Agenda packet — Woodland City Council, July 15, 2025 (part 1 of 3)

City of Woodland

Meeting Agenda

City Council
City Hall
Council Chambers
300 First Street
Woodland, CA 95695
July 15, 2025
6:00 PM

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

A. CALL TO ORDER

B. ROLL CALL

C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Land Acknowledgment Statement - The City of Woodland acknowledges the land on which we live and work.

For thousands of years, this land has been the home of Patwin people. Today, there are three federally recognized Patwin tribes: Cachil DeHe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Community, Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation, and Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation. The Patwin people have remained committed to the stewardship of this land over many centuries. It has been cherished and protected, as elders have instructed the young through generations. We are honored and grateful to be here today on their traditional lands.

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.

Page 1 ends

2. SUBJECT: Long Range Calendar

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

F. PRESENTATIONS

3. SUBJECT: 2025 Woodland Regional Park Preserve Photo Contest Winner

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council receive a brief presentation and recognize the winner of our 2025 Woodland Regional Park Preserve Photography Contest.

G. CONSENT CALENDAR

4. SUBJECT: Appointment of a Member to the Manufactured Homes Fair Practices Commission

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council appoint Stacie Lewis as a member of the Manufactured Homes Fair Practices Commission.

5. SUBJECT: Salary Schedule Effective July 1, 2025

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council approve the Salary Schedule effective July 1, 2025.

6. SUBJECT: Special Assessment Tax Roll Collections - Fiscal Year 2025/26

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, Requesting Collection of Charges on the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Tax Roll for the Lighting and Landscaping Districts, Special Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts described herein.

7. SUBJECT: Community Services Department Quarterly Status Report for the Fourth Quarter FY25

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council receive the Community Services Department Quarterly Status Report for the Fourth Quarter of FY25.

8. SUBJECT: Approval to Cast City Ballot for Springlake Fire Protection District Prop 218 Assessment

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, approving the proposed property assessment under Proposition 218 for parcels owned by the City within the Springlake Fire Protection District, and to approve casting a “Yes” vote on the assessment ballot and authorizing the City Manager to submit the ballot on behalf of the City.

9. SUBJECT: Receive and File the Manufactured Home Fair Practices Commission Annual Report for the 2024 Program Year

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council receive and file the Manufactured Home Fair Practices Commission Annual Report for the 2024 program year.

Page 2 ends

10. SUBJECT: Certification of the 2025 Sewer System Management Plan

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, certifying the 2025 Revised Sewer System Management Plan.

11. SUBJECT: Award Construction Contract for the Downtown Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-09 and the First Street Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-13

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. ______,
1) Waiving the minor bid irregularity and approving a construction contract for the Downtown Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-09 and the First Street Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-13, awarding the construction contract in the amount of $376,572.19 to JB-TC Ventures LLC (DBA JB Bostick Company), authorizing a contract contingency up to 20% ($75,314.44), and authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract and change orders; and
2) Approving the first amendment to the consultant services agreement with Associated Engineering Consultants, Inc. (AEC) for staff augmentation services related to CIP 24-09 in the amount of $68,632 bringing the total contract amount to $152,863.75, authorizing a contract contingency up to 20% of the first amendment ($13,726.40), and authorizing the City Manager to execute amendments; and
3) Approving the first amendment to the consultant services agreement with AEC for staff augmentation services related to CIP 24-13 in the amount of $44,352 bringing the total contract amount to $128,583.75, authorizing a contract contingency up to 20% of the first amendment ($8,870.40), and authorizing the City Manager to execute amendments.

12. SUBJECT: Allocate Funding and Award Construction Contract for the Water Pollution Control Facility Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, to
1) Reallocate $2,500,000 from the Water Pollution Control Facility ("WPCF") Asset Replacement Project, CIP 14-02 to the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12;
2) Reallocate $1,500,000 from the Annual Sewer Repair & Replacement Project, CIP 08-21 to the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12;
3) Approve the construction contract for the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12, awarding the construction contract in the amount of $3,177,200 to Cushman Contracting Corporation, authorizing a contract contingency up to 10% of the base bid amount ($317,720), and authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract and change orders; and
4) Approving a consultant agreement for construction inspection services with WSP USA, Inc., in the amount up to $307,970, authorizing a contract contingency of up to 10% ($30,797), and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement and amendments.

Page 3 ends

13. SUBJECT: Request for the Appropriation of Reserve Balances into the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012) to Purchase Replacement Fleet Vehicles

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, 1) Authorizing the appropriation of $100,000 from the Water (2210) Fund Balance, as well as $100,000 from the Sewer (2220) Fund Balance as an expense transfer into the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012); and 2) Authorize the appropriation of the same $200,000 in the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012) for the purchase of replacement vehicles for 2-107 and 3-107.

14. SUBJECT: Request for the City Manager to Execute a Cooperative Fuel Services Agreement with Interstate Oil

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute a cooperative Fuel Services Agreement with Interstate Oil for card-lock fuel services for a total not to exceed an amount of $1,800,000 through June 30, 2028.

15. SUBJECT: Authorize Purchase Authority for Magnesium Hydroxide for the Water Pollution Control Facility

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute the Water Pollution Control Facility’s purchase of magnesium hydroxide from Hill Brothers Chemical Company for a total of $268,000.

16. SUBJECT: Authorize a One-Year Renewal of San Joaquin Chemicals, Inc.

Contract for a Total Not-To-Exceed Amount of $215,500 for the Purchase of Coagulants in Fiscal Year 2026

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute the second one-year renewal of the San Joaquin Chemicals, Inc. contract for a total amount of $215,500 for the purchase of coagulants in Fiscal Year 2026.

H. PUBLIC HEARINGS

17. SUBJECT: Proposed Solid Waste Service Rate Increase

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council:
1) Hold a public hearing to consider adopting increases to the rates for collection and handling of solid waste, recycling, and organic waste services within the City;
2) Consider all protests, including any written protests submitted prior to the close of the public hearing, tabulate ballots;
3) If a majority protest exists, do not approve the proposed increase to customer rates for garbage collection service; and
4) If no majority protest exists, adopt Resolution No. _____, establishing new customer rates for garbage collection service, effective September 1, 2025.

18. SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2025/2026 Community Development Block Grant Annual Action Plan and 2025-2029 Community Development Block Grant Consolidated Plan, and Authorization for Submittal of the Action Plan and the Consolidated Plan

Page 4 ends

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council take the following actions:
1) Hold a public hearing to receive community input on the Fiscal Year 2025/2026 Community Development Block Grant Action Plan and 2025-2029 Community Development Block Grant Consolidated Plan;
2) Adopt Resolution No. _____, approving the 2025-2029 Community Development Block Grant Consolidated Plan in substantially the same form as presented to the City Council with the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Community Development Block Grant Action Plan funding allocations and incorporating any public input received during the public comment period; 3) Direct staff to complete the Fiscal Year 2025/2026 Action Plan and 2025- 2029 Community Development Block Grant Consolidated Plan, as well as any other related documents required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, incorporating the adopted funding allocations and submit both documents to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; 4) Authorize the City Manager to execute any agreements, contracts, or other documents with the appropriate entities to carry out the Community Development Block Grant-funded activities; and
5) Authorize the Administrative Services Director to make the budget allocations as specified.

19. SUBJECT: Waste Management Liens

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council conduct a Public Hearing to receive input from property owners and adopt Resolution No. _____, requesting collection of charges on the 2025-26 tax roll.

20. SUBJECT: 2025 Weed Abatement Program Parcels Not in Compliance

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. _____, to hear and approve the list of parcels that were out of compliance with weed abatement requirements for the year 2025 and direct the Tax Collector of Yolo County to assess liens against real property to reimburse the City for the cost of removal of weeds, refuse, and dirt from the properties.

I. REPORTS OF THE CITY MANAGER

21. SUBJECT: Appropriation of $1,500,000 in Affordable Housing Funds in Connection with Tupelo Family Apartments

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____,
1) Approving an appropriation of $1,500,000 from the Affordable Housing In- Lieu Fees Fund (1327) and authorizing the Finance Officer to amend the Fiscal Year 2026 budget as necessary;
2) Authorizing the City to enter into a Loan Agreement with Yolo County Housing or its affiliates for the development of Tupelo Family Apartments; 3) Approving a fifty-five-year residual receipts loan in the amount of $1,500,000 with three percent (3%) simple interest for Tupelo Family Apartments; 4) Authorizing the City to enter into a regulatory agreement and declaration of restrictive covenants with Tupelo Family Apartments to ensure the affordability of the project for a term of not less than 55 years; and

Page 5 ends

5) Authorizing the City Manager to execute the Loan Agreement and regulatory agreement in a form as prepared and approved by the City Attorney and take such other actions and execute such documents as necessary to make the City loans and ensure the affordability of the project.

22. SUBJECT: Approve a Contract for a Public Art Project at the Woodland Aquatic Center

RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION: Staff recommend the City Council 1) Receive a presentation regarding the selected artwork and artist; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. _____, appropriating $100,000 from the Art in Public Places funds in the General Fund and authorizing the City Manager to enter into a public art agreement with artist Brian Valenzuela for the creation and installation of a tile mural at the Woodland Aquatic Center.

J. 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 July 15, 2025 was posted on July 11, 2025 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.

Page 6 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: D.1
SUBJECT: General Public Comments

Attachments:

None

Page 7 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: E.2
SUBJECT: Long Range Calendar

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

Staff Contact:

Sarah Lansburgh, CMC, 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

Page 8 ends

CITY COUNCIL LONG RANGE CALENDAR
July 16th – August 18th COUNCIL SUMMER RECESS
August 19th REGULAR MEETING
Approve Contract Amendment with The Ferguson Group, CIP 22-16 Approve a Consultant Agreement with RBI for the Water Pollution Control Facility Police Department Semi-Annual Report
Fire Department Semi-Annual Report
Public Works Semi-Annual Report
Woodland Soccer Club – License Agreement Sports Park
Pacific Coast Producers – Development Agreement
September 2nd REGULAR MEETING
Community Development Department Semi-Annual Report
MOU with Yolo County for Crisis Now Receiving Beds
September 16th REGULAR MEETING
Sewer and Water Rate Study Presentations
FY24/25 Budget Carry-Overs
Future Topics / Study Sessions:

Yolo Active Transportation Corridors Project Presentation (October) Short-Range Transit Plan Presentation (October)
Animal Services Governance Model (TBD)
Downtown Parking Management Plan (TBD)
Updated 7/11/2025

Page 9 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: F.3
SUBJECT: 2025 Woodland Regional Park Preserve Photo
Contest Winner

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council receive a brief presentation and recognize the winner of our 2025 Woodland Regional Park Preserve Photography Contest.

Staff Contact:

Spencer Bowen, Communication & Strategic Policies Manager, (530) 661-5808, [email protected]

Background:

To help celebrate the recent grand opening of the Woodland Regional Park Preserve, the City promoted a photography contest that began in May and closed on Friday, June 13, 2025.

Discussion:

City staff reviewed the submission and selected photographer Peri Hoke as the winner of the photo contest. Peri's photo demonstrates one of the park preserve's bird boxes in use and is attached to this staff report. In the coming weeks, the City will print and display Peri's winning photo at the kiosk near the entry of the park preserve.

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council receive a brief presentation and recognize the winner of our 2025 Woodland Regional Park Preserve Photography Contest.

Attachments:

1. Photo Contest Winner July 2025

Page 10 ends

Page 11 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.4
SUBJECT: Appointment of Member to the Manufactured Homes Fair Practices Commission

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council appoint Stacie Lewis as a member of the Manufactured Homes Fair Practices Commission.

Staff Contact:

Sarah Lansburgh, CMC, City Clerk, (530) 661-5806, [email protected]

Background:

There is currently one regular vacancy and two alternate vacancies on the Manufactured Homes Fair Practices Commission (MHFPC). Stacie Lewis previously served one term on the MHFPC, beginning September 6, 2022 and ending June 30, 2025. City staff received Ms. Lewis' application on July 3, 2025. Mayor Lansburgh and Mayor Pro Tempore Stallard reviewed the application and recommended Ms. Lewis' re-appointment to the MHFPC for a three-year term effective July 15, 2025 and ending June 30, 2028.

Attachments:

1. Lewis S_MHFPC Application

Page 12 ends

Page 13 ends

Page 14 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.5
SUBJECT: Salary Schedule Effective July 1, 2025

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council approve the Salary Schedule effective July 1, 2025.

Staff Contact:

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

Fiscal Impact:

The action to approve the revisions to the salary schedule has no direct fiscal impact. Relevant salaries were calculated and assumed in the Fiscal Year 2025/26 budget.

Background:

The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) requires that the City Council adopt and approve the citywide salary schedule every quarter. This staff report serves to meet the CalPERS requirement for the revised salary schedule effective July 1, 2025.

Discussion:

The salary scheduled is consistent with current employee contracts and with the approved Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with various employee bargaining groups in the City.

Changes effective July 1, 2025 are related to general cost of living adjustments included in the MOUs of the following groups:
• Woodland Police Officers' Association - 3% increase
• Woodland Police Supervisor's Association - 3% increase • Police Mid-Management Association - 1% increase
• Woodland Professional Firefighter's Association - 3% increase • Fire Mid-Management Association - 3% increase
• Woodland City Employees' Association - 4% increase

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council approve the Salary Schedule effective July 1, 2025.

Prepared by: Kim McKinney, Administrative Services Director

Attachments:

1. Salary Schedule - 07.01.2025

Page 15 ends

Page 16 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025

CLASSIFICATION
GRADE
GROUP
Period
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8

ACCOUNTANT I
M116
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$2,637.02
$2,768.87
$2,907.32
$3,052.68
$3,205.31
$3,365.57
-
-
Monthly
$5,713.54
$5,999.22
$6,299.19
$6,614.13
$6,944.84
$7,292.07
-
-

ACCOUNTANT II
M120
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$2,910.78
$3,056.31
$3,209.12
$3,369.59
$3,538.08
$3,714.96
-
-
Monthly
$6,306.70
$6,622.00
$6,953.10
$7,300.78
$7,665.83
$8,049.09
-
-

ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN
G45
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,363.11
$2,481.25
$2,605.32
$2,735.59
$2,872.38
$3,015.98
-
-
Monthly
$5,120.07
$5,376.04
$5,644.85
$5,927.11
$6,223.48
$6,534.63
-
-

ADMIN SERVICES DIRECTOR
116
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$6,228.23
-
-
-
$7,996.15
-
-
-
Monthly
$13,494.50
-
-
-
$17,325.00
-
-
-

ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK I
G28
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,553.01
$1,630.68
$1,712.21
$1,797.81
$1,887.71
$1,982.09
-
-
Monthly
$3,364.86
$3,533.14
$3,709.78
$3,895.25
$4,090.04
$4,294.53
-
-

ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK II
G32
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,714.24
$1,799.96
$1,889.94
$1,984.45
$2,083.67
$2,187.85
-
-
Monthly
$3,714.19
$3,899.90
$4,094.88
$4,299.64
$4,514.62
$4,740.33
-
-

ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK III
G36
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,892.19
$1,986.82
$2,086.16
$2,190.47
$2,300.00
$2,414.99
-
-
Monthly
$4,099.75
$4,304.79
$4,520.00
$4,746.02
$4,983.33
$5,232.48
-
-

ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
G42
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,194.37
$2,304.10
$2,419.29
$2,540.26
$2,667.28
$2,800.64
-
-
Monthly
$4,754.47
$4,992.22
$5,241.79
$5,503.90
$5,779.10
$6,068.04
-
-

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISOR
G47
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,482.74
$2,606.86
$2,737.21
$2,874.06
$3,017.78
$3,168.66
-
-
Monthly
$5,379.26
$5,648.21
$5,930.62
$6,227.13
$6,538.51
$6,865.43
-
-

ASSISTANT ENGINEER
M125
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,293.28
$3,457.94
$3,630.84
$3,812.37
$4,002.99
$4,203.14
-
-
Monthly
$7,135.43
$7,492.20
$7,866.82
$8,260.13
$8,673.15
$9,106.81
-
-

ASSISTANT PLANNER
M118
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$2,770.52
$2,909.05
$3,054.49
$3,207.23
$3,367.58
$3,535.96
-
-
Monthly
$6,002.80
$6,302.94
$6,618.06
$6,948.99
$7,296.43
$7,661.24
-
-

ASSOCIATE CIVIL ENGINEER
M131
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,819.19
$4,010.15
$4,210.65
$4,421.19
$4,642.24
$4,874.36
-
-
Monthly
$8,274.92
$8,688.65
$9,123.07
$9,579.24
$10,058.19
$10,561.11
-
-

ASSOCIATE ENGINEER
M127
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,460.00
$3,633.00
$3,814.64
$4,005.38
$4,205.65
$4,415.93
-
-
Monthly
$7,496.67
$7,871.50
$8,265.05
$8,678.32
$9,112.24
$9,567.84
-
-

ASSOCIATE PLANNER
M124
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,212.95
$3,373.60
$3,542.27
$3,719.39
$3,905.36
$4,100.63
-
-
Monthly
$6,961.40
$7,309.47
$7,674.92
$8,058.68
$8,461.61
$8,884.70
-
-

BUILDING INSPECTOR I
G49
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,608.42
$2,738.84
$2,875.78
$3,019.57
$3,170.54
$3,329.07
-
-
Monthly
$5,651.57
$5,934.15
$6,230.85
$6,542.39
$6,869.51
$7,212.98
-
-

BUILDING INSPECTOR II
G53
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,879.20
$3,023.18
$3,174.32
$3,333.05
$3,499.69
$3,674.67
-
-
Monthly
$6,238.27
$6,550.21
$6,877.70
$7,221.60
$7,582.67
$7,961.79
-
-

BUS ENGAGE/RSRCE CONS PROG MGR
M124
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,212.95
$3,373.60
$3,542.27
$3,719.39
$3,905.36
$4,100.63
-
-
Monthly
$6,961.40
$7,309.47
$7,674.92
$8,058.68
$8,461.61
$8,884.70
-
-

CDD DEPUTY DIRECTOR
120
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$4,925.32
-
-
-
$6,314.76
-
-
-
Monthly
$10,671.53
-
-
-
$13,681.99
-
-
-

REGULAR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES - BIWEEKLY/MONTHLY SALARY
Page:
1

Page 17 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025

CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL
M140
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,769.64
$5,008.12
$5,258.52
$5,521.46
$5,797.52
$6,087.40
-
-
Monthly
$10,334.21
$10,850.92
$11,393.47
$11,963.16
$12,561.30
$13,189.37
-
-

CHIEF COLLECTION SYSTEM OPER
M132
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,914.66
$4,110.40
$4,315.92
$4,531.70
$4,758.30
$4,996.22
-
-
Monthly
$8,481.77
$8,905.86
$9,351.17
$9,818.69
$10,309.66
$10,825.15
-
-

CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER
M142
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$5,011.10
$5,261.66
$5,524.74
$5,800.98
$6,091.03
$6,395.58
-
-
Monthly
$10,857.39
$11,400.27
$11,970.28
$12,568.79
$13,197.23
$13,857.09
-
-

CHIEF WATER SYSTEM OP
M132
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,914.66
$4,110.40
$4,315.92
$4,531.70
$4,758.30
$4,996.22
-
-
Monthly
$8,481.77
$8,905.86
$9,351.17
$9,818.69
$10,309.66
$10,825.15
-
-

CIRCULATION SUPERVISOR
G37
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,939.50
$2,036.47
$2,138.31
$2,245.21
$2,357.49
$2,475.36
-
-
Monthly
$4,202.25
$4,412.36
$4,633.00
$4,864.63
$5,107.89
$5,363.27
-
-

CITY CLERK
125
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$4,804.62
-
-
-
$6,130.38
-
-
-
Monthly
$10,410.00
-
-
-
$13,282.50
-
-
-

CITY COUNCIL
110
CNCL
Bi-Weekly
$115.38
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Monthly
$250.00
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

CITY ENGINEER
M145
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$5,396.41
$5,666.23
$5,949.53
$6,247.02
$6,559.37
$6,887.33
-
-
Monthly
$11,692.23
$12,276.84
$12,890.65
$13,535.22
$14,211.97
$14,922.55
-
-

CITY MANAGER
101
CM
Bi-Weekly
$11,682.58
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Monthly
$25,312.25
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER I
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER II
G50
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,673.63
$2,807.31
$2,947.67
$3,095.05
$3,249.82
$3,412.30
-
-
Monthly
$5,792.86
$6,082.51
$6,386.61
$6,705.95
$7,041.28
$7,393.32
-
-

COMM & STRATEGIC POLICY MGR
M134
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,112.86
$4,318.48
$4,534.41
$4,761.12
$4,999.19
$5,249.16
-
-
Monthly
$8,911.19
$9,356.71
$9,824.56
$10,315.77
$10,831.57
$11,373.17
-
-

COMM ENHANCEMENT SPECIALIST
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

COMM RISK REDUCTION SPEC I
185A
WPFA
Bi-Weekly
$2,547.85
$2,675.37
$2,809.13
$2,949.59
$3,097.06
-
-
-
Monthly
$5,520.35
$5,796.64
$6,086.45
$6,390.78
$6,710.29
-
-
-

COMM RISK REDUCTION SPEC II
185B
WPFA
Bi-Weekly
$2,739.79
$2,876.78
$3,020.62
$3,171.65
$3,330.24
-
-
-
Monthly
$5,936.20
$6,233.03
$6,544.68
$6,871.91
$7,215.52
-
-
-

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CLERK I
G32
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,714.24
$1,799.96
$1,889.94
$1,984.45
$2,083.67
$2,187.85
-
-
Monthly
$3,714.19
$3,899.90
$4,094.88
$4,299.64
$4,514.62
$4,740.33
-
-

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CLERK II
G37
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,939.50
$2,036.47
$2,138.31
$2,245.21
$2,357.49
$2,475.36
-
-
Monthly
$4,202.25
$4,412.36
$4,633.00
$4,864.63
$5,107.89
$5,363.27
-
-

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
119
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$6,228.23
-
-
-
$7,996.15
-
-
-
Monthly
$13,494.50
-
-
-
$17,325.00
-
-
-

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TECH I
G42
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,194.37
$2,304.10
$2,419.29
$2,540.26
$2,667.28
$2,800.64
-
-
Monthly
$4,754.47
$4,992.22
$5,241.79
$5,503.90
$5,779.10
$6,068.04
-
-

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TECH II
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Page:
2

Page 18 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
122
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$6,228.23
-
-
-
$7,996.15
-
-
-
Monthly
$13,494.50
-
-
-
$17,325.00
-
-
-

COMMUNITY SVCS OFFICER
228
WPOA
Bi-Weekly
$2,204.20
$2,314.42
$2,430.14
$2,551.65
$2,679.24
$2,813.20
-
-
Monthly
$4,775.77
$5,014.58
$5,265.31
$5,528.57
$5,805.01
$6,095.26
-
-

COMMUNITY SVCS PROGRAM MGR
M125
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,293.28
$3,457.94
$3,630.84
$3,812.37
$4,002.99
$4,203.14
-
-
Monthly
$7,135.43
$7,492.20
$7,866.82
$8,260.13
$8,673.15
$9,106.81
-
-

CONSERVATION COORDINATOR
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

CONTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER
M129
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,635.16
$3,816.91
$4,007.76
$4,208.14
$4,418.56
$4,639.48
-
-
Monthly
$7,876.19
$8,269.97
$8,683.47
$9,117.63
$9,573.55
$10,052.21
-
-

CRIME PREVENTION SPECIALIST
231
WPOA
Bi-Weekly
$2,204.20
$2,314.42
$2,430.14
$2,551.65
$2,679.24
$2,813.20
-
-
Monthly
$4,775.77
$5,014.58
$5,265.31
$5,528.57
$5,805.01
$6,095.26
-
-

DATA SERVICES MANAGER
M136
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,321.06
$4,537.11
$4,763.97
$5,002.17
$5,252.28
$5,514.88
-
-
Monthly
$9,362.29
$9,830.41
$10,321.94
$10,838.04
$11,379.93
$11,948.91
-
-

DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF
162
FMMA
Bi-Weekly
$5,710.39
$5,995.91
$6,295.70
$6,610.48
$6,997.49
-
-
-
Monthly
$12,372.51
$12,991.13
$13,640.69
$14,322.71
$15,161.24
-
-
-

DEPUTY POLICE CHIEF
205
PMMA
Bi-Weekly
$5,662.61
$5,945.75
$6,243.03
$6,555.19
$6,882.95
$7,227.10
$7,588.45
$7,967.88
Monthly
$12,269.00
$12,882.47
$13,526.57
$14,202.92
$14,913.06
$15,658.71
$16,441.65
$17,263.73

DEPUTY PW DIRECTOR - UTILITIES
138
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$4,925.32
-
-
-
$6,314.76
-
-
-
Monthly
$10,671.53
-
-
-
$13,681.99
-
-
-

DNU - FOR TESTING
G28
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,553.01
$1,630.68
$1,712.21
$1,797.81
$1,887.71
$1,982.09
-
-
Monthly
$3,364.86
$3,533.14
$3,709.78
$3,895.25
$4,090.04
$4,294.53
-
-

ELECTRICAL/SIGNS & MARK SUPER
M134
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,112.86
$4,318.48
$4,534.41
$4,761.12
$4,999.19
$5,249.16
-
-
Monthly
$8,911.19
$9,356.71
$9,824.56
$10,315.77
$10,831.57
$11,373.17
-
-

ELECTRICIANS ASSISTANT
G43
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,249.23
$2,361.68
$2,479.78
$2,603.78
$2,733.97
$2,870.65
-
-
Monthly
$4,873.32
$5,116.97
$5,372.85
$5,641.52
$5,923.59
$6,219.74
-
-

ENGINEERING AIDE I
G33
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,757.10
$1,844.95
$1,937.20
$2,034.05
$2,135.76
$2,242.56
-
-
Monthly
$3,807.05
$3,997.39
$4,197.27
$4,407.10
$4,627.48
$4,858.87
-
-

ENGINEERING AIDE II
G37
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,939.50
$2,036.47
$2,138.31
$2,245.21
$2,357.49
$2,475.36
-
-
Monthly
$4,202.25
$4,412.36
$4,633.00
$4,864.63
$5,107.89
$5,363.27
-
-

ENGINEERING ASSISTANT
G56
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,100.59
$3,255.62
$3,418.41
$3,589.33
$3,768.79
$3,957.22
-
-
Monthly
$6,717.95
$7,053.85
$7,406.55
$7,776.88
$8,165.72
$8,573.98
-
-

ENGINEERING TECH I
G44
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,305.46
$2,420.73
$2,541.77
$2,668.86
$2,802.30
$2,942.42
-
-
Monthly
$4,995.17
$5,244.91
$5,507.17
$5,782.54
$6,071.65
$6,375.24
-
-

ENGINEERING TECH II
G48
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,544.79
$2,672.04
$2,805.63
$2,945.93
$3,093.22
$3,247.87
-
-
Monthly
$5,513.72
$5,789.42
$6,078.87
$6,382.85
$6,701.97
$7,037.06
-
-

ENGINEERING TECH III
G52
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,808.97
$2,949.42
$3,096.91
$3,251.74
$3,414.34
$3,585.05
-
-
Monthly
$6,086.10
$6,390.42
$6,709.97
$7,045.44
$7,397.73
$7,767.61
-
-
Page:
3

Page 19 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025

ENV COMPLIANCE INSPECTOR I
G39
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,037.70
$2,139.57
$2,246.57
$2,358.88
$2,476.82
$2,600.67
-
-
Monthly
$4,415.01
$4,635.74
$4,867.58
$5,110.90
$5,366.45
$5,634.79
-
-

ENV COMPLIANCE INSPECTOR II
G43
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,249.23
$2,361.68
$2,479.78
$2,603.78
$2,733.97
$2,870.65
-
-
Monthly
$4,873.32
$5,116.97
$5,372.85
$5,641.52
$5,923.59
$6,219.74
-
-

ENV COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST
G49
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,608.42
$2,738.84
$2,875.78
$3,019.57
$3,170.54
$3,329.07
-
-
Monthly
$5,651.57
$5,934.15
$6,230.85
$6,542.39
$6,869.51
$7,212.98
-
-

ENV RESOURCES ANALYST
M127
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,460.00
$3,633.00
$3,814.64
$4,005.38
$4,205.65
$4,415.93
-
-
Monthly
$7,496.67
$7,871.50
$8,265.05
$8,678.32
$9,112.24
$9,567.84
-
-

EQUIPMENT MECHANIC HEAVY
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

EQUIPMENT MECHANIC LIGHT
G41
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,140.85
$2,247.89
$2,360.29
$2,478.31
$2,602.23
$2,732.33
-
-
Monthly
$4,638.52
$4,870.43
$5,113.96
$5,369.66
$5,638.16
$5,920.04
-
-

EQUIPMENT MECHANIC SENIOR
G50
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,673.63
$2,807.31
$2,947.67
$3,095.05
$3,249.82
$3,412.30
-
-
Monthly
$5,792.86
$6,082.51
$6,386.61
$6,705.95
$7,041.28
$7,393.32
-
-

EQUIPMENT SERVICE CLERK
G32
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,714.24
$1,799.96
$1,889.94
$1,984.45
$2,083.67
$2,187.85
-
-
Monthly
$3,714.19
$3,899.90
$4,094.88
$4,299.64
$4,514.62
$4,740.33
-
-

EQUIPMENT SERVICE WORKER
G34
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,801.02
$1,891.08
$1,985.63
$2,084.90
$2,189.16
$2,298.61
-
-
Monthly
$3,902.21
$4,097.35
$4,302.20
$4,517.29
$4,743.18
$4,980.31
-
-

EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT
G49
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,608.42
$2,738.84
$2,875.78
$3,019.57
$3,170.54
$3,329.07
-
-
Monthly
$5,651.57
$5,934.15
$6,230.85
$6,542.39
$6,869.51
$7,212.98
-
-

EXECUTIVE ASST TO CM
G50
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,673.63
$2,807.31
$2,947.67
$3,095.05
$3,249.82
$3,412.30
-
-
Monthly
$5,792.86
$6,082.51
$6,386.61
$6,705.95
$7,041.28
$7,393.32
-
-

FACILITY MAINT WORKER III
G45
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,363.11
$2,481.25
$2,605.32
$2,735.59
$2,872.38
$3,015.98
-
-
Monthly
$5,120.07
$5,376.04
$5,644.85
$5,927.11
$6,223.48
$6,534.63
-
-

FACILITY MAINTENANCE WORKER I
G35
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,846.06
$1,938.35
$2,035.27
$2,137.03
$2,243.88
$2,356.08
-
-
Monthly
$3,999.79
$4,199.76
$4,409.76
$4,630.23
$4,861.73
$5,104.84
-
-

FACILITY MAINTENANCE WORKER II
G41
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,140.85
$2,247.89
$2,360.29
$2,478.31
$2,602.23
$2,732.33
-
-
Monthly
$4,638.52
$4,870.43
$5,113.96
$5,369.66
$5,638.16
$5,920.04
-
-

FINANCE CLERK I
G32
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,714.24
$1,799.96
$1,889.94
$1,984.45
$2,083.67
$2,187.85
-
-
Monthly
$3,714.19
$3,899.90
$4,094.88
$4,299.64
$4,514.62
$4,740.33
-
-

FINANCE CLERK II
G37
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,939.50
$2,036.47
$2,138.31
$2,245.21
$2,357.49
$2,475.36
-
-
Monthly
$4,202.25
$4,412.36
$4,633.00
$4,864.63
$5,107.89
$5,363.27
-
-

FINANCE OFFICER
M141
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,888.89
$5,133.32
$5,389.99
$5,659.49
$5,942.47
$6,239.60
-
-
Monthly
$10,592.59
$11,122.20
$11,678.32
$12,262.22
$12,875.36
$13,519.14
-
-

FINANCE SPECIALIST
G41
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,140.85
$2,247.89
$2,360.29
$2,478.31
$2,602.23
$2,732.33
-
-
Monthly
$4,638.52
$4,870.43
$5,113.96
$5,369.66
$5,638.16
$5,920.04
-
-

FINANCE SUPERVISOR
G54
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,951.19
$3,098.74
$3,253.69
$3,416.35
$3,587.20
$3,766.54
-
-
Monthly
$6,394.25
$6,713.93
$7,049.67
$7,402.09
$7,772.26
$8,160.84
-
-

FINANCIAL SERVICES MGR
M136
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,321.06
$4,537.11
$4,763.97
$5,002.17
$5,252.28
$5,514.88
-
-
Page:
4

Page 20 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025
Monthly
$9,362.29
$9,830.41
$10,321.94
$10,838.04
$11,379.93
$11,948.91
-
-

FIRE BATTALION CHIEF-REG
152
FMMA
Bi-Weekly
$5,005.97
$5,256.26
$5,519.07
$5,795.03
$6,084.78
-
-
-
Monthly
$10,846.26
$11,388.56
$11,957.99
$12,555.90
$13,183.69
-
-
-

FIRE CAPTAIN BASE ONLY
178
WPFA
Bi-Weekly
$4,038.79
$4,240.72
$4,452.75
$4,675.41
$4,909.17
-
-
-
Monthly
$8,750.71
$9,188.23
$9,647.63
$10,130.05
$10,636.53
-
-
-

FIRE CHIEF
128
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$6,275.77
-
-
-
$8,461.54
-
-
-
Monthly
$13,597.50
-
-
-
$18,333.34
-
-
-

FIRE ENGINEER BASE ONLY
175
WPFA
Bi-Weekly
$3,505.24
$3,680.49
$3,864.52
$4,057.75
$4,260.62
-
-
-
Monthly
$7,594.68
$7,974.39
$8,373.13
$8,791.80
$9,231.34
-
-
-

FIRE MARSHAL
165
FMMA
Bi-Weekly
$5,005.96
$5,256.26
$5,519.07
$5,795.03
$6,084.78
-
-
-
Monthly
$10,846.26
$11,388.56
$11,957.99
$12,555.90
$13,183.69
-
-
-

FIREFIGHTER BASE ONLY
172
WPFA
Bi-Weekly
$3,088.55
$3,242.98
$3,405.12
$3,575.39
$3,754.15
-
-
-
Monthly
$6,691.85
$7,026.46
$7,377.76
$7,746.67
$8,133.98
-
-
-

FIREFIGHTER RECRUIT BASE
182
WPFA
Bi-Weekly
$2,779.70
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Monthly
$6,022.68
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

FLEET & FACILITIES MGR
M131
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,819.19
$4,010.15
$4,210.65
$4,421.19
$4,642.24
$4,874.36
-
-
Monthly
$8,274.92
$8,688.65
$9,123.07
$9,579.24
$10,058.19
$10,561.11
-
-

GIS ANALYST
G62
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,595.72
$3,775.53
$3,964.30
$4,162.51
$4,370.62
$4,589.17
-
-
Monthly
$7,790.72
$8,180.31
$8,589.32
$9,018.77
$9,469.68
$9,943.19
-
-

GIS COORDINATOR
M131
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,819.19
$4,010.15
$4,210.65
$4,421.19
$4,642.24
$4,874.36
-
-
Monthly
$8,274.92
$8,688.65
$9,123.07
$9,579.24
$10,058.19
$10,561.11
-
-

GIS TECHNICIAN I
G49
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,608.42
$2,738.84
$2,875.78
$3,019.57
$3,170.54
$3,329.07
-
-
Monthly
$5,651.57
$5,934.15
$6,230.85
$6,542.39
$6,869.51
$7,212.98
-
-

GIS TECHNICIAN II
G53
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,879.20
$3,023.18
$3,174.32
$3,333.05
$3,499.69
$3,674.67
-
-
Monthly
$6,238.27
$6,550.21
$6,877.70
$7,221.60
$7,582.67
$7,961.79
-
-

HOUSING ANALYST I
M120
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$2,910.78
$3,056.31
$3,209.12
$3,369.59
$3,538.08
$3,714.96
-
-
Monthly
$6,306.70
$6,622.00
$6,953.10
$7,300.78
$7,665.83
$8,049.09
-
-

HOUSING ANALYST II
M124
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,212.95
$3,373.60
$3,542.27
$3,719.39
$3,905.36
$4,100.63
-
-
Monthly
$6,961.40
$7,309.47
$7,674.92
$8,058.68
$8,461.61
$8,884.70
-
-

HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST I
M121
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$2,983.54
$3,132.72
$3,289.35
$3,453.83
$3,626.53
$3,807.85
-
-
Monthly
$6,464.34
$6,787.56
$7,126.93
$7,483.29
$7,857.48
$8,250.34
-
-

HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST II
M126
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,375.61
$3,544.39
$3,721.61
$3,907.68
$4,103.07
$4,308.22
-
-
Monthly
$7,313.82
$7,679.51
$8,063.49
$8,466.63
$8,889.98
$9,334.48
-
-

HUMAN RESOURCES CLERK
G39
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,037.70
$2,139.57
$2,246.57
$2,358.88
$2,476.82
$2,600.67
-
-
Monthly
$4,415.01
$4,635.74
$4,867.58
$5,110.90
$5,366.45
$5,634.79
-
-

HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER
M140
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,769.64
$5,008.12
$5,258.52
$5,521.46
$5,797.52
$6,087.40
-
-
Monthly
$10,334.21
$10,850.92
$11,393.47
$11,963.16
$12,561.30
$13,189.37
-
-

HUMAN RESOURCES TECH I
G45
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,363.11
$2,481.25
$2,605.32
$2,735.59
$2,872.38
$3,015.98
-
-
Monthly
$5,120.07
$5,376.04
$5,644.85
$5,927.11
$6,223.48
$6,534.63
-
-
Page:
5

Page 21 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025

HUMAN RESOURCES TECH II
G50
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,673.63
$2,807.31
$2,947.67
$3,095.05
$3,249.82
$3,412.30
-
-
Monthly
$5,792.86
$6,082.51
$6,386.61
$6,705.95
$7,041.28
$7,393.32
-
-

IND ELECTRICAL/ELECT TECH
G58
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,257.56
$3,420.44
$3,591.47
$3,771.02
$3,959.59
$4,157.55
-
-
Monthly
$7,058.06
$7,410.95
$7,781.51
$8,170.55
$8,579.10
$9,008.03
-
-

INFORMATION SYSTEMS TECH I
G48
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,544.79
$2,672.04
$2,805.63
$2,945.93
$3,093.22
$3,247.87
-
-
Monthly
$5,513.72
$5,789.42
$6,078.87
$6,382.85
$6,701.97
$7,037.06
-
-

INFORMATION SYSTEMS TECH II
G52
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,808.97
$2,949.42
$3,096.91
$3,251.74
$3,414.34
$3,585.05
-
-
Monthly
$6,086.10
$6,390.42
$6,709.97
$7,045.44
$7,397.73
$7,767.61
-
-

INFRA ADMINISTRATOR
M141
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,888.89
$5,133.32
$5,389.99
$5,659.49
$5,942.47
$6,239.60
-
-
Monthly
$10,592.59
$11,122.20
$11,678.32
$12,262.22
$12,875.36
$13,519.14
-
-

JUNIOR ENGINEER
M121
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$2,983.54
$3,132.72
$3,289.35
$3,453.83
$3,626.53
$3,807.85
-
-
Monthly
$6,464.34
$6,787.56
$7,126.93
$7,483.29
$7,857.48
$8,250.34
-
-

JUNIOR PLANNER
M113
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$2,448.74
$2,571.17
$2,699.73
$2,834.72
$2,976.46
$3,125.28
-
-
Monthly
$5,305.60
$5,570.86
$5,849.41
$6,141.90
$6,448.99
$6,771.43
-
-

LAB SUPERVISOR
M127
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,460.00
$3,633.00
$3,814.64
$4,005.38
$4,205.65
$4,415.93
-
-
Monthly
$7,496.67
$7,871.50
$8,265.05
$8,678.32
$9,112.24
$9,567.84
-
-

LABRATORY TECHNICIAN I
G43
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,249.23
$2,361.68
$2,479.78
$2,603.78
$2,733.97
$2,870.65
-
-
Monthly
$4,873.32
$5,116.97
$5,372.85
$5,641.52
$5,923.59
$6,219.74
-
-

LABRATORY TECHNICIAN II
G47
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,482.74
$2,606.86
$2,737.21
$2,874.06
$3,017.78
$3,168.66
-
-
Monthly
$5,379.26
$5,648.21
$5,930.62
$6,227.13
$6,538.51
$6,865.43
-
-

LIBRARY PROGRAM MANAGER I
M122
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,058.14
$3,211.05
$3,371.58
$3,540.16
$3,717.18
$3,903.04
-
-
Monthly
$6,625.97
$6,957.28
$7,305.10
$7,670.35
$8,053.89
$8,456.58
-
-

LIBRARY PROGRAM MANAGER II
M125
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,293.28
$3,457.94
$3,630.84
$3,812.37
$4,002.99
$4,203.14
-
-
Monthly
$7,135.43
$7,492.20
$7,866.82
$8,260.13
$8,673.15
$9,106.81
-
-

LIBRARY SERVICES DIRECTOR
131
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$4,804.62
-
-
-
$6,130.38
-
-
-
Monthly
$10,410.00
-
-
-
$13,282.50
-
-
-

LIBRARY TECH ASSISTANT I
G29
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,591.85
$1,671.43
$1,755.01
$1,842.77
$1,934.90
$2,031.63
-
-
Monthly
$3,449.00
$3,621.44
$3,802.52
$3,992.66
$4,192.28
$4,401.87
-
-

LIBRARY TECH ASSISTANT II
G33
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,757.10
$1,844.95
$1,937.20
$2,034.05
$2,135.76
$2,242.56
-
-
Monthly
$3,807.05
$3,997.39
$4,197.27
$4,407.10
$4,627.48
$4,858.87
-
-

LITERACY COORDINATOR
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
G53
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,879.20
$3,023.18
$3,174.32
$3,333.05
$3,499.69
$3,674.67
-
-
Monthly
$6,238.27
$6,550.21
$6,877.70
$7,221.60
$7,582.67
$7,961.79
-
-

MAINTENANCE WORKER I
G35
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,846.06
$1,938.35
$2,035.27
$2,137.03
$2,243.88
$2,356.08
-
-
Monthly
$3,999.79
$4,199.76
$4,409.76
$4,630.23
$4,861.73
$5,104.84
-
-

MAINTENANCE WORKER II
G40
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,088.65
$2,193.07
$2,302.72
$2,417.85
$2,538.74
$2,665.69
-
-
Monthly
$4,525.41
$4,751.65
$4,989.23
$5,238.68
$5,500.61
$5,775.66
-
-

MAINTENANCE WORKER III
G44
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,305.46
$2,420.73
$2,541.77
$2,668.86
$2,802.30
$2,942.42
-
-
Page:
6

Page 22 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025
Monthly
$4,995.17
$5,244.91
$5,507.17
$5,782.54
$6,071.65
$6,375.24
-
-

MANAGEMENT ANALYST I
M120
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$2,910.78
$3,056.31
$3,209.12
$3,369.59
$3,538.08
$3,714.96
-
-
Monthly
$6,306.70
$6,622.00
$6,953.10
$7,300.78
$7,665.83
$8,049.09
-
-

MANAGEMENT ANALYST II
M125
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,293.28
$3,457.94
$3,630.84
$3,812.37
$4,002.99
$4,203.14
-
-
Monthly
$7,135.43
$7,492.20
$7,866.82
$8,260.13
$8,673.15
$9,106.81
-
-

MARKTNG & BUS RELATIONS SPEC
M118
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$2,770.52
$2,909.05
$3,054.49
$3,207.23
$3,367.58
$3,535.96
-
-
Monthly
$6,002.80
$6,302.94
$6,618.06
$6,948.99
$7,296.43
$7,661.24
-
-

PARK MAINTENANCE WORKER I
G35
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,846.06
$1,938.35
$2,035.27
$2,137.03
$2,243.88
$2,356.08
-
-
Monthly
$3,999.79
$4,199.76
$4,409.76
$4,630.23
$4,861.73
$5,104.84
-
-

PARK MAINTENANCE WORKER II
G39
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,037.70
$2,139.57
$2,246.57
$2,358.88
$2,476.82
$2,600.67
-
-
Monthly
$4,415.01
$4,635.74
$4,867.58
$5,110.90
$5,366.45
$5,634.79
-
-

PARK MAINTENANCE WORKER III
G43
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,249.23
$2,361.68
$2,479.78
$2,603.78
$2,733.97
$2,870.65
-
-
Monthly
$4,873.32
$5,116.97
$5,372.85
$5,641.52
$5,923.59
$6,219.74
-
-

PARK SUPERINTENDENT
M132
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,914.66
$4,110.40
$4,315.92
$4,531.70
$4,758.30
$4,996.22
-
-
Monthly
$8,481.77
$8,905.86
$9,351.17
$9,818.69
$10,309.66
$10,825.15
-
-

PARK SUPERVISOR
G51
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,740.48
$2,877.49
$3,021.37
$3,172.43
$3,331.08
$3,497.61
-
-
Monthly
$5,937.70
$6,234.57
$6,546.29
$6,873.59
$7,217.33
$7,578.16
-
-

POLICE CHIEF
134
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$7,734.16
-
-
-
$10,176.52
-
-
-
Monthly
$16,757.34
-
-
-
$22,049.13
-
-
-

POLICE CRIME & INTEL ANALYST
212
WPSA
Bi-Weekly
$2,825.80
$2,967.10
$3,115.44
$3,271.21
$3,434.77
-
-
-
Monthly
$6,122.56
$6,428.72
$6,750.12
$7,087.63
$7,442.00
-
-
-

POLICE LIEUTENANT
202
PMMA
Bi-Weekly
$5,152.08
$5,409.68
$5,680.16
$5,964.18
$6,262.38
$6,575.51
$6,904.28
$7,249.50
Monthly
$11,162.85
$11,720.96
$12,307.02
$12,922.38
$13,568.48
$14,246.93
$14,959.28
$15,707.24

POLICE OFFICER RECRUIT
222
WPOA
Bi-Weekly
$3,013.82
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Monthly
$6,529.94
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

POLICE OFFICER-BASE ONLY
225
WPOA
Bi-Weekly
$3,348.69
$3,516.13
$3,691.94
$3,876.51
$4,070.36
$4,273.88
$4,487.57
-
Monthly
$7,255.51
$7,618.29
$7,999.21
$8,399.12
$8,819.11
$9,260.08
$9,723.06
-

POLICE RECORDS SPECIALIST
234A
WPOA
Bi-Weekly
$1,956.43
$2,054.26
$2,156.96
$2,264.82
$2,378.06
-
-
-
Monthly
$4,238.93
$4,450.89
$4,673.42
$4,907.10
$5,152.46
-
-
-

POLICE RECORDS SUPERVISOR
215
WPSA
Bi-Weekly
$2,650.79
$2,783.33
$2,922.48
$3,068.63
$3,222.06
-
-
-
Monthly
$5,743.37
$6,030.54
$6,332.04
$6,648.69
$6,981.12
-
-
-

POLICE SERGEANT
218
WPSA
Bi-Weekly
$3,873.69
$4,067.38
$4,270.76
$4,484.29
$4,708.50
$4,943.93
$5,191.12
$5,450.68
Monthly
$8,393.00
$8,812.65
$9,253.31
$9,715.95
$10,201.75
$10,711.86
$11,247.43
$11,809.80

POOL FACILITIES TECH
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

PRINCIPAL CIVIL ENGINEER
M141
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,888.89
$5,133.32
$5,389.99
$5,659.49
$5,942.47
$6,239.60
-
-
Monthly
$10,592.59
$11,122.20
$11,678.32
$12,262.22
$12,875.36
$13,519.14
-
-

PRINCIPAL PLANNER
M136
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,321.06
$4,537.11
$4,763.97
$5,002.17
$5,252.28
$5,514.88
-
-
Monthly
$9,362.29
$9,830.41
$10,321.94
$10,838.04
$11,379.93
$11,948.91
-
-
Page:
7

Page 23 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025

PRINCIPAL UTILITIES CIVIL ENG
M141
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,888.89
$5,133.32
$5,389.99
$5,659.49
$5,942.47
$6,239.60
-
-
Monthly
$10,592.59
$11,122.20
$11,678.32
$12,262.22
$12,875.36
$13,519.14
-
-

PROGAMMER ANALYST
G63
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,685.62
$3,869.91
$4,063.40
$4,266.57
$4,479.90
$4,703.88
-
-
Monthly
$7,985.51
$8,384.80
$8,804.03
$9,244.24
$9,706.46
$10,191.74
-
-

PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
137
MGMT
Bi-Weekly
$6,228.23
-
-
-
$7,996.15
-
-
-
Monthly
$13,494.50
-
-
-
$17,325.00
-
-
-

RECREATION COORDINATOR
G36
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,892.19
$1,986.82
$2,086.16
$2,190.47
$2,300.00
$2,414.99
-
-
Monthly
$4,099.75
$4,304.79
$4,520.00
$4,746.02
$4,983.33
$5,232.48
-
-

RECREATION SUPERVISOR
G50
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,673.63
$2,807.31
$2,947.67
$3,095.05
$3,249.82
$3,412.30
-
-
Monthly
$5,792.86
$6,082.51
$6,386.61
$6,705.95
$7,041.28
$7,393.32
-
-

SIGNS AND MARKINGS TECH I
G39
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,037.70
$2,139.57
$2,246.57
$2,358.88
$2,476.82
$2,600.67
-
-
Monthly
$4,415.01
$4,635.74
$4,867.58
$5,110.90
$5,366.45
$5,634.79
-
-

SIGNS AND MARKINGS TECH II
G43
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,249.23
$2,361.68
$2,479.78
$2,603.78
$2,733.97
$2,870.65
-
-
Monthly
$4,873.32
$5,116.97
$5,372.85
$5,641.52
$5,923.59
$6,219.74
-
-

SOCIAL SERVICES MANAGER
M132
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,914.66
$4,110.40
$4,315.92
$4,531.70
$4,758.30
$4,996.22
-
-
Monthly
$8,481.77
$8,905.86
$9,351.17
$9,818.69
$10,309.66
$10,825.15
-
-

SR ACCOUNTANT
M125
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,293.28
$3,457.94
$3,630.84
$3,812.37
$4,002.99
$4,203.14
-
-
Monthly
$7,135.43
$7,492.20
$7,866.82
$8,260.13
$8,673.15
$9,106.81
-
-

SR ASSOCIATE CIVIL ENG
M134
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,112.86
$4,318.48
$4,534.41
$4,761.12
$4,999.19
$5,249.16
-
-
Monthly
$8,911.19
$9,356.71
$9,824.56
$10,315.77
$10,831.57
$11,373.17
-
-

SR BUILDING INSPECTOR
G57
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,178.10
$3,337.01
$3,503.86
$3,679.06
$3,863.02
$4,056.15
-
-
Monthly
$6,885.88
$7,230.19
$7,591.69
$7,971.29
$8,369.88
$8,788.33
-
-

SR BUILDING PLAN EXAMINER
G58
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,257.56
$3,420.44
$3,591.47
$3,771.02
$3,959.59
$4,157.55
-
-
Monthly
$7,058.06
$7,410.95
$7,781.51
$8,170.55
$8,579.10
$9,008.03
-
-

SR CIVIL ENGINEER
M138
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,539.81
$4,766.80
$5,005.13
$5,255.40
$5,518.17
$5,794.08
-
-
Monthly
$9,836.26
$10,328.06
$10,844.44
$11,386.71
$11,956.03
$12,553.83
-
-

SR COMM RISK REDUCTION SPEC
185C
WPFA
Bi-Weekly
$3,033.63
$3,185.32
$3,344.59
$3,511.81
$3,687.41
-
-
-
Monthly
$6,572.86
$6,901.53
$7,246.60
$7,608.91
$7,989.39
-
-
-

SR CONTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER
M131
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,819.19
$4,010.15
$4,210.65
$4,421.19
$4,642.24
$4,874.36
-
-
Monthly
$8,274.92
$8,688.65
$9,123.07
$9,579.24
$10,058.19
$10,561.11
-
-

SR ENGINEERING ASSISTANT
G58
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,257.56
$3,420.44
$3,591.47
$3,771.02
$3,959.59
$4,157.55
-
-
Monthly
$7,058.06
$7,410.95
$7,781.51
$8,170.55
$8,579.10
$9,008.03
-
-

SR ENV RESOURCES ANALYST
M131
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,819.19
$4,010.15
$4,210.65
$4,421.19
$4,642.24
$4,874.36
-
-
Monthly
$8,274.92
$8,688.65
$9,123.07
$9,579.24
$10,058.19
$10,561.11
-
-

SR HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST
M132
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,914.66
$4,110.40
$4,315.92
$4,531.70
$4,758.30
$4,996.22
-
-
Monthly
$8,481.77
$8,905.86
$9,351.17
$9,818.69
$10,309.66
$10,825.15
-
-

SR MANAGEMENT ANALYST
M131
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,819.19
$4,010.15
$4,210.65
$4,421.19
$4,642.24
$4,874.36
-
-
Monthly
$8,274.92
$8,688.65
$9,123.07
$9,579.24
$10,058.19
$10,561.11
-
-

SR PLANNER
M132
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,914.66
$4,110.40
$4,315.92
$4,531.70
$4,758.30
$4,996.22
-
-
Page:
8

Page 24 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025
Monthly
$8,481.77
$8,905.86
$9,351.17
$9,818.69
$10,309.66
$10,825.15
-
-

SR POLICE RECORDS SPECIALIST
234B
WPOA
Bi-Weekly
$2,152.09
$2,259.69
$2,372.67
$2,491.30
$2,615.86
-
-
-
Monthly
$4,662.85
$4,896.00
$5,140.79
$5,397.81
$5,667.70
-
-
-

SR PROGRAMMER ANALYST
G67
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$4,068.24
$4,271.64
$4,485.24
$4,709.50
$4,944.98
$5,192.21
-
-
Monthly
$8,814.52
$9,255.22
$9,718.01
$10,203.92
$10,714.12
$11,249.80
-
-

SR SIGNING AND MARKING TECH
G45
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,363.11
$2,481.25
$2,605.32
$2,735.59
$2,872.38
$3,015.98
-
-
Monthly
$5,120.07
$5,376.04
$5,644.85
$5,927.11
$6,223.48
$6,534.63
-
-

SR TRAFFIC SIGNAL STREET LIGHT
G60
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,422.47
$3,593.59
$3,773.27
$3,961.95
$4,160.05
$4,368.04
-
-
Monthly
$7,415.34
$7,786.11
$8,175.42
$8,584.22
$9,013.44
$9,464.08
-
-

SR TREE TRIMMER
G45
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,363.11
$2,481.25
$2,605.32
$2,735.59
$2,872.38
$3,015.98
-
-
Monthly
$5,120.07
$5,376.04
$5,644.85
$5,927.11
$6,223.48
$6,534.63
-
-

SR UTIL MAINT WORKER WATER
G49
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,608.42
$2,738.84
$2,875.78
$3,019.57
$3,170.54
$3,329.07
-
-
Monthly
$5,651.57
$5,934.15
$6,230.85
$6,542.39
$6,869.51
$7,212.98
-
-

SR UTIL MAINT WORKER WWC
G54
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,951.19
$3,098.74
$3,253.69
$3,416.35
$3,587.20
$3,766.54
-
-
Monthly
$6,394.25
$6,713.93
$7,049.67
$7,402.09
$7,772.26
$8,160.84
-
-

SR WATER POLLUTION CR OP
G67
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$4,068.24
$4,271.64
$4,485.24
$4,709.50
$4,944.98
$5,192.21
-
-
Monthly
$8,814.52
$9,255.22
$9,718.01
$10,203.92
$10,714.12
$11,249.80
-
-

SR WATER QUALITY SPECIALIST
G62
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,595.72
$3,775.53
$3,964.30
$4,162.51
$4,370.62
$4,589.17
-
-
Monthly
$7,790.72
$8,180.31
$8,589.32
$9,018.77
$9,469.68
$9,943.19
-
-

SR WATER SYSTEM OPERATOR
G54
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,951.19
$3,098.74
$3,253.69
$3,416.35
$3,587.20
$3,766.54
-
-
Monthly
$6,394.25
$6,713.93
$7,049.67
$7,402.09
$7,772.26
$8,160.84
-
-

SR WATER WASTEWATER INST TECH
G66
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,969.00
$4,167.47
$4,375.83
$4,594.62
$4,824.37
$5,065.58
-
-
Monthly
$8,599.51
$9,029.52
$9,480.97
$9,955.00
$10,452.80
$10,975.43
-
-

TECHNICAL SERVICES MANAGER
M136
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,321.06
$4,537.11
$4,763.97
$5,002.17
$5,252.28
$5,514.88
-
-
Monthly
$9,362.29
$9,830.41
$10,321.94
$10,838.04
$11,379.93
$11,948.91
-
-

TRAFFIC SIG/STREET LIGHT TECH
G56
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,100.59
$3,255.62
$3,418.41
$3,589.33
$3,768.79
$3,957.22
-
-
Monthly
$6,717.95
$7,053.85
$7,406.55
$7,776.88
$8,165.72
$8,573.98
-
-

TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
M134
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,112.86
$4,318.48
$4,534.41
$4,761.12
$4,999.19
$5,249.16
-
-
Monthly
$8,911.19
$9,356.71
$9,824.56
$10,315.77
$10,831.57
$11,373.17
-
-

TREATMENT PLANT MECHANIC
G54
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,951.19
$3,098.74
$3,253.69
$3,416.35
$3,587.20
$3,766.54
-
-
Monthly
$6,394.25
$6,713.93
$7,049.67
$7,402.09
$7,772.26
$8,160.84
-
-

TREATMENT PLANT SUPERINTENDENT
M137
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,429.08
$4,650.54
$4,883.06
$5,127.22
$5,383.57
$5,652.77
-
-
Monthly
$9,596.34
$10,076.17
$10,579.96
$11,108.98
$11,664.40
$12,247.67
-
-

TREE TRIMMER I
G39
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,037.70
$2,139.57
$2,246.57
$2,358.88
$2,476.82
$2,600.67
-
-
Monthly
$4,415.01
$4,635.74
$4,867.58
$5,110.90
$5,366.45
$5,634.79
-
-

TREE TRIMMER II
G43
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,249.23
$2,361.68
$2,479.78
$2,603.78
$2,733.97
$2,870.65
-
-
Monthly
$4,873.32
$5,116.97
$5,372.85
$5,641.52
$5,923.59
$6,219.74
-
-

UNDERGRND UTIL SVC WRKR
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-
Page:
9

Page 25 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025

UTILITIES ADMINISTRATOR
M141
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,888.89
$5,133.32
$5,389.99
$5,659.49
$5,942.47
$6,239.60
-
-
Monthly
$10,592.59
$11,122.20
$11,678.32
$12,262.22
$12,875.36
$13,519.14
-
-

UTILITY MAINT SUPERVISOR
G53
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,879.20
$3,023.18
$3,174.32
$3,333.05
$3,499.69
$3,674.67
-
-
Monthly
$6,238.27
$6,550.21
$6,877.70
$7,221.60
$7,582.67
$7,961.79
-
-

UTILITY MAINT WORKER WATER I
G37
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,939.50
$2,036.47
$2,138.31
$2,245.21
$2,357.49
$2,475.36
-
-
Monthly
$4,202.25
$4,412.36
$4,633.00
$4,864.63
$5,107.89
$5,363.27
-
-

UTILITY MAINT WORKER WATER II
G42
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,194.37
$2,304.10
$2,419.29
$2,540.26
$2,667.28
$2,800.64
-
-
Monthly
$4,754.47
$4,992.22
$5,241.79
$5,503.90
$5,779.10
$6,068.04
-
-

UTILITY MAINT WORKER WATER III
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

UTILITY MAINT WORKER WATER IV
G50
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,673.63
$2,807.31
$2,947.67
$3,095.05
$3,249.82
$3,412.30
-
-
Monthly
$5,792.86
$6,082.51
$6,386.61
$6,705.95
$7,041.28
$7,393.32
-
-

UTILITY MAINT WORKER WWC I
G37
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$1,939.50
$2,036.47
$2,138.31
$2,245.21
$2,357.49
$2,475.36
-
-
Monthly
$4,202.25
$4,412.36
$4,633.00
$4,864.63
$5,107.89
$5,363.27
-
-

UTILITY MAINT WORKER WWC II
G42
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,194.37
$2,304.10
$2,419.29
$2,540.26
$2,667.28
$2,800.64
-
-
Monthly
$4,754.47
$4,992.22
$5,241.79
$5,503.90
$5,779.10
$6,068.04
-
-

UTILITY MAINT WORKER WWC III
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

UTILITY MAINT WORKER WWC IV
G50
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,673.63
$2,807.31
$2,947.67
$3,095.05
$3,249.82
$3,412.30
-
-
Monthly
$5,792.86
$6,082.51
$6,386.61
$6,705.95
$7,041.28
$7,393.32
-
-

WASTEWATER SYSTEMS ADMIN
M141
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,888.89
$5,133.32
$5,389.99
$5,659.49
$5,942.47
$6,239.60
-
-
Monthly
$10,592.59
$11,122.20
$11,678.32
$12,262.22
$12,875.36
$13,519.14
-
-

WATER METER SERVICES TECH
G46
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,422.17
$2,543.29
$2,670.44
$2,803.97
$2,944.18
$3,091.37
-
-
Monthly
$5,248.04
$5,510.45
$5,785.96
$6,075.27
$6,379.05
$6,697.96
-
-

WATER POLL CTRL O-I-T
G40
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,088.65
$2,193.07
$2,302.72
$2,417.85
$2,538.74
$2,665.69
-
-
Monthly
$4,525.41
$4,751.65
$4,989.23
$5,238.68
$5,500.61
$5,775.66
-
-

WATER POLL CTRL OPER I
G51
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,740.48
$2,877.49
$3,021.37
$3,172.43
$3,331.08
$3,497.61
-
-
Monthly
$5,937.70
$6,234.57
$6,546.29
$6,873.59
$7,217.33
$7,578.16
-
-

WATER POLL CTRL OPER II
G55
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,024.98
$3,176.22
$3,335.02
$3,501.78
$3,676.87
$3,860.70
-
-
Monthly
$6,554.11
$6,881.81
$7,225.88
$7,587.20
$7,966.54
$8,364.86
-
-

WATER POLL CTRL OPER III
G59
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,339.00
$3,505.94
$3,681.24
$3,865.31
$4,058.57
$4,261.49
-
-
Monthly
$7,234.49
$7,596.21
$7,976.01
$8,374.83
$8,793.57
$9,233.23
-
-

WATER POLL CTRL OPER IV
G63
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,685.62
$3,869.91
$4,063.40
$4,266.57
$4,479.90
$4,703.88
-
-
Monthly
$7,985.51
$8,384.80
$8,804.03
$9,244.24
$9,706.46
$10,191.74
-
-

WATER QUALITY SPECIALIST I
G48
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,544.79
$2,672.04
$2,805.63
$2,945.93
$3,093.22
$3,247.87
-
-
Monthly
$5,513.72
$5,789.42
$6,078.87
$6,382.85
$6,701.97
$7,037.06
-
-

WATER QUALITY SPECIALIST II
G52
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,808.97
$2,949.42
$3,096.91
$3,251.74
$3,414.34
$3,585.05
-
-
Monthly
$6,086.10
$6,390.42
$6,709.97
$7,045.44
$7,397.73
$7,767.61
-
-

WATER SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR
M141
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$4,888.89
$5,133.32
$5,389.99
$5,659.49
$5,942.47
$6,239.60
-
-
Page:
10

Page 26 ends

CITY OF WOODLAND - SALARY SCHEDULE
Effective
July 1, 2025
Monthly
$10,592.59
$11,122.20
$11,678.32
$12,262.22
$12,875.36
$13,519.14
-
-

WATER SYSTEMS OPERATOR I
G42
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,194.37
$2,304.10
$2,419.29
$2,540.26
$2,667.28
$2,800.64
-
-
Monthly
$4,754.47
$4,992.22
$5,241.79
$5,503.90
$5,779.10
$6,068.04
-
-

WATER SYSTEMS OPERATOR II
G50
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$2,673.63
$2,807.31
$2,947.67
$3,095.05
$3,249.82
$3,412.30
-
-
Monthly
$5,792.86
$6,082.51
$6,386.61
$6,705.95
$7,041.28
$7,393.32
-
-

WATER/WASTE INSTR TECH
G62
WCEA
Bi-Weekly
$3,595.72
$3,775.53
$3,964.30
$4,162.51
$4,370.62
$4,589.17
-
-
Monthly
$7,790.72
$8,180.31
$8,589.32
$9,018.77
$9,469.68
$9,943.19
-
-

WPCF CHIEF OPERATOR
M132
MMPA
Bi-Weekly
$3,914.66
$4,110.40
$4,315.92
$4,531.70
$4,758.30
$4,996.22
-
-
Monthly
$8,481.77
$8,905.86
$9,351.17
$9,818.69
$10,309.66
$10,825.15
-
-

CLASSIFICATION
GRADE
GROUP
Period
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8

ACTIVITY LEADER I
901
TEMP
Hourly
$16.50
$16.75
$17.00
$17.25
$17.50
-
-
-

ACTIVITY LEADER II
905
TEMP
Hourly
$17.00
$17.25
$17.50
$17.75
$18.00
-
-
-

ACTIVITY MANAGER
909
TEMP
Hourly
$18.00
$18.25
$18.50
$18.75
$19.00
-
-
-

CIVIC FELLOW
917
TEMP
Hourly
$20.00
$25.00
-
-
-
-
-
-
INTERN
925
TEMP
Hourly
$17.00
$18.00
$19.00
$20.00
$21.00
-
-
-

LIBRARY CIRCULATION ASSISTANT
927
TEMP
Hourly
$18.94
$19.19
$19.44
$19.69
$19.94
-
-
-

LIBRARY PAGE
929
TEMP
Hourly
$16.50
$16.75
$17.00
$17.25
$17.50
-
-
-

LIBRARY PROGRAM ASSISTANT
931
TEMP
Hourly
$20.90
$21.15
$21.40
$21.65
$21.90
-
-
-

LIFEGUARD / AIDE
933
TEMP
Hourly
$18.00
$18.25
$18.50
$18.75
$19.00
-
-
-

LIFEGUARD / INSTRUCTOR
937
TEMP
Hourly
$19.00
$19.25
$19.50
$19.75
$20.00
-
-
-

MAKERSPACE LEAD
938
TEMP
Hourly
$23.08
$23.58
$24.08
$24.58
$25.08
-
-
-

MAKERSPACE SUPPORT STAFF
939
TEMP
Hourly
$16.50
$16.75
$17.00
$17.25
$17.50
-
-
-

MAKERSPACE TECHNICIAN
940
TEMP
Hourly
$20.90
$21.40
$21.90
$22.40
$22.90
-
-
-

POOL MANAGER
941
TEMP
Hourly
$21.50
$21.75
$22.00
$22.25
$22.50
-
-
-

RECREATION FACILITY AIDE
945
TEMP
Hourly
$19.25
$19.50
$19.75
$20.00
$20.25
-
-
-

SPECIAL PROGRAM COORDINATOR
949
TEMP
Hourly
$20.50
$20.75
$21.00
$21.25
$21.50
-
-
-

SWIM INSTRUCTOR AIDE
953
TEMP
Hourly
$16.50
$16.75
$17.00
$17.25
$17.50
-
-
-

TEMPORARY PART-TIME EMPLOYEES - HOURLY WAGES
Page:
11

Page 27 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.6
SUBJECT: Special Assessment Tax Roll Collections - Fiscal Year 2025/26

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, Requesting Collection of Charges on the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Tax Roll for the Lighting and Landscaping Districts, Special Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts described herein.

Staff Contact:

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

Fiscal Impact:

City assessments that will be collected through County property tax rolls for the special districts described herein total about $10.7 million, which have been included in the Fiscal Year 2025/26 budget.

Background:

In conjunction with the annual collection of property taxes, Yolo County collects special assessment taxes on behalf of the City of Woodland. These special assessments include the following:
• Lighting and Landscape Districts (Spring Lake, Gateway, Gibson Ranch, North Park, Streng Pond, West Wood);
• Assessment Districts (Fire Suppression);
• Community Facility Districts (Spring Lake Maintenance, Gibson Ranch CFD No. 1, Prudler Services, and Spring Lake CFD 2004-1);
• Waste Management Liens
• Weed Abatement Liens

The intent of the attached resolution is to specify the respective responsibility of the County and the City regarding the collection of special taxes, fees and assessments as required by Proposition 218.

All the conditions expressed in the resolution, including compliance with Proposition 218 and collection of the annual assessments, have been in existence throughout the life of each of the assessments discussed herein. Annual approval of the resolution is required by the County to ensure these practices are documented in a specific and formal manner.

Discussion:

For the 2025-2026 tax levies, consistent with past practice, Yolo County is requiring a resolution to be passed authorizing the collection of the special assessments by Yolo County and also releasing Yolo County from any liability which may arise regarding the collection of the special assessments.

The six parts of the resolutions are summarized as follows:
• The Auditor-Controller of Yolo County is requested to attach for collection on the County tax rolls the related special assessment(s) detailed in each of the resolutions.

Page 28 ends

• The City acknowledges that all special assessments comply with all requirements of state law, including Proposition 218.
• The City releases and discharges the County from any potential liability or expenditures arising from the collection of any special assessments authorized by the City. • In the event of a judgment against the City arising from the collection of the special assessment(s), the County may offset the amount of the judgment from any monies collected by the County on behalf of the City, including property taxes. • The City will agree to cooperate with the County in answering questions related to special assessments and the City will not refer inquirers to County staff for response. • The City agrees to pay such reasonable and ordinary charges as the County may prescribe to recoup its costs related to the collection of the special assessments as provided by Government Code sections 29304 and 51800. The County is charging an annual $1 levy per parcel for all special assessments. Any increase to these levy fees charged by the County would have to be approved by the City and adopted in a separate resolution.

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, Requesting Collection of Charges on the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Tax Roll for the Lighting and Landscaping Districts, Special Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts described herein.

Prepared by: Kim McKinney, Administrative Services Director

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution - Requesting Collection of Charges on Tax Roll FY25-26

Page 29 ends

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

REQUESTING COLLECTION OF CHARGES ON TAX ROLL
WHEREAS, the City of Woodland requests the County of Yolo collect on the County tax rolls certain charges which have been imposed pursuant to section 50078 of The Government Code of the State of California by the City for the following District:

Fire Suppression Assessment District;
WHEREAS, the City requests the County collect on the County tax rolls certain charges which have been imposed pursuant to section 22645 and 22646 of The Streets and Highways Code of the State of California by the City for the following Districts:

Spring Lake Landscaping and Lighting District;
Gateway Landscaping and Lighting District;
Gibson Ranch Landscaping and Lighting District;
North Park Landscaping and Lighting District;
Streng Pond Landscape Maintenance District; and
West Wood Unit No. 1 Landscaping and Lighting District; WHEREAS, the City requests the County collect on the County tax rolls certain charges which have been imposed pursuant to Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 (commencing with Section 53311) of the California Government Code by the City for the following Districts:

City of Woodland Community Facilities District No. 1 (Gibson Ranch); City of Woodland Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 (Spring Lake); and City of Woodland Community Facilities District No. 2022-1 (Prudler); WHEREAS, the City requests the County collect on the County tax rolls certain charges which have been imposed pursuant to section 53340 of Government Code of the State of California by the City for the following District:

Spring Lake Maintenance Community Facilities District;
WHEREAS, the City requests the County collect on the County tax rolls certain charges which have been imposed pursuant to section 13.04.130 of the City Municipal Code by the City for the following:

Waste Management Liens;
WHEREAS, the City requests the County collect on the County tax rolls certain charges which have been imposed pursuant to section 9.44.130 of the City Municipal Code by the City for the following:

Page 30 ends

Weed Abatement Liens;
WHEREAS, the County has required as a condition of the collection of said charges that the District/City warrant the legality of said charges and defend and indemnify the County from any challenge to the legality thereof.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Woodland that:

1. The Auditor-Controller of Yolo County is requested to attach for collection on the County tax rolls those taxes, assessments, fees and/or charges, attached hereto.

2. The City warrants and represents that the taxes, assessments, fees and/or charges imposed by the City and being requested to be collected by Yolo County comply with all requirements of state law, including but not limited to Articles XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution (Proposition 218).

3. The City releases and discharges County, and its officers, agents and employees from any and all claims, demands, liabilities, costs and expenses, damages, causes of action and judgments, in any manner arising out of the collection by County of any taxes, assessments, fees and/or charges on behalf of City,

4. The City agrees to and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officers, agents and employees (the “Indemnified Parties”) from any and all claims, demands, liabilities, costs and expenses, damages, causes of action, and judgments, in any manner arising out of the collection by County of any of City’s said taxes, assessments, fees and/or charges requested to be collected by County for City, or in any manner arising out of City’s establishment and imposition of said taxes, assessments, fees and/or charges. City agrees that, in the event a judgment is entered in a court of law against any of the Indemnified Parties as a result of the collection of one of City’s taxes, assessments, fees and/or charges, the County may offset the amount of the judgment from any other monies collected by County on behalf of City, including property taxes.

5. The City agrees that its officers, agents and employees will cooperate with the County in answering questions referred to City by County from any person concerning the City’s taxes, assessments, fees and/or charges, and that City will not refer such persons to County officers and employees for response.

6. The City agrees to pay such reasonable and ordinary charges as the County may prescribe to recoup its costs in placing on the tax rolls and collecting the taxes, assessments, fees and/or charges, as provided by Government Code sections 29304 and 51800. The County is charging an annual $1 levy fee per parcel for all special assessments. Any increase to these levy fees charged by the County would have to be approved by the City and adopted in a separate resolution.

Page 31 ends

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Woodland at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of July 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Rich Lansburgh, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Lansburgh, CMC, City Clerk Ethan Walsh, City Attorney

Page 32 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.7
SUBJECT: Community Services Department Quarterly Status Report for the Fourth Quarter of FY25

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council receive the Community Services Department Quarterly Status Report for the Fourth Quarter of FY25.

Staff Contact:

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

Discussion:

This Quarterly Status Report covers the period from April through June 2025. The report summarizes recreation programming, events, parks, recreation facility operations, and maintenance. The report also contains a narrative of major work performed and notable department highlights.

Conclusion:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive the Community Services Department Quarterly Status Report for the Fourth Quarter of FY25.

Prepared by: Kris Bain, Community Services Program Manager

Reviewed by: Christine Ferrara, Community Services Director

Attachments:

1. CSD Q4 FY25

Page 33 ends

Community Services Department
FY25 Fourth Quarter Report Page 1
Community Services Department Fourth Quarter Report FY25 The following summarizes the Community Service Department’s programs, activities, and events for the fourth quarter of 2025, covering the period from April to June.

This report references participant hours. The methodology for calculating participant hours is explained at the end of the document. Participant totals (total number of participants and total participant hours) represent the overall number of participants and hours for the entire reporting period.

Quarterly Highlights
•Approximately 37,613 participant hours were recorded for aquatics; and youth, teen and adult recreation classes and sports.
•Approximately 10,781 participant hours were recorded for senior programs and senior events. •Approximately 2,673 people attended events at the Community & Senior Center during facility rentals.

Gentlemen using the Senior Center Pool Room
Program Marketing
During this reporting period, the Department used the following marketing efforts to promote the recreation program offerings, community events, and senior programs. •Direct Marketing: Digital flyers promoting the summer activities and programs were sent to current and past program participants. Banners and yard signs were strategically placed to promote seasonal hiring, adult sports, and Summer Teen Pack.

Page 34 ends

Community Services Department
FY25 Fourth Quarter Report Page 2
•Senior Newsletter: The “Senior Gram” newsletter is mailed to 760 households monthly and is available online at www.cityofwoodland.gov/seniors.
•Social Media: The Department utilizes Facebook, Instagram, and Nextdoor to advertise upcoming events and recreation programs.

Rec2Go
Rec2Go provided departmental outreach at several community events and activities such as the Dia de los Niños event at Ferns Park, the Read Rumble, and Rev event at the Library, Unidos Egg Hunt, Cesar Chavez Community School Easter Festival, Bayside Church Easter Egg Hunt, Woodland Little League, Regional Park Preserve Grand Opening, Woodland Downtown Farmer’s Market, Paletas con Policia, the Summer Reading Program Kick-off at the Library, and various school and park activities.

Parks & Recreation Facilities
Community & Senior Center Facility Reservations
The Community & Senior Center facility rental program is designed to both generate revenue for the City of Woodland and provide a location for community events. Types of rentals held at the Community Center include: meetings, parties (bridal and baby showers), weddings and receptions, quinceañeras, and business meetings. Reservations of the facility during the fourth quarter are shown below.

General Facility Rentals
Includes rentals receiving discounts
Facility Rentals
with Fees Waived
Number of Rentals 21 19
Approximate Participants 1,957 716
Total Fees $24,649 $15,424 (waived)
Skip and Julie Davies Sports Park Tournament Reservations Tournament rentals are available at Skip and Julie Davies Sports Park. During the tournament weekend allocation period each August, local tournament directors have the first choice of dates for the following year. During the fourth quarter, the Sports Park was reserved for youth baseball, softball, and soccer tournaments.

Skip and Julie Davies Sports Park Tournament Reservations Number of Rentals 11
Number of Teams 198
Total Fees Collected $40,950
Parks and Recreation Facility Maintenance and Improvement Projects Park/Recreation Facility Projects Completed
Beamer Park Replaced the barbecue at the picnic station.

Clark Ballfield Replaced sixty-three bleacher boards.

Community & Senior Center Installed padding on basketball backboards.

Repaired roof leak and damaged ceiling tiles.

Diagnosed and repaired offline security cameras.

Worked with the new vendor to install an access control system for the building.

Page 35 ends

Community Services Department
FY25 Fourth Quarter Report Page 3
Crawford Park Worked to combat vandalism to the light controller for the pickleball courts.

Rebuilt the air pump at the bike station.

Replaced the gates on the restroom doors with new metal auto locks.

Performed deep cleaning, including pressure washing the building, eaves, trash cans, sidewalks, and windows.

Christiansen Park Performed thorough maintenance on the horseshoe pits by replacing the fill materials and replacing the wood backstops.

Ferns Park Repainted the park sign.

Replaced the sound play musical handles at the playground.

Replaced the baby changing station in one of the restrooms.

Heritage Plaza Replaced the clock pole after the original was damaged.

Jack Slaven Park Repaired women’s restroom stalls.

Woodside Park Prepped and repaired the cracks in the tennis court surface.

Other City locations
Regional Park Added siding to the interior of the shed and placed shelving peg boards.

Stained the kiosk at the pathway entrance.

Cleaned up the space for the Grand Opening event.

Recreation Activities – Special Events
Event Event Date Total
Participants Participant Hours Fees Collected
Concert on Court Apr. 11 450 900 Free event
Total Participants 450 900 Free event
Photos from Concert on Court, April 11, 2025
RECREATION ACTIVITIES - Aquatics
All aquatic programs are held at the Charles Brooks Community Swim Center. Aquatic programming is available for children as young as six months old through seniors and includes swimming lessons,

Page 36 ends

Community Services Department
FY25 Fourth Quarter Report Page 4
lifeguard training, recreation swimming, recreation swim teams, lap swim and water aerobics. During the spring, the primary programming at the pool is lap swim, water aerobics, and the use of the pool by the Woodland Swim Team and the Woodland and Pioneer High Schools.

Aquatics Program Total Participants
(3 months)
Participant Hours
(3 months)
Fees Collected
(3 months)
Lap Swim & Water Aerobics 9,346 9,346 $3,332
Lifeguard Training 18 720 $2,256
Water Polo Clinic 17 272 $1,564
Rentals N/A N/A $10,586
Total 9,381 10,338 $17,738
Rentals
During non-programmed hours, the Charles Brooks Community Swim Center is available to reserve for other aquatic activities not affiliated with the City of Woodland. Pool reservation fees account for the facility and safety personnel on-site during the scheduled event. Fees collected during the fourth quarter included $4,856 for general swim meet reservations and $5,730 from the Woodland Swim Team.
.

Lap Swim participant at the pool
RECREATION ACTIVITIES - Youth & Teen
The department offers a variety of youth and teen recreation programs year-round; however, many programs are offered during the summer. In addition to the programs listed below, please refer to the Contract Classes section for other program offerings for youth and teens.

Youth Recreation Program Total Participants
(3 months)
Participant Hours
(3 months)
Fees Collected
(3 months)
After School Teen Pack - Measure R 1,153 2,858 Free program Rec2Go - Measure R 1,625 4,295 Free program
Summer at City Hall – Measure R 23 966 Free Program
You’ve Been Egged -Measure R 18 0 $475
Total 2,819 8,119 $475

Page 37 ends

Community Services Department
FY25 Fourth Quarter Report Page 5
Summer at City Hall 2025 cohort
RECREATION ACTIVITIES - Contract Classes
The City contracts with outside instructors to teach recreation and leisure classes for people of all ages. For all classes except tennis and boxing, the City keeps 30% of the fees collected and non- resident fees. For the tennis program, the City keeps 10% of the fees. As for boxing, the City supplements this program and pays the two contractors a monthly stipend.

Total
Participants
Participant
Hours
Fees
Collected
Total
Expense Net RevenueContract Class
(3 months) (3 months) (3 months) (3 months) (3 months)
Boxing Youth 132 1320 $1,990 $4,200 -$2,210
Boxing Adult 58 580 $1,465 $4,800 -$3,335
Cello Tennis Academy 253 1398 $17,418 $15,240 $2,178
Cheer 530 34 816 $4,890 $3,360 $1,530
Country Line Dance 261 391.5 $1,566 $1,096 $470
Cuban Salsa 13 52 $454 $308 $146
Dance Fitness & Tai Chi 126 567 $5,678 $3,766 $1,912
Golf Lessons Youth 10 100 $1,040 $700 $340
Mad Science 23 345 $3,768 $2,528 $1,240
National Academy of Athletics 9 54 $594 $0 $594
Pioneer Football Conditioning 86 2064 $1,764 $1,218 $546 Play-Well Lego Engineering 24 360 $4,920 $2,688 $2,232
Rock Steady Boxing 40 560 $800 $650 $150
Scottish Country Dance 35 490 $1,111 $746 $365
Socceroo 26 121.5 $3,201 $2,163 $1,038

Page 38 ends

Community Services Department
FY25 Fourth Quarter Report Page 6
Yoga 41 328 $1,664 $1,120 $544
Zumba Kids 22 66 $846 $567 $279
Total 1,193 9,613 $53,169 $45,150 $8,019
RECREATION ACTIVITIES - Adult Sports
Adult sports activities are offered through the City. Activities include drop-in sports as well as organized softball, basketball, and volleyball leagues. Drop-in basketball (open gym) numbers are not reported; however, participation for the other programs is listed below.

Drop-In Participation Sign-Ins Participant Hours Fees Collected Badminton 1,168 3,504 Free Program
Pickleball 25 75 Free Program
Total 1,193 3,579 No fees collected
Sports League
Participation
Teams Participants Participant Hours Fees Collected
Basketball (spring league) 20 200 1,800 $12,500
Softball (spring league) 28 420 3,780 $18,200
Volleyball (spring league) 6 48 384 $2,520
Total 54 668 5,964 $33,220
Spring 2025 Women’s Volleyball Champions
RECREATION ACTIVITIES – Senior Activities
Programs at the Woodland Senior Center include art classes, exercise classes, games, leisure programs and activities, education resources, support groups, and special events, resulting in 10,781 participant hours during the fourth quarter.

Page 39 ends

Community Services Department
FY25 Fourth Quarter Report Page 7
Senior Programs
Program Total Sign-ins Participant Hours Fees Collected Art Groups 575 1,640 Free Programs
Exercise Classes 3,160 2,044 Free Programs
General Programs 412 1,928 Free Programs
Support Groups 234 451 Free Programs
Games 1,182 3,834 Free Programs
Total 5,563 9,897 No fees collected
Senior Events
Event Total Participants Participant Hours Fees Collected Senior Center Inc. Installation Dinner 178 534 Free Program Senior Resource Fair 350 350 Free Program
Total 528 884 No fees collected
Members of the Writing Life Stories class at the Senior Center Participant Hours Calculation
The Community Services Department measures programs through “participant hours”. Participant hours are a calculation of total program hours multiplied by the total number of unique participants within a program. Total participant hours reports how much time participants spend within each program. The measurement breaks down to 1 person x 1 hour = 1 Participant Hour. It should be noted that a higher number of participant hours is not, by itself, a measurement of greater program success compared to the participant hours of another program. Participant Hours (PH) is calculated by:

Drop-In Programs
1 Class meeting (in hours) x Total sign-ins
Examples include Water Aerobics & Lap Swim, and Badminton

Page 40 ends

Community Services Department
FY25 Fourth Quarter Report Page 8
Classes/Camps/Leagues
Total unique participants x total class time (in hours) Examples include: Swim Lessons, Mad Science
Individual Entry
Each class meeting (in hours) x Total in attendance (adding each day) Examples include: Teens Helping Seniors
Events
Total Attendees x Average Time
Examples include: Concert on Court, 4th of July
Participant hours and participants in this report are listed for the three-month reporting period; therefore, if 100 participants are listed, the 100 refers to the total participants for the three-month period and could double or triple count the same participants if they participated each month (i.e. drop in Lap Swim).

Page 41 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.8
SUBJECT: Approval to Cast City Ballot for Springlake Fire Protection District Prop 218 Assessment

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, approving the proposed property assessment under Proposition 218 for parcels owned by the City within the Springlake Fire Protection District, and to approve casting a “Yes” vote on the assessment ballot and authorizing the City Manager to submit the ballot on behalf of the City.

Staff Contact:

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

Fiscal Impact:

The total proposed new annual assessment for the city-owned properties within the district is estimated to be approximately $4,600. This is an increase of approximately $4,200 and will be absorbed within current departmental budgets and, if approved, will not require additional budget appropriation for Fiscal Year 2025/26.

Background:

The Springlake Fire Protection District (SLFPD) has initiated a Proposition 218 process to establish a new property assessment. The assessment is intended to ensure the District’s ongoing fiscal sustainability, address increased operational demands, and secure reliable funding for fire protection and emergency response services.

The assessment, if approved by a majority of voting property owners, would replace the existing rate structure with a more equitable and updated formula based on parcel type and benefit received.

City-Owned Parcels:

The City of Woodland owns 8-parcels within the boundaries of the SLFPD, including public right-of- way and undeveloped tracts. Each of these parcels is subject to the proposed assessment and therefore entitles the City to submit ballots as a property owner.

Ballots have been issued by the SLFPD to all affected property owners, including the City. As a governmental landowner, the City has the right and responsibility to vote on the assessment based on its own parcels.

Assessment Details:
• Assessment Purpose: To provide sustainable funding for fire protection, prevention, and emergency response services to properties within SLFPD. • Assessment Structure: Based on parcel type, land use, and benefit methodology as outlined in the Engineer’s Report.

The full Engineer’s Report has been provided as Attachment A for Council review.

Page 42 ends

Considerations for City Council Action:

As a property owner, the City of Woodland’s votes may influence the outcome of the Proposition 218 proceeding. In determining how to vote, the Council may consider:
• The public benefit of continued and enhanced fire protection in the unincorporated Springlake area.
• The equity and fairness of the proposed assessment structure. • The regional implications of SLFPD’s financial stability for mutual and automatic aid partners, including Woodland Fire Department.

The proposed property assessment will ensure continued high-quality fire protection and emergency response services in the Springlake Fire Protection District. City participation and support of the assessment demonstrates prudent stewardship of public assets and commitment to public safety.

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, approving the proposed property assessment under Proposition 218 for parcels owned by the City within the Springlake Fire Protection District, and to approve casting a “Yes” vote on the assessment ballot and authorizing the City Manager to submit the ballot on behalf of the City.

Prepared by: Nallely Castro, Management Analyst

Reviewed by: Eric Zane, Fire Chief

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution - City Prop 218 SLFPD

2. Springlake FPD ER 25-26

Page 43 ends

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF A BALLOT IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED PROPERTY ASSESSMENT UNDER PROPOSITION 218 FOR CITY-

OWNED PARCELS WITHIN THE SPRINGLAKE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Springlake Fire Protection District (“SLFPD”) has initiated proceedings under Proposition 218 to establish a new property assessment for the purpose of funding fire protection, prevention, and emergency response services; and WHEREAS, the proposed assessment would replace the District’s existing rate structure with a more equitable and updated methodology based on parcel type, land use, and proportional benefit received, as outlined in the Engineer’s Report prepared in support of the assessment; and WHEREAS, the City of Woodland owns eight (8) parcels located within the boundaries of the Springlake Fire Protection District which are subject to the proposed assessment; and WHEREAS, as a property owner within the District, the City of Woodland is entitled to submit assessment ballots under the provisions of Proposition 218; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that sustainable fire protection and emergency response services provide critical public safety benefits to City-owned property and the surrounding community, and that the proposed assessment represents a reasonable and necessary funding mechanism for those services.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Woodland as follows:

SECTION 1.Ballot Direction: The City Council directs that the official assessment ballots for all City-owned parcels be completed to reflect a “Yes” vote in favor of the proposed assessment
SECTION 2.Authorization: The City Council authorizes the City Manager to execute and submit the ballots on behalf of the City of Woodland and to take any further actions necessary to carry out the intent of this Resolution.

SECTION 3.This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Woodland at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of July 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Page 44 ends

_______________________________
Rich Lansburgh, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Lansburgh, CMC, City Clerk Ethan Walsh, City Attorney

Page 45 ends

ENGINEER’S REPORT

Springlake Fire Protection District
Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services
Assessment

Fiscal Year 2025-26

Pursuant to California Government Code Section
50078 et seq., Health and Safety Code Section
13914 and Article XIIID of the California
Ci i

Page 46 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page i
Springlake Fire Protection District
Board of Commissioner’s
 Westin Arvin, Board Chair
 (Laura) Celeste Santoni, Vice Chair
 Carolyn Bunfill, Commissioner
 Brooke Herrgesell, Commissioner
 Patrick Raber, Commissioner

Fire Chiefs
 Eric Zane, Fire Chief, Woodland Fire
 Joe Tenney, Fire Chief, Davis Fire

Page 47 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page ii
Table of Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 4 Legal Analysis of Proposition 218 ................................................................................. 6 Assessment Process .......................................................................................... 9 Description of Services .................................................................................... 11 Cost and Budget .............................................................................................. 14 Method of Apportionment ............................................................................. 15 Implementation of an Assessment for Fire Protection Services ................................ 15 Overview of Special Benefits from Fire Protection Services ...................................... 17 Description of Special Benefit From Fire Protection Services .................................... 17 General Versus Special Benefit .................................................................................. 19 Calculating General Benefit ........................................................................................ 20 Summary of General Benefits .................................................................................... 24 Zones of Benefit ......................................................................................................... 24 Assessment Apportionment ....................................................................................... 25 Method of Assessment ............................................................................................... 25 Assessments Calculation ............................................................................................ 34 Government Code § 53759.1 and 53759.2 ................................................................ 35 Appeals of Assessments Levied to Property .............................................................. 36 Additional Background on Relative Benefit ............................................................... 36 Criteria and Policies .................................................................................................... 37 Duration of Assessment ............................................................................................. 37 Assessment ..................................................................................................... 38 Assessment Diagram ....................................................................................... 40 Appendix A – Fire Hazard Areas Diagram ........................................................ 42 Appendix B – Response Areas Travel Time Diagram ........................................ 43 Appendix C – Assessment Roll, Fiscal Year 2025-26 ......................................... 44 End Notes ....................................................................................................... 45

Page 48 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page iii
List of Tables
Table 1 – Proposed Assessment Rates................................................................................ 5 Table 2 – Cost and Budget ................................................................................................ 14 Table 3 – Normalized Fire Risk Factors ............................................................................. 28 Table 4 – Structure Replacement Factors ......................................................................... 29 Table 5 – Benefit Summary per Property Type ................................................................. 30 Table 6 – Fire Hazard Zone Risk Factors ........................................................................... 32 Table 7 – Travel Time Premium Factor ............................................................................. 34 Table 8 – Summary Cost Estimate .................................................................................... 38

Page 49 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 4 ends

Introduction
The Springlake Fire Protection District (“Springlake FPD,” “Fire District,” or “District”), was originally formed in 1942 and provides fire protection, fire prevention and emergency response services to the unincorporated area between the City of Davis and the City of Woodland and the unincorporated area northeast of the City of Woodland between Yolo Fire Protection District and El khorn Fire Protection District. The Fire District is governed by a five-member Board of Fire Commissioners appointed by the Yolo County Board of Supervisors. The Fire District contracts with the City of Davis and City of Woodland (“the Cities,” or “Fire Departments”) for fire serv ices, staffing, equipment and apparatus. The Fire District also contracts with University of California, Davis (“UC Davis”) to provide services to properties owned by UC Davis (see assessment diagram on page 41). UC Davis assumes sole responsibility for fire protecti on and related services for the UC Davis parcels; the UC Davis service area and is not a part of the proposed assessment. The Fire District does not have any employees or own any assets.

The Fire District covers approximately 51 square miles and serv es an approximate population of 4,500. Springlake FPD responds to over 240 service calls per year, including structure fires, brush fires, vegetation fire s, vehicle fires, traffic collisions, hazardous materials incidents, and emergency medical calls. In addition, Springlake FPD provides fire prevention, community education, emergency preparedness and other services relating to the protection of lives and property.

The proposed assessment district described in this Engineer’s Report is intended to provide an ongoing secure funding source for local fire protection services. Springlake FPD is funded through a small portion of local property taxes and a static $75 per residence special assessment that has remained uncha nged since 1997. This existing assessment does not include a cost-of-living index adjustment mechanism.

The cost of providing fire protection and em ergency response services continues to rise each year due to increasing emergency calls, enhanced firefighter training requirements, and substantial increases in operational co sts, including fuel, utilities, equipment, insurance, and personnel over the last 28 years.

The lack of a cost-of-living adjustment in the property owner-approved special assessment has left the District unable to keep pace economically with the increased costs of operations, equipment, equipment maintenance and personnel.

Page 50 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 5 ends

Competitive wages in other agencies have made it increasingly difficult for the Fire Departments to retain and attract firefighters. A new funding source will help with increased firefighter staffing and retention, as well as equipment and apparatus replacement. Adequate staffing will also allow the Fire District to assemble the recommended number of personnel on the scene of an incident faster, which is a factor for the Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating for local properties, affecting insurance rates.

A negative change in ISO rating could result in higher costs with possibly lower coverage limits or the complete loss of homeowners insurance coverage.

Springlake FPD seeks to maintain a high leve l of fire protection and emergency response service by maintaining appropriate staffing levels and providing improved apparatus replacement.

This Engineer’s Report supports a proposed new assessment to enhance existing funding sources, associated services, and equipmen t, and fund these improved services and equipment. The proposed rates for this proposed assessment are shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1 – Proposed Assessment Rates

These proposed assessment rates, adjusted by the relative fire hazard zone factor and the relative travel time factor, are used to calc ulate the specific assessment for each parcel.

These factors are explained in more detail in the Method of Apportionment section of this report.

This Engineer’s Report (the "Report") was prepared to:
 Describe the fire suppression, safety and emergency response services and equipment that would be funded by the assessments (the "Services")  Establish a budget for the Services that would be funded by the assessments in fiscal year 2025-26
Property Type Proposed Rate Unit
Single Fam ily $149.98 e ach
Multi-Fam ily $46.43 re s unit
Com m e rcial/Industrial $646.85 acre
Office $318.48 acre
Storage $497.75 acre
Parking Lot $33.72 each
Vacant $26.08 each
Agriculture $2.83 acre
Range Land & Open Space $1.86 acre

Page 51 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 6 ends

 Determine the special benefits received from the proposed Services by property within the Springlake Fire Protection District Assessment (the "Assessment District"), and
 Describe the method of apportionment to lots and parcels within the Assessment District.

This Report and the proposed assessments have been made in compliance with California Government Code Section 50078 et seq., Heal th and Safety Code Section 13914 (the "Code") and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (the “Article”).

The Assessment District is narrowly drawn to include only properties that directly receive the additional fire protection and prevention services provided by the assessment funds and are specially benefited from such Services. The Assessment Diagram included in this Report shows the boundaries of the Assessment District.

Legal Analysis of Proposition 218
The proposed assessment complies with Proposition 218, The Right to Vote on Taxes Act, which was approved by the voters of California on November 6, 1996, and is now Articles XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution. Proposition 218 provides for benefit assessments to be levied to fund the cost of providing services, improvements, as well as maintenance and operation expenses of a public improvement that provide a special benefit to the assessed property.

Proposition 218 imposes a number of important requirements, including property-owner balloting, for the formation and continuation of assessments, and these requirements are satisfied by the process used to establish this assessment.

Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v Santa Clara County Open Space District (2008) 44 Cal.4th 431
On July 14, 2008, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space District (“Silicon Valley”). Several of the most important elements of the ruling are:
 Benefit assessments are for special, not general benefit  The services and/or improvements funded by assessments must be clearly defined
 Special benefits are directly received by and provide a direct advantage to property in the Assessment District

Page 52 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 7 ends

Dahms v. Downtown Pomona Property (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 708 On June 8, 2009, the Court of Appeal amende d its original opinion upholding a benefit assessment for property in the downtown area of the City of Pomona. On July 22, 2009, the California Supreme Court granted review and transferred the case back to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court’s discussion in the Silicon Valley case. In Dahms, the Appellate Court then upheld the assessment that was 100% special benefit (i.e., 0% general benefit) holding that the services and improvements funded by the assessments were directly provided to property in the assessment District.

The Court also upheld discounts and exemptions from the assessment for certain properties.

Bonander v. Town of Tiburon (2009) 46 Cal.4th 646
On December 31, 2009, the Court of Appeal ov erturned a benefit assessment approved by property owners to pay for placing overhead utility lines underground in an area of the Town of Tiburon. The Court invalidated the assessments on the grounds that the assessments had been apportioned to assessed property based in part on relative costs within sub-areas of the assessment district, instead of each individual property’s proportional special benefits.

Beutz v. County of Riverside (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1516 On May 26, 2010, the California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Steven Beutz v.

County of Riverside (“Beutz”). This decision overturned an assessment for park maintenance in Wildomar, California, primarily because the general benefits associated with improvements and services were not explicitly calculated, quantified, and separated from the special benefits.

Golden Hill Neighborhood Association V. City of San Diego (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 416
On September 22, 2011, California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Golden Hill Neighborhood Association v. City of San Diego . This decision overturned an assessment for street and landscaping maintenance in the Greater Golden Hill neighborhood of San Diego, California. The court described two pr imary reasons for its decision. First, as in Beutz, the court found the general benefits associ ated with services were not explicitly calculated, quantified and separated from the special benefits. Second, the court found that the City had failed to document the basis for the assessment on city-owned parcels.

Page 53 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 8 ends

Compliance with Current Law
This Engineer’s Report is consistent with the requirements of Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution and with the Silicon Valley decision because the Services to be funded are clearly defined; the Services are ava ilable to and will be directly provided to all benefited property in the Assessment District; the Services provide a direct advantage to property in the Assessment District that would not be received in the absence of the assessment; and the Services are benefits that are over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in Springlake FPD or to the public at large by other public entities that make up the membership of Springlake FPD.

This Report is consistent with Dahms because, similar to the Downtown Pomona assessment validated in Dahms, the Services will be directly provided to property in the Assessment District. More specifically, as discussed hereafter, the Services afford benefits specifically unique and supplied only to property owners within the District, with a corresponding effect that is not shared by ot her parcels outside of the District or real property in general, including the public at large. While Dahms could be used as the basis for a finding of 0% general benefits, this En gineer’s Report establishes a more generous separation and quantification of general benefits.

This Report is also consistent with Bonander because the Assessment has been apportioned based on the proportional specia l benefit to each property. Furthermore, the Assessment is consistent with Beutz and Golden Hill because the general benefits have been explicitly calculated, quantified, and excluded from the Assessment.

Page 54 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 9 ends

Assessment Process
Following submittal of this Report to Sp ringlake FPD for preliminary approval, the Springlake FPD Board of Commissioners (the “Board”) may, by Resolution, call for an assessment ballot proceeding and public hearing on the proposed establishment of a Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment.

If the Board approves such a Resolution, a Notice of Assessment and Assessment Ballot will be mailed to each property owner within the proposed Assessment District boundaries who will be subject to the proposed assessment. The Notice will include a description of the Services to be funded by the proposed assessment, the total amount of the proposed assessment and the amount chargeable to the owner’s parcel, the reasons for the proposed assessment and the basis upon which it was calculated, and an explanation of the process for submitting a ballot. Each Notice will also include a postage prepaid return envelope and a ballot on which the property owner may mark his or her approval or disapproval of the proposed assessment as well as affix his or her signature.

After the ballots are mailed to property owners in the Assessment District, a minimum 45-daytime period must be provided for the return of the assessment ballots. Following this balloting time period, a public hearing must be held for the purpose of allowing public testimony regarding the proposed assessments . Ballots will be received if previously mailed and received by the public agency before the public hearing, or if physically submitted at the public hearing. At the public hearing, the public will have the opportunity to speak on the issue. The public hearing is currently scheduled for July 2025. After receiving ballots and public comment, the public hearing will be closed. The Board will then take a recess to allow for the tabulation of the ballots.

If it is determined that the assessment ballots submitted in opposition to the proposed assessment do not exceed the assessment ballo ts submitted in favor of the assessment (weighted by the proportional financial obligation of the property for which ballots are submitted), the Board may approve the imposi tion of assessment for fiscal year 2025-26 and each fiscal year thereafter. If the a ssessment is confirmed and approved, the Board will order the levy of the assessment to be submitted to the Yolo County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the proper ty tax roll for Fiscal Year 2025-26. The levy and collection of the assessment would continue year-to-year until terminated by the Board.

Page 55 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 10 ends

The assessment authorized by the ballot proceeding would be for a maximum assessment rate of $149.98 per single family equivalent (see Table 1 for maximum assessment rates of other types of property), increased each year by the consumer price index not to exceed 3% per year. However, the District will not increase the assessment rate for at least 5 years from adoption if the proposed assessments are approved. The first year a CPI increase may be added to the assessment is fiscal year 2030-31.

In each subsequent year for which the assessment will be continued, an updated proposed budget, assessment rate and an updated assessment roll listing all parcels and their proposed assessment for the upcoming fiscal year shall be prepared and considered by the Board of Commissioners, subject to the maximum assessment rate and 3% consumer price index increase described in the ballot materials.

If the assessment is confirmed and approved, the levies would be submitted to the Yolo County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the property tax roll for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Page 56 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 11 ends

Description of Services
Springlake FPD provides a range of fire suppression and protection, prevention, and other fire and emergency-related services to properties within its boundaries.

This proposed benefit assessment would provide funding for two major areas of service improvements within the District for its fire suppression and protection operations (with the majority of the proposed assessment revenue being dedicated to replacement of outdated apparatus.)
 Increased Firefighter Staffing and Training
 Improved Maintenance and Replacement of Apparatus and Equipment The City of Davis fire stations are located at:

Fire Station 31, 530 5
th Street, Davis, CA
Fire Station 32, 1350 Arlington Boulevard, Davis, CA
Fire Station 33, 425 Mace Boulevard, Davis, CA
The City of Woodland fire stations are located at:

Fire Station 1, 101 Court Street, Woodland, CA
Fire Station 2, 1619 West Street, Woodland, CA
Fire Station 3, 1550 Springlake Court, Woodland, CA
The formula below describes the relationship between the final level of services, the baseline level of service based on existing funding, and the enhanced level of services funded by the assessment if it is approved. It should be noted, due to the fact that current operating costs are increasing at a faster ra te than current funding sources, the baseline level of services is diminishing over time.

Final Level of Service =
Current and
Diminishing Baseline
Level of Service

+
Proposed Enhanced Level of
Service

Below is a more detailed description of th ese improvements that are provided for the special benefit of property in the Assessment District.

Page 57 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 12 ends

Increased Firefighting Staffing and Training
Firefighting emergency response staffing levels are described colloquially in terms of “speed and weight,” with speed describing the response time and weight describing the number and types of personnel. Also, staffing levels are also commonly described in terms of the number of firefighting staff per fire truck and/or apparatus, such as “4 on an initial response” or “3 on an initial response.” Springlake Fire is satisfied with its response time (“speed”) but has determined that its staffing levels (“weight”) need to be improved.

Although there are many approaches to deploying firefighting staff, OSHA guidelines place strict requirements on operations, part icularly when firefighters are required to enter potentially Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) environments such as structure fires. In these atmospheres, OSHA requires that personnel use self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA), that a minimum of two firefighters work as a team inside the structure, and that a minimum of two firefighters be on standby outside the structure to provide assistance or perform rescue.

To meet the “2 in, 2 out” standard, the National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) recommendation is four (4) personnel per apparatus in a community of this size and risk.

The District is having difficulty meeting the NFPA recommendation due to budget constraints.

Essentially the “2 in, 2 out” rule severely limits Springlake FPD’s ability to respond effectively to many types of emergencies. The challenge is compounded in the case of multiple calls. Springlake FPD has determin ed that an increase in staffing would significantly increase its effectiveness, as well as compliance with OSHA requirements, and would benefit the property owners with heightened levels of property and human life protection.

Improved and increased firefighting staffing levels will significantly contribute to improved safety and protection of real property within the proposed Assessment District.

The proposed assessment is intended to provide funding firefighter staffing and additional training. The costs for the prop osed staffing increases would support the implementation of “3 on an initial response” staffing and are included in the Table 2 Budget.

Page 58 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 13 ends

Improved Maintenance and Replacement of Apparatus and Equipment Springlake FPD desires to ensure maintenance and replacement of apparatus in order to maximize safety and effectiveness for fire suppression. Improved maintenance and replacement will significantly contribute to improved safety and protection of real property. It should be noted that the need for equipment replacement will be ongoing.

The Fire Districts relies on a 30-year-old Water Tender that is overdue for replacement.

If approved, the proposed assessment will fund replacement of the Water Tender by allocating $93,313 per year to replacement of the Water Tender.

Other Services and Supplies
The budget shown in Table 2 includes and summarizes budget allocations for firefighter staffing and training, equipment and appara tus maintenance and replacement, capital repairs, equipment operation and maintenance, professional services, supplies and materials, utilities, and administration in support of Springlake FPD’s operations.

Page 59 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 14 ends

Cost and Budget
The following budget lists the proposed expenditures funded by the Assessment District in Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Table 2 – Cost and Budget

The “Service Needs” cost estimates are presented in the budget table above for the 2025-26 fiscal year only but are based upon financial forecasting over a 10-year cycle and beyond. This forecasting concludes that these costs will likely persist consistently into the future. Consistent with the General Benefit requirement described later in this Report, at least 20% of the total cost of the Springlake FPD Fire Services must be funded from sources other than this proposed assessment to cover any general benefits from the Services. Therefore, the cost of services of $708,596 funded by the proposed assessment can be funded exclusively through the assessment levy as a special benefit since the current County contributions from its dedicated ad valorem property taxes, other sources and the existing benefit assessment revenue exceed approximately

77.26%. ($547,483/$708,596) of the total cost of Springlake FPD Fire Services, far in excess of the above required 20% non-assessment general benefit funding requirements. The 77.26% funding is from property taxes and other sources. The Total SFEs are the sum of the assigned Single Family Equivalent units for each affected parcel based upon a parcel-by-parcel analysis of the service area consistent with the Method of Apportionment described later in the Report.

Budget Item Amount
Service, Appartus and Equipment Needs
City of Davis Contract for Fire Protection Services $231,925 City of Woodland Contract for Fire Protection Services $282,958 Univerisity of California Davis Fire Protection Services $25,000 Firefighter Staffing and Training $67,800
Equipment and Apparatus Replacement $93,313
Professional Services $6,200
Administration $1,400
Contingency $0
Total Service Needs (a) $708,596
Less: Est. Dedicated Revenue from Property Taxes & Other Sources (b) -$498,205 Less: Est. Dedicated Revenue from Current Benefit Assessment (c) -$49,278 Est Total Revenue from Other Sources (General benefit contribution) (b+c) = (d) -$547,483 Net Cost of Servicing to Assessment District (a-d) = ('e) $161,113 Allowance for County Collection (1.00 per parcel) = (f) $595
Total Fire Suppression and Protection Services Budget (e+f) =(g) $161,708 Total Proposed Assessment Budget (g) $161,708
Effective Single Family Equivalent Benefit Units in Assessment District (h) 1,078.20 Proposed Assessment per Effectiv e Single Family Equiv alent Unit (SFE) (g/h) $149.98 Springlake Fire Protection District
Estimate of Costs
Fis cal Year 2025-26

Page 60 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 15 ends

Method of Apportionment
This section includes an explanation of the special benefits to be derived from the Services, the criteria for the expenditure of assessment funds, and the methodology used to apportion the total assessment to properties within the Assessment District.

The Assessment District area consists of a ll Assessor Parcels within Springlake FPD boundaries, with the exception of the UC Davis parcels (see assessment diagram on page 41). The method used for apportioning the assessment is based upon the proportional special benefits from the Services to be provided to the properties in the assessment area over and above general benefits conferred on real property or to the public at large.

Special benefit is calculated for each parcel in the Assessment District using the following process:

1. Identification of all benefit factors derived from the improved services

2. Calculation of the proportion of these benefits that are general

3. Determination of the relative special benefit within different areas within the Assessment District

4. Determination of the relative special benefit per property type

5. Calculation of the specific assessment for each individual parcel based upon special vs. general benefit, location, property type, property characteristics, improvements on property and other supporting attributes Implementation of an Assessment for Fire Protection Services California Government Code Section 50078 et. seq. allows agencies which provide fire suppression services, such as Springlake FPD, to levy assessments for fire suppression services. Section 50078 states the following:
“Any local agency which provides fire suppre ssion services directly or by contract with the state or a local agency may, by ordinance or by resolution adopted after notice and hearing, determine and levy an assessment for fire suppression services pursuant to this article.”
In addition, California Government Code Section 50078.1 defines the term “fire suppression” as follows:
“(c) "Fire suppression" includes firefighting and fire prevention, including, but not limited to, vegetation removal or management undertaken, in whole or in part, for the reduction of a fire hazard.”

Page 61 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 16 ends

Therefore, the Services to be provided by the Assessment District fall within the scope of services that may be funded by assessments under the Code.

The assessment must be levied based on the special benefit to property. Special benefit means a particular and distinct benefit received by property over and above any general benefits conferred on real property located in the Assessment District or the public at large. With reference to the requirement s for assessment, Section 50078.5 of the California Government Code states:
"(b) The benefit assessment shall be levied on a parcel, class of improvement to property, or use of property basis, or a combination thereof, within the boundaries of the local agency, zone, or area of benefit.”

“The assessment may be levied against any parcel, improvement, or use of property to which such services may be made available whether or not the service is actually used."

Health and Safety Code Section 13914 states:

A [fire protection] district may levy an a ssessment for fire suppression services pursuant to Article 3.6 (commencing with Section 50078) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 1 of Title 5 of the Government Code.

Proposition 218, as codified in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, has confirmed that assessments must be based on the special benefit to property:
"No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel."

Since assessments are levied on the basis of special benefit, they are not a tax and are not governed by Article XIIIA of the California Constitution.

The following two sections describe how and why the Fire Protection Services specially benefit properties. This special benefit is part icular and distinct from its effect on other property, and other real property and the public at large do not share the special benefit.

Page 62 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 17 ends

Overview of Special Benefits from Fire Protection Services Special Benefit is defined in Article XIIID of the California Constitution as a “particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits.” The proposed services and improvements provide “particular and distinct” benefit because they are distinctly defined and described and are provided directly to the parcels within the Assessment District boundaries. The proposed servic es and improvements are “over and above general benefits” currently supplied by the Springlake FPD and other agencies.

Moreover, this assessment for fire protection services can be clearly contrasted with assessments for parks and recreation, or even open space, as addressed in Silicon Valley, because fire services are provided directly to individual parcels in the form of fire prevention and suppression; by contrast, property owners must travel from their properties to dispersed locations to fully enjoy the benefits of parks and open space.

In summary, real property located within the boundaries of the proposed Assessment District distinctly and directly benefits from increased safety and protection of real property and human life in the Assessment District.

Description of Specia l Benefit From Fire Protection Services In order to allocate the assessments, the special benefit arising from the Services that will be provided to property in the Assessment District has been identified and described below. This special benefit must confer a direct advantage to the assessed properties; otherwise it would be general benefit, as described further in this report.

The following special benefit confers to reside ntial, commercial, industrial, institutional, and other lots and parcels resulting from the improved fire protection and emergency response services that will be provided in the Assessment District. Th is special benefit is summarized as follows:

Increased safety and protection of real property assets for all property owners within the Assessment District.

The proposed Assessments will fund improved fire suppression, pr evention, protection, and emergency response services, and thereby can significantly reduce the risk of property damage, human injury, or death a ssociated with fires within the assessment District. Clearly, fire mitigation helps to prot ect and specifically benefits both improved properties and vacant properties in the Assessment District.

Page 63 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 18 ends

"Fire is the largest single cause of property loss in the United States. In the last decade, fires have caused direct losses of more than $120 bi llion and countless billions more in related cost."1

“Over 140,000 wildfires occurred on average each year, burning a total of almost

14.5 million acres. And since 1990, over 900 homes have been destroyed each year by wildfires.”
2 “The strategies and techniques to address fire risks in structures are known. When implemented, these means have proven effective in the reduction of losses.”3

The proposed improved fire suppression, prevention, protection, and emergency response services support this special bene fit by providing Springlake FPD with the needed resources to protect real property from uncontrolled fires.

The proposed increased firefighting staffing supports this special benefit by providing needed personnel resources. For instance, current OSHA regulations require that two firefighters remain outside a structure during an emergency response to a structure fire, while two firefighters may enter. (This OSHA Policy is documented as United States Department of Labor - Occupational Safety and Health Administration — OSHA Regulation “2 in 2 out”— The “2In/2 Out” policy is part of paragraph (g)(4) of OSHAs revised respiratory protection standard, 29 CFR 1910.134.) This “2 in, 2 out” requirement places significant limitations on Springlake FPD’s ability to respond to structure fires, particularly when second and third calls are made. The proposed assessment would allow Springlake FPD to optimize staffing levels and respond with the standard of “3 on an initial response” on emergency calls. Properties receive direct special benefit from the increased staffi ng because the increase in staffing in turn increases the likelihood that property and life will be protected. For example, if only two firefighters are available to respond to a structure fire, no firefighter would be allowed to enter the structure –significantly delaying critical fire suppression activity.

The increased firefighting staffing specifically satisfies the strict legal requirements of the Silicon Valley decision in that these Services are cl early defined, are available to and will be directly provided to all benefited property and will provide a direct advantage that would not be received in the absence of the assessment.

Page 64 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 19 ends

General Versus Special Benefit
Article XIII D of the California Constitution requires any local agency proposing to increase or impose a benefit assessment to “separate the general benefits from the special benefits conferred on a parcel.”
In other words:

Total Benefit = General Benefit + Special Benefit

The rationale for separating special and general benefits is to ensure that property owners subject to the benefit assessment are not paying for general benefits. The assessment, therefore, can fund special benefits but cannot fund general benefits.

Please note that the property owners of the parcels subject to the assessment should not and cannot be required to pay for the general benefits arising from the proposed service and equipment improvements – this is an essential assessment-payer-protection requirement of all Proposition 218–compliant assessments. In order to clearly and overwhelmingly satisfy this important requirement, the general benefit has been calculated in each step favoring its reason able maximum to totally avoid any possibility that the total general benefit to be funded from other sources is under-calculated.

There is no statutory formula to calculate, quantify and separate general benefit in support of benefit assessment analysis. General benefits are benefits from improvements or services that are not special in nature, are not “particular and distinct,” and are not “over and above” benefits received by other properties, or the public at large. Silicon Valley provides some clarification by indicating that general benefits provide “an indirect, derivative advantage” and are not necessarily proximate to the improvements. Again, in this Report, the general benefit is genero usly estimated and described, and then budgeted so that it is funded by sources other than the assessment. Although there is not an industry standard for this general benefit calculation, the three-component (plus an adjustment for emergency medical) approach shown in the formula below has been the most-widely used.

Page 65 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 20 ends

1.) Benefit to Real Property Outside the Assessment District + 2.) Benefit to Real Property Inside the Assessment District that is Indirect and Derivative
+ 3.) Benefit to the Public at Large
+ (Adjustment for Emergency Medical Services)
= General Benefit

Special benefit, on the other hand, is defined in the California Constitution as “a particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large.” The Silicon Valley decision indicates that a special benefit is conferred to a property if the property “receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g., proximity to a park).” In this assessment, as noted previously, the improved Services are available when needed to all properties in the Assessment District, so the overwhelming proportion of the benefits conferred to property is special, and the benefits are only minimally received by property outside the Assessment District or the public at large.

Calculating General Benefit
This section provides a measure of the general benefits from the assessments.

1.) Benefit to Property Outs ide the Assessment District Properties within the Assessmen t District receive almost all of the special benefits from the Services because the Services will be provided solely in the Assessment District boundaries. (It should be noted that the Serv ices may, at times, be used outside the Springlake FPD boundaries. However, this use is part of a mutual aid agreement and is offset, at least in part, by the provision of Services by other outside agencies within the Assessment District boundaries.)

Page 66 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 21 ends

Properties proximate to, but outside of, the boundaries of the Assessment District receive some benefit from the proposed Services due to some degree of indirectly reduced fire risk to their property. Specifically, the parcels immediately contiguous to Springlake FPD’s boundaries enjoy a reduction to the possibility of a fire “jumping” from an adjacent structure (within the Springlake FPD bounda ries) because Springlake FPD controls structure fires within its boundaries. Because Springlake FPD’s primary role is directed towards structure fires, as opposed to wildland fires, and structure fires generally “jump” more slowly, it is reasonable to only consider the directly adjacent, but outside, parcels.

These are estimated to receive some benefit relative to parcels within the Assessment District, but they do not directly receive the improved fire protection resulting from the Services funded by the Assessments.

At the time the Assessment was proposed, th e Engineer of Work, using the Geographic Information Systems, quantified the number of parcels proximate to the Assessment District boundary but outside the Assessment District, and thereby determined that there were approximately 108 directly adjacent properties. Further consideration of the types, use, location, and other attributes of the ou tside but proximate parcels is not warranted due to numeric insignificance, and would not materially increase the accuracy of this analysis:

It can reasonably be argued that properties protected inside, but near the Assessment District boundaries, are offset by similar fire protection provided outside, but near, the Assessment District’s boundaries, through mutual aid agreements. However, this analysis uses the more generous approach of finding that 15.0% of the Services may be of general benefit to property outside the Assessment District and cannot be funded by this assessment.
108 parcels outside Springlake FPD but proximate to the District Boundaries
626 parcels in the Assessment District.

Calculation:

General Benefit to Property Outside the Assessment District = 108 / (626+108) = 14.71%: ~ rounded to 15.0%

Page 67 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 22 ends

2.) Benefit to Property Inside the District that is Indirect and Derivative In determining the proposed Assessment District area, Springlake FPD has been careful to only include parcels that will directly receive the benefit of the improved Services. All parcels will directly benefit from the us e of the improved Services throughout the Assessment District in order to maintain the same improved level of fire suppression and protection throughout the area. Fire protec tion and suppression will be provided as needed throughout the area. The shared special benefit - reduced severity and number of fires - would be received on an equivalent basis by all parcels in the Assessment District due to the proposed increased funding. Fu rthermore, all parcels in the Assessment District would directly benefit from the ab ility to request or receive service from Springlake FPD and to have a Springlake FPD resource promptly respond directly to the parcel and address the owner’s or resident’s service need.

The Silicon Valley decision indicates that the fact that a benefit is conferred throughout the Assessment District area does not make the benefit general rather than special, so long as the Assessment District is narrowly drawn and limited to the parcels directly receiving shared special benefits from the serv ice. This concept is particularly applicable in situations involving a landowner-a pproved assessment-funded extension or improvement of a local government service to benefit lands. This Report therefore concludes that, other than the general benefit to properties outside the Assessment District (discussed above) and to the public at large (discussed below), the general benefit from the fire protection services that is “indirect and derivative” is negligible.

3.) Benefit To The Public At Large
Because the Services directly serve and benefit all of the property in the Assessment District, any general benefit conferred on the public at large would be small.

The public at large uses the public highways, and when traveling in and through the Assessment District the public may benefit from the services without contributing to the assessment. Although the protection of this critical infrastructure is certainly a benefit to all the property within Springlake FPD, this protection is arguably “indirect and derivative” and possibly benefits people rather than property. A fair and appropriate measure of the general benefit to the public at large therefore is the amount of highway and throughway street area within the Assessment District relative to the overall land area. An analysis of maps of the Assessment District shows that approximately 0.91% of the land area in the Assessment District is covered by highways and throughway streets.

A 1.0% contribution therefore is a generous, fair, and appropriate measure of the general benefit to the public at large within the Assessment District and cannot be funded by this assessment.

Page 68 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 23 ends

Adjustment to Account for Emergency Medical Services as General Benefit For the purposes of this Report, an additional adjustment has been made to the general benefits calculation to account for general benefits that may result from the District’s rescue and emergency medical services (“EM S”) associated with the proposed Services . (Limitations on the appropriateness of Prop osition 218-compliant assessments to fund EMS is still debated - in any case, this assessment does not include funding for EMS). This assessment is designed to provide funding fo r fire protection and emergency response services, including fire-related and non-fire-related rescue and associated medical services. However, it is not designed to f und typical, non-fire/non-rescue medical calls (e.g., a cardiac arrest medical call).

Springlake FPD is authorized to provide EMS in addition to its primary responsibility of fire prevention and suppression. In fact, a significant portion of Springlake FPD’s emergency service calls are associated with providing EMS. Nonetheless, the largest portion by far of the costs associated with operating Springlake FPD is support for fire suppression services as illustrated in Table 4, below.

Incremental costs associated with non-fi re/non-rescue emergency medical service include almost exclusively the operating costs associated with transportation to such calls such as fuel and maintenance. For further cl arification, these are costs that are only incurred because of EMS, and do not include fixed costs such as personnel who would be on active duty in any case as well (as the associated training) and would therefore be incurred in any event in satisfying Spring lake FPD’s primary responsibility of fire protection and suppression.

Evaluation of the transportation associated with non-fire/non-rescue emergency medical calls for several similar fire districts in Yolo County indicates that typically around 3.1% of overall operating costs are for such calls and supports an adjustment of 3.1%. This adjustment has generously been rounded up to 4%.

The proposed assessment, as indicated through this Report, will exclusively fund special benefits conferred upon the properties with in Springlake FPD boundaries, while EMS is directly funded from Springlake FPD through non-assessment sources including property taxes. For purposes of this Report, EMS co sts over and above those necessary for fire suppression have been treated as general benefits, and it is conceded that these general benefits may exist at the same percentage for the proposed Services as with the existing baseline services. Therefore, it can be concluded that Springlake FPD’s services are 4.0% general as a result of providing EMS services. The engineer is requiring a 4% adjustment for this component.

Page 69 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 24 ends

Summary of General Benefits
Using a sum of the measures of general benefit for the public at large and land outside the Assessment Area, we find that approximately 20% of the benefits conferred by the proposed Fire Protection and Emergency Response Assessment may be general in nature and must therefore be funded by sources other than the assessment.

The Assessment District’s total budget for 2025-26 is $708,596. Of this total assessment budget amount, the District will contribute $547,483 which is more than 77% of the total budget from sources other than this proposed assessment including dedicated property taxes and the existing benefit assessment. This contribution constitutes significantly more than the 20% general benefits estimated by the Assessment Engineer, which must be paid for by non-assessment sources.

Zones of Benefit
The Assessment District has been narrowly dr awn. The assessments will fund improved fire protection services relatively unifo rmly throughout the Assessment District.

Properties of similar type will receive essentially equivalent types of special benefit with reasonable, parcel-by-parcel adjustments for fire hazard zone and proximity to fire stations (as explained later in the Method of Assessment section), and no broad, widespread Zones of Benefit are needed. Instead, each parcel is subject to geographic factors, acting as effective individual mini zones.

General Benefit Calculation

15.0% (1. Outside the Assessment District - Adjacent parcels) + 0.0% (2. “Indirect and Derivative” Property within the Assessment District) + 1.0% (3. Public at Large)
= 16.0% (Subtotal of General Benefit)

+ 4% (Emergency Medical Adjustment)

=20.0% (Total of General Benefits)

Page 70 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 25 ends

The Assessment Area is extremely rural and includes a patchwork of areas of moderate fire risk. Further, travel by roadway througho ut the Assessment Area is very limited, and travel times from stations to specific parcels vary greatly. Accordingly, in lieu of traditional Zones of Benefits, the specific benefit of each parcel is individually calculated and adjusted for both fire risk zone and response travel time.

As noted previously, the Fire District contra cts with UC Davis to provide services to properties owned by UC Davis (see assessment diagram on page 41). UC Davis assumes sole responsibility for fire protection and re lated services for UC Davis parcels, the UC Davis service area and is not a part of the proposed assessment.

Assessment Apportionment
The Assessment Engineer determined that the appropriate method of assessment should be based on the type of property, the relative risk of fire by type of property, the relative fire hazard zone factor, the relative travel time factor, the relative size of the property, and the relative damage value (replacement cost) of fires by property type. This method is further described below.

Method of Assessment
The next step in apportioning assessments is to determine the relative special benefit for each property. This process involves determining the relative benefit received by each property in relation to a "benchmark" property, a single family detached dwelling on one parcel (one “Single Family Equivalent Benefit Unit” or “SFE”).

This SFE methodology is commonly used to distribute assessments in proportion to estimated special benefits and is generally recognized as providing the basis for a fair and appropriate distribution of assessments. In this Report, all properties are assigned an SFE value, which is each property’s relative benefit in relation to the benefit received by a single family home on one parcel.

The relative benefit to properties from fire related services is:

Equation 1 – Relative Special Benefit to Properties

Special Benefit =

∑(Fire Risk Factors) * ∑(Structure Replacement Factors) * ∑(Location/Topography Factors)

Page 71 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 26 ends

Simply put, the special benefit conferred to property is the product of the fire risk, the structure replacement costs and the location and topographic factors.

Typically, the development of the rate methodology for fire assessments is based upon fire risk and structure value. However, in this case, due to the particular nature of Springlake FPD fire hazards and terrain, two additional factors (Fire Hazard Zone and Proximity (Travel Time ) were added in support of a uniquely rigorous and detailed, parcel-by-parcel development of rate and assessment.

For example, by this formula, a hypothetical parcel used for a high fire risk operation (i.e., a fireworks factory), with high value structures , in a high fire hazard zone and very close to a fire station, receives a high amount of special benefit. Conversely, a vacant lot not in a high fire hazard area and a long way from a fire station would receive far less special benefit. It follows that the special benefi t, and accordingly, the assessment amount, should be calculated and assigned consistent with this logic.

Overview of Approach
Each parcel is evaluated, and the special benefit is calculated using 4 attribute criteria:

Risk and Replacement Factors:

1.) Fire Risk (see Table 5)

2.) Structure Replacement Value (see Table 6)
These factors are summarized in Table 7

Location and Topography Adjustments:

3.) Location and Topography
- Hazard Zone (see Table 8)

4.) Location and Topography - Proximity (Travel Time) (see Table 9)

Page 72 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 27 ends

Overview of Normalization in Adjustments in Multi-Attribute Analysis One of the greatest engineering challenges in modeling and calculating special benefit on a specific parcel is the need to balance the effect of various attributes in a multi-attribute analysis. In this case, the special benefit me thod of apportionment is based upon four different attributes and each must be “weigh ted” to affect the overall special benefit calculation in a reasonable way, commensurat e with their effect on the overall special benefit. The general approach taken is to adjust each attribute value towards a reasonable proportion of 1, such that it is consistent with the base unit of 1 Single Family Equivalent. See the “Area Adjustment Factor” used in Table 6 and the Impact Factor used in Tables 8 and 9.

1.) Fire Risk Factors
This fire risk is based upon the specific parcel type and use, including use of structure (e.g., used for cooking), type of structure (centralized heating), etc.

The National Fire Protection Association (“NFPA”), one of the preeminent authorities on fire protection in the United States, publis hes the Structure Fires by Occupancy Annual Averages Report. This report comprehensivel y tabulates the number of fires for each classification of property type within the Un ited States. Our analys is uses the Structure Fires by Occupancy Annual Averages from 2015-2019 Report and the 2018-2022 Report and serves as a reasonable and rational basis to determine fire risk.

The percentage of fires for each property is then divided by the total number of that property type to determine un-normalized fire risk factors. Finally, the risk factors are normalized based upon a factor of 1.00 for a single-family property. Table 5 below tabulates the Fire Risk Factors for each property type.

Page 73 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 28 ends

Table 3 – Normalized Fire Risk Factors

Structure Fires by Occupancy 2015-2019 Annual Averages and 2018-2022 Annual Averages, NFPA, and an analysis of the percentage of properties by property type in the State of California by SCI.
(1) This study did not provide sufficient analysis to develop risk factors for parking lots, so the vacant property type is used as a proxy.

The effect of installed fire sprinklers on the special benefit received from the proposed services must be tempered by the fact that many factors including fire type, weather, roofing material, building materials response time, defensible space, use of working smoke detectors, type of windows, maintenance of sprinkler system, etc. likely more significantly affect fire protection.

These factors are incorporated into our analysis. Sprinklers have been required for commercial parcels for many years, so that element is already incorporated into our risk analysis. However, more recently, sprinklers for new and renovated residential structures have become required.

Special cases will be considered as part of the standard appeals process described later in this Report.

2.) Structure Replacement Value Factors
The relative value of different property types was evaluated within the District to determine the Structure Replacement Value Factor according to the following formula:

Equation 2 – Structure Replacement Value Factors
Structure Replacement Value =

Normalized: [((Structure Weighting Factor * (Average Improved Value)) +

((Land Weighting Factor * (Average Land Value))] * Area Adjustment Factor

Percentage of
Study Units(a)
Percentage of
Fires(b) Risk Factor(b/a)
Normalized Risk
Factor
Single Family 68.2% 58.9% 0.8640 1.0000
Multi-Family 15.5% 23.4% 1.5028 1.7394
Comme rcial/Industrial 3.3% 8.8% 2.6982 3.1230
Office 0.6% 1.0% 1.5861 1.8358
Storage 0.6% 2.5% 4.4027 5.0959
Parking Lot(1) NA NA 0.0000 0.4439
Vacant 8.8% 3.4% 0.3836 0.4439
Agriculture 1.5% 0.9% 0.5906 0.6836
Range Land & Open Space 1.4% 1.1% 0.7688 0.8898

Page 74 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 29 ends

Where:
 “Structure Weighting Factor” = 10 to “weight” relative importance of structure over land.
 “Average Improved Value” is average of value of all structures and improvements.
 “Normalized:[ ]” process is required to adjust the Structure Replacement Value factor as compared to a Single Family property type. The calculated structure replacement value for a specific property type is divided by the structure replacement value for a single family property type – and then it is multiplied by the area adjustment factor.
 Area Adjustment Factor adjusts for various average parcel size as compared to an average single family residence and only affects multi-family parcels for the service area. Hence, the adjustment factor is 0.42 for multi-family parcels and

1.0 (e.g., no effect) for all other property use types.  “Land Weighting Factor” = 1
 “Average Land Value” is average of value of all land per property type

Table 6 below is a tabulation of the structur e replacement values for each property type as defined by Equation 2, on the previous page.

Table 4 – Structure Replacement Factors

 (a) and (b) values derived from an analysis of the 2024 Yolo County Assessor records.

Property Type
Average Improvement
Values (a)
Average Land Values
(b)
Adjusted, Weighted
Normalized Replacement
Value Factor Unit
Single Family $285,569 $151,833.50 1.0000 each
Multi-Family $120,998 $53,327.00 0.1780 res unit
Commercial/Industrial $388,993 $263,476.00 1.3810 acre
Office $329,256 $186,212.00 1.1567 acre
Storage $181,309 $145,611.75 0.6513 acre
Parking Lot $140,025 $122,634.00 0.5064 acre
Vacant $37,354 $90,723.00 0.3917 each
Agriculture $7,346 $9,699.00 0.0277 acre
Range Land & Open Space $3,509 $6,717.35 0.0139 acre

Page 75 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 30 ends

Summary of Risk and Replacement Factors
Per Equation 1, the relative special benefit for each property type (the “SFE” or “Single Family Equivalent” Benefit Units) is determined as the product of the normalized Fire Risk Factors and the normalized Structure Repl acement Value Factors. Table 7, below, summarizes the benefit for each property type.

Note that to derive an actual Assessment amount, each of these values needs to be then multiplied by the parcel specific Fire Hazard Zone Risk Factors and Proximity (Travel Time) Risk Factors in Tables 8 and 9, below.

Table 5 – Benefit Summary per Property Type

Residential Properties
All improved residential properties with a single residential dwelling unit are assigned one Single Family Equivalent or 1.0 SFE. Residential properties on parcels that are larger than one acre receive additional benefit and are assigned additional SFEs on an “Agricultural/Rangeland” basis. Detached or attached houses, zero lot-line houses and town homes are included in this category.

Properties with more than one residential unit are designated as multi-family residential properties. These properties benefit from the Services in proportion to the number of dwelling units that occupy each property. The relative benefit for multi-family properties was determined per Equation 1 to be 0.3096 SFEs per residential unit. This rate applies to condominiums as well.

Property Type
Fire Risk
Factors
Replacement Cost
Factors SFE Factors Unit
Single Family 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 each
Multi-Family 1.7394 0.1780 0.3096 res unit
Commercial/Industrial 3. 1230 1.3810 4.3129 acre
Office 1.8358 1.1567 2.1235 acre
Storage 5.0959 0.6513 3.3188 acre
Parking Lot 0.4439 0.5064 0.2248 each
Vacant 0.4439 0.3917 0.1739 each
Agriculture 0.6836 0.0277 0.0189 acre
Range Land & Open Space 0.8898 0.0139 0.0124 acre

Page 76 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 31 ends

Commercial/Industrial, Storage & Office Properties
Commercial and industrial properties are assigned benefit units per acre, since there is a relationship between parcel size, structure size and relative benefits. The relative benefit for commercial and industrial properties wa s determined per Equation 1 to be 4.3129 SFEs per acre or portion thereof. The relative benefit for office properties was determined per Equation 1 to be 2.1235 SFEs per acre or portion thereof. The relative benefit for storage properties was determined per Equati on 1 to be 3.3188 SFEs per acre or portion thereof.

Vacant and Undeveloped Properties
The relative benefit for vacant properties was determined per Equation 1 to be 0.1739 SFEs per parcel. The relative benefit for stand-alone parking lots was determined per Equation 1 to be 0.2248 SFEs per parcel.

Rangeland & Open Space Properties
The relative benefit for range land & open space properties was determined per Equation 1 to be 0.0124 SFEs per acre or portion thereof. (This group includes TPZ parcels.) Agricultural Properties
The relative benefit for agricultural properties requires additional analysis, as required by Government Code 50078 et. seq and the unique aspects of agricultural properties within the boundaries. This analysis considered ho w agricultural operatio ns may mitigate risk, onsite or proximate water availability, respon se time, capability of the fire suppression service, and any other factors which reflect the benefit to the land resulting from the fire suppression service provided. Agricultural properties have been analyzed for fire risk and replacement cost per Equation 1. The relative benefit for agricultural properties was determined per Equation 1 to be 0.0189 SFEs per acre or portion thereof.

Other Properties
Properties that do not fit within the major categories described above have been individually reviewed and the special benefi t has been individually calculated. These properties are primarily mixed-use properties with the relative special benefit calculated from the relative proportion of each of the underlying property uses.

Article XIIID, Section 4 of the California Constitution states that publicly owned properties shall not be exempt from assessment unless th ere is clear and convincing evidence that those properties receive no special benefit.

Page 77 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 32 ends

All public properties that are specially benefited are assessed. Publicly owned property that is used for purposes similar to privat e residential, commercial, industrial, or institutional uses is benefited and assessed at the same rate as such privately owned property.

Miscellaneous, small, and other parcels such as roads, and right-of-way parcels typically do not have significant risk of fire damage . Moreover, for common area parcels, the fire benefits are assigned to the other improved parcels in the project that share common ownership of the common area. These miscellaneous parcels receive minimal benefit from the Services and are assessed an SFE benefit factor of 0.

3.) Fire Hazard Zone Risk Factors
C A L F I R E w o r k s w i t h l o c a l a g e n c i e s t o s t u d y various fire risk factors throughout rural California including terrain, vegetation, fuel load, wind, weather, etc. and designates specific geographic areas according to fire risk. Within the Assessment Area certain areas are designated as Very High, High, or Moderate as well as areas that do not fall into any of these zones (“None”). Accordingly, parcels receive higher special benefit from the fire protection and emergency response services if they are higher risk zones.

Refer to Appendix A for a diagram of the Fire Hazard Areas in Springlake FPD.

Table 8 shows the normalized Fire Hazard Risk Factor for each fire risk zone.

Table 6 – Fire Hazard Zone Risk Factors

The Score is relative special benefit conferred for each risk zone. The Impact Factor is the relative weight for this risk factor on the overall special benefit calculation, and is the Score multiplied by 10 and added to the base value of 100.

Fire Hazard
Zone Score Impact Effect
Normalized Fire
Hazard Zone
Factor
Very High 2 120 1.20
High 1.2 112 1.12
Moderate 1 110 1.10
None 0 100 1

Page 78 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 33 ends

4.) Proximity (Travel Time) Risk Factors
Timely response is a critical factor in respo nding to emergency calls to ensure the safety of people and protection of property. Numerous studies have confirmed this well- established understanding and the results of one such study is included with this Report.

The graph below shows the linear function relationship ranking between response time and loss in dollars. Accordingly, parcels that ar e closer to a fire station require a shorter travel time for response, and receive a higher level of special benefit than parcels with a longer travel time.

Travel Time versus Property Loss

Source: Neil Challands “The Relationships Between Fire Service Response Time and Fire Outcomes,” Fire Technology, July 2010.

Travel time from the fire station to each parcel was calculated and analyzed using Geographical Information Systems.

Refer to Appendix B for a diagram of the Response Areas Travel Time in Springlake FPD.

Page 79 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 34 ends

Table 9 below shows the relative normalized value of travel time Table 7 – Travel Time Premium Factor

Assessments Calculation
Each parcel’s assessment is calculated by multiplying the assessment rate by the SFE benefit factor (Table 5), fire hazard zone factor (Table 6) and travel time premium factor (Table 7):

Example Calculations
Case #1: Single Family Residence in Very High Hazard Zone with a 3-6 minute Travel Time Assessment Rate = Annual Base SFE Rate * 1.000 (from table 5) * 1.20 (from table 6) * 0.91 (from table 7) = 1.092 * Annual Base SFE Rate
Case #2: Single Family Residence in Moderate Hazard Zone with a 10+ minute Travel Time Assessment Rate = Annual Base SFE Rate * 1.000 (from table 5) * 1.10 (from table 6) * 0.82 (from table 7) = 0.902 * Annual Base SFE Rate
Case #3: Commercial Property on 2 Acres in Very High Hazard Zone with a 6-8 minute Travel Time
Assessment Rate = Annual Base SFE Rate * 4.3129 (from table 5) * 2 acres* 1.20 (from table 6) * 0.84 (from table 7) = 8.6948 * Annual Base SFE Rate Case #4: Vacant Lot in a Moderate Hazard Zone with a <3 minute Travel Time Assessment Rate = Annual Base SFE Rate * .1739 (from table 5) * 1.10 (from table 6) * 1.00 (from table 7) = 0.1913* Annual Base SFE Rate
Annual Base SFE Rate = $149.98 for 2025-26
Travel Time Score ($) Impact Effect
Normalized Travel
Time Factor
<3 43,690 138 1.00
3 to 6 63,810 126 0.91
6-8 83,930 120 0.87
8-10 104,050 116 0.84
10+ 124,170 114 0.82

Page 80 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 35 ends

Government Code § 53759.1 and 53759.2
AB 2257, effective January 1, 2025, codifies Government Code §§ 53759.1 and 53759.2.

Government Code § 53759.1 authorizes public agencies to implement an exhaustion of administrative remedies requirement in th e context of a proposed Proposition 218 property related fee or assessment. If the local agency complies with certain specified requirements, property owners are required to submit a written objection regarding a proposed property related fee or assessment during the ratemaking process and by a specified deadline no less than 45 days after mailing of notice pursuant to Proposition 218, and prohibited from challenging the property related fee or assessment in litigation if they did not submit a timely written objection. To implement this requirement, the local agency is required, among other things, to prepare written responses to the timely submitted objections and present them to th e local agency governing body, which will make certain specified determinations prior to the close of the Proposition 218 protest hearing. This process is intended to run concurrently with the Proposition 218 timeline and does not impact a property owner’s ab ility to submit a protest pursuant to Proposition 218.

Government Code § 53759.2 specifies the scope of a Court’s review of the administrative record of the underlying ra temaking proceeding, if the local agency complied with Government Code § 53759.1 in adopting the property rela ted fee or assessment being challenged.

Springlake FPD intends to comply with and implement Government Code § 53759.1 with respect to the proposed assessment. Property owners will be informed of the deadline and process to submit a written objection, and other dates related to Springlake FPD’s compliance with this provision.

Page 81 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 36 ends

Appeals of Assessments Levied to Property
Any property owner who feels that the assessm ent levied on the subject property is in error as a result of incorrect information be ing used to apply the foregoing method of assessment or for any other reason, may file a written appeal with the Springlake FPD Fire Chief, or his or her designee. Any such appe al is limited to correction of an assessment during the then current fiscal year. Upon the filing of any such appeal, the Chief, or his or her designee, will promptly review the appeal and any information provided by the property owner. If the Chief, or his or her designee, finds that the assessment should be modified, the appropriate changes shall be made to the assessment roll. If any such changes are approved after the assessment roll has been filed with the County for collection, the Chief, or his or her designee, is authorized to refund to the property owner the amount of any approved reduction. Any dispute over the decision of the Chief, or his or her designee, shall be referred to the Springlake FPD Board of Commissioners; the decision of the Board shall be final.

Additional Background on Relative Benefit
When property owners decide how to cast their ballot for a proposed assessment, each property owner should weigh the perceived val ue of the Services proposed to them and their property against the proposed cost of the assessment to their property. If property owners of a certain type of property are ei ther opposed or in support of the assessment in much greater percentages than owners of other property types, this is an indication that, as a group, these property owners pe rceive that the proposed assessment has relatively higher or lower “utility” or value to their property relative to owners of other property types. One can also infer from these hypothetical ballot results, that the apportionment of benefit (and assessments) was too high or too low for that property type. In other words, property owners, by their balloting, ultimately indicate if they perceive the special benefits to their property to exceed the cost of the assessment, and, as a group, whether the determined level of benefit and proposed assessment (the benefit apportionment made by the Assessment Engineer) is consistent with the level of benefits perceived by the owners of their type of property relative to the owners of other types of property.

Page 82 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 37 ends

Criteria and Policies
This sub-section describes the criteria that shall govern the expenditure of assessment funds and ensures equal levels of benefit for properties of similar type. The criteria established in this Report cannot be subs tantially modified; however, the Board may adopt additional criteria to further clarify cert ain criteria or policies established in this Report, or to establish additional criteria or policies that do not conflict with this Report.

Duration of Assessment
It is proposed that the Assessment be levi ed for fiscal year 2025-26 and continued every year thereafter, so long as the risk of fire on property in the Assessment District remains in existence and Springlake FPD Fire requires funding from the Assessment for improved fire protection and suppression services. As noted previously, if the Assessment and the duration of the Assessment are approved by property owners in an assessment ballot proceeding, the Assessment can be imposed and continued annually after the Board approves an annually updated budget and rate for the Assessment. In addition, the Board must hold an annual public hearing to continue the Assessment.

Page 83 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 38 ends

Assessment
WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners of the Spring lake Fire Protection District formed the Fire Protection and Emergency Respon se Services Assessmen t District and is proceeding with the proposed levy of assessments under California Government Code sections 50078 et seq. (the “Code”) and Articl e XIIID of the California Constitution (the “Article”);
WHEREAS, the undersigned Engineer of Work has prepared and filed a report presenting an estimate of costs, a diagram for the A ssessment District and an allocation of the estimated costs of the Services upon all assessable parcels within the Assessment District; NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned hereby recommends the following assessment to cover the estimated cost of said Services, including incidental costs.

The amount to be paid for said Services and the expense incidental thereto, to be paid by the Assessment District for the fiscal year 2025-26 is generally as follows:

Table 8 – Summary Cost Estimate

An Assessment Diagram is hereto attached and made a part hereof showing the exterior boundaries of said Assessment District. The di stinctive number of each parcel or lot of land in said Assessment District is its Assessor Parcel Number appearing on the Assessment Roll.

I do hereby assess and apportion said net amount of the cost and expenses of said Services, including the costs and expenses inci dent thereto, upon the parcels and lots of land within said Assessment District, in accordance with the special benefits to be received by each parcel or lot, from the Se rvices, and more particularly set forth in the Cost Estimate and Method of Assessment hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof.

Total for Se rvicing $708,596
Contributions from Other Sources ($547,483)
Total A llowance for Colle ctions $595
Total Fire Suppression & Protection Services Budget $161,708 FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 BUDGET

Page 84 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 39 ends

The assessment may increase in future years by an amount equal to the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the San Francisco-Oakland- Hayward, not to exceed 3% per year withou t a further vote or balloting process. The District will not increase the assessment rate for at least 5 years, until at least after fiscal year 2030-31.

Each parcel or lot of land is described in the Assessment Roll by reference to its parcel number as shown on the Assessor's Maps of Yolo County for the fiscal year 2025-26. For a more particular description of said property, reference is hereby made to the deeds and maps on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder of Yolo County.

I hereby place opposite the Assessor Parcel Number for each parcel or lot within the Assessment Roll, the amount of the assessment for the fiscal year 2025-26 for each parcel or lot of land within the said Assessment District.

Dated: April 18, 2025

Engineer of Work

By
John W. Bliss, License
No. C052091

Page 85 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 40 ends

Assessment Diagram
The Assessment District includes all properties within the boundaries of the Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services District. The boundaries of the Assessment District are displayed on the following Assessment Diagram. The lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel within the Assessment District are those lines and dimensions as shown on the maps of the Assessor of Yolo County, and are incorporated herein by reference, and made a part of this Diagram and this Report.

Page 86 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 41 ends

Page 87 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 42 ends

Appendix A – Fire Hazard Areas Diagram
The Springlake Fire Protection District does not have any fire hazard areas currently identified.

Page 88 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 43 ends

Appendix B – Response Areas Travel Time Diagram

Page 89 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 44 ends

Appendix C – Assessment Roll, Fiscal Year 2025-26
The Assessment Roll is made part of this report and is available for public inspection during normal office hours. Each lot or parcel listed on the Assessment Roll is shown and illustrated on the latest County Assessor reco rds and these records are, by reference, made part of this Report. These records shall govern all details concerning the description of the lots of parcels.

Page 90 ends

Springlake Fire Protection District
2025-26 Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services Assessment

Page 45 ends

End Notes

1 Insurance Services Offices Inc. http://www.rockwall.com/documents/fire/ISO.pdf

2 Institute for Business & Home Safety, “Protect Your Home Against Wildfire Damage,” http://www.ibhs.org/publications/view.asp?id=125

3 ibid., p.2

Page 91 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.9
SUBJECT: Receive and File the Manufactured Home Fair
Practices Commission Annual Report for the 2024
Program Year

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council receive and file the Manufactured Home Fair Practices Commission Annual Report for the 2024 Program Year.

Staff Contact:

Franklin Cui, Housing Analyst II – 530-661-2019, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

In 2024 the City collected registration fees totaling $9,570 from three of the five manufactured home parks located in Woodland. These revenues help to offset the City costs incurred to administer the program. Two of the parks are not required to pay registration fees: Leisureville is a cooperative and residents purchase a share of the non-profit cooperative (Leisureville Community Association) at the time of entry and the residential units at Casa Del Sol are subject to long-term affordability agreements.

Background:

The City’s voters adopted Measure T in November 2001, which added Chapter 16B to the Woodland Municipal Code, entitled Manufactured Home Space Rent Control. Chapter 16B was subsequently moved to Chapter 5.36 in the code. The purpose of the ordinance (Measure T) is to protect the owners and residents of manufactured homes from unreasonable space rental increases while simultaneously recognizing and providing for the need of park owners to receive a just and reasonable return on their property. The ordinance also provided for the establishment of the Manufactured Home Fair Practices Commission of the City of Woodland (Woodland Municipal Code § 5.36.040A). Its membership consists of five regular members and two alternate members, none of whom are permitted to be either a manufactured homeowner, resident, or otherwise have any interest in a manufactured home park (§ 5.36.040B(1)). The Commission reviews all proposed rent increases for mobile home spaces subject to the rent control provisions of the ordinance.

Discussion:

For program year 2024 there were a total of 631 manufactured home spaces in the City, of which 342 spaces are subject to the registration and rent ceiling provisions of the City’s Manufactured Home Space Rent Control Ordinance. An Annual Permissive Adjustment (space rent increase) of 2.4% was approved by the Commission in June 2024 for Royal Palm Mobile Estates and Bell’s Trailer Village effective July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. The status of Idle Wheel’s 2024 re-registration and permissive adjustment application is pending Idle Wheel's response and corrective actions to the 2024 exemption denial letter. The Commission approved the Annual Report for the 2024 program year at their June 30, 2025 meeting.

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council receive and file the Manufactured Home Fair Practices Commission Annual Report for the 2024 program year.

Page 92 ends

Prepared by: Franklin Cui, Housing Analyst II

Reviewed by: Erika Bumgardner, Community Development Deputy Director

Attachments:

1. 2024 MHFPC Annual Report

Page 93 ends

1 | P a g e
ANNUAL REPORT 2024

MANUFACTURED HOME FAIR PRACTICES

COMMISSION

AUTHORITY
The City of Woodland’s mobile home rent control ordinance specifies that the Manufactured Home Fair Practices Commission (MHFPC) render “at least semiannually a comprehensive written report to the City Council concerning the commission’s activities, holdings, actions results of hearings and all other matters pertinent to this chapter…” (§5.36.040(M)(6).) The City Council is provided copies of minutes of MHFPC meetings during the year, but this document represents a more formal reporting of the Commission’s activities for the 2024 program year.

The City’s ordinance also specifies: “The city manager is hereby directed to maintain an accurate accounting of all direct and indirect costs of administering the regulations contained in this chapter. The city manager shall submit a report to the commission and city council of such costs and any recommendation for a change in the registration fee at least annually from and after the effective date of this chapter.” (§5.36.060(E).)

FINANCIAL STATUS
For program years 2002 through 2005, park owners were required to pay an annual registration fee of $137 per-space. Starting in program year 2006, the Commission recommended, and the City Council approved a lower registration fee of $30 per space.

The $30 per-space fee continues to remain in effect until changed by the City Council upon the recommendation of the Commission.

MHFPC COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF
In 2024, the MHFPC Commissioners were:

Name Term Expires
Kathy Trott, Regular Member 6/30/2028
Dick Cronin, Regular Member 6/30/2027
Paul Kramer, Regular Member 6/30/2026
Stacie Lewis, Regular Member 6/30/2025
Ben Cadranel, Regular Member 3/26/2024
VACANT, Alternate Member N/A
VACANT, Alternate Member N/A

Franklin Cui from the Community Development Department currently serves as staff to the Commission.

Page 94 ends

2 | P a g e
2024 STATISTICS
In 2024, there were a total of 631 manufactured home spaces in the City of Woodland, of which 342 spaces are subject to the registration and rent ceiling provisions of the City of Woodland’s Manufactured Home Space Rent Control ordinance.

Mobile Home Park Spaces in Park Regulated Spaces
Bell’s Trailer Village 39 39
Leisureville 150 0
Idle Wheel Estates 154 154
Casa del Sol 157 18
Royal Palm 131 131
TOTAL 631 342
2024 ACTIVITY BY PARK:

Bells Trailer Village:
▪All 39 spaces at Bells Trailer Village were registered with the Commission. ▪Registration fees of $1,170 were paid to the City in December 2023. ▪All regulated space rents as of December 31, 2023, appeared to be within the

3.0% increase (permissive adjustment) in the space rent ceiling previously approved by the Commission in 2023.
▪Bells completed its annual re-registration process on time and requested a permissive adjustment in 2024.
▪The Commission approved a permissive adjustment increase to the space rent ceiling of 2.4% in 2024.

Idle Wheel:
▪All 154 spaces at Idle Wheel are subject to the rent control ordinance of Chapter

5.36 with the Commission.
▪Idle Wheel registered only 149 of 154 spaces with the Commission in 2023. ▪Registration fees of $4,470 were paid to the City in December 2023. ▪For further action, Idle Wheel has not responded to the July 15, 2024, exemption denial letter for previously requested exempted units (space 134 in 2023 and spaces 12, 37, 68, 134, and 204 in 2024) from the City’s MHFPC space rent ordinance. Moreover, further updates from Idle Wheel are needed in response to the aforementioned spaces for adherence to space rent regulatory requirements subject to City municipal code ordinances and California Civil Code. ▪Idle Wheel completed its annual re-registration process on time and requested a permissive adjustment in 2024.
▪The status of Idle Wheel’s 2024 re-registration and permissive adjustment application is pending Idle Wheel response and corrective actions to the aforementioned July 15, 2024, exemption denial letter.

Page 95 ends

3 | P a g e
▪The Commission’s 2017 decision on Idle Wheel’s Special Adjustment application also included a limited term monthly charge for residents starting at $7.17 for a period of ten years. (The charge is collected for 20 years and is reduced after ten years and again after fifteen years.) Staff reported that Idle Wheel has been collecting a monthly amount of $7.17 according to the annual registration.

Royal Palm:
▪All 131 spaces at Royal Palm were registered with the Commission. ▪Registration fees of $3,930 were paid to the City in December 2023. ▪All regulated space rents as of December 31, 2023, appeared to be within the

3.0% increase (permissive adjustment) in the space rent ceiling previously approved by the Commission in 2023.
▪Royal Palm completed its annual re-registration process on time and requested a permissive adjustment in 2024.
▪The Commission approved a permissive adjustment increase to the space rent ceiling of 2.4% in 2024.

Leisureville:
▪There are 150 spaces at Leisureville. Management claims there are no space renters, and that all residents have an ownership interest in the park. Because Leisureville did not have at least 2 spaces rented or held out for rent, Leisureville is exempt from the Ordinance and the Commission took no action.

Casa del Sol:
▪Community Housing Opportunities Corporation submitted an annual registration showing that 156 of the 157 park spaces at Casa del Sol, the one park space not listed is used for the park manager. Of the 156 units, 138 are subject to recorded affordable housing covenants which restrict tenancies to low- very-low income households and require rents affordable to residents at those income levels. The remaining 18 units are held out for median income households and claimed by CHOC to be exempt under Cal. Civil Code section 798.17, a state law preempting local rental control for spaces under specified long-term leases (greater than one year). As a result, registration fees were not paid for these spaces, but CHOC is required to annually re- confirm the exemption for the spaces.

Commission Meetings for Program Year 2024
For Program Year 2024, the Manufactured Home Fair Practices Commission held 4 meetings that took place on May 22, 2024 & June 12, 2024 & June 26, 2024 & August 21, 2024.
_______________________________ Dated: ________________________ Franklin Cui, Housing Analyst II
MHFPC Staff

Page 96 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.10
SUBJECT: Certification of the 2025 Sewer System Management Plan

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, certifying the 2025 Revised Sewer System Management Plan.

Staff Contact:

Tim Busch, Principal Utilities Civil Engineer, 530-661-5963, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

This action has no impact on the City’s General Fund. The sewer enterprise fund currently covers staffing and preventative maintenance costs necessary to operate according to the Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP).

Background:

On December 6, 2022 the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted the Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs), Order No. 2022-0103-DWQ to provide statewide approach for reducing Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs) and other hazardous spills. A spill is a discharge of sewage from any portion of a sanitary sewer system due to a sanitary sewer system overflow, operational failure, and/or infrastructure failure. Spills can pollute surface and ground waters, threaten public health, adversely impact aquatic life, and impair the recreational use and esthetics of surface waters. The goal of spill reduction is to decrease the risk to human health and the environment. To accomplish this goal, the general WDRs require each public agency that owns and/or operates a sanitary sewer system to meet specific requirements, including development and implementation of a system-specific SSMP. To comply with this requirement, the City Council certified the SSMP on June 16, 2009 and recertified updated versions on June 13, 2015 and December 15, 2020.

Waste Discharge Requirements and Sewer System Management Plan A key requirement of the Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems is the development and implementation of an SSMP to reduce the risk of spills, particularly those that may reach waters of the State. The SSMP must be reviewed and updated at least every six years to ensure continued compliance. A copy of the 2025 revised SSMP will be made publicly available on the City’s website.

The mandatory elements of the SSMP are specified below:

1. Goals – The SSMP must establish clear goals for the effective management, operation, and maintenance of the sewer system.

2. Organization – the SSMP must identify responsible personnel and lines of authority for SSMP implementation and spill response.

3. Legal Authority – the SSMP must describe the City’s legal authority to regulate, maintain, and enforce proper use of the sanitary sewer system.

Page 97 ends

4. Operations and Maintenance Program – the SSMP must include an O&M program that outlines routine maintenance, mapping, asset condition assessment, staffing, and long-term system planning.

5. Design and Performance Standards – the SSMP must provide design, construction, inspection, and testing standards for system infrastructure.

6. Spill Emergency Response Plan – the SSMP must include a Spill Emergency Response Plan (SERP) that details procedures for spill response, notification, mitigation, and public health protection.

7. Sewer Pipe Blockage Control Program – the SSMP must describe the City’s program to minimize blockages in the sanitary sewer system, including public outreach, source control, inspection, and enforcement efforts related to fats, oils and grease (FOG), debris, and other common causes of pipe blockages.

8. System Evaluation, Capacity Assurance, and Capital Improvements (SECAP) – the SSMP must provide a plan for evaluating system capacity during peak flow conditions and outline capital improvements to address them.

9. Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications – the SSMP must establish methods to measure SSMP effectiveness and implement necessary updates.

10. Internal Audits – The SSMP must require audits at least every three years to assess program effectiveness and identify corrective actions.

11. Communication Program – the SSMP must describe the City’s plan to provide public access to SSMP-related information and ensure transparency and responsiveness.

Discussion:

The revised 2025 SSMP complies with all mandatory elements required under the current SWRCB regulations. City Engineering and Public Works staff, with consultation from Robertson-Bryan Inc. (RBI), conducted a thorough review and update of the SSMP to ensure consistency with applicable regulatory requirements, including General Order 2022-0103-DWQ, which most recently supplemented previous WDRs for sanitary sewer systems. General Order 2022-0103-DWQ establishes updated requirements for the operation, maintenance, monitoring, and reporting of publicly owned sanitary sewer systems to reduce the frequency and severity of spills. It also introduces revised definitions, performance criteria, and enhanced spill response and notification protocols. This 2025 update reflects those changes and affirms the City’s ongoing commitment to effective sewer system management and regulatory compliance.

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, certifying the 2025 Revised Sewer System Management Plan.

Prepared by: Matt Cohen, Associate Engineer

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

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution - Certification of 2025 SSMP

Page 98 ends

Page 99 ends

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND CERTIFYING THE 2025 REVISED SEWER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, State General Waste Discharge Requirements (“WDRs”) were adopted statewide by the State Water Resources Control Board on May 2, 2006 and updated by Order No. 2006-0003, Order 2008-0002-EXEC, Order 2013-0058-EXEC; and Order WQ 2022–0103- DWQ; and
WHEREAS, the updated WDRs require each public agency that owns and/or operates a sanitary sewer system to meet specific requirements, including development and implementation of a system-specific Sewer System Management Plan (“SSMP”) and update/re-certify the SSMP every 6 years; and
WHEREAS, to comply with this requirement, the City Council certified the SSMP on June 16, 2009, re-certified the updated SSMP on June 13, 2015 and re-certified the new updated SSMP on December 15, 2020; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to re-certify the 2025 version of the SSMP.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Woodland as follows:

SECTION 1.The City Council hereby certifies the 2025 revised Sewer System Management Plan.

SECTION 2.A copy of the updated SSMP will be made available on the City of Woodland’s website.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Woodland at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of July 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Page 100 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.11
SUBJECT: Award Construction Contract for the Downtown
Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-09 and
First Street Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP
24-13

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. ______, 1) Waiving the minor bid irregularity and approving a construction contract for the Downtown Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-09 and the First Street Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24- 13, awarding the construction contract in the amount of $376,572.19 to JB-TC Ventures LLC (DBA JB Bostick Company), authorizing a contract contingency up to 20% ($75,314.44), and authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract and change orders; and 2) Approving the first amendment to the consultant services agreement with Associated Engineering Consultants, Inc. (AEC) for staff augmentation services related to CIP 24-09 in the amount of $68,632 bringing the total contract amount to $152,863.75, authorizing a contract contingency up to 20% of the first amendment ($13,726.40), and authorizing the City Manager to execute amendments; and
3) Approving the first amendment to the consultant services agreement with AEC for staff augmentation services related to CIP 24-13 in the amount of $44,352 bringing the total contract amount to $128,583.75, authorizing a contract contingency up to 20% of the first amendment ($8,870.40), and authorizing the City Manager to execute amendments.

Staff Contact:

Sara Andreotti, Engineering Assistant, (530) 661-5951, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The projects are included in the current Capital Budget as CIP 24-09 and CIP 24-13, with a combined total budget of $1,325,000. The funding for the projects is entirely Measure F, including $575,000 for CIP 24-09 and $750,000 for CIP 24-13. This allocation aligns with both the approved Capital Budget and the Measure F Spending Plan.

Background:

In November 2016, Woodland voters approved Measure F, extending the ½ cent supplemental sales tax for 12 years. This tax provides funding for essential city services, including pavement rehabilitation.

Pavement rehabilitation addresses pavement surface deterioration by replacing, restoring, and repairing damaged surfaces. This extends their useful life, improves rideability and durability, and helps to prevent costly complete replacement while enhancing safety and performance. Parking lot pavement rehabilitation is a necessary maintenance activity to reduce hazards for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians by eliminating surface deficiencies.

Discussion:

The two projects will be constructed as one contract to minimize cost, delay and coordination challenges. The project scope includes pavement maintenance and rehabilitation in two key

Page 101 ends

downtown parking lots (see attached location map):

• Downtown Parking Lot: Public parking lot behind Hotel Woodland - south of Main Street between Elm and College streets
• First Street Parking Lot: Public parking lot across from City Hall – south of Court Street between First and Second streets

Parking lots will be restriped to meet current parking stall standards and signage will be updated as necessary.

On May 13, 2025, Council approved plans and specifications for the project and the project was advertised for bid shortly thereafter. On July 1, 2025, the City received 7 bids for construction of the project.

Staff performed due diligence in reviewing the bids and, barring one waivable minor bid irregularity in the low bid, the bids complied with the technical submittal requirements. The City received the following bids:

Bidder Name Bid Amount
1 JB Bostick Company $376,572.19
2 George Reed, Inc. $464,727.64
3 Martin General Engineering, Inc. $498,311.15
4 B & M Civil, LLC $558,666.20
5 Granite Construction Company $659,168.59
6 JPB Designs, Inc. $860,995.00
7 Vintage Paving Co, Inc. $1,004,487.08

JB Bostick Company has been determined to be the lowest responsible, responsive bidder. Staff recommends that Council award the construction contract in the amount of $376,572.19.

To ensure quality control during construction, staff request authorization to amend each of the existing agreements with AEC to proceed with construction management, specialized inspection, and testing services for both projects.

The contract amounts for each project are as follows:

CIP 24-09: Amendment 1 - $68,632; new total contract amount $152,863.75 CIP 24-13: Amendment 1 - $44,352; new total contract amount $128,583.75

Staff is also requesting that the Council approve a contingency of up to 20% on both the construction and consultant contracts to account for work and inspections associated with any unforeseen conditions on the project. This contingency amount is consistent with prior similar projects.

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. ______, 1) Waiving the minor bid irregularity and approving a construction contract for the Downtown Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-09 and the First Street Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24- 13, awarding the construction contract in the amount of $376,572.19 to JB-TC Ventures LLC (DBA

Page 102 ends

JB Bostick Company), authorizing a contract contingency up to 20% ($75,314.44), and authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract and change orders; and 2) Approving the first amendment to the consultant services agreement with Associated Engineering Consultants, Inc. (AEC) for staff augmentation services related to CIP 24-09 in the amount of $68,632 bringing the total contract amount to $152,863.75, authorizing a contract contingency up to 20% of the first amendment ($13,726.40), and authorizing the City Manager to execute amendments; and
3) Approving the first amendment to the consultant services agreement with AEC for staff augmentation services related to CIP 24-13 in the amount of $44,352 bringing the total contract amount to $128,583.75, authorizing a contract contingency up to 20% of the first amendment ($8,870.40), and authorizing the City Manager to execute amendments.

Prepared by: Sara Andreotti, Engineering Assistant

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

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. CIP 24-09 and CIP 24-13 Project Limits

Page 103 ends

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

APPROVING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AND CONSULTANT CONTRACT

AMENDMENTS FOR THE DOWNTOWN PARKING LOT REHABILITATION
PROJECT (CIP 24-09) AND FIRST STREET PARKING LOT REHABILITATION PROJECT (CIP 24-13)
WHEREAS, the City of Woodland has funding in the Capital Budget for the Downtown Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-09 and the First Street Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-13 (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the plans and specifications and authorized bid advertisement on May 13, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the City received seven bids on July 1, 2025, and of the seven received bids, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder was JB-TC Ventures LLC (DBA JB Bostick Company), as determined by their bid amount of $ 376,572.19; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to waive the minor bid irregularity and award the construction contract to JB-TC Ventures LLC (DBA JB Bostick Company) in the amount of $376,572 and authorize a contingency up to 20% ($75,314.44); and WHEREAS, the City desires to have the construction management, inspection and testing performed by an experienced consultant that has managed similar pavement projects for the City; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to approve the first amendment for staff augmentation services for CIP 24-09 with Associated Engineering Consultants, Inc. in the amount of $68,632 for CIP 24-09 and authorize contingency up to 20% ($13,726.40) of the first amendment; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to approve the first amendment for staff augmentation services for CIP 24-09 with Associated Engineering Consultants, Inc. in the amount of $44,352 for CIP 24-13 and authorize contingency up to 20% ($8,870.40) of the first amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to approve the above mentioned construction contract and consultant agreement amendments and authorize their execution 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 construction contract with JB-TC Ventures LLC (DBA JB Bostick Company) in the amount of $376,572.19. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract and change orders up to 20% ($75,314.44) of the original contract amount, subject to City Attorney approval. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to make clarifying and conforming changes so long as the total dollar amount authorized herein does not change.

Page 104 ends

Section 2. The City Council hereby approves the first amendment to the consultant services agreement with Associated Engineering Consultants, Inc. for staff augmentation services related to CIP 24-09, in the amount of $68,632, for a total contract amount of$152,863.75. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the amendment and change orders up to 20% ($13,726.40) of the first amendment amount, subject to City Attorney approval. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to make clarifying and conforming changes so long as the total dollar amount authorized herein does not change.

Section 3. The City Council hereby approves the first amendment to the consultant services agreement with Associated Engineering Consultants, Inc. for staff augmentation services related to CIP 24-3, in the amount of $44,352, for a total contract amount to $128,583.75. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the amendment and change orders up to 20% ($8,870.40) of the first amendment amount, subject to City Attorney approval. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to make clarifying and conforming changes so long as the total dollar amount authorized herein does not change.

Section 4 Copies of the Construction Contract and Consultant Agreement for Construction Management and Inspection Services 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 schedule meeting held on the 15th day of July 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Rich Lansburgh, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Sarah Lansburgh, CMC, City Clerk

Page 105 ends

Map Title
Legend
COWGIS
Parcels
Aerial Imagery with Labels - 2023
Red: Red
Green: Green
Blue: Blue
Notes
0 300 600 ft
Downtown Parking
Lot Rehabilitation
Project, CIP 24-09
Project Limits

Page 106 ends

Map Title
Legend
COWGIS
Parcels
Aerial Imagery with Labels - 2025
Red: Red
Green: Green
Blue: Blue
Notes
0 300 600 ft
First Street Parking
Lot Rehabilitation
Project, CIP 24-09
Project Limits

Page 107 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.12
SUBJECT: Allocate Funding and Award Construction Contract for the Water Pollution Control Facility Grit System
and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, to 1) Reallocate $2,500,000 from the Water Pollution Control Facility ("WPCF") Asset Replacement Project, CIP 14-02 to the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12; 2) Reallocate $1,500,000 from the Annual Sewer Repair & Replacement Project, CIP 08-21 to the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12; 3) Approve the construction contract for the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12, awarding the construction contract in the amount of $3,177,200 to Cushman Contracting Corporation, authorizing a contract contingency up to 10% of the base bid amount ($317,720), and authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract and change orders; and
4) Approving a consultant agreement for construction inspection services with WSP USA, Inc., in the amount up to $307,970, authorizing a contract contingency of up to 10% ($30,797), and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement and amendments.

Staff Contact:

Tim Busch, Principal Utilities Civil Engineer, 530-661-5963 [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

Funding for the Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12, (hereafter “Project”) is currently funded in the Capital Budget with $500,000 of Sewer Enterprise Funds. This current funding in CIP 24-12 was to cover design, engineering and bidding costs. Now that the bid period has closed, project costs can be more accurately summarized.

The construction contract award, plus 10% construction contingency, inspection costs, design, and project management resulted in a total project cost of $4,500,000. Staff is recommending the reallocation of $2,500,000 of Sewer Enterprise funding from WPCF Asset Replacement Project, CIP 14-02 and $1,500,000 from the Annual Sewer Repair & Replacement Project, CIP 08-21 to the Project to cover the total project cost.

There is no impact to the General Fund.

Background:

City staff continuously operate the WPCF and continually review statuses of the equipment and treatment processes necessary to discharge treated wastewater in accordance with the WPCF’s NPDES permit. Repair and replacement of WPCF components is based on information obtained from these assessments. Several components were identified for replacement at the headworks, including the influent pumps and the grit removal system, due to deteriorated conditions, operational constraints, and lack of availability of replacement parts. A reliable, properly operating headworks that can be efficiently maintained is imperative for the continued operation of the WPCF. The Project will replace aging and deteriorated influent screw pumps and grit removal equipment. Both the grit system and influent screw pumps handle raw sewage. As raw sewage is corrosive, which generally limits equipment operational life to less than 20 years, the Project was planned as part of the WPCF

Page 108 ends

Master Planning effort and has already been included in forecasting the Asset Replacement Program.

Discussion:

The City advertised for bids on May 29, 2025. On July 2, 2025, the City received 5 bids for CIP 24-12 in the amounts tabulated below:

BID NO. CONTRACTOR BASE BID AMOUNT

1. Cushman Contracting Corporation - $3,177,200.00

2. TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. - $3,597,000.00

3. Innovative Construction Solutions - $3,645,000.00

4. GSE Construction Company, Inc. - $3,755,689.00

5. Valentine Corporation - $3,873,369.00

The engineer’s estimate for Project construction was $3.2 million. Staff performed due diligence in reviewing the bids. Cushman Contracting Corporation has been determined to be the lowest responsive, responsible bidder and has complied with all bid submittal requirements.

The construction contract provides 430 working days for completion of the Project. Staff anticipate completion in Fall of 2027. The Project will utilize City staff for construction management and contract with WSP USA, Inc. for assistance with construction management and part-time construction inspection services. WSP USA, Inc. is one of 8 firms selected by the City for on-call construction inspection through a Quality-Based Selection process performed in September 2018. WSP USA, Inc. is also one of 3 firms selected in 2018 by the City for qualified inspection of the City’s North Regional Pond and Pump Station Project, CIP 17-21.

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, to 1) Reallocate $2,500,000 from the Water Pollution Control Facility ("WPCF") Asset Replacement Project, CIP 14-02 to the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12; 2) Reallocate $1,500,000 from the Annual Sewer Repair & Replacement Project, CIP 08-21 to the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12; 3) Approve the construction contract for the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12, awarding the construction contract in the amount of $3,177,200 to Cushman Contracting Corporation, authorizing a contract contingency up to 10% of the base bid amount ($317,720), and authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract and change orders; and
4) Approving a consultant agreement for construction inspection services with WSP USA, Inc., in the amount up to $307,970, authorizing a contract contingency of up to 10% ($30,797), and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement and amendments.

Prepared by: Tim Busch, P.E., Principal Utilities Civil Engineer

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

Page 109 ends

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution - Award Construction Contract WPCF Grit System Screw Pump Rehab Project, CIP 24-12

2. City_of_Woodland-WPCF_IPS_GFI_Project

Page 110 ends

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

ALLOCATING PROJECT FUNDS, AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO

CUSHMAN CONTRACTING CORPORATION, AND APPROVING A CONSULTANT

AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES WITH WSP USA, INC., FOR THE GRIT SYSTEM AND SCREW PUMP REHABILITATION PROJECT, CIP 24-12
WHEREAS, on April 15, 2025, the City Council approved the plans and specifications for CIP 24-02, the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project (the “Project”) and authorized advertisement for bids; and
WHEREAS, on May 29, 2025, the City of Woodland advertised for bids; and WHEREAS, on July 2, 2025, the City of Woodland (the “City”) received 5 bids and Cushman Contracting Corporation (“Cushman”) was determined to be the lowest responsible bidder submitting a responsive bid with a base bid amount of $3,177,200; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to approve the reallocation of $1,500,000 of Sewer Enterprise Funds from the Annual Sewer Repair and Replacement Project, CIP 08-21, to CIP 24-12; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to approve the reallocation of $2,500,000 of Sewer Enterprise Funds from the WPCF Asset Replacement Project, CIP 14-02, to CIP 24-12; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to approve a construction contract in the amount of $3,177,200 with Cushman for construction of the Project and authorize a contract contingency of up to 10% ($317,720); and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to approve a consultant agreement with WSP USA, Inc. (“WSP”) for construction inspection services for an amount up to $307,970 and approve a contract contingency of up to 10% ($30,797); and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to approve the construction contract with Cushman, to approve the consultant agreement with WSP, and to authorize their execution 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 authorizes the reallocation of $1,500,000 of Sewer Enterprise Funds from the Annual Sewer Repair and Replacement Project, CIP 08-21, to the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12.

Page 111 ends

SECTION 2.The City Council hereby authorizes the reallocation of $2,500,000 of Sewer Enterprise Funds from the WPCF Asset Replacement Project, CIP 14-02, to the WPCF Grit System and Screw Pump Rehabilitation Project, CIP 24-12.

SECTION 3.The City Council hereby approves the construction contract with Cushman Contracting Corporation in the amount of $3,177,200. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract and change orders up to 10% of the original contract amount ($317,720), 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 herein does not change.

SECTION 4.The City Council hereby approves the consultant agreement with WSP USA, Inc. in the amount of $307,970. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the agreement and amendments up to 10% of the original contract amount ($30,797), 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 herein does not change.

SECTION 5. Copies of the Construction Contract and Consultant Agreement for Construction Inspection Services 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 meeting held on the 15th day of July 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Page 112 ends

PAG
E 1 OF 5
Approved: _________________________ Date: 6/30/2025 Basis For Estimate
1 WSP Task Order contract is expected to start September 2025 and end in April 2027. 2 Construction duration, September 2025 through March 2027. 3 Estimate based on 11 months of on-site construction work in accordance with the 5/2025 schedule provided. 4 Based on part-time CM and inspection services. CM services to be consistent with scope provided by the City 5 Claims support will be to extent that the budget accommodates. 6 Rate escalations of 3.5% occur annually (with concurrence) in January and are included in this proposal, or in accordance with PW requirements.
7 Field office space at WPCF is requested, but not required. 8 Based on available Plans and Specifications.
9 No OT or night shift work is anticipated.
10 Material testing by others. Some special inspections by others, a detailed breakdown can be provided upon request. 10 Work is in conjunction with the Citys Water and Sewer Repair project. 11 Suzie Carlson is identified as the inspector for pricing purposes only. Qualified staff member may very. 6/30/2025
To:

FOR

COST PROPOSAL
City of Woodland
CIP24-12, WPCF Influent Pump Station & Grit Facility Improvements Project City of Woodland
On-Call Professional Municipal Engineering Services
From:

Page 113 ends

City of Woodland PAGE 2 OF 5
CIP24-12, WPCF Influent Pump Station & Grit Facility Improvements Project WSP

COST PROPOSAL SUMMARY
1) BURDENED LABOR COSTS (Includes Profit)
REGULAR TIME 283,652

OVERTIME -

PREMIUM TIME -
SUBTOTAL 283,652
2) SUBCONSULTANTS: No Subs.
3) MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES 24,318
SUBTOTAL 24,318
TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: 307,970
4) ADDITIONAL SERVICES (None)

Page 114 ends

Ci
ty of Woodland PAGE 3 OF 5
CIP24-12, WPCF Influent Pump Station & Grit Facility Improvements Project WSP

WSP STAFFING SCHEDULE
(REGULAR TIME HOURS - ENTIRE TEAM)
YEAR:

PRECONSTRUCTION

TRAINING

POSTCONSTRUCTION
MONTH: J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D POSITION NAME FIRM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

TOTAL HOURS
Project Manager Bob Nichols WSP 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 12 12 12 12 8 8 8 8 16 16 16 16 208 Inspector/ARE TBD WSP 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 80 80 40 40 80 80 80 80 80 40 40 80 864 Intern TBD WSP 0
Project Administration Tuyen Tran WSP 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20 OE TBD WSP 0
Senior Inspector* Bo Peterson WSP 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 Electrical Inspector Shawn Bolich WSP 40 40 40 40 160
1,296
2025 2026 2027

Page 115 ends

City of Woodland PAGE 4 OF 5
CIP24-12, WPCF Influent Pump Station & Grit Facility Improvements Project WSP

WSP LABOR COSTS
(REGULAR TIME)

POSITION NAME FIRM
Project Manager Bob Nichols WSP 32 $286 $9,152 112 $296 $33,152 64 $306 $19,584 Inspector/ARE TBD WSP 32 $196 $6,272 592 $203 $120,176 240 $210 $50,400 Intern TBD WSP 0 $55 $0 0 $57 $0 0 $59 $0
Project Administration Tuyen Tran WSP 4 $138 $552 12 $143 $1,716 4 $148 $592 OE TBD WSP 0 $97 $0 0 $100 $0 0 $104 $0
Senior Inspector* Bo Peterson WSP 0 $196 $0 32 $203 $6,496 12 $210 $2,520 Electrical Inspector Shawn Bolich WSP 0 $196 $0 80 $203 $16,240 80 $210 $16,800 TOTALS: 68 15,976.00$ 828 177,780.00$ 400 89,896.00$
Total 283,652.00$
2025
TOTAL
HRS

BURDENE
D RATE

BURDENED

WAGE COST
2027
TOTAL
HRS

BURDENED
RATE

BURDENED

WAGE COST
2026
TOTAL
HRS

BURDENED
RATE

BURDENED

WAGE COST

Page 116 ends

C
ity of Woodland PAGE 5 OF 5
CIP24-12, WPCF Influent Pump Station & Grit Facility Improvements Project WSP
UNIT
UNIT QTY COST ($) SUBTOTAL ($) TOTAL ($)

A) FIELD COSTS
(Includes vehicles lease and O & M; digital cameras; video recorder; field, survey and safety equipment.) Total Hours for Field CM Staff
Project Manager Bob Nichols Hours 208 $14 $2,912
Inspector/ARE TBD Hours 864 $14 $12,096
Intern TBD Hours 0 $14 $0
Project Administration Tuyen Tran Hours 20 $0 $0
OE TBD Hours 0 $14 $0
Senior Inspector* Bo Peterson Hours 44 $14 $616
Electrical Inspector Shawn Bolich Hours 160 $14 $2,240
$17,864

B) OFFICE COSTS
Computers Hour 1296 $0.35 $454
Miscellaneous Supplies Month 20.0 $250 $5,000
Printing Month 20.0 $50 $1,000
$6,454
24,318

TOTAL DIRECT EXPENSES

WSP ESTIMATED MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES

Page 117 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.13
SUBJECT: Request for the Appropriation of Reserve Balances into the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012) to
Purchase Replacement Fleet Vehicles

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, 1) Authorizing the appropriation of $100,000 from the Water (2210) Fund Balance, as well as $100,000 from the Sewer (2220) Fund Balance as an expense transfer into the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012); and 2) Authorize the appropriation of the same $200,000 in the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012) for the purchase of replacement vehicles for 2-107 and 3-107.

Staff Contact:

Reece Ulrich, Fleet and Facilities Manager, (530) 661-5828, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The appropriation of $200,000 into the Vehicle Replacement Fund (2012) will be fully funded through the Water and Collections groups reserve balances. This allocation will be used exclusively for the purchase of replacement fleet vehicles. The reserve fund is sufficient to cover the cost, and there will be no adverse impact on the City’s General Fund or operating budget.

Background:

The City of Woodland maintains a reserve fund designated for capital expenditures, including vehicle replacements. This fund supports the sustainability and operational readiness of City services. Many of the City’s fleet vehicles, essential to departments such as Public Works and Parks, become unreliable due to age or other factors and require replacement to safely and efficiently be used by city personnel. Sufficient funds have previously been allocated to the reserves for each of these vehicles to make this purchase possible.

Recently, two fleet vehicles used by the Water and Collection Divisions were evaluated and determined to be beyond repair. These vehicles, which are critical to daily operations, now require accelerated replacement. The total cost for these replacements is estimated at $200,000.

Discussion:

Fleet vehicles are critical to the operation of various City departments. As vehicles age, maintenance costs and downtime due to repairs increase significantly, negatively impacting service delivery and staff productivity.

In this case, the Water and Collection Division’s electric fleet vehicles have reached the end of their service life sooner than expected and cannot be repaired. To avoid operational disruptions, it is necessary to proceed with immediate replacements.

Appropriating $200,000 from reserve fund 2210 and 2220 balances into Fund 2012 will allow the City to replace these vehicles and maintain continuity in essential services. This investment will reduce further risk of service interruption, lower maintenance costs, and enhance overall fleet reliability.

Timely approval of this appropriation will ensure continued support for vital water and collections

Page 118 ends

services without disruption.

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, 1) Authorizing the appropriation of $100,000 from the Water (2210) Fund Balance, as well as $100,000 from the Sewer (2220) Fund Balance as an expense transfer into the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012); and 2) Authorize the appropriation of the same $200,000 in the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012) for the purchase of replacement vehicles for 2-107 and 3-107.

Prepared by: Courtney Morgan, Management Analyst

Reviewed by: Reece Ulrich, Fleet and Facilities Manager

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution - Vehicle Reserve Appropriations and Purchase Replacement Fleet Vehicles

Page 119 ends

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND

REQUESTING THE APPROPRIATION OF RESERVE BALANCES INTO THE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND (2012) TO PURCHASE REPLACEMENT

FLEET VEHICLES
WHEREAS, the City of Woodland maintains a reserve fund designated for capital expenditures and vehicle purchases to support the continuity of City operations; and WHEREAS, the City has identified the need to replace two (2) fleet service vehicles that have been deemed beyond repair for the Water and Collections Divisions; and WHEREAS, the immediate replacement of these vehicles is necessary to maintain operational efficiency and avoid service disruptions within the Water and Collections Divisions; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to appropriate a total of $100,000 from Fund 2210 and $100,000 from Fund 2220 reserve balances into the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012) for the purpose of purchasing replacement fleet vehicles for the Water and Collections Divisions; and WHEREAS, the total cost for the purchase of the replacement fleet vehicles is estimated to be $200,000.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Woodland hereby authorizes and approves the following:

SECTION 1. The appropriation of $100,000 from the Water (2210) Fund Balance, as well as $100,000 from the Sewer (2220) Fund Balance as an expense transfer into the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012).

SECTION 2. The appropriation of the same $200,000 in the Equipment Replacement Fund (2012) for the purchase of replacement vehicles for 2-107 and 3-107.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Woodland at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of July 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Page 120 ends

______________________________
Rich Lansburgh, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Lansburgh, CMC, City Clerk Ethan Walsh, City Attorney

Page 121 ends

TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting
DATE: July 15, 2025
ITEM #: G.14
SUBJECT: Request for the City Manager to Execute a
Cooperative Fuel Services Agreement with Interstate
Oil

Recommendation for Action: Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute a cooperative Fuel Services Agreement with Interstate Oil for card-lock fuel services for a total not to exceed an amount of $1,800,000 through June 30, 2028.

Staff Contact:

Reece Ulrich, Fleet and Facilities Manager, (530) 661-5828, [email protected]

Fiscal Impact:

The recommended purchases will be made from the Fleet Services Oil & Gas operating budget (Vehicle Operations and Maintenance Fund). The City will encumber $600,000 per year through June 2028 if the City Council approves this resolution, for a total contract amount of $1,800,000. This amount was based on fuel usages and costs from previous years, with taking rising fuel prices into consideration. Any unused portion of the $600,000 encumbrance at the end of each year will be returned to the Equipment Services Fund.

Background:

The City’s previous contract with Interstate Oil ended in June 2025. The City entered into a cooperative purchasing bid with Yolo County for fuel services in the Spring of 2025. Yolo County hired Blue Blood Consulting, who was the primary coordinator throughout the bidding process. Two proposals received were from Interstate Oil and Ramos Oil. Bids were evaluated based on a points system: a) reasonableness of cost; b) suppliers questionnaire; c) references; e) location of cardlock sites; and f) extra value services/products. Interstate Oil won the bid based on having the most points.

Discussion:

The proposed purchase will be made under a Fuel Services Agreement for a three (3) year term beginning on July 1, 2025 and ending on June 30, 2028. The Agreement also specifies the option for the City to extend the contract for two (2) additional one (1) year periods with the recommendation of the City Manager and the approval from City Council. Interstate Oil is based in Sacramento but has a branch office in Woodland.

The City will be charged discounted prices at Interstate Oil’s Pacific Pride locations in Woodland. By filling at these facilities, the City can maximize its cost savings under this fuel purchasing program.

The stations are located at:
• 801 East Street;
• 454 N. East Street;
• 183 W. Main Street; and
• 18430 County Road 102

Page 122 ends

Conclusion:

Staff recommend the City Council adopt Resolution No. _____, authorizing the City Manager to execute a cooperative Fuel Services Agreement with Interstate Oil for card-lock fuel services for a total not to exceed an amount of $1,800,000 through June 30, 2028.

Prepared by: Courtney Morgan, Management Analyst

Reviewed by: Craig Locke, Public Works Director

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution - FY26-FY28 Interstate Fuel

2. RFP for Unleaded Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Products and Services

3. 05.30.25 Notice of Intent to Award Letter

4. FY26 Interstate Fuel Contract

Page 123 ends

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND ADOPTING AND APPROVING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A 3-YEAR

COOPERATIVE FUEL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH INTERSTATE OIL WHEREAS, the previous agreement with Interstate Oil ended in June 2025; and WHEREAS, the City of Woodland entered into a cooperative purchasing bid with Yolo County for fuel services and products in Spring 2025; and WHEREAS, two proposals were received from Interstate Oil and Ramos Oil, bids were evaluated based on a points system, and Interstate Oil won the bid based on having the most points; and
WHEREAS, the City of Woodland wishes to enter into a three-year Fuel Services Agreement with Interstate Oil for a total Not To Exceed amount of $1,800,000 through June 2028; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to authorize the City Manager to execute the Fuel Services Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Woodland hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a three-year Fuel Services Agreement with Interstate Oil for a total Not To Exceed the amount of $1,800,000 through June 30, 2028.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Woodland at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of July 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_______________________________
Rich Lansburgh, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________ ___________________________________ Sarah Lansburgh, CMC, City Clerk Ethan Walsh, City Attorney

Page 124 ends

Page 1 of 25 ends

Notice of Request for Proposals (RFP)
For
Unleaded Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Product and Services

Bid#: RFP-2025-0017
Bid Posted: April 4, 2025

Proposal Responses Due:
2:00 pm Pacific
May 8, 2025

Issued on behalf of
Yolo County Fleet Services
Woodland, California

RFP Coordinator: Hiren Desai
(859) 420-6760
[email protected]

COUNTY OF YOLO
Procurement Division

Page 125 ends

Page 2 of 25 ends

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ........................ 3 II. SCHEDULE OF EVENTS ................................ ................................ ........... 12 III. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION ................................ ........... 13 IV. TERMS AND CONDITIONS ................................ ................................ ...... 17 V. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION OF PROPOSAL ................................ ........ 23

Exhibits:

Exhibit “A” Proposal Transmittal Letter
Exhibit “B-1” Cost Proposal for Tankwagon deliveries except Cache Creek (County Supplied Form)
Exhibit “B-2” Cost Proposal for Tankwagon deliveries for Cache Creek (County Supplied Form)
Exhibit “B-3” Cost Proposal for Cardlock (County Supplied Form) Exhibit “C” Suppliers Questionnaire (County Supplied Form) Exhibit “D” References (County Supplied Form)
Exhibit “E” OPIS PAD#5 Report for the Sacramento Area Exhibit “F” Northern California Cardlock Fueling Site Locations Exhibit “G” Signature Page (County Supplied Form)
Exhibit “H” Non-Collusion Non-Conflict of Interest Statement (County Supplied Form)

Attachments:

Attachment 1 2023 Insurance Requirements
Attachment 2 Yolo County PO Terms and Conditions
Attachment 3 Yolo County Fuel Delivery Site Locations
Attachment 4 City of Woodland Fuel Delivery Locations

Page 126 ends

Page 3 of 25 ends

I. INTRODUCTION

A. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
The County of Yolo is requesting proposals for Unleaded Gasoline & Diesel Fuel Products & Services for countywide use as specified herein. This proposal will include both a Proprietary Cardlock Gasoline and Diesel Fuel System as well as delivery of product to different site locations within Yolo County and the City of Woodland. All products and services shall be performed per specifications outlined in this bid.

The City of Woodland anticipates exercising its option to participate in any agreement created as a result of this RFP with the same terms and conditions specified, including pricing.

Proposers who submit a response to this RFP must have the ability to meet all the requirements, including the terms and conditions contained in this RFP.

B. SYNONYMOUS TERMS
As used throughout this proposal and its attachment s, the following terms are synonymous:

1. a. Supplier, Vendor, Contractor
b. Purchase Order, Contract, Agreement
c. Services, Work, Scope, and Project
d. Bidder, Offeror, Proposer
e. Beacon, Beacon Bid

2. “The County” generally refers to the County of Yolo, California.

[REST OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

Page 127 ends

Page 4 of 25 ends

C. SCOPE OF WORK (SOW)

1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Annually Yolo County uses approximately 17,962 gallons of on -road diesel, 218,200 gallons gasoline, 6158 gallons of off -road diesel and 644 gallons of off-road gasoline, spending approximately $800,000 dollars per year. The City of Woodland uses approximately 90,000 gallons of gasoline and 36,500 gallons of diesel, spending approximately $560,000 per year.

Purchases and services will be made on an "as requested" basis during the five (5) contract period. The price adjustment methodology for fuel (articulated in Section V) shall remain firm during the entire contract period. There is no guarantee as to the total amount to be purchased during the awarded period.

2. PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS
All products furnished shall conform to the State of California specifications shown below:

a. Regular Unleaded Gasoline:
i. Minimum Octane Rating of 87 which shall be determined by using the R+M/2 Method.
ii. Comply with the requirements of American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) D4815 latest version.

b. Unleaded Plus Gasoline:
i. Minimum Octane Rating of 89 which shall be determined by using the R+M/2 Method.
ii. Comply with the requirements of American Society of Testing materials (ASTM) D4815 latest version.

c. Unleaded Premium Gasoline:
i. Minimum Octane Rating of 91.5 which shall be determined by using the R+M/2 Method.
ii. Comply with the requirements of American Society of Testing materials (ASTM) D4815 latest version.

d. Diesel #2 Ultra-Low Sulfur Fuel LSN2 must comply with requirements of American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) D975 latest version.

e. Diesel #2 Ultra -Low Sulfur Fuel LSN2 ( red dye) must comply with requirements of American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) D975 latest version.

Only products of new manufacture or distillation will be accepted. No refined or reclaimed products will be accepted. All gasoline and diesel fuel shall have a minimum shelf life of one (1) year.

Page 128 ends

Page 5 of 25 ends

Approximate Usage:

Estimated annual quantities are given for each commodity. Approximate usage does not constitute an order, but only implies probable quantity the County and City may use. Fuel will be ordered on an as -needed basis. Actual usage less than estimated shall not affect the prices as bid and accepted by Yolo County.

F.O.B. Destination:

Fuel site deliveries shall include delivery to various locations throughout the County of Yolo as specified within this bid. All prices for delivered fuel must be inclusive of any freight/delivery charges or fuel surcharges.

3. DELIVERY FACILITY FUEL SITE REQUIREMENTS

IMPORTANT:
• See Attachment 3 – Yolo County Delivery Site Locations • See Attachment 4 – City of Woodland Fuel Delivery Locations

a. Fuel site deliveries will include a combination of direct fueling of off- road equipment or filling tanks with specified quantities of fuel for use in off -road equipment and generators as requested by the Departments. No orders shall be delivered without an order being placed by the Department.

b. The County reserves the right to add additional locations or discontinue service to existing locations without any additional charges or a change in bid price structure.

c. It shall be expected by the vendor to delivery any fuel orders placed by the County within forty-eight (48) hours of time of order.

d. It shall be required that a metered ticket for each delivery of fuel be delivered to the ordering Department. The ticket should show the purchase order number.

e. If the delivery vehicle is equipped with metered pumps, these pumps shall be currently certified as to accuracy by the California Department of Agriculture, Division of Weights and Measures.

f. If metering shall not be accomplished from the delivery vehicles at the time of delivery, a highway transportation receipt (H.T.R.), issued at the point where the fuel order was loaded on the delivery vehicle, shall be delivered to the ordering Department. At a minimum, this H.T.R. shall show the date fuel loaded, carrier, truck number, quantity and type of fuel loaded, and temperature of the fuel when loaded.

g. All deliveries shall be temperature corrected to 60 degrees Fahrenheit.

Page 129 ends

Page 6 of 25 ends

h. All delivery trucks must comply with the current California Air Resources Regulations. Proof of compliance will be supplied by the awarded vendor when requested by the County.

i. If service on any County owned tank is required, the vendor will service the tank only at the County’s request at the hourly price rate submitted in this bid.

j. Delivery dates and times must be coordinated with the County end users. All deliveries to be made Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00am -4:00pm, and closed between 12:00pm -1:00pm, unless special delivery restrictions or instructions are required by the requesting Department.

Urgent Deliveries:

It shall be expected by the vendor to delivery any urgent fuel orders placed by the County within twenty- four (24) hours of the time that the orders were placed at no additional cost to the County. Urgent deliveries are not anticipated to occur often and should be kept at a minimum by the ordering department. There are no minimum requirements for urgent deliveries. All urgent deliveries shall occur during normal delivery hours between the hours of 8:00am -4:00pm unless special delivery restrictions apply by the requesting department.

Emergency Deliveries:

All deliveries requested outside the regular working hours of 8:00am to 4:00pm and County observed holidays shall be considered an emergency. Emergency deliveries may be placed by phone from the ordering department following by a facsimile containing the purchase order number on request. The emergency delivery fee will be billed at the rate designated in this bid. The emergency delivery fee will be invoiced separately, but must accompany the fuel invoice for payment.

Trip Charge:

During normal delivery hours of 8:00am to 4:00pm, unless other department restrictions apply, if the contractor attempts to deliver fuel to a delivery site location and is not admitted to the site for reasons beyond the contractor’s control caused by the ordering department, the contractor will be paid a trip charge. Contractor will contact using department to reschedule the delivery. The trip charge will be billed at the rate designated in this bid. Trip charge time shall be invoiced separately and supported by appropriate documentation (delivery logs, contact names, etc.). A trip charge fee invoice must accompany the fuel invoice, for the rescheduled delivery, for payment of the trip charge fee.

Standing Time:

The County will not be charged any additional fees for the amount of time it takes the contractor to fuel the County’s off-road equipment or generator tanks.

Spillage:

The County has a “zero” leakage” standard for fuel transfer operations.

Page 130 ends

Page 7 of 25 ends

The vendor shall provide equipment and training of truck drivers to minimize the chance of spillage during connection and disconnection of hoses and during the transfer of fuel. The vendor will ensure that all equipment, tools and procedures used are in compliance with all applicable specifications and regulations governing such operations.

In the event of leakage or spillage, it shall be the vendor’s responsibility to effect immediate containment, clean up, disposal and restoration activities in accordance with applicable State of California laws and regulations and subject to the County’s satisfaction. All material associated with such clean up shall be removed by the vendor.

Method of Ordering:

For Yolo County, each User Department will have their own Blanket Purchase Order.

County User Departments will place orders directly with the Vendor. The City of Woodland will also use Blanket Purchase Order(s) as needed and follow a similar process. An acknowledgment, confirmation, or delivery order number must be indicated in your response.

4. CARDLOCK FACILITY SITE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS

a. Must have the ability for fueling of large truck, trailer and equipment.

b. Must have multiple site fueling capabilities for convenience. Areas sites should include Woodland, Davis, West Sacramento, and areas outside Yolo County.

c. Must have twenty -four (24) hour access three hundred sixty -five (365) days per year to fueling site locations.

d. Must have an emergency plan for fueling in case of an electrical outage (power source for pumps and card).

e. Must provide a hand ticket record when system is down.

f. Must inform County Fleet Services of pump outages at local stations which would increase driver’s fueling time.

5. CARDLOCK REPORTING AND BILLING

a. Must have data patch capabilities to feed daily information into the County’s CAMS fuel management software system (CSV file) and the City’s Faster Asset Solutions System (CSV file). Systems must be live on April 1st contract start date.

b. Must provide initial, additional and replacement cards at no charge to both the County and City. This includes any shipping or freight charges.

Page 131 ends

Page 8 of 25 ends

c. Must have the ability to limit access by “locking out” lost or stolen cards at the County’s direction for both the County and City and offer system control features.

d. System must allow lockout of any individual card by Fleet Services via data link, or from a master location.

e. Provide Fleet Services with fuel charge detail (OPIS rate + tax + markup etc.) prior to or same day as transaction report.

Material Safety Data Sheet:

It is required by law that all hazardous materials must be identified and be accompanied with a “Material Safety Data Sheet” (MSDS) at time of delivery.

Substitutions:

Vendor will not be allowed to substitute any product ordered with other merchandise/products without the consent of the County User Department placing the order. If substitute products are delivered without approval, it will be the responsibility of the ve ndor to pick up those products at no charge or penalty to the County.

Rejected Product Deliveries:

Materials must meet specifications. The vendor shall immediately remove any rejected materials/products brought to the County at his or her own expense.

Rejected materials/products shall never again be offered to the County. Vendor will be responsible for all costs and transportation charges incurred in replacing materials/products that do not meet all specifications.

6. INVOICING DOCUMENTATION

Service Representative:

The vendor must provide a knowledgeable representative to respond to all questions regarding orders and billing.

Invoicing:

All invoices must show the contract pricing formula (OPIS PAD 5 Sacramento Regional Rack Price + Differential =Total Price per Gallon). At the close of each month the vendor shall submit a priced statement to include the following billing requirements:

a. Cardlock System Requirements:

i. Invoices are to be submitted (respectively) to:

• Yolo County PPW-Fleet Services Department
294 West Beamer St.

Woodland, CA. 95695

• City of Woodland Fleet and Facilities Division
655 N. Pioneer Ave

Page 132 ends

Page 9 of 25 ends

Woodland, CA 95776

ii. Invoice information must include:

• Fueling site location
• Date and time of transaction
• Miscellaneous codes - County vehicle number and cross reference
• Employee name & card number.
• Vehicle odometer reading
• Product description
• Gallons and price per transaction
• Total gallons and dollars by product
• Total by card.
• Summary of fuel gallons
• Applicable taxes
• Purchase Order Number

b. Delivery Facility Fuel Site Requirements:

i. Invoices are to be submitted to each individual department.

ii. Each delivery location is to be invoiced/credited separately.

iii. Invoice information is to include:
• Agency Name
• Fuel site location
• Date and time of transaction
• Product description
• Amount of fuel dispensed
• Total gallons and dollars by product
• Summary of fuel gallons
• Applicable taxes
• Purchase Order Number

7. MINIMUM VENDOR REQUIREMENTS

The successful awarded vendor (Contractor) must meet all of the following requirements:

a. Vendor shall possess all Federal, State and Local permits, licenses and approvals necessary to perform each aspect of the work or service required.

b. The Vendor will make all necessary adjustments to software system(s) to interface with the Yolo County Fleet Services fleet management software system; currently Cascade Software
Systems Cost Accounting Management Systems (CAMS) and the City of Woodland’s Faster Asset Solutions System at no additional cost the County or City. The County and/or Cascade Software

Page 133 ends

Page 10 of 25 ends

Systems will provide information needed for interface with the vendor. The City and/or Faster Asset Solutions will provide information needed for the interface with the vendor.

c. Vendor must export data as a CSV file, with the following data elements such as:

• Site
• Transaction Type
• Card (card# & driver name)
• Quantity of Fuel
• Date
• Time
• Pump
• Product
• Vehicle
• Odometer

d. The vendor will provide all transitional interfacing and continual uninterrupted service at date of contract.

e. Vendor shall provide a 24 -hour, toll free line customer support service.

f. Vendor must provide a 24-hour phone number (beyond answering service) for emergency access only.

g. Vendor must provide all fuel cards and replacement cards at no expense to the County and City. Currently the County has approximately 500 active cards and 450 vehicles. The City has approximately 450 active cards and 346 vehicles.

h. Single or multiple cards may be issued for specific vehicles and/or individuals and/or specific fuel types. Types of fueling cards will be requested based on the needs of the County and City.

i. Vendor shall have gasoline and diesel fuel supply contracts which shall assure the continuous supply of product during the contract period. Vendor must provide information with this bid showing information supporting their ability to supply, without major interruption, the products covered in the bid

8. AWARDED CONTRACTOR ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
a. The Contractor must supply all applicable insurance requirements required in Attachment 1.
b. CONTRACT TERM:
• Contractor agrees to provide awarded items and/or services as specified in the RFP document for an initial term of three

Page 134 ends

Page 11 of 25 ends

(3) years. It is anticipated that this initial term would begin July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2028.
• The contract may be extended by mutual consent for two (2) additional one-year renewal terms. Pricing shall remain firm for the entire contract term (including renewals).

9. PROPOSAL DEADLINE
Proposals shall be submitted no later than the Proposal Deadline time and date detailed in the Section II, RFP Schedule of Events. Proposers shall respond to the written RFP and any exhibits, attachments, or amendments . A Proposer's failure to submit a proposal as required before the deadline shall cause the proposal to be disqualified . Late proposals shall not be accepted nor shall additional time be granted to any potential Proposer.

10. SUBMITTING PROPOSALS
The required method of submitting your proposal is electronically through Beacon Bid’s platform (https://www.beaconbid.com/solicitations/yolo- county/open).

It is the sole responsibility of the proposer to ensure their proposal reaches Beacon before the closing date and time. If you have any questions regarding the submittal of this proposal, please contact Beacon at 1-888-402-2231 or [email protected] for vendor support.

Bidders/Offerors are cautioned to allow adequate time to ensure timely receipt of their proposals. The County is not responsible for any delays of the Bidder’s/Offeror’s proposal delivery. Late proposals shall not be accepted, nor shall additional time be granted to any potential Bidder/Offeror.

11. ADDENDA
Any additional information not included in this solicitation which the County finds necessary and material to responding to the RFP will be posted as an addendum on Beacon. Answers to questions submitted through Beacon shall be considered addenda to the solicitation documents.

[REST OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

Page 135 ends

Page 12 of 25 ends

II. SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

The following RFP Schedule of Events represents the County’s best estimate of the schedule that shall be followed. Unless otherwise specified, the time of day for the following events shall be between 8:00 AM and 4:00 PM., Pacific Time.

The County reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to adjust this schedule as it deems necessary. Notification of any adjustment to the Schedule of Events shall be provided to all vendors through Beacon.

The County is not responsible for failure of the prospective Bidders/Offerors to check for any RFP document updates, changes, or answers to questions posted on the Beacon website. Failure to periodically check the website will be at the Bidder’s/Offeror’s sole risk.

EVENT DATE TIME
1 County Issues RFP April 4, 2025
2 Deadline for Written Comments (Questions)
Posted on Beacon
April 17, 2025 2:00pm
3 County Issues Responses to Written
Comments
April 24, 2025
4 U Deadline Proposals Due May 8, 2025 2:00pm
5 County Completes Evaluations May 2025
6 Anticipated Contract Start Date July 1, 2025

[REST OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

Page 136 ends

Page 13 of 25 ends

III. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION

A. RFP COORDINATOR
The following RFP Coordinator shall be the main point of contact for this RFP:

RFP Coordinator: Hiren Desai
Phone: (859) 420-6760
[email protected]
B. COMMUNICATIONS REGARDING THE RFP
Upon release of this RFP, all vendor communications concerning this procurement must be directed to the RFP Coordinator named above . Unauthorized contact regarding the RFP with other County employees of the procuring county agency may result in disqualification.

Questions concerning this proposa l, including specifications, requirements, terms and/or conditions of a solicitation, etc. should be submitted solely in writing online at: https://www.beaconbid.com/solicitations/yolo-county/open in the questions and answers section of the solicitation no later than the date and time noted above in the Section II. Schedule of Events Chart, Deadline for Written Comments Posted or per any changes to Schedule of Events as posted to Beacon.

The County is not responsible for failure of the prospective Bidders/Offerors to check for any RFP document updates, changes, or answers to questions posted at the Beacon website . Failure to periodically check the website will be at the Bidder’s/Offeror’s sole risk.

Any oral communications shall be considered unofficial and nonbinding on the County.

Any irregularities or lack of clarity in the RFP should be brought to the attention of the County for correction or clarification.

C. PROPOSAL PREPARATION COSTS
The County shall not pay any costs associated with the preparation, submittal, or presentation of any proposal.

D. PROPOSAL WITHDRAWAL
To withdraw a prop osal, the V endor must submit a written request, signed by an authorized representative, to the RFP Coordinator . After withdrawing a previously submitted proposal, the vendor may submit another proposal at any time up to the deadline for submitting proposals.

E. PROPOSAL AMENDMENT
The County shall not accept any amendments, revisions, or alterations to proposals after the deadline for proposal submittal unless the County formally requests such in writing.

Page 137 ends

Page 14 of 25 ends

F. PROPOSAL ERRORS
Proposers are liable for all errors or omissions contained in their proposals. Proposers shall not be allowed to alter proposal documents after the deadline for submitting a proposal.

G. PROHIBITION OF PROPOSER TERMS & CONDITIONS
A Proposer may not submit the Proposer's own contract terms and conditions in a response to this RFP. If a proposal contains such terms and conditions, the County, at its sole discretion, may determine the proposal to be a nonresponsive counteroffer, and the proposal may be rejected.

H. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING
The Contractor may not subcontract, transfer, or assign any portion of the contract without prior, written approval from the County . The County must approve each subcontractor in writing. The substitution of one subcontractor for another may be made only at the discretion of the County and with prior, wri tten approval from the County.

Notwithstanding the use of approved subcontractors, the Proposer, if awarded a contract under this RFP, shall be the prime contractor and shall be responsible for all work performed.

Contractor shall require each of its subcontractors of any tier to carry the aforementioned coverage, or Contractor may insure subco ntractors under its own policy.

I. PROPOSAL OF ADDITIONAL SERVICES
If a Proposer indicates an offer of goods or services in addition to those required by and described in this RFP, these additional goods or services may be added to the contract before contract signing at the sole discretion of the County.

J. INDEPENDENT PRICE DETERMINATION
A proposal shall be disqualified and rejected by the County if the price in the proposal was not arrived at independently without collusion, consultation, communication, or agreement as to any matter relating to such prices with any other Proposer, a County employee, or any Competitor.

K. INSURANCE
The successful Contractor will be required to provide and maintain insurance as required and listed in Attachment 1 before commencing work on the contract.

L. LICENSURE
Before a contract pursuant to this RFP is signed, the Proposer must hold all necessary, applicable business and professional licenses . The County may require any or all Proposers to submit evidence of proper licensure.

M. RFP AMENDMENT AND CANCELLATION
The County reserves the unilateral right to amend this RFP in writing at any time. The County also reserves the right to cancel or reissue the RFP at its sole discretion. If an amendment is issued it shall be provided to all proposers through Beacon. Proposers

Page 138 ends

Page 15 of 25 ends

shall respond to the final written RFP and any exhibits, attachments, and amendments.

N. RIGHT OF REJECTION
The County reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to reject any and all proposals or to cancel this RFP in its entirety.

Any proposal received which does not meet the requirements of this RFP may be considered to be nonresponsive, and the proposal may be rejected . Proposers must comply with all of the terms of this RFP and all applicable State and County laws and regulations. The County may reject any proposal that does not comply with all of the terms, conditions, and performance requirements of this RFP.

The County reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to waive variances in proposals provided such action is in the best interest of the County . Where the County waives minor variances in proposals, such waiver does not modify the RFP requirements or excuse the proposer from full compliance with the RFP . Notwithstanding any minor variance, the County may hold any Proposer to strict compliance with the RFP.

O. DISCLOSURE OF PROPOSAL CONTENTS
All proposals become the property of the County, which is a public agency subject to the disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act (CPRA, California Government Code §6250 and following) . The CPRA contains limited exemptions. If you contend that any documents, as defined by the CPRA, are confidential or proprietary material and exempt from CPRA, these documents shall be clearly marked “Exempt from CPRA.” Proposer shall defend, indemnify and hold the County harmless against any claim, action or litigation (including but not limited to all judgments, costs, fees, and attorney’s fees) that may result from denial of a CPRA request. If Proposer does not respond to a CPRA request or agree to do so within five (5) days, the County may disclose the requested information under the CPRA.” P. PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS
The evaluation process is designed to award the procurement to the Proposer with the best combination of attributes based upon the evaluation criteria.

The County reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to request clarifications of proposals or to conduct discussions for the purpose of clarification with any or all Proposers. If clarifications are made as a result of such discussion, the Proposer shall put such clarifications in writing.

Q. AWARD OF PROPOSAL
Award will be made to the Proposer offering the most advantageous proposal after consideration of all Evaluation Criteria set forth below . This criterion is not listed in any order of preference . The County reserves the right to establish weight factors that will be applied to the criteria depending upon the order of importance. The County shall not be obligated to accept the lowest priced proposal, but will make an award in the best interests of the County after all factors have been evaluated.

Page 139 ends

Page 16 of 25 ends

Award Evaluation Criteria:

Criteria Maximum
Points
Reasonableness of Cost 35
Supplier’s Questionnaire 10
References 15
Location of Cardlock Sites within Yolo County 30
Other Factors (best value, such as can provide both
fuel delivery and cardlock, etc.)
10 The County reserves the right to hold interviews/discussions with selected finalists, if it is in the best interest of the County to do so. If the County decides to move forward with interviews, a separate set of criteria points will be created and added to the total.

R. AWARD PROCESS
The County reserves the right to make an award without further discussion of any proposal submitted. Each proposal should be initially submitted on the most favorable terms the proposer can offer . The County reserves the right to negotiate and/or include a best and final offer stage to the process.

Notwithstanding, the county reserves the right to add terms and conditions, deemed to be in the best interest of the county, during final negotiations. Any such terms and conditions shall be within the scope of the RFP and shall not affect the basis of proposal evaluations and will be incorporated in a purchase order.

The County reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to negotiate with the apparent best evaluated Proposer.

[REST OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

Page 140 ends

Page 17 of 25 ends

IV. TERMS AND CONDITIONS

A. QUALIFICATIONS/INSPECTION
Proposals will only be considered from firms normally engaged in providing the types of commodities/services specified herein. The County reserves the right to inspect the Proposer’s facilities, equipment, personnel, and organization at any time, or take any other action necessary to determine Proposer’s abi lity to perform . The RFP Coordinator reserves the right to reject proposals where evidence or evaluation is determined to indicate inability to perform.

B. NON-WAIVER
The County’s failure to address errors or omissions in the proposals shall not constitute a waiver of any requirement of this RFP by the County.

C. FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LAWS
The successful proposer must operate in conformity with all applicable, federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, orders, rules, and regulations pertaining to work. It is the responsibility of the awarded proposer to ensure that all permits and/or licensees required for operation are valid and current. Failure to comply with this provision may be cause to cancel any contract awarded, and award will be made to the next lowest, responsive, responsible proposer.

D. GOVERNING LAW
If an award is made, the contract will be made in the County of Yolo and shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California . Any action relating to the Contract shall be instituted and prosecuted in the courts of Yolo County, California.

E. ADDITIONAL LAWS AND REQUIREMENTS (AS APPLICABLE)

1. The Contractor will comply with the equal opportunity clause provided under 41 CFR 60-1.4, in accordance with Executive Order 11246, ‘‘Equal Employment Opportunity’’ (30 FR 12319, 12935, 3 CFR, 1964 –1965 Comp., p. 339), as amended by E.O. 11375, ‘‘Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity,’’ and as supplemented by regulations at 41 CFR part 60, ‘‘Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor.’’

2. The Contractor will file the required certification under the Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment (31 U.S.C. 1352), ensuring that the parties will not use, and have not used, Federal appropriated funds to attempt to influence any person or organization in connection with obtaining any Federal contract, grant, or any other award covered by 31 U.S.C. 1352. The parties must also disclose any lobbying with non-Federal funds that takes place in connection with obtaining any Federal award.

3. The Contractor shall conform to any additional restrictions or conditions that may be imposed upon the County by the Federal or State government, including but not limited to the following: Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards (40 U.S.C. 3701-3708), Rights to Inventions Made Under a Contract

Page 141 ends

Page 18 of 25 ends

or Agreement (37 CFR Part 401), and the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 - 7671q.) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387.

4. The Contractor is required to comply with Federal Regulations 2 CFR Part 180 and 2 CFR Part 3000.

i. Contractor is required to verify that none of the Contractor, its principals (defined at 2 CFR §180.995), or its affiliates (defined at 2 CFR §180.905) are excluded (defined at 2 CFR §180.940) or disqualified (defined at 2 CFR §180.935).
ii. The Contractor must comply with 2 CFR Part 180, Subpart C and 2 CFR Part 3000, Subpart C and must include a requirement to comply with these regulations in any lower tier covered transaction it enters into. iii. This certification is a material representation of fact relied upon by the County. If it is later determined that the Contractor did not comply with 2 CFR Part 180, Subpart C and 2 CFR Part 3000, Subpart C, in addition to remedies available to (name of sub -awarding State agency, if applicable), and County, the Federal Government may pursue available remedies, including but not limited to suspension and/or disbarment. iv. The Contractor agrees to comply with the requirements of 2 CFR Part 180, Subpart C and 2 CFR Part 3000 Subpart C throughout the period of this contract. The Contractor further agrees to include a provision requiring such compliance in its lower tier covered transactions.

5. The Contractor shall make the maximum use of products containing recovered materials that are EPA -designated items unless the product cannot be acquired:

i. Competitively within a timeframe providing for compliance with the contract performance schedule;
ii. Meeting contract performance requirements; or
iii. At a reasonable price.

Information about this requirement, along with the list of EPA-designate items, is available at EPA’s Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines web site, https://www.epa.gov/smm/comprehensive-procurement-guideline-cpg- program

6. The Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 (“the Act”) requires the Contractor to comply with the requirements of Government Code Sections 8350 -8357 and the requirements of federal law as implemented in 28 CFR Part 67, Subpart F, Sections 615 and 620.

7. The Contractor must certify it has not been suspended or debarred from participation in federal grants or have been convicted of fraud, theft, or embezzlement of federal, state, or local government grant funds for a period of three years following conviction.

Page 142 ends

Page 19 of 25 ends

F. NON-DISCRIMINATION
There shall be no discrimination as to race, sex, color, creed, age or national origin in the operations conducted under any resulting contract.

G. PUBLIC AGENCY
It is intended that other public agencies (i.e., city, special district, public authority, public agency and other political subdivisions of the State of California) shall have the option to participate in any agreement created as a result of this RFP with the same terms and conditions specified, including pricing. The County shall incur no financial responsibility in connection with a purchase order from another public agency . The public agency shall accept sole responsibility for placing orders and making payment to the vendor.

H. ADDITIONAL PURCHASES
Following the award, the County may dispense with separate bidding for additional purchases of like item(s) from the successful Proposer within a twelve (12) month period from the initial purchase date provided that the Vendor agrees to provide the like item(s) at the same discounted price and under the same terms and conditions as the previous award.

I. EXTENSIONS
The County reserves the right to extend any contract past the end term date upon mutual agreement and under the same pricing, terms and conditions for continual service and supplies while a new contract is being solicited, evaluated and/or awarded for a period not to exceed six (6) months.

J. PRICE ESCALATION
Not Applicable.

K. INVOICES AND PAYMENT TERMS
Invoices are to be mailed to the County department(s) specified on the resulting purchase order, blanket purchase order or contract. All invoices must include the purchase order number, blanket purchase order number, or contract number, product description and reference to back ordered items. Failure to comply may result in delayed payments.

The County will make payment on a Net 30-day basis unless a cash discount of one- half percent (1/2%) or greater, which amounts to $2.50 or more, is allowed for payment within not less than twenty (20) days. The payment term shall begin on the date the merchandise is inspected, delivered and accepted by the County, or on the date a correct invoice is received in the office specified in the order, whichever is later. Prompt payment discounts shall be considered earned if payment is postmarked or personally de livered within the prescribed term. The beginning date described above shall be considered day zero for the purposes of counting days in the prescribed term.

L. COMPLIANCE
Late, incomplete, incorrect deliveries or excessive backorders will be documented, and performance evaluated when considering contract continuation or extension.

Page 143 ends

Page 20 of 25 ends

Inaccurate or erroneous billing will also be documented and monitored for the purpose of evaluating performance when considering continuation or extension of contract.

Failure to meet quoted delivery timeframes, or inaccurate or erroneous invoices (as determined by the Purchasing Department) may be cause for the County to cancel the balance of the awarded purchase order and award will be made to the next lowest proposer. Failure to receive County concurrence for substitutions or alternates will be documented and considered when evaluating continuation or extension of contract.

M. DEFAULT
In case of default by the awarded proposer, the County may procure the goods or services from another source and may recover the loss occasioned thereby from any unpaid balance due the selected proposer, or by any other legal means available to the County. The County may also ban selected proposer up to two years from future solicitations for default.

N. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE
The County reserves the right, in its best interest as determined by the County, to cancel any contract by giving written notice to the C ontractor thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of such cancellation.

O. CANCELLATION FOR UNAPPROPRIATED FUNDS
The obligation of the County for payment to a Contractor is limited to the availability of funds appropriated in a current fiscal period, and continuation of the contract into a subsequent fiscal period is subject to appropriation of funds, unless otherwise authorized by law.

P. ASSIGNMENT/TRANSFER/SUBCONTRACTING
Awarded C ontractor shall not assign, transfer, or subcontract any portion of the contract without the express written consent of the department . Any award issued pursuant to this RFP, and the monies, which may become due hereunder, are not assignable without the prior written approval of the County.

Q. F.O.B. POINT
All prices quoted shall be F.O.B destination, freight prepaid (proposer pays and bears freight charges, proposer owns goods in transit and files any claims), excluding sales tax. The County is exempt from Federal Excise and Transportation taxes.

R. PROTESTS
The County encourages S uppliers to resolve issues regarding requirements or the procurement process through written correspondence and discussions. The County is committed to fo stering relationships with its S uppliers to encourage an ongoing pursuit to fulfill requirements.

1) Protest Procedures:

All protests shall be typed under the protester’s letterhead and submitted in accordance with the provisions stated herein . Protests may be submitted by mail or by electronic mail. Protests submitted by facsimile will not be accepted.

All protests must be addressed and submitted to both the RFP Coordinator of

Page 144 ends

Page 21 of 25 ends

this solicitation and the Manager of Procurement. All protests shall include at a minimum the following information:
a. The name, address, and telephone number of the Protester; b. The signature of the Protester or Protester’s representative; c. The solicitation title and due date;
d. Name of County employee designated as the RFP/IFB Coordinator; e. Identification of the statute or procedure that is alleged to have been violated;
f. A detailed statement identifying the legal and/or factual grounds of the protest and all documentation supporting the vendor’s position; g. The form of relief requested.

The contact information for the Manager of Procurement is as follows:

Manager of Procurement
Yolo County Department of General Services
120 W Main St., Ste. C
Woodland, CA 95695
Protester’s failure to comply with these procedures shall constitute a waiver of any right to further the RFP Protest and shall constitute a failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

The Manager of Procurement will review the materials in connection with the protest, assess the merits of the protest, and provide a written decision on the protest. The Manager of Procurement’s decision is final.

If it is determined the protest is frivolous, the party originating the protest may be determined to be irresponsible and may be ineligible for future contracts. 2) Protest of RFP Specifications/Requirements/Terms & Conditions:

Companies who are concerned regarding irregularities or lack of clarity in specifications, requirements, terms and/or conditions of a solicitation should be brought to the attention of the County. Notice shall be provided prior to the closing date and time of the designated “question and answer period ” of the proposal noted above in the Section II. Schedule of Events Chart, item#3 Deadline for Written Comments Posted on Beacon.

Notice must be clearly marked “Notice of Protest of
Specifications/Requirements/Terms & Conditions .” No requests for protests of solicitation specifications, requirements, terms and/or conditions shall be considered after the deadline stated above.

Companies who fail to do so forfeit all rights to protest a solicitation or any subsequent award based on the specifications, requirements, terms or conditions of this solicitation . In the event of the protest for specifications, requirements, terms and/or conditions is denied and the protester wishes to continue in the solicitation process they must still submit a bid/proposal prior to the close of the solicitation.

Page 145 ends

Page 22 of 25 ends

3) Protest of Disqualification:

Initial evaluations will determine if proposals have met the minimal requirements as indicated in this RFP. Notices will be sent to all companies who have been disqualified for not meeting the minimal requirements. Should a company disagree with the determination, notice of disagreement must be received within five (5) working days of date of notice identifying areas that are in question and how the compan y met the minimal requirements . Notice must be clearly marked “Notice of Disagreement.” Companies who fail to do so forfeit all rights in the protest process. It is at the county’s discretion at the department level to make final determinations for all disqualified protests. 4) Protest of Award of Contract:

In protests related to the award of a contract, the protest must be received by e-mail or hard copy no later than 4:00 PM Pacific Time five (5) business days after the notice of the proposed contract . Notice must be clearly marked “Notice of Protest of Award of Contract.” A review may be granted if the protest is received within the specified time and the firm/person submitting the protest is a Bidder/Offeror.

Throughout the review process, the County has no obligation to delay or otherwise postpone an award of a contract based on a protest.

[REST OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

Page 146 ends

Page 23 of 25 ends

V. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION OF PROPOSAL

A. SUBMITTING PROPOSALS

The required method of submitting your proposal is electronically through Beacon. It is the sole responsibility of the proposer to ensure their proposal reaches Beacon before the closing date and time. If you have any questions regarding the submittal of this proposal, please contact Beacon at 1 -888-402-2231 or [email protected] for vendor support.

Late proposals shall not be accepted, nor shall additional time be granted to any potential Proposer.

B. REQUIRED PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS
The submittals requested shall be included with the proposal response. Failure to include required submittals may be cause for rejection of your proposal. The following items are required for your proposal to be considered and must be labeled as such:
1) Exhibit “A” - Proposal Transmittal Letter
a. The proposal transmittal letter shall be on official letterhead and signed by an official authorized to solicit business and enter into contracts for the Proposer. The letter shall include : the name, address, email address, and phone number of the authorized business contact.
b. If the Proposer is submitting this proposal in conjunction with a subcontractor, information on the subcontractor shall also be included for all relevant Exhibits.

2) Exhibit “B” – Cost Proposal Forms
Please complete all of the following forms:
a. Exhibit B-1 Cost Proposal for Tankwagon deliveries except Cache Creek b. Exhibit B-2 Cost Proposal for Tankwagon deliveries for Cache Creek c. Exhibit B-3 Cost Proposal for Cardlock

IMPORTANT: Proposers have to bid on both Tankwagon fuel deliveries (Exhibits B1 and B-2) and Cardlock (Exhibit B-3) and cannot just bid on Tankwagon deliveries or Cardlock

3) Exhibit “C” – Suppliers Questionnaire
Complete Exhibit C (the Suppliers Questionnaire).

4) Exhibit “D” - References
a. Complete Exhibit D and provided references from at least three (3) different clients served by the Proposer during the past five (5) years, with services substantially similar to those being requested in this RFP. b. Preference will be given for references from California state or local government agencies, other than Yolo County itself.
c. References cannot be from any individuals on behalf of Yolo County itself. d. Each reference shall include the following information:

Page 147 ends

Page 24 of 25 ends

i. A description of the work which the Proposer provided for the Reference.
ii. The timeframe during which the work was performed.
iii. The contract value (if available).
iv. Any additional information the Proposer wishes to provide. v. The name, email address and telephone number for a contact person from each reference.
e. The County reserves the right to contact references, and probably will, if it is in the County’s best interest to do so.

5) Exhibit “E” – OPIS PAD#5 Report for the Sacramento Area Please provide this Report with your Proposal, in accordance with the following requirements.

PRICING REQUIREMENTS
Proposers are to quote an adjustment/differential to the daily “average” price published in the OPIS (Oil Price Information Service) PAD 5 Sacramento Regional Rack Price Report for the type of fuel requested. Rack pricing must include the Cap and Trade Fee enacted January 1, 2015.

If quoting a price less than OPIS, show a “minus” ( -) preceding the adjustment/differential. If quoting a price greater than OPIS, show a “plus” (+) preceding the adjustment/differential. If quoting the OPIS price as the bid price, insert the word “OPIS” i n that column. This daily “average” report will serve as base prices for purchases made each delivery or fueling date.

a. The quoted adjustment/differential is to be inclusive of:
• All Federal and California State superfund charges
• All California State fees
• All delivery, fuel surcharges, handling or other vendor related charges

b. The quoted adjustment/differential is to be exclusive from:
• Federal Excise Tax
• California State Sales and California Excise Taxes.

The adjustment/differential (difference between the bid price and the average Sacramento Rack Price reported by OPIS) shall remain firm for the entire term of the contract.

Bid prices shall be based on margin above, below or equal to the average Sacramento rack price reported by the OPIS dated Thursday, May 1, 2025 close of business day. Rack pricing must include the Cap and Trade Fee enacted January 1, 2015. Bidders shall submit a copy of the OPIS Report dated Thursday, May 1, 2025 with their proposal.

Invoiced prices are to be the daily “average” price published in the OPIS PAD 5 Report for the Sacramento, California Area +/ - vendors quoted adjustment/differential. All invoices must show the contract pricing formula (OPIS PAD 5 Sacramento Regional Rack Price + Adjustment/Differential =Total

Page 148 ends

Woodland City CouncilJuly 15, 2025

Woodland City Council
July 15, 2025