodland and allow appropriate adaptive reuse and reinvestment of properties.

14. Encourage mixed-use nodes, districts and corridors. Allow the integration of commercial uses within residential districts as well as residential into commercial districts.

Generally, the public, residents, and prospective developers value three central qualities in any zoning code: 1) certainty in the requirements and structure of the review process, 2) built-in flexibility to adjust development standards to the needs of individual projects, and 3) opportunities to request relief from requirements that constitute a substantial burden.

Comprehensive Code Features
The following summarizes key features incorporated into the draft Code:

1. Provides graphic examples and generalized tables to present information whenever possible.

2. Provides “objective design standards” for all districts.

3. Provides performance standards to address sensitive adjacency issues such as odors, dust, and contamination.

4. Updates parking standards and reduces overly burdensome requirements.

5. Continues to accommodate and incentivize food and agricultural industries where appropriate.

6. Updates and clarifies the non-conforming use standards.

7. Updates the allowed land use table to incentivize desired uses.

8. Updates standards that apply to all properties, such as fencing, outdoor storage, landscaping, parking, and lighting.

9. Provides design standards and criteria that apply to specific uses such as alcohol, auto services, bed and breakfast, bee keeping, emergency shelters, mobile vendors, and temporary uses, etc.

10. Identifies height, setbacks, coverage, and other development standards that apply to each district.

11. Revises sign standards to comply with legislative requirements to be content neutral.

12. Provides an Administration section that clearly describes and outlines all permit and entitlement review requirements.

13. Clarifies public notice procedures.

14. Clarifies roles and responsibilities for all recommending and approving bodies.

15. Provides Rules of Measurement.

16. Provides clear understandable procedures for exceptions from standards and when allowed.

17. Provides a comprehensive list of definitions of terms and uses.

Zoning and General Plan Map
In addition to text amendments, there are suggested amendments to the Zoning Map. Some of the map changes identified will require amendment to the General Plan (GP) land use map as well. However, in several instances, the existing zoning provides a higher zone category than the General Plan and will remain at the higher zone category:

• Add back in areas of Low Medium Density (R-LM) and Medium Density (R-M) residential zones that were in place in the 2002 General Plan and as studied in the 2035 General Plan EIR. (GP and Zone change)
• Add some areas of Low Medium (R-LM) to Medium Residential (RM) where the area would support such change, such as on major corridors or where existing development exceeds lower density.
• Replace Community Commercial (CC) sites along corridors with the Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)

designation, thereby allowing a greater mix of uses including residential development. (GP and Zone change)
• Change Community Commercial (CC) to Community Commercial Mixed Use (CCMU) and allow residential development in the zone. (GP and Zone change) • Revise the Light Industrial (IF) zone to the south side of the I-5 freeway and add General Industrial (IG) north of the I5 freeway. (GP and Zone change) • Identify a separate Corridor Mixed Use zone for the Armfield neighborhood (CMU-A). (Zone change)
• Update the Downtown districts by consolidating the existing five districts with subcategories into four clearly defined zones (DX-1 – 4). (Zone change)
• Modify the (Regional Commercial (RC) zone at the north end of East Street to Regional Commercial Flex (RCF) (Zone change)

A copy of the Draft Comprehensive Zoning Map is attached to the report as well as a second map which highlights areas where zone changes are proposed. Additional detailed information regarding the zone changes will be provided on the CZC web page and discussed in future workshops. Below are images from the CZC Zoning Map to illustrate the proposed zones. A third map is attached which illustrates areas on the General Plan map that will require amendment.

Code Framework
The draft Comprehensive Zoning code was developed over the past three plus years based on requirements of State law, review of best practices, and consideration of objectives for the code. The CZC has five divisions or sections as described below:

Format and Organization
Division 1: General Provisions
Division 2: Districts and Regulations
Division 3: Citywide Standards
Division 4: Administration and Procedures
Division 5: Definitions of Terms and Uses

Division 1 – General Provisions:

This Division sets the underlying purpose and effect of the Zoning Code and outlines the authority for the Code and relationship to the General Plan. This Division includes a section that discusses rules for interpretation and rules of measurement. It also references and establishes the zoning map, other relevant maps, and districts.

Division 2 – Districts and Regulations
Division 2 identifies the purpose and applicability of each zone. The district provides the use regulations, development standards and supplemental regulations. This is where the objective standards for building and site design are provided.

Division 3 – Citywide Standards
Division 3 provides citywide standards in two sections, those that apply generally and also those that only apply to specific uses or specific activities.
• Chapter 17.64: General Site Standards. This chapter provides standards that apply generally to

all properties and include things like accessory structures, fences, landscaping, parking, lighting, screening, signs, performance standards, non-conforming provisions, and flood management provisions.

• Chapter 17.84: Standards for Specific Uses and Activities. This chapter applies to specific uses regardless of zone. Examples include accessory dwelling units, alcoholic beverage sales, automobile sales and service use, bed and breakfast, day care centers, mobile home parks/RV/Trailer Parks and manufactured homes, mobile vendors, emergency shelters, and temporary uses.

Division 4 – Administration and Procedures
Division 4 identifies all planning authorities and reviews authorization. It provides all of the common procedures that are required as part of any type of review for purposes of zoning. The division outlines all of the planning permits and approvals that are possible and establishes a new three- tiered Development Review process to replace the existing ZAP Tier 2 and Design Review processes. There are also procedures outlined for reviewing actions involving general plan or zoning amendments, establishment of specific plans or precise plans, as well as enforcement.

Division 5 – Definitions of Terms and Uses.

Division 5 provides a comprehensive set of definitions of the terms used in the code and also provides a definition for all permitted, conditionally permitted and in some cases non-permitted uses.

Code Highlights and Key Changes
The CZC has been re-written with each and every standard and requirement evaluated in view of best practices and through a frame of the City’s development goals as identified in the General Plan, past experience, experience in implementing the Interim Zoning Ordinance, and desired economic development path. Development standards and design standards were assessed, taking into consideration limited resources, such as land and water, while also taking into account environmental and climate considerations, as well as housing and jobs, in order to allow for a resilient and prepared community to face 2050 and beyond. Below is a summary of some of the key highlights and changes in the CZC:

• Increase housing opportunities.
o Ensure consistency with the Housing Element regarding identified sites and densities. o Add back in the Low Medium Zone to further facilitate missing middle housing. The 1996 and 2002 General Plans had a land use called Medium Low Density Residential (MLDR) with a density between Low and Medium zones. These areas are shown as a duplex zone (R2) on the existing zoning map. The General Plan EIR studied all of these areas as Medium density, but they were approved as Low density in 2017.
o Ensure consistency between the General Plan and zoning. On some parcels the zoning shows Multi-family (RM) where the General Plan shows Low density (LD). Due to SB 330, sites may not be downzoned from how they were shown as of January 1, 2018. o Transition the Community Commercial zone to a mixed-use zone (CCMU) which allows multi- family residential.
o Expand CMU zones along the West Main Street corridor. • Incorporate historical standards and the updated Downtown zones as a new section in the code. • Retained the Neighborhood Preservation (NP) zone.
• Add small lot subdivision development standards to provide flexibility for infill residential development.
• Provide allowance for limited retail uses in specific residential locations and situations • Update building and site design standards for all zones • Add a new chapter for screening and outdoor storage standards • Update parking, lighting and landscaping sections.

• Increase development intensity standards for the Community Commercial Mixed Use (CCMU), Regional Commercial (RC), Regional Commercial Flex (RCF), Industrial Flex (IF) and Industrial General (IG) zones to allow appropriate intensity of development. Encourages more efficient use of limited land resources.
• Carry forward the standards of the General Plan Light Industrial Flex (LIF) Overlay into new base zone standards.

Community Outreach
All meetings will be recorded and posted on the Comprehensive Zoning Code web page to allow members of the public the ability to view all presentations and discussions. The city will offer a range of meeting types, from pre-recorded to virtual to in person. In the past, the city has found that virtual meetings tend to be very well attended and provide an alternative option for the public to gain access to meetings. In-person meetings will be held at the City of Woodland Council Chambers, located at 300 First Street. More information regarding meeting times will be provided. Outreach will be conducted using notices in the newspaper, direct mailings, email to identified interested parties, and various forms of social media, including press releases, notices to list-serve groups, and posting on the city’s web page.

Proposed Public Meeting Schedule:

Meetings may be subject to change, so please continue to check the CZC web site for up-to-date information.

• September 19, 2023 – Release of Draft Code and Information Update to City Council • September 21, 2023 – Release of Draft Code and Information Update to Planning Commission • September 26, 2023 – Comprehensive Code Detailed Overview (Recorded and posted) • October 5, 2023- Planning Commission meeting to review new standards and key discussion or decision points
• October 18, 2023 – Workshop to review commercial and mixed-use standards; • October 19, 2023 – Planning Commission meeting to review regulations and standards related to housing development
• October 24, 2023 – Workshop to review industrial and new development standards (mid-day meeting); and
• October 25, 2023 – Workshop to review downtown and historical related development standards (morning meeting).
• November 7, 2023 – City Council meeting to review all comments and proposed changes. • December 7, 2023 – Planning Commission hearing to review and provide a recommendation. • December 19, 2023 – City Council adoption hearing.

The public review draft will be released for public review and comment from September 19, 2023 through October 27. After which all comments will be evaluated and suggested changes provided in an errata format to be presented to the City Council for final consideration before preparing a final draft for adoption. However, public comment may continue to be provided up until final adoption.

The city invites all interested residents to attend the scheduled community events and express opinions. Community members may also provide comments regarding the Comprehensive Zoning Code update to the following email:
[email protected]

The Zoning Code is considered a living document and represents the goals and policies of the General Plan as translated into regulatory requirements. It is anticipated that as the city begins to actively utilize the code, there may be fine tuning required moving forward.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive a presentation on the Public Review Draft of the Comprehensive Zoning Code and an outline of the public review process.

Prepared by: Cindy A. Norris, Principal Planner

Reviewed by: Brent Meyer, Community Development Director / City Engineer

Attachments:

1. CZC Cover and Table of Contents

2. CZC Division I-General Provisions

3. CZC Division II-Zone Regulations

4. CZC Division III-Citywide Standards

5. CZC Division IV-Administration & Procedures

6. CZC Division V-Definitions

7. Draft Comprehensive Zoning Code Map

8. Proposed Zone Changes on the Draft Comprehensive Code Map

9. Proposed Zone Changes that Require General Plan Amendment 10 .

Current Zoning Map with Zone Changes Shown

Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc.

City of Woodland Comprehensive Zoning Code Update
PRD Comment Tracker, Updated 11/28/23
Topic Reference/Quote Comment Source of Comment Date Repercussions/ Impact City Response LWC Response
Guiding Principles and
Objectives for the
Comprehensive Code
Update
Goal No. 6 (from ppt):
"Allow increased intensity
of development and
compact form while
retaining the character
and scale of the
community’s
neighborhoods."
To me this language is code for exercising "white privilege" and minimizing minority home ownership.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023
This objective statement is not specifically included in the Zoning Code, but provided in the overview presentation.  It is intended as a summary statement combing a variety of adopted General Plan policies and goals that speak to increasing density and promoting infill development within the city while still being sensitive to existing neighborhood scale and contexts.  There are appropriate design and development regulations that allow increased density and infill development within existing neighborhoods while still being sensitive to existing, adjacent properties and homes.  It is not intended as an exclusionary statement.

These goals were articulated by City staff
and do not appear in the draft Code
Guiding Principles and
Objectives for the
Comprehensive Code
Update
Goal No. 8 (from ppt):
"Address sustainability
concerns including the
heat island effect.

Facilitate appropriate and
increased tree planting
and preservation."
To me no amount of tree planting and preservation will diminish the rapidity of climate change. Tree planting is to be encouraged, yes, but there also needs to be emphasis on use of recycled materials, home- based energy generation and recycling of water as well as low-water landscape design.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023
This objective statement is not specifically included in the Zoning Code, but provided in the overview presentation.  The “purpose statement” included in the Zoning Code reads as follows:  Incorporate sustainability practices and ensure climate resiliency.  Staff will look at ways to incorporate additional sustainable design and site planning recommendations in the Code update.

These goals were articulated by City staff
and do not appear in the draft Code
Guiding Principles and
Objectives for the
Comprehensive Code
Update
Goal No. 9 (from ppt):
"Respect the existing
community fabric and
groundwork while
reflecting current best
practices in evaluation of
uses, activities, and
development patterns."
I have no specific problem with this but what is a true definition of “existing community fabric”? That’s vague and also again, relates to No. 6, in that it promotes white homeownership and minimizes minority home ownership.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023
Please see prior response to the first statement.  This objective statement is not specifically included in the Zoning Code, but provided in the overview presentation.  Part of the existing community fabric is our diverse community, in all respects, age, ethnicity, as well as architecture and neighborhood characteristics which vary throughout the city.  “Current best practices” acknowledge that we can provide more opportunities for diverse housing types, densities, and neighborhoods, uses, etc. while still being sensitive to established neighbor characteristics.

These goals were articulated by City staff
and do not appear in the draft Code
Guiding Principles and
Objectives for the
Comprehensive Code
Update
Goal No. 10 (from ppt):
"Encourage mixed-use
nodes, districts and
corridors. Allow the
integration of commercial
uses within residential
districts as well as
residential into
commercial districts."
I have no problem with the overall intent of this statement. However, I believe it needs to include some aspect governing safety for residential homeowners. Putting a “commercial use” microchip manufacturer within a residential zone might look good, but that manufacturer is going to generate increased traffic, water use and necessitate more power, which means more power lines, etc.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023
Yes, staff is in agreement. There are a number of operational and performance standards provided in the Code to ensure the safety of and to minimize impacts to neighboring properties.  See Division III, Section

17.84.200.

These goals were articulated by City staff
and do not appear in the draft Code
Citywide Standards
Goal No. 8 (from ppt):
"Updates the standards
that apply to all
properties, such as
fencing, outdoor storage,
landscaping, parking, and
lighting."
I have no specific objections except for the use of the word “fencing,” which can mean many things. Californians, for example, prefer redwood fencing to maintain backyard privacy. However, the city should also encourage cyclone fencing in smaller neighborhoods to promote community.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023
Front yard fencing guidelines encourage lower and more transparent fence styles to promote community.  Chain link and cyclone fencing is not prefered in residential areas.

These goals were articulated by City staff
and do not appear in the draft Code

Use-Specific Design
Standards
Gaol No. 9 (from ppt):
"Provides design
standards and criteria
that apply to specific uses
such as alcohol, auto
services, bed and
breakfast, bee keeping,
emergency shelters,
mobile vendors, and
temporary uses, etc. 10.

Identifies height,
setbacks, coverage, and
other development
standards that apply to
each district."
I have no problem with most of this, but why the necessity to include “bee keeping?” I would speculate there are more people keeping chickens in their backyards than bees or rabbits? Shouldn’t they be included as well? Perhaps something like, “beekeeping, raising chickens and other small-scale, backyard activities for fun, personal use and modest revenue.” How detailed do we want to be? All this being said, I am reading Page 156 and am curious why the limitations on backyard poultry, rabbits, etc. I get the “crowing” part, but am still confused why bees are better than small animals.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023
This code statement is not specifically included in the Zoning Code, but provided in the overview presentation as a means of showing the variety of “special uses” considered in the Code.  Domestic Animal Keeping is regulated by the City’s Municipal Code but outside of the Zoning Code specifically and is primarily concerned with health or nuisance problems associated with keeping large animals in a residential area or too many small animals at one property in the city.  A household can keep a certain number of chickens, pigeons, rabbits, etc. at their home per the code.  See Title 9 of the Municipal Code.

These goals were articulated by City staff
and do not appear in the draft Code
"...to face 2050 and beyond"
"Development standards
and design standards
were assessed, taking into
consideration limited
resources, such as land
and water, while also
taking into account
environmental and
climate considerations, as
well as housing and jobs,
in order to allow for a
resilient and prepared
community to face 2050
and beyond."
The phrase “to face 2050 and beyond” is vague. I would recommend modifying it to read: “…community through the year 2050 and beyond.” Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023
This statement is not specifically included in the Zoning Code, but provided in the overview presentation to reflect the many considerations involved with the code update.  The presentation will be updated to reflect the recommended language.

This is not Code text, no change needed
Entitlement Review Process
"Update entitlement
review processes to
provide clear direction as
well as to allow
streamlined review for
projects that are
compliant with objective
standards."
Please explain what is “entitlement review process” for greater clarity. Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim Smith 10/5/2023 The permitting process through the Planning project review. This is not Code text, no change needed ?
"Reflects the existing
regional commercial wave
park use."
I have no issue with this but shouldn't there be some way of recognizing that someone else may want to build a 'wave park'?" Designating a specific site seems to imply that there is no further room for a competitive facility.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023
The zoning for Velocity Island is recommended to change to Regional Commercial which better reflects the on-the-ground use of the property.  A new wave park or other large scale outdoor recreational facility can be proposed in any Regional Commercial zone…and would be welcomed! This is not Code text, no change needed
Zoning Map n/a
Neighborhood Preservation Zone seems very limited and could have to change should the city grow larger. Should it be expanded farther west beyond West Street?
Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023 Map only
The zone generally reflects areas adjacent to the Historic Downtown District with an abundance of historic homes and unique architectural styles.  Yes, at some point, the NP zone could expand.

No change
Zoning Map n/a
South of Maxwell Avenue to E. Gibson Road and south of East Gibson Road to the Heritage Parkway extension are shown as “white” or seemingly outside the city limits. Don’t they fall under the Urban Limit Line? Shouldn’t this area be identified as being off limits for building? What I’m concerned about is if these areas will at some point in the future be included as part of the Southeast Area Development Area, which would allow single- family residences in a flood zone.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023
This area is located within the ULL, but currently outside of the city limits.

The area will need to be annexed into the city prior to development.  The General Plan designates this area as Corridor Mixed Use and Business Park.

Various flood modeling and elevation requirements would be required of any new development in a flood plain.

Outside of City Limits, also exlcuded in City's
current Zoning Map. Should these areas be
aneexed, they would be added to the zoning
map.

Zoning Map n/a
Division II: “Districts and Regulations” is shown in the Zoning Guide but it
is listed as “Zone Regulations” in the actual document. This is confusing.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023 Unclear about the refrence to "Zoning Guide" This is not code text, no change needed Zoning Map n/a Yolo County Fairgrounds is shown as “Residential Low” it should be rezoned to be state land.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023 Map only Thank you, this will be corrected. Agree Zoning Map n/a County Fair Mall acreage is shown as “Community Commercial Mixed Use.” I would prefer it be rezoned to “Corridor Mixed-Use Flex.” Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023
The County Fair Mall site is zoned Corridor Mixed Use-East St which allows a mix of residential and commercial.  Unclear what Flex would allow.  A rezone can be considered at a future time should an applicant submit a request to allow increased intensity of development.  A CEQA review would be required.

Per GP
Zoning Map n/a
Considering that the Zoning Code is looking out to 2050 and beyond, shouldn’t the new Woodland Research and Technology Park be included in this document? Or is the zoning for that area already part of this revised document?
Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 5, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/5/2023 Once the WRTP is annexed (in early 2024), the zoning established by the Specific Plan will be added to the Citywide Zoning Map. Outside of City limit and scope of Code Residential Lot Size n/a
I have no specific comments other than the lot sizes seem too large for today’s generation. I don’t want to be like one of my fellow commissioners and rewrite lot sizes, but I do think that that large front- or backyards are unnecessary.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023 Development and
design standards
The proposed densities for each residential zone, with the exception of R- LM described below, are consistent with the General Plan land use designations established in the 2035 General Plan Update.  The Zoning Code is a tool to implement General Plan policy and is therefore required to be consistent.

Due to recent housing legislation, the proposed R-LM zoned areas (currently zoned Duplex Residential or “R2”) cannot be downzoned, meaning densities cannot decrease.  In this case the General Plan land use designations will need to be amended to return to Medium Density Residential in these areas, as it once was.

Proposed R-L zoning (1-8 dwelling units per acre) covers existing, established neighborhoods.  Not greenfield areas, which are either governed by existing Specific Plans (ie. Woodland Research and Technology Park) or will be governed by future Master or Specific Plans where higher densities will likely be desired and can be adequately planned for in terms of neighborhood design, infrastructure, etc.

Higher density (20+ du/ac) are permitted throughout the downtown DX zones and all along Main Street and East Street.  Medium Density (8.1 to

19.9 du/ac) zoning is proposed is several areas proximate to these corridors.  There are many opportunities for increased residential density development in the city in the Downtown, along commercial corridors and within transition areas between major corridors and existing established neighborhoods without completely doing away with established lower density neighborhoods where infrastructure to support increased traffic and intensity of development may not be available.

Regarding setbacks, here again, the 20-foot front yard setback generally reflects existing neighborhood development patterns.  If the Commission would like to collectively propose reduced setbacks whereby someone could construct a addition to their house in the front yard for instance, staff is open to that discussion.  Side setbacks require minimal 5-foot separation between the home and the property line.  ADU’s and smaller accessory structures are permitted with lesser setbacks.  Staff have added an allowance for a front porch to have a reduced setback (closer to the street).

Residential Zones/Zoning
Regulations n/a
I think there needs to be more flexibility in the number of lots per acre to provide for a greater mix of housing sizes within a given area. My issue, I think, is that you’re allowing 8 units an acre under low-density residential and this increases housing costs. My personal preference (given the success of the David Snow developments) is that “Low- Density Residential” should be between 20 and 25 units an acre (although this may be too much). Given that you also have Residential Low-Medium and Residential Medium zones, perhaps forgo the entire concept of Low-Density Residential. However, given there is so little low- density single-family residential remaining within the city the zoning area I don’t know how you could add any additional “higher density” residential.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023
Development and
design standards;
Potential GP
amendment
The density ranges generally implement the
Land Use Element of the General Plan.

Missing Middle Housing n/a
I do, however, feel the County Fair Mall site should be designated as a special area of some type to encourage Missing Middle Housing. I note that it is designated Mixed Use under the new zoning map and I think that’s a good thing, but I think the city should work on some incentive program that favors housing over commercial.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023 Map; Potential
GP amendment Outside of City limit and scope of Code
Residential Setbacks n/a
Regarding setbacks: I think given the changing nature of families, which are smaller, the requirement that a front-yard and side-yard setbacks are excessive. It appears that in general you want each home to have 20 feet of front-yard space, probably for trees, etc. But I think that’s too much for a single-family home in a low-density residential area. I don’t see too many people using their front yards these days, other than for gardens and California landscaping, which minimizes the use of trees and instead focuses on pollinators and minimizes the use of grass.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023 Development and
design standards
Is there broad support for this comment?
See change re: porch projections.

Examples/Compliment n/a I do like the Downtown designations of DX-1, DX-2, DX-3 and DX-4. I think they are very well thought out and work well.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023
General Site Standards
"A Building Permit is
required for decks over
30 inches in height"
Why "over 30 inches" in height? Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim Smith 10/18/2023
At a certain height (over 30 inches), they need inspection to prevent possible injury.  The Building Code requires a permit and handrails for decks over 30”
This is typical and consistent with Building
Code
General Site Standards "Appurtenant"
One definition of “appurtenant” is accessory, but you’ve already used accessory in the sentence. Suggest word “adjacent” or put Appurtenant in the definitions section.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023 Include a definiton for appurtenant.

General Site Standards 17.64.030.J.B - "Minimum
maintenance" What does "minimum maintenance" mean? Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim Smith 10/18/2023
This is in reference to wall materials that they shall be constructed of brick, concrete, or decorative masonry material. "The wall surface shall be graffiti resistant and require minimum maintenance".   The intent is to attempt to explain that wall materials used shall be durable, graffiti resistant and not require a great deal of on-going maintenance.  (This can be restated if needed for explanatory purposes)
General Site Standards "Water efficient plants"
Do the “water efficient plants,” indeed, does water use in the Zoning document comply with the new state standards that call for a 12% reduction of water use in Woodland by 2035, from 232 gallons per day (used in 2020)? I presume so, but perhaps there should be a statement to this effect?
Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023 Text will refer back to state requirements. Section 17.64.040.H identifies what is meant by "water efficient plants."
General Site Standards "California landscaping"
Trees. I’m not arguing against trees, but it seems to me the protocols you are setting up are not consistent with “California landscaping,” which could be more low-lying, low-water-use shrubs and pollinating plants other than trees. Perhaps a statement to the effect, that property owners who want to landscape without trees, should (or will) make a contribution for tree planting at a public facility as you have elsewhere in this section? It also seems you’re adding to the overall cost of a home when you are requiring “tree minimums.”
Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023
The Landscape Chapter has been enhanced in order to provide additional shade planting requirements to address heat island concerns consistent with the Climate Action Plan.  City procedures already provide for the possibility of in-lieu payment for trees in some circumstances.

General Site Standards
“Pedestrian Scale
Lighting. Pedestrian-
scaled lighting, less than
15-feet in height, shall be
used to illuminate areas
used for pedestrian
circulation. Bollards may
be used as well.”
To my knowledge Bollards don’t emit light. I don’t have objection to their use, but I’m wondering why they are showing up under the “lighting” section.”
Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023 Some bollards do emit light and are often used along pathways. Some bollards are designed to illuminate.

General Site Standards
“Inoperable Vehicles. In
addition to the standards
of Woodland Municipal
Code Section 9.04.030,
Acts Constituting a
Nuisance, the following
standards apply to
inoperable vehicles. 1.

Residential Districts.

Inoperable vehicles in
residential districts shall
not be visible from the
public right-of-way.

Inoperable vehicles may
only be stored on non-
permeable surfaces in
residential garages, or
rear or side yards.

Inoperable vehicles shall
be limited to one per lot."
Can a few words be added after “residential garages” to the effect of “or permanent, enclosed structure”? My point being that not all residences need have garages in the future.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023
If there is no garage at the front of the yard in which to store the vehicle in an enclosed area, the inoperable vehicle will have to be stored on a side or rear yard or in another location.

OK as is

General Site Standards Community Gardens
Community Gardens. I think this is a wonderful idea. But you have a problem in that you don’t specify where community gardens can occur.

And based on your residential zoning standards you don’t allow for adequate space to provide for a community garden. Low-density residential, as well as medium- and higher- density residential sites are all precluded because you provide for setbacks and other property geared toward housing and landscaping. Unless you designate space in a new development for a community garden, I don’t see how you’ll have any incentive to have a garden constructed. I don’t know if this is possible, but perhaps a section of a community park can be given over to a community garden. I’m specifically thinking of the new southeast area, where there are some great parks, but they all seem very large.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023
Community gardens may be considered in many zones with a Zoning Administrator permit, as identified in the Use Table.  The criteria provided in the Citywide standards, Division III, is intended to provide additional clarifying standards, including operational requirements, for uses listed in the use table.  There are no set setbacks identified for the garden use itself, other than for structures that may be proposed to be constructed.

In the R-L, N-P, and R-LM districts, a
community garden is allowed as a primary
use (not accessory).

In the R-M and R-H, it is allowed as
accessory only.

In all cases, Sec. 17.84.130 applies and
addresses the commenter's concerns
General Site Standards Hookah Lounges
I think this shows innovative thinking on the city’s park. One recommendation, however, is to add “cigar lounge” as part of the language since there is an established audience for “cigar smoking” within Yolo County.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023
Div II use tables;
Section 17.84.350
Smoke Shops; Ch

17.144
Definitions of
Uses
Not every use can be provided in the use table.  Section 17.96.040 allows the Director to make an interpretation regarding similar uses.  Note: The City Council has passed several anti-smoking ordinances and it is not a use that is encouraged.

General Site Standards Language Consistency Regarding live/work units, simply make sure you're consistent with "live/work" vs. "live-work".

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023 Noted OK
General Site Standards Mobile Vendors during
Special Events
Regarding “mobile vendors.” No problems with the limitations but there’s no provision for the use of “mobile vendors” during “special events.” I’m specifically thinking of the Woodland Farmer’s Market, as well as the First Sunday of the month closure of First Street between Bush and Main Street, both of which feature more than one mobile vendor. I don’t see any provision to allow those; other than the “special event” permit. So, perhaps this is enough.

Notes on Zoning Update for Oct. 18, 2023 from Jim
Smith 10/18/2023
Municipal Code Chapter 10.20 governs Mobile Vendors and Peddlers.  The standards provided in the zoning code respond to the requirement in WMC section 10.20.060A.2 – that as part of the Mobile Vendor Permit that the vehicle storage and location comply with applicable zoning regulations and other codes.

Section 10.20.120 provides an exemption for a mobile vendor permit if it is parked in conjunction with a permitted temporary outdoor use permit as allowed as a Temporary Outdoor Use (private property) or with a Special Events permit (public property).

We will ensure that the Temporary Use section refence is updated in Section 10.20.120
This is not a Zoning issue, since these
vendors operate in the right-of-way.

Meeting Notification/Flyer n/a Send notifications out earlier. Flyers should be clear and descriptive. Nancy Kaufman, email 10/17/2023 Noted This is not Code text, no change needed Interactive PDF n/a Online documents should have links to click from one section to another. Nancy Kaufman, email 10/17/2023 Noted This is not Code text, no change needed Viewing Changes between
New and Redacted
Ordinance/ Documents
n/a Show changes between current and redacted ordinance clearly. Nancy Kaufman, email 10/17/2023 Crosswalk Tables to show standards and use comparison.  It is not possible to prepare a redlined version because the new zoning code is a compilation from several documents (Zoning Code, Interm Zoning Code, Downtown Specific Plan, Community Design Standards) and incorporates many new standards.

This would be a significant effort, since the
Code includes elements of the exising Code,
the Community Design Standard, the IZO,
and new content. Out of LWC's scope.

Wheelchair Acessibility in
Newer Higher Density
Homes
n/a
Further, there should be an environmental analysis that addresses the impact on the disabled.  The newer townhouse developments going up are almost all inaccessible to persons in a wheelchair.  We specifically bought our home because it is accessible for our daughter.

Nancy Kaufman, email 10/17/2023
The CZC includes a chapter called "Reasonable Accomodation for Persons with Disabilities". 17.100.160.  New Universal Design Standards have been added to the code for single and multi-family housing projects, Chapter

17.56. This is a Building Code issue, not a CEQA
issue.

Code Interpretation n/a
Zoning code interpretations may take up too much of Staff's time. (Time spent handling long-range planning, subdivision/specific plans, and all other planning functions etc, vs. time spent interpreting zoning code on specific projects or for specific uses and permits.

Michael McLaughlin, email 10/13/2023
Staff have not been directed by City Council to analyze staff time spent on the variety of planning activities handled by the Division.  The new code inlcudes an extensive definitions section which will make a significant difference in the evaluation of proposed uses.  Additionally, objective standards provide clearly written requirements.  Interpretations may still be required in any situation in which individuals present creative ideas that may not have been previously considered.

Segregatory Land Use,
Zoning Map n/a
Current zoning and proposed zoning likely reinforce, rather than attempt to reverse, segregatory land use patterns of exclusion.

However that is difficult to show without some finer grained analysis of who lives where.

Michael McLaughlin, email 10/13/2023 Comment noted.

Springlake Specific Plan
Implications n/a
While there is a map showing the proposed implementation of the general plan land use designations, is there a map that shows how these general plan land use designations would map onto the Springlake Specific Plan? Because having an entire map that is separate makes it harder to see our "true" land uses across the entire City -- as we add specific plans its actually more difficult to visually understand residential and commercial densities.

Michael McLaughlin, email 10/13/2023 A map to this effect was prepared and shared at the last Planning Commission hearing. See GP Land Use map
Truck Advertising / Sign
Ordinance n/a Can we regulate trucks that have magnetic advertising on the side and park in Downtown or elsewhere Tania Garcia-Cadena (CC) 9/19/2023 Chapter 17.72 contains sign regulations.  Section 17.72.40.B.10 and C address signs on vehicles and a prohibition on mobile billboards.   Vehicles that are used for buisiness that may have magnetic signs on the exterior are excluded as long as they are operable and parked in a lawful manner.

Any commercial vehicle operating in the
right-of-way should be allowed to have signs
on it advertising the business it serves.

Section 17.72.040.B.10 provides the
standards for the parking of motor vehicles
that are purposefully parked to attract
attention, which is a different matter.

PC and CC Meetings n/a Should there be a joint PC/CC meeting? Vicky Fernandez (CC) 9/19/2023 Not proposed at this time.

RV Parking on Residential
Lots n/a Concern about new standards regarding RV parking on residential lots Seth Wurzel 9/19/2023 Subject to City Council direction.  Staff has not recieved direction at this time to modify the section. However, should direction be provided to modify the section, it is recommended that criteria be included to address that aspects of RV parking that create the most significant nuisance and aesthetic concerns, such as; illegal 2nd driveways, removing trees, impacting utilities, and impacting sight visibility.  If standards are imposed, provide a time period (1-year) before city begins any enforcement.

Pending direction from CC
Fourplexes Uses table Allow Fourplexes or four units on a lot city wide Michael McLaughlin (PC) 9/21/2023 Subject to City Council direction.  Considering allowing 4-plex in the table.

What design criteria and specific standards including parking. Pending direction from CC Commercial Uses as
Accessory Units Uses table Allow commercial uses as accessory units? Michael McLaughlin (PC) 9/21/2023 Code does allow multiple opportunities for commercial in residential zones (Home Occ, Live/work, Res Limited Retail).

Allowed as Home Occ, and also allowed as
part of Live/work projects.

Zoning Restricts Based on
Class and Racial Divisions n/a Repeal zoning; Zoning does not regulate health & safety but restricts based on class and racial divisions; Michael McLaughlin (PC) 9/21/2023 Comment noted. Inconsistent with project goals Zoning Map for Specific Plan
Areas n/a Would like to see the zoning map include zones for Specific Plans as well; Michael McLaughlin (PC) 9/21/2023
The General Plan land use map provides land uses for all areas within the City.  (See prior comment).  Areas under the perview of the CZC project are shown on the zoning map.

Speciifc Plans are shown on the Zoning map
Minimum Lot Coverage for
Small Lots Residential? Minimum lot coverage for small lot too high; allow smaller lot sizes Michael McLaughlin (PC) 9/21/2023 Lot coverage has already been increased in some instances.   Could consider specific exceptions for identified circumstances.  (As example, with small lot, lot coverage may be considered for the overall project rather than on individual lots).

Is there broad support for reduction of
minimum lot size for small lot projects? Not
at this time
County Fair Mall Density should the city allow higher densities at the County Fair Mall? Jim Smith (PC) 9/21/2023 The CMU E zone allow densities up to 40 du/ac.  Density may be higher with approved density bonus.  Proposal for generally increasing densities is a General Plan issue and outside the scope of this project.   May be considered at a later time.

Armfield Area Uses table Concern about Armfield neighborhood and private residential adjacency to existing light industrial and auto shop uses Jim Smith (PC) 9/21/2023 A new zone called CMU Armfield is proposed in which standards and uses are tailoered to the area in part based upon the Armfield/Lemen Ave Framework study
General Plan Amendment
Topics n/a
Was there a requirement for a garage for RV and boat storage? Jim Smith (PC) 9/21/2023 No requirement for a garage.  However, proposed language would require screening.

Precise Plan vs. Specific Plan Definitions Definition of Precise Plan vs Specific Plan Chris Holt (PC) 9/21/2023 A specific plan has a definition based on state requirements.  There are required analysis and freatures that must be included.  They often expensive and require a years long lead time to approval.  A Specific Plan often amends General Plan land uses and develops new zoning standards.

A Precise Plan is more of a master plan and would not necessarily include financing and other details inlcuded in a SP, but does allow evaluating zoning on a master plan level and setting future development criteria.

There may be associated GP and Zonign changes or not.

Include definitions for both terms in Div V.

Front Yard Setbacks for
Primary Residences
Residential Front Yard
setbacks
Suggests reducing the front yard setback from 20 feet for a primary residence.  Keep garage at 20, but move primary to 10 feet to allow for a larger front porch.

JD Trebec (PC) 9/21/2023 Table 17.64.060.C-
1 Allow for the potential for additional projection for porches Edit Table 17.64.060.C-1: Allowed Building
Projections into Required Setbacks to allow
porches, but no closer than 10 feet from
property line.

Link Error Section 17.84.360 17.84.360 wrong link Chris Holt (PC) 9/21/2023 Will review chapter refrences to ensure they are correct. Need clarification on this comment Renumber Pages n/a Renumber pages by Division to also identify the Division like II-1, III-3, etc. Chris Holt (PC) 9/21/2023 Agree OK
Zoning Administrator
Permits for Small Lots in RL
and NP Zones
n/a Use a ZAP for Small lot in RL and NP Chris Holt (PC) 9/21/2023 Agree OK Clarity on Maps at Parcel
Level Map The map is not clear regarding changes to the property at 917 Main Street, Woodland Ted Wilson, email 9/21/2023 City has provided a searchable GIS map to allow individuals to look up their property and see existing and proposed zoning.

City to clarify map and/or create GIS online
portal
Armfield Area n/a What does zoning update have to do with Armfield area? Richard Lakai, email 9/21/2023 Response provided to Mr. Sakai on 9.22.23.  Indicated that there is a proposed zone change from CMU-East to CMU - Armfield. None Cargo Containers as
Accessory Structures Accessory Structures Cargo containers in his front/side yard.  Code enforcement issue.  Why cant he have them and what will the new code require? Daryl Rung 10/5/2023 Currently handled as an "accessory structure'.  They are much taller than an allowed accessory building and larger.  Related to an active code enforcement case.

CMU-A Proposed Change What are the specific changes proposed with the new CMU-A zone Bobby Moore 10/5/2023 Crosswalk tables illustrate proposed modification to uses and standards.  As example, Lower bulding height, greater lot coverage allowance.

Densification Downtown
(General Plan) n/a Concern with densificaiton.  Why unlimited density in the Downtown? Dee Rosenberg 10/5/2023 Already in the GP Per GP Fencing and Vandalism n/a
Concern regarding the property at the NEC of East and Main and the homeless and vandalism.  Can they be allowed to put up temporary or permanent fencing around the site or a portion of the site.

Fred Lopez (PC) 10/5/2023
Fencing standards under reivew.   Chain link is currently prohibited, but it has been used.  Consideration to allow tubular steel fencing, pending determination on setback, height, etc..  At this time fencing over 3.5-feet should not be located at the front setback.

TBD
Commercial/Live-Work
Leasing/Selling 17.84 Live/Work
Existing wording in B.2 and B.3 "... allowing the commercial section to be independently leased out for limited use." seems to contradict existing wording in G "No portion of a live/work unit may be separately rented or sold as a commercial space for a person or persons not living on the premises ...". You are probably going to lease the commercial part to someone who doesn't live in the residential part, otherwise why would you enter into a lease.  The wording in G is ok for selling, but not for renting. The owner should be able to rent the commercial space to someone who is not a resident of the residential space.

Bruce Barton, email 10/18/2023 Provision G stands.

Urban Reserve Areas and
Undesignated Planning
Areas
Pg 210 - 17.84.360
Telecommunication
Facilities A.1.d. "Urban
reserve areas or
undesignated planning
areas"
Existing wording makes reference to "urban reserve areas or undesignated planning areas" but these areas are not identified on the "Identified Areas of Change on the Draft Comprehensive Zoning Map". I would argue that if these areas are outside the City Limits, they should not appear in the zoning code wording. If they are in the City Limits, they should appear on the map.
----Can I please get an answer to these 2 questions: Where are these areas? Are they within the Urban Limit Line but outside the City Limits? Bruce Barton, email 10/18/2023 No change - the term Urban Reserve was a land use provided in the prior general plan to describe lands that were outside city boundary.

Satellite Dishes

17.84.360
Telecommunication
Facilities (pg. 210, A.2.a.i)
Pg 210 - 17.84.360 Telecommunication Facilities A.2.a.i.

Existing wording "No more than one satellite dish exceeding 36 inches in diameter per parcel." is not suitable for duplexes. At least 2 dishes should be allowed.  I have seen many residences with multiple satellite services, so one could argue that each unit may require 2 dishes. It seems to me that 4 satellite dishes per parcel would be a better upper limit. Maybe the wording should mention duplexes explicitly.

Bruce Barton, email 10/18/2023 No change
Note, no one uses satelitte dishes over 36
inches on a residence any more - they are
smaller than that for residential use. Any
residence or duplex can have a dish for TV
or internet that is 36" or less in diameter.

Business Park Designation 2035 GP Map What happens to the "Business Park" designation in the General Plan Land Use - 2035 map (see the above link)? Bruce Barton, email 10/18/2023 Consideraiton to add pre-annexation zoning. This designation occurs only within the ULL - not the City limits
R-L Intent Statement for all
Residential Zones?

17.24.010 Low-Density
Residential (R-L) -- "The R-
L zone is intended to
accommodate primarily
low-density housing with
private yards and private
parking to ensure
adequate light, air,
privacy, and open space
for each dwelling ; to
provide space for
community facilities
needed to complement
urban residential areas
and for institutions which
require a residential
environment."
Noted by Commissioner McLaughlin, this statement really applies to all residential zones.  Remove here and add into the introductory statement instead?
Div II Staff Comments 11/1/2023
We advise keeping as-is, as private yards is
not the emphasis on some of the higher-
density residential zones.

Incorrect Graphic for
Required Building Location
Figure 17.32.030.C-1:

Required Building
Location
Graphic is incorrect.  It should show the closest building face at 10 feet, to match the intent of the language. Div II Staff Comments 11/1/2023 To be corrected To be corrected Fourplexes 17.56.030 Multi-Unit
Design Standards
Adding a separate buildign and design standard section pertaining to 4- plexes…in low density versus higher density zones. Div II Staff Comments 11/1/2023 TBD Need CC input on the types of tri- and four-
plex we might want to allow in the low-
density residential zones.

RV Parking on Residential
Lots

17.64.100.C.2 Residential
Zones -- "On a single
familysingle-family site
(RL, NP, RLM),
recreational vehicles shall
be parked on a  non-
permeable surface in a
fenced area, or in the rear
yard or side yard,
screened by a wall or
solid fence not less than
six feet in height. (may
not be parked in RM or
RH, CMU, CCMU zones)"
May need to consider revised requirements:
⦁RV may only be parked in the RL, NP, RLM zones, if required conditions can be met.  Otherwise, an RV shall be stored off site. ⦁Only one RV may be parked on a non-permeable surface, typically in a driveway, and may only be accessed by an approved driveway approach (encroachment permit).
⦁RV may not be stored in a manner so that they are highly visible, such as parallel to a house front.
⦁RV must be a parked a minimum of 5 feet back of a sidewalk in order to allow adequate sight visibility.
⦁Access to RV parking shall not require driving over a curb or utility infrastructure and shall not require the removal of any required street trees.
⦁Second driveways shall only be allowed in accordance with Section……..

Div III Staff Comments 11/1/2023 TBD Need CC input regarding standards.

Heat Areas Without Shade n/a How does the code address heat areas / areas without shade? Comments from the Sustainability Committee 11/7/2023 See Purpose section of the code for overarching statement in support of sustainability and climate resiliency.

Chapter 17.56.010 (B) addresses shade and cooling requirements for new development.

Chapter 17.64.040 (I) addresses shade requirements for landscaped areas.

Shade requirements have been extensively expanded and cover areas other than parking lots.

Agree

Adaptive Reuse
encouraged? n/a Does (the Code) encourage "adaptive reuse" of buildings into housing / mixed use? Comments from the Sustainability Committee 11/7/2023 The CZC does not specifically address adaptive reuse in the general city as a pro/con.  However, adaptive re-use has been and will continue to be allowed, subject to any Building Code requirements that may arise due to a change in occupancy classification.

Chapters 17.56.050 and 17.56.060 provide design criteria to address the preservation, restoration, or renovation of historic and non-historic buildings in the Downtown.

Agree
Corner Stores Encouraged? n/a Does (the Code) allow for/encourage "corner stores"? Comments from the Sustainability Committee 11/7/2023 The CZC provides a number of means by which to allow a mix of uses, including allowing commercial in residential zones.
---Live/Work is allowed in the R-LM, RM, and RH zones as well as in the Downtown and in all mixed-use zones.
---Residential Limited Retail uses are allowed with a Staff level Zoning Administrator Permit.  Specific criteria relating to this use are found in Chapter 17.84.230
---Home Occupation and cottage Food Operations are allowed in residential zones subject to criteria found in Chapter 17.84.200
---Combined commercial and residential uses are allowed in the Downtown and in all mixed-use zones.

Agree
Climate Friendly Bldg
Requirements n/a What are the "climate friendly" building requirements? (solar, gas stoves, etc.) Comments from the Sustainability Committee 11/7/2023 These types of requirements are found in the Green Code. Agree Residential Landscaping? n/a Are there any residential landscaping / gardening guidelines? Comments from the Sustainability Committee 11/7/2023 The CZC has a new extensively updated landscape Chapter 17.64.040, which addresses all areas that require landscaping including identifying areas to be landscaped and number of trees required.

New criteria are provided for Community Gardens in Chapter 17.84.130.

Restrictions regarding Turf are provided in Chapter 17.64.040(H) (14).

Chapter 17.64.040(H)(1)(f) states that garden areas and other areas dedicated to edible plants are considered landscaped areas and count toward required landscaping.

Note: separate informational handouts can be prepared in the future to provide additional guidance for residential landscaping/gardening.

Agree
Residential Pools n/a Does the code encourage / discourage residential pools? Comments from the Sustainability Committee 11/7/2023 The Code does not take a position regarding pools.  The code is regulatory only, and is not a policy document. Agree
Equity Section/Statement n/a Where can SAC members find an "equity section" or statement? Comments from the Sustainability Committee 11/7/2023 The purpose statement for the Zoning Code is provided in Chapter

17.04.030.  The overarching purpose of the Zoning Code is to implement the policies of the 2035 General Plan. The Zoning Code is a regulatory document not a policy document.

The General Plan, Chapter 6, Healthly Community Element includes Environmental Justice considerations as it relates to health.

Agree

Parcels Containing Two or
More Zones
Div. 1, pg. 5: Parcels
Containing Two or More
Zones.

1. For parcels containing
two or more zones, the
location of the zoning
district boundary shall be
determined by the
Director.

2. For parcels containing
two or more zones, the
applicable regulations for
each zone shall apply.

The government serves the people, not the other way around.

A parcel containing two or more zones should be annexed to the zone which allows the property owner to enjoy the highest and most use, as the property owner determines, based on advice by the Director.

Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
This is a broader policy discussion.  As with all comments, staff will review with the City Council to obtain direction regarding proposed amendments, community priorities, and staff time allocation.  Staff has been conducting the CZC update at the direction of the CC in order to bring the Zoning Code into conformance with the 2035 General Plan.  The Council has not provided direction nor additional funding allocation to embark on a larger General Plan amendment process.

The first part does allow some discretion on the part of the Director.

However, the  wholesale change suggested  in the comments  could pose a problem in situations where there are large parcels in which there may be significantly different zone categories identified in both the GP and Zoning (such as in SLC).

Agree with City's response
Determining Lot Coverage Div. 1, pg. 10:

Determining Lot Coverage
Remove the provisions of lot coverage (and private open space) entirely.
(AM):  Determining Lot Coverage. Lot coverage is the ratio of the total footprint area of all structures on a lot to the net lot area, typically expressed as a percentage. The footprints of all principal and accessory structures, including garages, carports, covered patios, and roofed porches, shall be summed in order to calculate lot coverage.

Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
This is a broader policy discussion.

There may be pros and cons to lot coverage and open space requirements.

There tends to be a reduction in both for higher intensity zones and urban environments. Benefits of lot coverage and open space include the provision of light and air, area for landscaping including trees,  percolation and drainage, parking arrangements, and utility installation on lots.

A competing goal to allowing intensification is to allow adequate ability for percolation, and needed landscaping to address heat concerns and a pleasing aesthetic environment.

It has been noted that in some lower income areas there can fewer trees and shade, which creates a hotter, harsher environment and requires greater utility usage.

Agree with City's response
Zoning Maps and Historic
Register
Div. 1, pg. 15:  MAPS
Zoning Maps and Historic
Register
Should this also include the State historic register?
Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023 Not clear what the comment means.  The maps are not included in the CZC. The GP includes a list of historic properties Light, Air, Privacy, and Open
Space Outside of R-L, NP,
and RLM Zones
Div 2, pg 1 Residential
Zones
Why does the reference to adequate “light, air, privacy, and open space” only show up in R-L, NP and RLM zones?
Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023 Thank you.  This statement is intended for and should be included in all zones.  Staff will work on revising.

Family Living
For whom is a zone “stabilized” and “protected” when low density residential and older housing stock is frozen in time?
What is the fundamental difference between the R-LM zone and other zones, and how is this “family living” different from other types of uses? Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
The R-LM zone allows for higher density residential development as compared to R-L and N-P zones. The zone is proposed in an area that had a higher allowed density in the prior general plan and as a result generally covers where there already exists both single and multifamily (multiunit) housing…The benefit of transitioning back to the RLM is that it will provide the continued opportunity to allow a variety of housing types that are not specifically limited to SF and duplex units.

Agree with City's response
R-M and R-H Area Locations Why are all of the R-M and R-H areas in high traffic, existing multifamily neighborhoods?
Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
There is one R-H area and it is not in a high traffic area although it is located on a collector road.   There are very few RM zones located on arterial roads (Main St, Gibson, East Street, West Street, CR 98, and CR 102.)  Those areas are not necessarily high traffic either. In addition, RH and RM zones have tended to be located in areas that can best take advantage of transit, which generally operates on arterials and collectors, and are located closer to parks/schools and shopping (walking distance).  The CMU zones, which allow densities from 20-40 du/ac, are generally located along arterials and collectors.

Per GP

Add additional
walking/biking/transit
statements to Purpose
Why do none of these zones reference general plan objectives such as walking and transit, except in the R-H area, of which is the smallest zoned area?
Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
Note: There are high density zones in the various specific plans as well.

The idea of encouraging walking, biking, and transit options are overarching goals in the General Plan that apply city wide as reflected in the Purpose statement for the Zoning Code in Section 17.04.030.  Perhaps additional purpose statements can be added that apply to the zoning code overall.

The Zoning code implements the GP, and
does not need to repeat its goals.

Lot Coverage and Lot Sizes in
R1, R-L, and N-P
Div 1, Table 17.24.030-1
Development Stds for
Residential Zones
What is the average lot size in R1 / R-L / N-P neighborhoods? Lot coverage and minimum lot sizes (and lot coverage, and floor area ratio) force property owners to lose value on their lots and are arbitrary tools created to exclude housing types that actual serve lower income peoples and people of different cultural backgrounds.
(AM): Max. Lot Coverage to 100% for all zones.

Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
This is a broader policy discussion.

Without GIS analysis the existing average lot size per zone is not known. In the older parts of town there is a great variety of lot sizes as these areas have developed over many years.  In newer developments, lot sizes tend to be more uniform and meet minimum to average standards.  Per the zoning code a minimim interior lot size is 5,000 sf and a minimum corner lot is 6,000 sf in the R-1 and NP zones.  Consitent standards are proposed in the CZC.

It is unclear how lot coverage and FAR cause a loss of value on a property and result in exclusion. There is value added to properties through the provision of open space and landscaping as well.

The code update is proposing a variety of tools, including the ability to reduce lot sizes, through the small lot subdivision or PD process, to allow a variety of housing types.  Minimum lot coverages account for open space, parking arrangements, landscaping, drainage and utility installation on lots.

A competing goal to intensification is to allow adequate ability for percolation, and needed landscaping to address heat concerns.

Agree with City's response
Max Height of 40ft?
Building Form and
Placement Standards
Height: Can we just allow a max at 40ft, except RH at 45? It doesn’t make a lot of sense to have NP 40 and other places somehow not.

Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
This additional height has traditionally been allowed in the NP zone to accommodate older historic homes typically found in the NP and downtown zones, that have steeper pitched roofs which have a higher resulting peak height.

Agree with City's response
Setbacks and Value of Land
Setbacks are additional tools to choke value from land. They might be desirable to some, but not all. Currently ADU and SB 9 law requires units to be built at 4’ rear/side setbacks – we should permit additional dwellings over crab grass to sprout up.
(AM): Front, Primary Structure: 5, Street Side: 5, Rear: 5 Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
Comments noted.

Please note, the minimum typical length of a driveway needed so that a vehicle does not overhang a sidewalk and obstruct visibility is 20-feet.

Agree with City's response
Div 3, Table 17.64.020.D-1
Accessory Structure
Setbacks
Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
The Development standards tables refer the reader to the Accessory Dwelling Unit and Accessory Structure requirements chapters.  Accessory structure setbacks are based upon the height of the proposed structure.

The higher the roof/structure the larger the required setback.

SB 9 / General Plan LD in the General Plan
Our General Plan is already stagnant and must reflect the post COVID reality. We must permit up to four units on a lot by right, as the State ADU Laws and SB 9 laws already require in “Single Family” residential neighborhoods.

Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
SB 9 permitted up to 4 units on a lot under specifically described conditions.

Consideration can be given to allowing 4-plex units in RL and NP districts.

The General Plan provided the ability to consider this.

Evaluation of the General Plan as an adequate policy document is a broader policy question.

SB 9 applies. No policy direction to expand
SB 9 beyond state mandate.

Townhomes = single-family
attached?
Residential Uses
Do the single-family attached units include townhomes, which can be built as 3 units or more attached?
(AM):  Add townhomes, four-unit dwellings (quadplexes) ministerially permitted, and multi-family units conditionally or with ZAP.

Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
Response:  The definition provided for multi-unit dwelling is three or more attached units on a single lot.  Multi-unit is currently not proposed as permitted in RL and NP.  However, suggestion has been made to allow tri or quad plex subject to discretionary review.

Agree with City's response
Div 2, pg 1 Residential
Zones

Showing ADUs as Permitted
This would give property owners more options and allow an actual expression of community character to be implemented rather than arbitrarily restricting uses to expensive, limiting, unsustainable housing types.
re ADUs:  Why are none of these listed as permitted by right, when in fact they are? Recommend we list these as being permitted with a note that directs people to the municode.

Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023 The use table does direct readers directly to the code section for ADUs.   It is possible to show as permitted as well. Agree with City's response Live/Work in Residential
Zones? Live/Work Uses
Why are Live/Work units not permitted in residential zones? How will these work in tandem with Home Occupancy and Residential Retail uses?
These would make Woodland a more walkable place if they were included in 70% of its land use area.

Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
Live work units have previously been and continue to be allowed in multiple zones within the city.  Should a future demand present itself, beyond the allowance for home occupations and the proposed Residential Limited Retail uses, adding live work can be re-evaluated at that time.

Agree with City's response
Total # of units on a small lot
subdivision? + add scale to
illustration?
Small Lot Subdivision Stds
Really nice consideration, I liked the existing cottage courts on College.

What is the total number of units that can result on a small lot subdivision?
Can these illustrations be given scale dimensions, for illustrative purposes?
Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on
the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
Illustrative code examples do not tend to contain specific dimensions because each situation varies.  However, after the code is adopted, specific handouts can be prepared to provide more guidance.

Agree with City's response. Also, note that
density requirements apply for this projects
types.

Why limit short term
rentals?
Table 17.24.020-1, Use
Regulations - Residential
Zones
Why is the City limiting all short-term rentals? By doing so it does not actually limit these establishments (there are plenty of rentals listed on Airbnb) but rather forces these lodgings to the black market. They should be permitted though potentially taxed (see NYC) Comments by Commissioner Mike McLaughlin on the City of Woodland's draft Comprehensive Zoning
Code (CZC), Divisions 1 and 2, released September
2023
11/15/2023
One concern is that short term rentals take up valuable housing opportunities.  That is why the State does not allow ADUs to be used for this purpose.   Short term rentals can also have negative impacts related to noise, parking, and trash, which is why they are only being considered is some locations such as in the Downtown or along corridors.

Noted, the city is adding the ability to incorporate retail/office/service uses within residential districts in limited situations (Corners on collector roads) initally in the CZC, Residential Limited Retail.  This will give the opportunity to evaluate the demand and functionality of such uses.

Agree with City's response
Allowing Residential Limite
Retail everywhere.

How does limiting commercial uses comport with the general plan’s concept to have more amenities available in walkable distances to residents?
The Residential Limited Retail allowed everywhere is a good place to start.

Residential Uses

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: December 19, 2023
ITEM #: G.14
SUBJECT: Measure F Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2023

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Measure F Annual Report for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2023, and direct staff to publish the required excerpts from the report in the Daily Democrat and on the City's website.

Staff Contact:

Kim McKinney, Administrative Services Director, (530) 661-5849, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

This is an informational report, and therefore does not result in any fiscal impact. However, the report provides an accounting of Measure F (1/2 cent sales tax) receipts and expenses for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023. The Measure F spending plan, which allocates resources to the various categories and projects within Measure F, is reviewed by the City Council annually, in connection with the development of the City's annual budget.

Background:-
In November 2016, the Woodland voters approved Measure F (MSF), which extended the 1/2 cent supplemental sales tax collected within the boundaries of and for the benefit of the City of Woodland.

The 12-year approval of MSF, a general tax, includes funding for general city services such as street maintenance, parks and facility projects, public safety and economic development.

MSF revenue is anticipated to be spent on various categories based on overall community needs.

The City Council has identified Parks, Roads, Public Safety, and Economic Development as the primary general categories for funding.

The initial spending plan was approved by the City Council within the FY2018/19 annual budget on June 19, 2018, which provided an allocation of anticipated MSF revenues in a manner consistent with Council policy direction. The City Council will approve a revised spending plan which is then incorporated into the next fiscal year's annual budget. The City Council adopted a revised MSF spending plan at the May 16, 2023, meeting for incorporation into the FY2023/24 annual budget.

Similar to the process that was followed for Measure E, staff will prepare an annual financial report in December each year, illustrating the actual revenues received and use of the funds, and an updated annual spending plan will be prepared during the spring to be incorporated into the annual budget.

Discussion:

The following table includes (1) a summary of approved uses of MSF, as adopted with the FY2022/23 annual budget, and consistent with the annual spending plan, (2) prior years' expenditures, (3) FY2022/23 expenditures, and (4) the life to date expenditures for each identified category. Final revenues from MSF sales tax for FY2022/23 were $8.6 million, which is 109% of the amended budget.