Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016/06/28 City Council Agenda PacketMission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." City of Rohnert Park ♦ 130 Avram Avenue ♦ Rohnert Park, California 94928 PHONE: (707) 588-2227+ FAX: (707) 794-9248 ♦ WEB: www.rpcity.org ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL Rohnert Park Financing Authority (RPFA) Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission (CDC) JOINT REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, June 28, 2016 Open Session: 5:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBER 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California The Rohnert Park City Council welcomes your attendance, interest and participation at its regular city meetings scheduled on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. City Council/RPFA agendas and minutes may be viewed at the City's website: www.rpciiy.org. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Council/RPFA may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on this agenda. If you challenge decisions of the City Council or the Rohnert Park Financing Authority of the City of Rohnert Park in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Rohnert Park at, or prior to the public hearing(s). RIGHT TO APPEAL: Judicial review of any city administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5 may be had only if a petition is filed with the court no later than the deadlines specified in Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits the time within which the decision may be challenged to the 90th day following the date that the decision becomes final. SIMULTANEOUS MEETING COMPENSATION DISCLOSURE (Government Code § 54952.3): Members of the City Council receive no additional compensation as a result of convening this joint meeting of the City Council and the Rohnert Park Financing Authority. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Provides an opportunity for public comment on items not listed on the agenda, or on agenda items if unable to comment at the scheduled time (limited to three minutes per appearance and a 30 minute total time limit, or allocation of time determined by Presiding Officer based on number of speaker cards submitted). PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD PRIOR TO SPEAKING ANNOUNCEMENT: Please turn off all pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices upon entering the Council Chamber. Use of these devices causes electrical interference with the sound recording and TV broadcast systems. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Agenda June 28, 2016 for City Council/RPFA/CDC Successor Agency Page 2 of 5 1. CITY COUNCIL/RPFA/SUCCESSOR AGENCY JOINT REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL (Ahanotu _ Callinan Stafford _ Mackenzie _ Belforte —) 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PRESENTATIONS A. Mayor's Proclamation: Honoring Fire Marshal Dan Adam on the Occasion of His Retirement 4. DEPARTMENT HEAD BRIEFING A. Department of Public Safety: Reminder on Fines Regarding Illegal Fireworks 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS Persons wishing to address the Council on any Consent Calendar item or on City business not listed on the Agenda may do so at this time. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. Those wishing to address the Council on any report item listed on the Agenda should submit a "Speaker Card" to the City Clerk before announcement of that at-enda item. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR All items on the Consent Calendar will be considered together by one or more action(s) of the City Council and/or the Rohnert Park Financing Authority and Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, whichever is applicable, unless any Council Member or anyone else interested in a consent calendar item has a question about the item. A. Approval of Minutes for: 1. City Council/RPFA/Successor Agency Joint Regular Meeting, June 14, 2016 B. Acceptance of Reports for: 1. Report on Councilmember Ahanotu's Appointment of Janeen Kirby to the Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board 2. City Bills/Demands for Payment dated June 28, 2016 3. Successor Agency to the CDC Bills/Demands for Payment dated June 28, 2016 4. City- Cash Report for Month Ending April 2016 C. City Council Resolutions for Adoption: 1. 2016-64 Authorizing the Finance Director to Increase Appropriations by $75,000 to the Capital Improvement Project 2016-12 Animal Shelter HVAC Replacement Project Funded by 2007R Tax Allocation Bond Proceeds and Any Other Transactions Necessary to Fund the Project 2. 2016-65 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amended and Restated Site Lease Agreement with the Community Child Care Council of Sonoma County for City -Owned Spaced Located at 1455 Golf Course Drive Effective July 1, 2016 and Supersede Resolution No. 2013-47 City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Agenda June 28, 2016 for City Council/RPFA/CDC Successor Agency Page 3 of 5 3. 2016-66 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with CSG Consultants Inc. for Development Review Services and Authorizing the Finance Director to Make Appropriations and Increase Budgeted Revenue to Account for Developer Reimbursements 4. 2016-67 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with Dudek for Planning and Environmental Services and Authorizing the Finance Director to Make Appropriations and Increase Budgeted Revenue to Account for Developer Reimbursements 5. 2016-68 Authorizing and Approving Job Description and Salary Range for Information Systems Analyst, and Change in Salary Range for Information Systems Operations Manager 2016-69 Approving the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges Revised June 26, 2016 2016-70 Approving the Plans & Specifications for Wilfred Avenue Rehabilitation Project (Project Number 2016-09), Awarding the Construction Contract to Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc., and Finding the Project Exempt From CEQA 2016-71 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Task Order 2016-01 with Green Valley Consulting Engineers for Construction Management and Inspection Services for the University District Project and Authorizing the Finance Director to Make Appropriations and Increase Budgeted Revenue to Account for Developer Reimbursements Council Motion/Vote 7. Presentation on Proposed Community Separator Ballot Measure by Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Department A. Staff Report B. Public Comment C. Council discussion/direction 8. PUBLIC HEARING: (NO EARLIER THAN 6 PM) Development Services Cost Recovery Annual Report — FY 2015-16 A. Staff Report B. Conduct Public Hearing C. Council discussion/action City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Agenda June 28, 2016 for City Council/RPFAICDC Successor Agency Page 4 of 5 9. PUBLIC HEARING: (NO EARLIER THAN 6 PM) Consideration of the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan A. Staff Report B. Public Comments C. Resolution for Adoption: 1. 2016-72 Adopting the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan and Authorizing Its Filing With the California Department of Water Resources a. Council motion/discussion/vote 10. COMMITTEE / LIAISON / OTHER REPORTS This time is set aside to allow Council members serving on Council committees or on regional boards, commissions or committees to present a verbal report on the activities of the respective boards, commissions or committees on which they serve. No action may be taken. A. Standing Committee Reports 1. Waste/Wastewater Issues Committee (6/21) B. Liaison Reports 1. Chamber of Commerce (Board of Directors) (6/21) 2. Library Advisory Board (6/21) 3. Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) General Assembly (6/16) 4. Legislative Committee (Mayors & Councilmembers) (6/17) 5. Russian River Watershed Association (RRWA) (6/23) C. Other Reports 11. COMMUNICATIONS Copies of communications have been provided to Council for review prior to this meeting. Council Members desiring to read or discuss any communication may do so at this time. No action may be taken except to place a particular item on a future agenda for Council consideration. 12. MATTERS FROM/FOR COUNCIL Prior to agenda publication, any Councilmember may place an item on this portion of the agenda. Upon the concurrence of two Councilmembers, the item may be added to a subsequent agenda for deliberation and action. In accordance with the Brown Act, at the City Council meeting, Councilmembers may not add items hereunder, except for brief reports on his or her own activities or brief announcements regarding an event of community interest. 13. PUBLIC COMMENTS Persons wishing to address the Council on City business not listed on the Agenda may do so at this time. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. Those wishing to address the Council on any report item listed on the Agenda should submit a "Speaker Card" to the City Clerk before announcement of that agenda item. 14. ADJOURNMENT City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Agenda June 28, 2016 for City Council/RPFA/CDC Successor Agency Page 5 of 5 NOTE: Time shown for any particular matter on the agenda is an estimate only. Matters may be considered earlier or later than the time indicated depending on the pace at which the meeting proceeds. If you wish to speak on an item under discussion by the Council which appears on this agenda, after receiving recognition from the Mayor, please walk to the rostrum and state your name and address for the record. Any item raised by a member of the public which is not on the agenda and may require Council action shall be automatically referred to staff for investigation and disposition which may include placing on a future agenda. If the item is deemed to be an emergency or the need to take action arose after posting of the agenda within the meaning of Government Code Section 54954.2(b), Council is entitled to discuss the matter to determine if it is an emergency item under said Government Code and may take action thereon. DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability which requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this City Council meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (707) 588-2227 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation by the City. Please notify the City Clerk's Office as soon as possible if you have a visual impairment requiring meeting materials to be produced in another format (Braille, audio -tape, etc.) AGENDA REPORTS & DOCUMENTS: Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to each item of business referred to on the agenda are available for public inspection at City Hall located at 130 Avram Avenue, during regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. Any writings or documents subject to disclosure that are provided to all, or a majority of all, of the members of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda after the agenda has been distributed will also be made available for inspection at City Hall during regular business hours. CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA I, Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk for the City of Rohnert Park, declare that the foregoing agenda for the June 28, 2016, Joint Regular Meeting of the Rohnert Park City Council/RPFA was posted and available for review on June 23, 2016, at Rohnert Park City Hall, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 94928. The agenda is also available on the City web site at www.rpcity.org, Executed this 23`d day of June, 2016, at Rohnert Park, California. Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk *Todaa�artim A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Honoring Fire Marshal DAN ADAM On the Occasion of his Retirement Vhtrtas, Dan Adam will retire after over 30 years of outstanding dedicated service to the City of Rohnert Park where he began working as a. Volunteer Auxiliary Firelighter on March. 1", 1986. He obtained a full-time position as a Customer Set -vice Rep- Meter Reader with the City on February 23`d, 1987, on March 16"', 1988 he became a Community Services Officer; February 6"', 1991 he transitioned to Public Safety Officer; and March 1 St, 2008 Dan promoted to Fire Marshal; Wbertao, Dan is widely recognized and known throughout the community as a result of his personal and professional life as well as his desire and willingness to work closely with the citizens, business owners, and employees throughout the City; Vbertao, throughout his career, Dan was heavily involved in the Sonoma County Fire Investigation Task Force and Fire Prevention Officer's Group; the City's Founder's Day Committee; and Community Events like the annual RPPSOA Santa Float and Easter Egg Hunt; Wbereao, Dan was recognized by the City of Rohnert Park for his assistance with the City's 501h Anniversary Celebration and received numerous professional commendations during his tenure; W btrCAO, perhaps some of the most memorable undertakings in his career, was his detailed investigative work as a result of his involvement with the Department's Accident, Crime, Homicide and Arson Investigation Teams; and 39htrtao, Dan has been and will always be highly regarded as not only a longtime resident of the City of Rohnert Park, but an honored member of the Department of Public Safety Family. Aft, Tberefore, be it prvtlaimtb that I, Gina Belforte, as Mayor and on behalf of the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park, do hereby extend our sincere thanks and appreciation to Dan Adam for his years of excellent service to our community and wish him all the best in his retirement. Gulp anb RCQularlp Protlaimtb this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK • Gina Belforle, MAYOR CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD )ate: t lekhL Agenda Item #:L Vame; See Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD ?,) � ( i L C 0 YA M.,W4 )ate: Agenda Itern M. bme, Wdress:— )hone'. Brief Summary of comments: see Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: Agenda Item M. L � Name: �" �: � Phone: _ TOPIC: l l �J "I .I., I iJ� I�' � -,• ^' Brief Summary of Comments: See Reverse PJbli i Supplemental Items for City Council Meeting: U 1-2-%) 201 U r- �V\ell Ilyr s, ('����tnr G�:A �.-� g.E:(il.�'�.�2.1.�1�(,,� , '�'�F'ti �'-�3�'LC'�e''►�, �'� it L41\16 - PX? -2- �lX0rr 14 P13 . , 3., �-2 / Y r , Vl lce r r- R �,in ��" Y x.12-(�- '►�r2 �c�: r 2 � v �014NeRT AA�k MINUTES OF THE JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK City Council Rohnert Park Financing Authority Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission Tuesday, June 14, 2016 Rohnert Park City Hall, Council Chamber 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California Item No. 6A1 1. CITY COUNCIL/RPFA/SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE CDC JOINT REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Mayor Belforte called the joint regular meeting to order at 5:01 pm, the notice for which being legally noticed on June 9, 2016. Present: Gina Belforte, Mayor Jake Mackenzie, Vice Mayor Amy O. Ahanotu, Councilmember Joseph T. Callinan, Councilmember Pam Stafford, Councilmember Absent: None Staff present: City Manager Jenkins, Assistant City Manager Schwartz, City Attorney Kenyon, Finance Director Howze, Development Services Director Pawson, Director of Public Works and Community Services McArthur, Director of Public Safety Masterson, Director of Human Resources Perrault, Senior Analyst Atkins, Interim City Clerk Frontella, Deputy City Clerk Saldanha, Community Services Manager Austin, Management Analyst Tacata, and Management Analyst Labourdette. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by the Rancho Cotate High School Girl's Lacrosse Team. 3. PRESENTATIONS A. Mayor's Certificate of Recognition: Honoring Sally Tomatoes for Being Selected as The Small Business of the Year by Assemblymember Bill Dodd Mayor Belforte read and presented the Certificate of Recognition to owner, Gerald Guidice, who accepted the honor on behalf of Sally Tomatoes and his business partner, Bill Pettibone, and thanked Council for their recognition. Mayor Belforte asked Council to hear Item 3.13 pending the arrival of Public Safety Detective Tara Douglas. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes June 14, 2016 for City Councit/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 2 of 8 C. Mayor's Certificate of Recognition: Honoring the Rancho Cotate High School Girls' Lacrosse Team for Winning the North Bay League Tournament Championship Mayor Belforte read and presented the Certificate of Recognition to members of the Rancho Cotate High School Girls' Lacrosse Team. Coach Melissa Hazelton thanked Council for their support. 4. DEPARTMENT HEAD BRIEFING A. Department of Development Services: Update on Magill Lane Director of Development Services provided the report and gave a presentation. 3. PRESENTATIONS (continued) B. Mayor's Certificate of Recognition: Honoring Public Safety Detective Tara Douglas as Rohnert Park-Cotati Rotary Club's Community Officer of the Year Award Mayor Belforte read and presented the Certificate of Recognition to Public Safety Detective, Tara Douglas. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Minutes for: 1. City Council/RPFA/Successor Agency Joint Regular Meeting, May 24, 2016 B. Acceptance of Reports for: 1. Informational Report Regarding the Preparation and Posting of a Catalog of Enterprise Systems in Compliance with California Senate Bill 272 2. City Bills/Demands for Payment dated June 14, 2016 3. RPFA- Cash Report for Month Ending April 2016 4. Housing Successor Agency- Cash Report for Month Ending April 2016 5. Successor Agency- Cash Report for Month Ending April 2016 6. City- Cash Report for Month Ending March 2016 C. City Council Resolutions for Adoption: 1. 2016-050 Adopting an Appropriations Limit for the City of Rohnert Park for the 2016-17 Fiscal Year Pursuant to Article XIII B of the California Constitution 2. 2016-051 Instituting a Revised Purchasing Policy for the City's Purchasing Program Pursuant to Chapter 3.04, "Purchasing Program" of Title 3 "Revenue and Finance," of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code 3. 2016-052 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Master Service Agreements with Brelje & Race, W -Trans, Green Valley Consulting Engineers, Cinquini & Passarino, Inc., and Moe Engineering 4. 2016-053 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with Omni Means, LTD for the Traffic Flow Improvement Study (Project 2016-03), and City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes June 14, 2016 for City Councit/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 3 of 8 D. Ordinance for Adoption: 1. No. 899 An Ordinance of the City of Rohnert Park, California, Amending the City of Rohnert Park Zoning Map to Rezone 435 Southwest Boulevard (APN: 143-370-010) from P -I: Public Institutional to R -H: High Density Residential E. Aeeept Resignation ffem Mobile Home Parks Refit Appea4s Board Member- Leon Cafise and Dir-eet Staffte Send Letter- of n,.,.,.veiatio (PULLED by Mackenzie) F. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Design Services Agreement with STRATA ap, Inc. for Professional Services for Design of the City Buildings Roof Replacement Project G. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with LCA Architects for a Public Safety Station/Corp Yard Master Plan (Project 1514) H. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement and Task Order 2016-01 with Firma Design Group for Engineering Design Services for Snyder Lane Rehabilitation (Project No. 2016-06) ACTION: Moved/seconded (Stafford/Callinan) to approve the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Ahanotu stated his abstention regarding Item 6.A ("Approval of Minutes for: City Council RPFA/Successor Agency Joint Regular Meeting, May 24, 2016") because he was not present for the May 24th meeting and declared he will not be voting on this particular item. Motion carried by the following unanimous 5-0 roll call vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. E. Accept Resignation from Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board Member Leonard Carlson and Direct Staff to Send Letter of Appreciation Recommended Action(s): Accept the resignation of Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board Member Leonard Carlson and direct staff to send letter of appreciation. Authorizing the Finance Director to Appropriate an Additional $50,000 for the Project 5. 2016-54 Adopting a Recreation Facility Fee Use Policy 6. 2016-55 Calling for the Holding of a General Municipal Election to be Held on Tuesday, November 8, 2016 for the Election of Certain Officers and Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Sonoma to Consolidate said Election Pursuant to § 10403 of Elections Code 7. 2016-56 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Lease Agreement and Future Agreement Extensions with Sonoma County Office of Education for City -Owned Office Space Located at 201 J Rogers Lane 8. 2016-57 Approving a Six -Month Extension of the Temporary Debris Box and Roll -Off Collection Services Franchise Agreements with Rohnert Park Disposal, Inc. and Industrial Carting and Authorizing the City Manager to Send Notices of Intent to Extend Agreements 9. 2016-58 Initiating the Vacation of Willis Avenue and Directing Related Actions D. Ordinance for Adoption: 1. No. 899 An Ordinance of the City of Rohnert Park, California, Amending the City of Rohnert Park Zoning Map to Rezone 435 Southwest Boulevard (APN: 143-370-010) from P -I: Public Institutional to R -H: High Density Residential E. Aeeept Resignation ffem Mobile Home Parks Refit Appea4s Board Member- Leon Cafise and Dir-eet Staffte Send Letter- of n,.,.,.veiatio (PULLED by Mackenzie) F. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Design Services Agreement with STRATA ap, Inc. for Professional Services for Design of the City Buildings Roof Replacement Project G. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with LCA Architects for a Public Safety Station/Corp Yard Master Plan (Project 1514) H. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement and Task Order 2016-01 with Firma Design Group for Engineering Design Services for Snyder Lane Rehabilitation (Project No. 2016-06) ACTION: Moved/seconded (Stafford/Callinan) to approve the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Ahanotu stated his abstention regarding Item 6.A ("Approval of Minutes for: City Council RPFA/Successor Agency Joint Regular Meeting, May 24, 2016") because he was not present for the May 24th meeting and declared he will not be voting on this particular item. Motion carried by the following unanimous 5-0 roll call vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. E. Accept Resignation from Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board Member Leonard Carlson and Direct Staff to Send Letter of Appreciation Recommended Action(s): Accept the resignation of Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board Member Leonard Carlson and direct staff to send letter of appreciation. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes June 14, 2016 for City Council/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 4 of 8 Vice Mayor Mackenzie recognized Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board Member Leonard Carlson and thanked him for his hard work and dedication throughout the years. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Stafford/Ahanotu) to accept the resignation of Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board Member Leonard Carlson and direct staff to send letter of appreciation. Motion carried unanimously by the following 5-0 roll call vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. 7. CLOSED SESSION A. Mayor Belforte made the closed session announcement pursuant to Government Code §54957.7 and Council recessed to Closed Session at 5:21 p.m. in Conference Room 2A to Consider: 1. Conference with Legal Counsel — Existing Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(1)) Don McComas vs. City of Rohnert Park, et. al., United States District Court Case No. 3:16-cv-02705-THE 2. Conference with Legal Counsel — Existing Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(1)) Nancy Atwell, et. al. vs. City of Rohnert Park, Sonoma County Superior Court Case No. SCV 256891 3. Conference with Legal Counsel — Existing Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(1)) Sierra Club vs. City of Rohnert Park, Sonoma County Superior Court Case No. SCV 248112 4. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code §54957.6) Agency designated representative(s): Darrin Jenkins, City Manager Employee Organizations: a. Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA) B. Reconvened Joint Regular Meeting Open Session in Council Chamber at 5:50 p.m. C. Report on Closed Session (Government Code § 54957.1) Mayor Belforte reported: no reportable action. 8. NOVEMBER 8, 2016 ELECTION MATTERS Consideration of Adopting Regulations for Candidates of Elective Office Pertaining to Candidates' Statements Interim City Clerk Frontella presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Staff recommends that the City Council adopt regulations for candidates for elective office pertaining to Candidates' Statements under Resolution 2016-59. Public Comment: None It is noted for the record that Councilmembers Callinan, Vice Mayor Mackenzie, and Mayor Belforte have potential financial conflicts of interest regarding this item. Per the Political Reform Act, Councilmember Callinan, Vice Mayor Mackenzie, and Mayor Belforte participated in a random selection process of drawing cards to determine which City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes June 14, 2016 for City CouncitlRohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 5 of 8 Councilmember would be selected to participate in the voting process for purposes of forming a quorum. Mayor Belforte drew the lowest card, and therefore, was selected to participate. Councilmember Callinan and Vice Mayor Mackenzie disclosed conflicts of interest because the outcome of voting on this item could have a potential financial effect if they should opt to run for re-election; thereby incurring printing costs which are set by City Council. Councilmember Callinan and Vice Mayor Mackenzie left the meeting at 5:54 p.m. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Stafford/Ahanotu) to adopt Resolution 2016-059 Adopting Regulations for Candidates for Elective Officer Pertaining to Candidates' Statements Submitted to the Voters at an Election to be Held on November 8, 2016. Motion carried by the following 3-0-2 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Stafford, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT Callinan and Mackenzie. Councilmember Callinan and Vice Mayor Mackenzie returned to the dais at 5:56 p.m. 9. Review and Consideration of Adoption of City of Rohnert Park Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets FY 2016/17 Finance Director Howze presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Staff recommends that the City Council consider and approve a resolution adopting the City Budget for Fiscal Year 2016/17. In addition, staff also recommends that City Council consider and approve a resolution adopting the Proposed Five -Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for FY 2016/17 through FY 2020/21, and the Capital Improvement Projects for FY 2016/17 as included in the City Budget for Fiscal Year 2016/17. Finance Director Howze noted a correction to the formula displayed on page 76 under the Public Safety section of the City Budget for Fiscal Year 2016/17. Public Comment: None. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Callinan/Stafford) to adopt Resolution 2016-060 Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget for the City of Rohnert Park for Fiscal Year 2016/17. Motion carried by the following 5-0 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Callinan/Stafford) to adopt Resolution 2016-061 Approving the Five -Year Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for Fiscal Years 2016/17 through 2020/21 and Approving Fiscal Year 2016/17 CIP Projects as Included in the City Budget for Fiscal Year 2016/17. Motion carried by the following 5-0 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes June 14, 2016 for City Council/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 6 of 8 10. Discussion and Direction on Bike Share Capital Grant Program Letter of Interest Management Analyst Tacata presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Discuss and provide direction to staff regarding inclusion of the City of Rohnert Park as an interested party in a Letter of Interest to be submitted by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for the Bike Share Capital Program grant. Public Comments: None ACTION: By Consensus (none opposed) City Council directed staff to move forward with the recommended action and include the City of Rohnert Park as an interested party in a Letter of Interest submitted by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for the Bike Share Capital Grant Program Grant. City Council directed staff to provide further details about the Bike Share Capital Program once more information becomes available. 11. PUBLIC HEARING: (NO EARLIER THAN 6PM —Noticed on 6/3/2016 and 6/10/2016) Wilfred Dowdell Specific Plan Reimbursement Fee Annual Report for FY 2015-16 and Fee Update Management Analyst Tacata presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Staff recommends that the City Council 1) consider the Wilfred/Dowdell Specific Plan Reimbursement Fee Annual Report for FY 2015-16, accept and file; 2) hold a Public Hearing to consider the proposed update to the Wilfred/Dowdell Specific Plan Reimbursement Fee ("Fee"); and 3) adopt attached resolution updating the Wilfred/Dowdell Specific Plan Reimbursement Fee and superseding Resolution No. 2015-120. Hearing Opened 6:41 p.m. Public Comments: None. Hearing Closed 6:41 p.m. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Stafford/Ahanotu) to Approve Resolution 2016-062 Updating the Wilfred/Dowdell Specific Plan Reimbursement Fee and Superseding Resolution No. 2015-120. Motion carried unanimously by the following 5-0 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. 12. PUBLIC HEARING: (NO EARLIER THAN 6PM —Noticed on 5/13/2016, 5/20/2016, and 5/25/2016) Adoption of Amendments to Proposed Recreation Facility and Program Fee Schedule and Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving Amendments to the Recreational Facility and Program Fee Schedule Community Services Austin presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Staff recommends that the City Council adopts a resolution approving an amended Recreation Facility and Program Fee Schedule effective June 14, 2016. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes June 14, 2016 for City Councit/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 7 of 8 Hearing Opened 6:43 p.m. Public Comments: None. Hearing Closed 6:44 p.m. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Callinan/Stafford) to Approve Resolution 2016-063 Approving the Amendments to the Recreation Facility and Program Fee Schedule. Motion carried unanimously by the following 5-0 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. 13. COMMITTEE / LIAISON/ OTHER REPORTS A. Standing Committee Reports None. B. Liaison Reports 1. Health Action Council (6/3 Mayor Belforte reported that Health Action Council lost a grant from a contributor located in Boston, Massachusetts due to a lack of community involvement. Mayor Belforte noted that the Health Action Council is working on increasing community involvement within their agency. 2. Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA.) (6/13) Vice Mayor Mackenzie reported that the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) examined a project list and reviewed data on climate change adaptation at their last meeting. C. Other Reports 1. Vice Mayor Mackenzie reported that a workshop on Planned Bay Area 2040 was held at the Luther Burbank Center on June 13, 2016. 2. Mayor Belforte reported that the entire City Council attended the B -Pool Grand Opening over the weekend. 14. COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Belforte reported that she received a request from a resident asking the Community Services Department to offer weekend swim lessons because many parents work during the week. Mayor Belforte also stated her concerns regarding the weeds located at the Sun Cal property site. Development Services Director Pawson reported that the Code Compliance Officer has begun the citation and violation process on this particular site. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes June 14, 2016 for City Councit/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 8 of 8 15. MATTERS FROM/FOR COUNCIL None. 16. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. 17. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Belforte adjourned the joint regular meeting at 6:49 pm. Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk City of Rohnert Park Gina Belforte, Mayor City of Rohnert Park ITEM NO. 6B l Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Administration Submitted By: Caitlin Saldanha, Administrative Assistant Prepared By: Caitlin Saldanha, Administrative Assistant Agenda Title: Acceptance of Reports - Councilmember Ahanotu's Appointment of Janeen Kirby to the Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board - Term Expiring December 31, 2017 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept Councilmember Ahanotu's appointment of Janeen Kirby to the Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board to complete a term expiring December 31, 2017. BACKGROUND: The City Clerk's Office has distributed and posted notices of a special vacancy since May 23, 2016. On May 31, 2016 the City Clerk's office received the attached Fact Sheet Application from Janeen Kirby seeking appointment to the Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board. No other applications were received for this position. Sarah M. Finnigan 8/2015 8/2015 12/2016 Pam Stafford VACANT L. Kurt Engelhart 7/1995 1/2015 Patrick Reymond Sandra Waterman 10/2009 1112015 11/2013 11/2015 Department Head Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 6/16/2016 City Attorney Approval Date: N/A Finance Director Approval Date: N/A Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Fact Sheet for Appointment (Redacted) 12/2017 Amy O. Ahanotu 12/2016 Jake Mackenzie 12/2017 Gina Belforte 12/2017 Joseph T. Callinan City of Rohnert Park 20 t}, Fact Sheet for Appointments to Commissions, ROHURT PARK Committees and Boards MAY 312016 CITY CLERK Which Commission, Board, or Committee do you seek Appointment? mrIRAB Name �RN e f x 1 Residence Telephone Address Work Phone ( ) Fax ( ) Cell Email Indic((a�te Reasons for your Interest in Appointment h S List Activities in Clubs, Associations, etc. AalyL� Cors a4&-, �. Are you Over 187 Yes No A!re yo Are you Registered to Vote in Rohnert Park?yes No What Year did you Become a Rohnert Park Resident? f Employerl�r%11�Q Address Type of Business Specific Work Performed RPM X &IQU Ae High School Diploma Yes No Other Degrees, Awards, etc. Signature Date: L�/,�6/ e ✓/ PLEASE RETURN TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 130 Avram Avenue • Rohnert Park CA • 94928 • (707) S88-2226 • Fax (707) 794-9248 www.rpcitV.org Form Approved by City Council 1/7/03 m:\commission-committee-board appointments\templates and forms\2016 fact sheet application docx CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BILLS FOR ACCEPTANCE June 28, 2016 Check Numbers: 232267 - 232714 $3,052,576.06 Dated: June 6, 2016 - June 21, 2016 TOTAL $3,052,576.06 Accounts Payable Checks for Approval User: csayavongsuek Printed: 6/22/2016 - 9:15 AM Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232267 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Tracy Anderson 160.86 232267 06/06/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Tracy Anderson 63.24 Check Total: 224.10 232268 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Shiu Dutt 22.93 232268 06/06/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Shiu Dutt 18.55 Check Total: 41.48 232269 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Expressway Partners LLC 3.32 232269 06/06/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Expressway Partners LLC 0.25 232269 06/06/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Expressway Partners LLC 6.70 232269 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Expressway Partners LLC 4.52 Check Total: 14.79 232270 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Mike Gozashti 44.95 232270 06/06/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Mike Gozashti 29.15 Check Total: 74.10 232271 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Mark Hedeen Jr. 86.68 232271 06/06/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Mark Hedeen Jr. 44.16 Check Total: 130.84 232272 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Lori Jin 27.89 232272 06/06/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Lori Jin 41.78 Check Total: 69.67 232273 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Gregory Mc Farland 100.00 Check Total: 100.00 232274 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Pacific Northern Environmental Corp 1,403.21 232274 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Pacific Northern Environmental Corp 370.14 Page 1 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232275 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund 232275 06/06/2016 Sewer Utility Fund 232276 06/06/2016 Water Utility Fund 232276 06/06/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Account Name Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Accounts Payable Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Accounts Payable 232277 06/09/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw 232277 06/09/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw 232278 06/09/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty 232278 06/09/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen Bldg/Facilty 232278 06/09/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M 232278 06/09/2016 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty 232278 06/09/2016 General Fund Gold Ridge/Bldg/Facility 232279 232279 232280 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 232281 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Water Utility Fund General Fund General Fund ISF - Fleet ISF - Fleet General Fund Sewer Utility Fund Water Utility Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund ISF - Fleet ISF - Fleet General Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs Water Entr/Contractual Svs Police /Contractual S Pac /Facility Repa Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Uniforms & Laundry Service -PW Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks City Hall Bldg/Facilty R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Uniforms & Laundry Service -PW Page 2 of 57 Vendor Name Check Total: Pablo Robles Pablo Robles Check Total: Calvin Sam Calvin Sam Check Total: Nationwide Retirement Solutions Nationwide Retirement Solutions Check Total: ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA Check Total: Ad Vantage Marketing Ad Vantage Marketing Check Total: American Medical Response, Inc Check Total: Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Void Amount 1,773.35 25.10 18.60 43.70 0.64 0.41 1.05 400.00 200.00 600.00 1,767.00 263.00 561.00 803.00 1,084.32 4,478.32 87.81 87.81 175.62 100.00 100.00 23.28 19.46 27.88 30.28 30.68 34.28 14.65 6.27 47.37 215.32 100.00 19.46 27.88 30.28 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232281 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Aramark Uniform Services 30.68 232281 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Aramark Uniform Services 34.28 232281 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Aramark Uniform Services 14.65 232281 06/09/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Aramark Uniform Services 6.27 232281 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 47.37 232281 06/09/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Aramark Uniform Services 114.59 232281 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 19.46 232281 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 27.88 232281 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-PW Aramark Uniform Services 30.28 232281 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Aramark Uniform Services 30.68 232281 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Aramark Uniform Services 34.28 232281 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 14.65 232281 06/09/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Aramark Uniform Services 6.27 232281 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 41.15 Check Total: 1,079.58 232282 06/09/2016 General Fund City Council /Dues & Subscr Association of Bay Area Governments 8,723.00 Check Total: 8,723.00 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 0.55 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.55 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 119.08 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint The Barricade Company 0.95 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.95 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint The Barricade Company 205.68 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 0.57 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.57 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 123.41 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 0.69 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.69 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 149.39 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 0.17 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.17 232283 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 37.35 Check Total: 634.91 232284 06/09/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S BOLT STAFFING SERVICE, INC. 1,069.46 232284 06/09/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S BOLT STAFFING SERVICE, INC. 1,019.88 232284 06/09/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S BOLT STAFFING SERVICE, INC. 1,048.21 Check Total: 3,137.55 232285 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Professional Brelje & Race Laboratories Inc 34.00 Page 3 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 34.00 232286 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - JEPA Mtn Buchanan Food Service 162.72 Check Total: 162.72 232287 06/09/2016 Casino Public Service RPSC Legal Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,443.00 232287 06/09/2016 Casino Public Service RPSC Legal Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 237.12 232287 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Professional Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 3,684.84 232287 06/09/2016 Sewer Captial Project Fund WW-21 Clausin@101 WW MainRehab Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,294.68 Check Total: 6,659.64 232288 06/09/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen CA Department of Justice 32.00 Check Total: 32.00 232289 06/09/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Contractual S CA Dept. of Transportation 961.72 Check Total: 961.72 232290 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint DC Electric Group Inc. 1,685.06 Check Total: 1,685.06 232291 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates Inc. 5,226.52 Check Total: 5,226.52 232292 06/09/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Fishman Supply Company 136.59 Check Total: 136.59 232293 06/09/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 363.30 232293 06/09/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 747.16 Check Total: 1,110.46 232294 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 22.45 232294 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 0.10 232294 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -0.10 232294 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Friedman's Home Improvement 9.18 232294 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Friedman's Home Improvement 0.04 232294 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -0.04 232294 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 99.43 232294 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 0.46 232294 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -0.46 Check Total: 131.06 Page 4 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232295 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Grainger, Inc. 62.48 232295 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - PW Grainger, Inc. 47.26 232295 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Grainger, Inc. 46.46 232295 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Grainger, Inc. 17.10 232295 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Grainger, Inc. 19.06 232295 06/09/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Grainger, Inc. 98.24 232295 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr Grainger, Inc. 18.84 232295 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr Grainger, Inc. 2.46 Check Total: 311.90 232296 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Hansel Ford 80.65 Check Total: 80.65 232297 06/09/2016 General Fund Shelter Food - AS Hill's Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc 8.24 232297 06/09/2016 General Fund Shelter Food - AS Hill's Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc 244.69 232297 06/09/2016 General Fund Shelter Food - AS Hill's Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc 57.44 Check Total: 310.37 232298 06/09/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 80.00 232298 06/09/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 75.00 Check Total: 155.00 232299 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 1.09 232299 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon -1.09 232299 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 235.25 Check Total: 235.25 232300 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Kelly Moore Paint Company, Inc 182.28 232300 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Kelly Moore Paint Company, Inc 26.98 232300 06/09/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty Kelly Moore Paint Company, Inc 8.04 Check Total: 217.30 232301 06/09/2016 General Fund Police /Contractual S Kone Inc 106.71 Check Total: 106.71 232302 06/09/2016 General Fund Animal Control /Contractual S Barbara Leach, D.V.M. 1,550.00 Check Total: 1,550.00 232303 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Martin Ranch Supple 54.36 Check Total: 54.36 Page 5 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232304 06/09/2016 Water Capital Project Fund WA -28 Water Meter Installtin National Meter & Automation, Inc. 3,869.33 Check Total: 3,869.33 232305 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 113.04 232305 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 113.04 232305 06/09/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 113.04 Check Total: 339.12 232306 06/09/2016 Water Capital Project Fund WA -28 Water Meter Installtin Pace Supply 3,533.55 Check Total: 3,533.55 232307 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - PW Platt 65.30 232307 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Platt 1.40 232307 06/09/2016 General Fund Benecia Rec Bld Bldg/Facilty Platt 3.43 232307 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Platt 138.07 Check Total: 208.20 232308 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police Redwood Lock & Key 12.23 232308 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police Redwood Lock & Key 41.43 Check Total: 53.66 232309 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Reliable Hardware & Steel Co. 103.31 Check Total: 103.31 232310 06/09/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Fac Maintenanc THE RENTAL PLACE 442.59 Check Total: 442.59 232311 06/09/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty RJ Mechanical Inc. 258.00 Check Total: 258.00 232312 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 30.83 232312 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 85.31 232312 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 39.15 Check Total: 155.29 232313 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Six Robblees' Inc. 168.03 232313 06/09/2016 General Fund Park Maint /C/0 -Vehicles/ Six Robblees' Inc. 38.23 Check Total: 206.26 232314 06/09/2016 General Fund Pac/ Licensing SOUND EXPRESSIONS 7,559.87 Page 6 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232315 232316 232317 232317 232317 232318 232318 232318 232319 232319 232320 232321 232321 232322 232322 232322 232322 232322 232322 232322 232322 232322 232322 232322 232322 232322 06/09/2016 General Fund 06/09/2016 General Fund 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund 06/09/2016 General Fund 06/09/2016 General Fund 06/09/2016 General Fund 06/09/2016 General Fund 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund 06/09/2016 General Fund 06/09/2016 General Fund 06/09/2016 General Fund 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 General Fund General Fund General Fund ISF - Fleet ISF - Fleet General Fund Sewer Utility Fund Water Utility Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund ISF - Fleet Account Name Police /Contractual S R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S System Repair - WTR Entr System Repair - WTR Entr Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Sales Tax Payable Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs Water Entr/Contractual Svs Fire /Spec Dept Equ Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Senior Ctr Bldg/Facilty Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Uniforms & Laundry Service -PW Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Page 7 of 57 Vendor Name Check Total: SpeakWrite Billing Dept. Check Total: Star Elevator Inc Check Total: Syar Industries, Inc. Syar Industries, Inc. Syar Industries, Inc. Check Total: United Forest Products, Inc. United Forest Products, Inc. United Forest Products, Inc. Check Total: Ad Vantage Marketing Ad Vantage Marketing Check Total: All Star Fire Equipment, Inc. Check Total: Allemand Electric Supply Allemand Electric Supply Check Total: Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Aramark Uniform Services Void Amount 7,559.87 814.03 814.03 239.49 239.49 210.98 0.97 -0.97 210.98 223.27 1.03 -1.03 223.27 24.81 24.80 49.61 40.78 40.78 45.13 8.37 53.50 114.59 62.08 61.82 19.46 27.88 30.28 30.68 34.28 14.65 6.27 47.37 100.00 27.88 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232322 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service -PW Aramark Uniform Services 30.28 232322 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Aramark Uniform Services 30.68 232322 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Aramark Uniform Services 34.28 232322 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Aramark Uniform Services 14.65 232322 06/09/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Aramark Uniform Services 6.27 232322 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 47.37 Check Total: 740.77 232323 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike BAY AREA BARRICADE SERVICE 163.13 Check Total: 163.13 232324 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Big O Tires 79.99 Check Total: 79.99 232325 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Emr. /Professional Brelje & Race Laboratories Inc 34.00 232325 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Professional Brelje & Race Laboratories Inc 34.00 232325 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Professional Brelje & Race Laboratories Inc 34.00 232325 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Professional Brelje & Race Laboratories Inc 34.00 Check Total: 136.00 232326 06/09/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Bldg/Facilty M Buchanan Food Service 143.82 Check Total: 143.82 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Legal Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 2,393.04 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 3,112.72 232327 06/09/2016 Successor Agency Housing Fund Legal Services - Housing Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 237.12 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,541.28 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 39,460.22 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -39,460.22 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 39,460.22 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,599.00 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -1,599.00 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,599.00 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 13,754.86 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -13,754.86 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 13,754.86 232327 06/09/2016 Successor Agency Housing Fund Legal Services - Housing Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 652.08 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Non -Department/ Legal Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 237.12 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 5,671.97 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -5,671.97 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 5,671.97 232327 06/09/2016 Sewer Captial Project Fund WW -23 Adrian Swr Syst Rehab Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 148.20 Page 8 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 232327 06/09/2016 Capital Projects Fund Southeast Dist. Specific Plan Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund Non -Department/ Legal Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 232327 06/09/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 232334 06/09/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Check Total: 232328 06/09/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty Cal -Steam 232328 06/09/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty Cal -Steam 232328 06/09/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Cal -Steam 232328 06/09/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty Cal -Steam 232334 06/09/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Check Total: 232329 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint CAMPWAYS 232329 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint CAMPWAYS 232329 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable CAMPWAYS 232335 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Check Total: 232330 06/09/2016 General Fund Productions/Marketing CJM Productions Check Total: 232331 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - PW Complete Welders Supply Check Total: 232332 06/09/2016 General Fund Fire /Contractual S Xerox Business Systems LLC Check Total: 232333 06/09/2016 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty First Alarm Securities Services Check Total: 232334 06/09/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 232334 06/09/2016 General Fund Diesel Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 232334 06/09/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 232334 06/09/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 232334 06/09/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 232334 06/09/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 232334 06/09/2016 General Fund Diesel Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy Check Total: 232335 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 232335 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 232335 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement Page 9 of 57 Void Amount 12,102.48 3,510.00 1,365.00 -3,510.00 3,510.00 85,785.09 150.15 102.04 213.32 48.90 514.41 121.39 0.56 -0.56 121.39 1,003.00 1,003.00 33.63 33.63 3,654.00 3,654.00 41.78 41.78 823.53 529.86 570.62 940.89 573.52 364.38 554.60 4,357.40 97.39 0.45 -0.45 Check Number 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232335 232336 232336 Check Date 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 06/09/2016 Fund Name General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund Water Utility Fund Water Utility Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund Account Name Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Sales Tax Payable Supplies - PW Supplies - PW Sales Tax Payable SC/ Repairs & Maintenance SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Sales Tax Payable Water Entr. /Small Tools Water Entr. /Small Tools Sales Tax Payable Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Sales Tax Payable Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Sales Tax Payable Supplies - AS Supplies - AS Page 10 of 57 Vendor Name Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Friedman's Home Improvement Check Total: Frizelle-Enos Company Frizelle-Enos Company Void Amount -48.12 -0.22 0.22 21.23 0.10 -0.10 40.95 0.19 -0.19 99.43 0.46 -0.46 241.99 1.12 -1.12 265.60 1.23 -1.23 41.65 0.20 -0.20 220.56 1.00 -1.00 109.91 0.50 -0.50 92.40 0.42 -0.42 48.64 0.22 -0.22 99.43 0.46 -0.46 99.43 1.12 -1.12 1,430.49 246.44 0.93 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232336 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Frizelle-Enos Company -0.93 232336 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS Frizelle-Enos Company 249.94 232336 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS Frizelle-Enos Company 1.04 232336 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Frizelle-Enos Company -1.04 Check Total: 496.38 232337 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint GCR Tires & Service 137.97 Check Total: 137.97 232338 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Grainger, Inc. 8.79 232338 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Grainger, Inc. 82.01 232338 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr Grainger, Inc. 82.00 232338 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr Grainger, Inc. 97.89 232338 06/09/2016 ISF _ Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Grainger, Inc. 444.98 232338 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Grainger, Inc. 386.08 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Grainger, Inc. 17.74 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Grainger, Inc. 4.44 232338 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Grainger, Inc. 112.58 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Grainger, Inc. 15.32 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - PW Grainger, Inc. 23.60 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Grainger, Inc. 3.64 232338 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Grainger, Inc. 30.49 232338 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Grainger, Inc. 158.96 232338 06/09/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr Grainger, Inc. 158.96 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Grainger, Inc. 158.96 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Grainger, Inc. 158.99 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 145.45 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 17.96 232338 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Grainger, Inc. 146.40 232338 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Grainger, Inc. 6.39 232338 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Grainger, Inc. 58.46 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Grainger, Inc. 125.64 232338 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Grainger, Inc. 238.13 232338 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Supplies - Fleet Grainger, Inc. 45.89 Check Total: 2,729.75 232339 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Hansel Ford 49.70 232339 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Hansel Ford 132.48 232339 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Hansel Ford 433.18 232339 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Hansel Ford 433.17 Check Total: 1,048.53 232340 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint HDS WHITE CAP CONST SUPPL 278.62 Page 11 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 232340 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint HDS WHITE CAP CONST SUPPL 232340 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable HDS WHITE CAP CONST SUPPL 232345 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Check Total: 232341 06/09/2016 General Fund Medications - AS Henry Schein Animal Health Check Total: 232342 06/09/2016 General Fund Shelter Food - AS Hill's Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc 232342 06/09/2016 General Fund Shelter Food - AS Hill's Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc 232347 06/09/2016 General Fund HSABank Payable Check Total: 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 Casino Public Service Supplies - RPSC Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 Casino Public Service Supplies - RPSC Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232343 06/09/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon Check Total: 232344 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Innovative Screen Printing 232344 06/09/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Innovative Screen Printing Check Total: 232345 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Jacobsen West 232345 06/09/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Jacobsen West Check Total: 232346 06/09/2016 General Fund Court Order Payable CA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Check Total: 232347 06/09/2016 General Fund HSABank Payable HSA Bank Check Total: Page 12 of 57 Void Amount 1.28 -1.28 278.62 6.88 6.88 248.95 65.77 314.72 36.26 0.17 -0.17 249.59 1.15 -1.15 3,788.92 17.50 -17.50 226.32 1.04 -1.04 104.40 0.48 -0.48 4,405.49 195.75 195.75 391.50 300.59 386.73 687.32 484.02 484.02 6,448.00 6,448.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232348 06/09/2016 General Fund Prepaid Legal Services Legal Shield 67.75 Check Total: 67.75 232349 06/09/2016 General Fund Supp Life W/H Payable LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INS CO 1,198.10 Check Total: 1,198.10 232350 06/09/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions 1,617.48 Check Total: 1,617.48 232351 06/09/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions 3,479.84 232351 06/09/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions 1,750.00 Check Total: 5,229.84 232352 06/09/2016 General Fund REMIF Health Ins Payable Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund 32,775.00 232352 06/09/2016 General Fund REMIF Health Ins - Ret Med Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund 48,099.00 Check Total: 80,874.00 232353 06/09/2016 General Fund Rpea Dues CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 585.00 Check Total: 585.00 232354 06/09/2016 General Fund Scope Dues Payable SEIU Local 1021 1,158.52 Check Total: 1,158.52 232355 06/09/2016 General Fund United Way Payable United Way 43.26 Check Total: 43.26 232356 06/09/2016 General Fund Eye Care/VSP/Payables Vision Service Plan - (CA) 2,358.45 232356 06/09/2016 General Fund Eye Care - Ret Med Vision Service Plan - (CA) 441.98 232356 06/09/2016 General Fund Eye Care - Ret Med Vision Service Plan - (CA) 251.25 Check Total: 3,051.68 232357 06/10/2016 General Fund Police /Contractual S American Medical Response, Inc 300.00 Check Total: 300.00 232358 06/10/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police KEITH ASTLEY 25.00 Check Total: 25.00 232359 06/10/2016 ISF - Fleet Training & Travel - FLEET MARTIN AVILA 95.00 Check Total: 95.00 232360 06/10/2016 General Fund SEA/Travels & Meetings Michael Bates 230.00 Page 13 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232361 06/10/2016 General Fund 232362 06/10/2016 General Fund 232363 06/10/2016 Capital Projects Fund 232363 06/10/2016 Capital Projects Fund 232363 06/10/2016 Capital Projects Fund 232364 06/10/2016 General Fund 232365 06/10/2016 General Fund 232366 06/10/2016 General Fund 232366 06/10/2016 General Fund 232366 06/10/2016 General Fund 232366 06/10/2016 General Fund 232366 06/10/2016 General Fund 232366 06/10/2016 General Fund 232366 06/10/2016 General Fund 232366 06/10/2016 General Fund 232366 06/10/2016 General Fund 232367 06/10/2016 General Fund 232368 232369 232370 06/10/2016 General Fund Check Total: Yolanda Bennett Check Total: Dev Svs /Dues & Subscr Jay Bradford Ps Main Station /Telephone Comcast Check Total: Check Total: 06/10/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Courtyard Pleasanton Check Total: 06/10/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Courtyard Pleasanton Page 14 of 57 230.00 497.20 497.20 55.00 55.00 4,225.00 2,652.00 312.00 7,189.00 550.00 550.00 140.00 140.00 8.15 5.00 2.50 10.63 15.00 13.68 3.24 20.00 15.25 93.45 30.86 30.86 26.35 26.35 767.55 767.55 614.04 Check Total: Sonoma Mtn Village Project Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Southeast Dist. Specific Plan Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP University Dist. Specific Plan Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Check Total: Meetings & Travel -ABC MiniGmt CA Alcohol Beverage Control Check Total: Training & Travel-Strts & Bike LAURA CAMPBELL Check Total: Supplies - Police Catherine Colburn Fire / Travel & Meetings Catherine Colburn Police / Travel & Meetings Catherine Colburn Police / Travel & Meetings Catherine Colburn Police / Travel & Meetings Catherine Colburn Police /Community Pro Catherine Colburn Police / Travel & Meetings Catherine Colbum Police / Travel & Meetings Catherine Colburn Police / Travel & Meetings Catherine Colburn Check Total: Police / Travel & Meetings Catherine Colburn Ps Main Station /Telephone Comcast Check Total: Check Total: 06/10/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Courtyard Pleasanton Check Total: 06/10/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Courtyard Pleasanton Page 14 of 57 230.00 497.20 497.20 55.00 55.00 4,225.00 2,652.00 312.00 7,189.00 550.00 550.00 140.00 140.00 8.15 5.00 2.50 10.63 15.00 13.68 3.24 20.00 15.25 93.45 30.86 30.86 26.35 26.35 767.55 767.55 614.04 Check Number Check Date .Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 614.04 232371 06/10/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Training & Travel - SWR PW E&M ELECTRIC & MACHINERY, INC. 1,250.00 Check Total: 1,250.00 232372 06/10/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - DS GEORGE FROSTICK 125.00 Check Total: 125.00 232373 06/10/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - FIN Government Finance Officers Association 1,566.00 Check Total: 1,566.00 232374 06/10/2016 General Fund JAMES HEROLD 226.00 Check Total: 226.00 232375 06/10/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police HIlton Garden Inn 708.75 Check Total: 708.75 232376 06/10/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Lynbrook 3,166.25 Check Total: 3,166.25 232377 06/10/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS Kyle Pinney 90.00 Check Total: 90.00 232378 06/10/2016 General Fund SEA/Travels & Meetings Anthony Savas 230.00 Check Total: 230.00 232379 06/10/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Anthony Savas 480.00 Check Total: 480.00 232380 06/10/2016 General Fund SEA/Vehicle Scott Signs 578.50 232380 06/10/2016 General Fund SEA/Vehicle Scott Signs 578.50 232380 06/10/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Scott Signs 478.50 232380 06/10/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Scott Signs 95.70 Check Total: 1,731.20 232381 06/10/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - FIN Elizabeth Smith 121.00 Check Total: 121.00 232382 06/10/2016 General Fund SEA/Travels & Meetings Dave Sutter 230.00 Page 15 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 230.00 232383 06/10/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police CASEY THOMPSON 295.00 Check Total: 295.00 232384 06/10/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS JUSTIN THOMPSON 117.00 Check Total: 117.00 232385 06/10/2016 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Marilu Aparicio 309.25 Check Total: 309.25 232386 06/10/2016 General Fund SEAN CAMILLERI 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 232387 06/10/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Chevron and Texaco Business Card Services 183.99 Check Total: 183.99 232388 06/10/2016 General Fund Comm Events/Conracted Svc Johnny Cipressi 500.00 Check Total: 500.00 232389 06/10/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 122.93 232389 06/10/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 290.26 232389 06/10/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 290.25 232389 06/10/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 207.68 232389 06/10/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 495.78 232389 06/10/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 495.78 232389 06/10/2016 General Fund Non-Deptmental - Cont Svcs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 1,262.31 232389 06/10/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 191.68 232389 06/10/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 53.30 232389 06/10/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 1,287.54 232389 06/10/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 1,287.53 232389 06/10/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 270.60 232389 06/10/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 75.24 232389 06/10/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 1,827.52 232389 06/10/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 1,827.52 232389 06/10/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 1,747.32 232389 06/10/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs Co of Sonoma Information Systems Departmer 1,747.31 Check Total: 13,480.55 232390 06/10/2016 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Maria Cortes 400.00 Page 16 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232391 06/10/2016 General Fund 232392 06/10/2016 Sewer Utility Fund 232393 06/10/2016 General Fund 232394 06/10/2016 General Fund 232394 06/10/2016 General Fund 232394 06/10/2016 General Fund 232394 06/10/2016 General Fund 232394 06/10/2016 General Fund 232394 06/10/2016 General Fund 232394 06/10/2016 General Fund 232395 06/10/2016 General Fund 232396 06/10/2016 General Fund 232397 06/10/2016 General Fund 232398 06/10/2016 General Fund 232399 06/10/2016 General Fund 232400 06/10/2016 General Fund 232401 06/10/2016 General Fund Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 400.00 Training & Travel- Fire Brandon Davidge 395.00 Check Total: 395.00 Supplies - SWR Entr Manfred Dehelean 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 Meetings & Travel -ABC MiniGrnt Embassy Suites San Diego Bay Downtown 673.12 Check Total: 673.12 Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 770.38 Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 506.55 Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 456.36 Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 559.60 Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 559.60 Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 456.49 Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 416.08 Check Total: 3,725.06 Comm Events/Conracted Svc Todd Grodrian 500.00 Check Total: 500.00 Rec Ref Clearing Luz Gutierrez 565.00 Check Total. 565.00 Rec Ref Clearing Cinthya Hernandez 400.00 Check Total: 400.00 POST Training & Travel -Police DEBORAH LAMAISON 18.00 Check Total: 18.00 Animal Shelter Fees Lisa Latiker 95.00 Check Total: 95.00 Rec Ref Clearing Iris Leal -Contreras 100.00 Check Total: 100.00 Meetings & Travel -ABC MiniGrnt Nicholas Miller 147.00 Check Total: 147.00 Page 17 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232402 06/10/2016 General Fund Pac /Contractual S Next Act Senior Theater 305.50 232402 06/10/2016 General Fund Pac /Contractual S Next Act Senior Theater 1,071.38 Check Total: 1,376.88 232403 06/10/2016 General Fund Meetings & Travel -ABC MiniGmt Jeffery Nicks 147.00 Check Total: 147.00 232404 06/10/2016 General Fund Outside Event Ticket Sales O'Brien Center for the Arts 7,788.00 232404 06/10/2016 General Fund Pac/Box Office Fees/Misc O'Brien Center for the Arts -778.00 232404 06/10/2016 General Fund Pac/Rental /Rentals O'Brien Center for the Arts -4,450.00 Check Total: 2,560.00 232405 06/10/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 218.24 Check Total: 218.24 232406 06/10/2016 General Fund Gold Ridge /Contractual S Lajwan Renee Robinson 585.00 232406 06/10/2016 General Fund Gold Ridge /Contractual S Lajwan Renee Robinson 72.00 Check Total: 657.00 232407 06/10/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Gay Shelton-Ostadi 343.20 Check Total: 343.20 232408 06/10/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S Sue Stubblebine 117.00 Check Total: 117.00 232409 06/10/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police WSIN 45.00 Check Total: 45.00 232410 06/10/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S Kathleen Zincavage 187.20 Check Total: 187.20 232411 06/13/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Chevron and Texaco Business Card Services 70.05 Check Total: 70.05 232412 06/14/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 156.59 232412 06/14/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -156.59 232412 06/14/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 156.59 232412 06/14/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 21,212.17 232412 06/14/2016 Traffic Signals Fund TR-102 Traffic Flow ImprovStdy Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 238.61 232412 06/14/2016 Wilfred Widening Maintenc JEPA TR-108 Wilfrd Rep Outside City Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,401.84 232412 06/14/2016 Casino Public Service TR-108 Wilfrd Rep Inside City Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,401.83 Page 18 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 24,411.04 232413 06/14/2016 ISF - Information Technology Equip< 5K (Old software acct) CDW Government 349.741,292.04 232413 06/14/2016 ISF - Information Technology Equip< 5K (Old software acct) CDW Government Check Total: 1,641.78 232414 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint City Electric Supply 204.75 Check Total: 204.75 232415 06/14/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Clone Digital Print & Copy 2,626.31 Check Total: 2,626.31 232416 06/14/2016 General Fund Medications - AS Complete Welders Supply 72.95 Check Total: 72.95 232417 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police Cream's South Towing 1,500.00 Check Total: 1,500.00 232418 06/14/2016 ISF - Information Technology Equip< 5K (Old software acct) Dell Software Inc 2,009.44 Check Total: 2,009.44 232419 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Theatre DTC Grip & Electric 203.92 0.86 232419 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Theatre DTC Grip & Electric -0.86 232419 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable DTC Grip & Electric Check Total: 203.92 232420 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan Dudek 1,080.00 5,205.40 232420 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan Dudek 3,050.00 232420 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan Dudek Check Total: 9,335.40 232421 06/14/2016 General Fund Mary Pop/Big Fish -Summer Prog Electric Crayon Inc 22838 Check Total: 22838 232422 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund Postage & Shipping - WTR Entr FedEx 134.37 Check Total: 134.37 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 1,037.87 956.12 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 560.41 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 97.31 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Fire /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy Page 19 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232423 06/14/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Vehicle Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 757.34 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 1,000.64 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Diesel Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 661.90 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 224.48 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 525.28 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 1,043.28 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 869.90 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 472.40 232423 06/14/2016 General Fund Fire /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 768.41 Check Total: 8,975.34 232424 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Friedman's Home Improvement 375.70 232424 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Friedman's Home Improvement 1.73 232424 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -1.73 232424 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Friedman's Home Improvement -19.15 232424 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Friedman's Home Improvement -0.08 232424 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement 0.08 232424 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Friedman's Home Improvement 11.53 232424 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Friedman's Home Improvement 0.05 232424 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -0.05 232424 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 8.14 232424 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 0.04 232424 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -0.04 232424 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 50.82 232424 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 0.24 232424 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -0.24 Check Total: 427.04 232425 06/14/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Grainger, Inc. 61.64 232425 06/14/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 101.27 232425 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - PW Grainger, Inc. 247.28 232425 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Grainger, Inc. 50.14 232425 06/14/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Grainger, Inc. 78.60 232425 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Grainger, Inc. 24.49 232425 06/14/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 41.46 Check Total: 604.88 232426 06/14/2016 General Fund Medications - AS Henry Schein Animal Health 415.69 Check Total: 415.69 232427 06/14/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 60.00 Page 20 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 60.00 232428 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint John Deere Financial 119.54 232428 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint John Deere Financial 0.56 232428 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable John Deere Financial -0.56 Check Total: 119.54 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police Office Depot 21.80 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS Office Depot -28.10 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS Office Depot -29.90 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS Office Depot -24.99 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS Office Depot 95.04 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - SpC Office Depot 17.28 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police Office Depot 91.22 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - Comm Cntr Office Depot 184.44 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - Comm Cntr Office Depot 14.13 232429 06/14/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - CM Office Depot 51.12 Check Total: 392.04 232430 06/14/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 282.60 232430 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 282.60 Check Total: 565.20 232431 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Pace Supply 787.34 232431 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Pace Supply 541.85 232431 06/14/2016 Water Capital Project Fund WA-28 Water Meter Installtin Pace Supply -573.28 Check Total: 755.91 232432 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-82 H Pool Heater/Filter/Cir Platt 253.71 232432 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Platt 16.05 232432 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - PW Platt 49.68 Check Total: 319.44 232433 06/14/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Fac Maintenanc Pollard Water 480.63 Check Total: 480.63 232434 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Power Industries 132.58 Check Total: 132.58 232435 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Powerplan 94.29 232435 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet FleetNehicle Repair & Maint Powerplan 32.29 232435 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet FleeWehicle Repair & Maint Powerplan 97.54 Page 21 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 232435 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Powerplan 232435 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Powerplan Check Total: 232436 06/14/2016 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty Redwood Lock & Key 232436 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Redwood Lock & Key Check Total: 232437 06/14/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty THE RENTAL PLACE 232437 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint THE RENTAL PLACE Check Total: 232438 06/14/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg-North /Bidg/Facilty Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. Check Total: 232439 06/14/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Santa Rosa Auto Parts 232439 06/14/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Santa Rosa Auto Parts 232439 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Santa Rosa Auto Parts 232439 06/14/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Santa Rosa Auto Parts 232439 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts Check Total: 232440 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Shamrock Materials 232440 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Shamrock Materials 232440 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 232440 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Shamrock Materials 232440 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Shamrock Materials 232440 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 232440 06/14/2016 General Fund Sports Supplies - SpC Shamrock Materials 232440 06/14/2016 General Fund Sports Supplies - SpC Shamrock Materials 232440 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials Check Total: 232441 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet FleetfVehicle Repair & Maint Six Robblees' Inc. 232441 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Six Robblees' Inc. Check Total: 232442 06/14/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures So Co Water Agency Check Total: 232443 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Soiland Co., Inc. 232443 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Soiland Co., Inc. Page 22 of 57 Void Amount -0.43 0.43 224.12 21.00 18.76 39.76 784.00 413.00 1,197.00 1,394.00 1,394.00 33.68 0.18 -0.18 51.95 26.57 112.20 226.96 -1.04 1.04 38.63 -0.18 0.18 204.52 -0.94 0.94 470.11 17.57 5.00 22.57 1,712.69 1,712.69 59.79 0.28 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232443 06/14/2016 General Fund 232444 06/14/2016 General Fund 232444 06/14/2016 General Fund 232444 06/14/2016 General Fund 232444 06/14/2016 General Fund 232444 06/14/2016 General Fund 232444 06/14/2016 General Fund 232445 06/14/2016 ISF -Fleet 232446 06/14/2016 General Fund Account Name Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Sales Tax Payable Softwr License & Maint - Fleet Other Services Vendor Name Soiland Co., Inc. Check Total: Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Check Total: Syn -Tech Systems Check Total: The Community Voice Check Total: 232447 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - FIN Trope Group 232448 06/14/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Contractual S UCPNB 232448 06/14/2016 General Fund City Hall/ Contractual Service UCPNB 232448 06/14/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S UCPNB 232448 06/14/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Contractual S UCPNB 232448 06/14/2016 General Fund City Hall Annex Bldg/Facilty UCPNB 232449 232449 232449 232450 232451 232451 232452 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable 06/14/2016 ISF - Information Technology Contractual Services 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund 06/14/2016 Water Capital Project Fund 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund PR -71 Benicia Pool Renovatins WA -28 Water Meter Installtin System Repair - WTR Entr Page 23 of 57 Check Total: Check Total: United Forest Products, Inc. United Forest Products, Inc. United Forest Products, Inc. Check Total: Vision Internet Providers, Inc. Check Total: Wheeler Zamaroni Wheeler Zamaroni Check Total: Wyatt Irrigation Co. Void Amount -0.28 59.79 270.63 1.25 -1.25 221.91 1.03 -1.03 492.54 2,250.00 2,250.00 144.00 144.00 380.96 380.96 2,303.34 216.66 540.15 324.09 324.09 3,708.33 86.60 0.40 -0.40 86.60 268.00 268.00 3,153.75 97.43 3,251.18 34.93 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 34.93 232453 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Yarbrough Bros. Towing, Inc. 80.00 Check Total: 80.00 232454 06/14/2016 General Fund PDA/Contractual Services AECOM Technical Services Inc 12,993.34 Check Total: 12,993.34 232455 06/14/2016 General Fund First Aid Supp - Fire American Medical Response, Inc 892.80 Check Total: 892.80 232456 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 968.19 232456 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 4.47 232456 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -4.47 Check Total: 968.19 232457 06/14/2016 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ BAUER COMPRESSORS 1,253.88 - Check Total: 1,253.88 232458 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-76a A Park Restroom Brokaw Design 3,103.00 232458 06/14/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR-85 C-Park Restrm Rplcmnt Brokaw Design 5,721.00 Check Total: 8,824.00 232459 06/14/2016 General Fund Sports Center/ Recruitment CA Department of Justice 16.00 232459 06/14/2016 General Fund RP Comm Ctr/ Recruitment CA Department of Justice 80.00 232459 06/14/2016 General Fund Animal Services/Recruitment/Hi CA Department of Justice 64.00 232459 06/14/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen CA Department of Justice 96.00 232459 06/14/2016 General Fund Finance/Recruitment CA Department of Justice 32.00 232459 06/14/2016 General Fund Park Maint/Recruitment CA Department of Justice 64.00 Check Total: 352.00 232460 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Carl's Body Shop 1,954.88 232460 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Carl's Body Shop 1.75 232460 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Carl's Body Shop -1.75 Check Total: 1,954.88 232461 06/14/2016 ISF - Information Technology Hardware Maintenance CDW Government 3,000.00 Check Total: 3,000.00 232462 06/14/2016 Casino Public Service RPSC/ Contracted Services DC Electric Group Inc. 430.50 232462 06/14/2016 Casino Public Service RPSC/ Contracted Services DC Electric Group Inc. 141.20 Page 24 of 57 Check plumber Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232462 06/14/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs DC Electric Group Inc. 2,954.00 Check Total: 3,525.70 232463 06/14/2016 General Fund Sports Supplies - SpC Direct Sports 857.67 232463 06/14/2016 General Fund Sports Supplies - SpC Direct Sports 70.93 232463 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Direct Sports -70.93 Check Total: 857.67 232464 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint GCR Tires & Service 285.01 Check Total: 285.01 232465 06/14/2016 2007R Loan Proceeds PR-86 SpC Ventilation Stdy GHD 1,166.05 232465 06/14/2016 2007R Loan Proceeds PR-86 SpC Ventilation Stdy GHD 2,244.30 Check Total: 3,410.35 232466 06/14/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 280.97 232466 06/14/2016 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 353.35 Check Total: 634.32 232467 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Hansel Ford 409.68 232467 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Hansel Ford -49.70 Check Total: 359.98 232468 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 14,258.86 232468 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 65.86 232468 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon -65.86 232468 06/14/2016 Casino Public Service Supplies - RPSC Horizon 1,190.75 232468 06/14/2016 Casino Public Service Supplies - RPSC Horizon 5.50 232468 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon -5.50 Check Total: 15,449.61 232469 06/14/2016 Sewer Captial Project Fund WW-24 Sewer Pipe Lining Projct Miksis Service Inc 282,948.83 232469 06/14/2016 Sewer Captial Project Fund Retention Payable - SWR CIP Miksis Service Inc -14,147.44 Check Total: 268,801.39 232470 06/14/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S MuniServices, LLC 438.48 232470 06/14/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S MuniServices, LLC 698.55 Check Total: 1,137.03 232471 06/14/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Occu-Med LTD 168.00 232471 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund PW/Recruitment Occu-Med LTD 313.50 Page 25 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232471 06/14/2016 General Fund 232471 06/14/2016 General Fund 232472 232472 232473 232474 232475 232476 232476 232476 232476 232477 232477 232477 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 232478 06/14/2016 General Fund 06/14/2016 General Fund 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet 06/14/2016 General Fund 06/14/2016 ISF - Fleet 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 06/14/2016 Account Name Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Park Maint/Recruitment Office Supplies - City Hall Supplies - PW Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint EAP Expense - Non Dept Fleet/Haz Mat Disposal ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr General Fund Sales Tax Payable Vendor Name Occu-Med LTD Occu-Med LTD Check Total: Office Depot Office Depot Check Total: Platinum Chevrolet Check Total: Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund Check Total: Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. Check Total: Santa Rosa Auto Parts Santa Rosa Auto Parts Santa Rosa Auto Parts Santa Rosa Auto Parts Check Total: Shamrock Materials Shamrock Materials Shamrock Materials Page 26 of 57 Void Amount 168.00 331.50 981.00 680.85 77.73 758.58 351.46 351.46 3,293.92 3,293.92 331.67 331.67 532.22 497.24 256.95 280.58 1,566.99 554.92 2.57 -2.57 554.92 509.61 1.76 -1.76 736.01 2.82 -2.82 530.43 2.45 -2.45 1,191.65 5.40 -5.40 1,787.48 8.09 Check Total: General Fund Supplies - H Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Supplies - H Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Sales Tax Payable SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Supplies - M Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Supplies - M Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Sales Tax Payable SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Supplies - M Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Supplies - M Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Sales Tax Payable SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Supplies - B Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Supplies - B Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Sales Tax Payable SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Supplies - H Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO General Fund Supplies - H Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO Page 26 of 57 Void Amount 168.00 331.50 981.00 680.85 77.73 758.58 351.46 351.46 3,293.92 3,293.92 331.67 331.67 532.22 497.24 256.95 280.58 1,566.99 554.92 2.57 -2.57 554.92 509.61 1.76 -1.76 736.01 2.82 -2.82 530.43 2.45 -2.45 1,191.65 5.40 -5.40 1,787.48 8.09 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 232478 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable SIERRA CHEMICAL CO Check Total: 232479 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Syar Industries, Inc. 232479 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Syar Industries, Inc. 232479 06/14/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Syar Industries, Inc. Check Total: 232480 06/14/2016 General Fund Software maintenance - CH Syserco, Inc Check Total: 232482 06/14/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint United Forest Products, Inc. Check Total: 232483 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 232483 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 232483 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 232483 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 232483 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 232483 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 232483 06/14/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni Check Total: 232484 06/14/2016 General Fund Kaiser W/H Payable KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC 232484 06/14/2016 General Fund Kaiser W/H Payable KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC 232484 06/14/2016 General Fund Kaiser W/H Payable KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC 232484 06/14/2016 General Fund Kaiser Hlth Ins - Retiree Med KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC 232484 06/14/2016 General Fund Kaiser Hlth Ins - Retiree Med KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC 232484 06/14/2016 General Fund Kaiser Hlth Ins - Retiree Med KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC Check Total: 232485 06/14/2016 General Fund Eye Care/VSP/Payables Vision Service Plan - (CA) 232485 06/14/2016 General Fund Eye Care - Ret Med Vision Service Plan - (CA) 232485 06/14/2016 General Fund Eye Care - Ret Med Vision Service Plan - (CA) Check Total: 232486 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial North Calif-LA Check Total: 232487 06/15/2016 General Fund Fire /Uniforms All Star Fire Equipment, Inc. Page 27 of 57 Void Amount -8.09 4,755.18 431.86 2.00 -2.00 431.86 1,339.00 1,339.00 273.21 273.21 259.91 449.14 259.91 307.22 259.91 259.91 259.91 2,055.91 99,825.53 16,772.05 23,638.47 33,948.41 1,392.24 14,180.19 189,756.89 509.58 83.44 4.76 597.78 133.37 133.37 50.78 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 50.78 232488 06/15/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 266.01 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Aramark Uniform Services 62.08 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr Bldg/Facilty Aramark Uniform Services 61.82 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty Aramark Uniform Services 215.32 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Aramark Uniform Services 214.55 232488 06/15/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 19.46 232488 06/15/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 27.88 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-PW Aramark Uniform Services 30.28 232488 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Aramark Uniform Services 30.68 232488 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Aramark Uniform Services 34.28 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Aramark Uniform Services 14.65 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Aramark Uniform Services 6.27 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 41.15 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Aramark Uniform Services 114.59 232488 06/15/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 19.46 232488 06/15/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 27.88 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-PW Aramark Uniform Services 30.28 232488 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Aramark Uniform Services 30.68 232488 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Aramark Uniform Services 34.28 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Aramark Uniform Services 17.35 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Aramark Uniform Services 6.27 232488 06/15/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 41.15 Check Total: 1,346.37 232489 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 92.55 232489 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 0.43 232489 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.43 232489 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 129.58 232489 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 0.59 232489 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.59 Check Total: 222.13 232490 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Bartley Pump, Inc 115.00 Check Total: 115.00 232491 06/15/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S BOLT STAFFING SERVICE, INC. 1,954.77 Check Total: 1,954.77 232492 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - CH Buchanan Food Service 176.43 Page 28 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232492 06/15/2016 General Fund 232493 232493 232494 232495 232496 232496 232497 232498 Account Name Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M 06/15/2016 Sewer Captial Project Fund WW -23 Adrian Swr Syst Rehab 06/15/2016 Water Capital Project Fund WA -36 Adrain Dr Warr Sys Repl 06/15/2016 ISF - Information Technology Telephone - IT 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - PW 06/15/2016 General Fund 06/15/2016 General Fund 06/15/2016 General Fund 06/15/2016 General Fund 232499 06/15/2016 General Fund 232499 06/15/2016 General Fund 232499 06/15/2016 General Fund 232499 06/15/2016 General Fund 232500 06/15/2016 Casino Public Service 232501 232502 232503 232503 232503 Supplies - Park Maint Supplies - Park Maint Dev Svs /Contractual Services Supplies - PW Non-Deptmental - Cont Svcs Non-Deptmental - Cont Svcs Non-Deptmental - Cont Svcs Non-Deptmental - Cont Svcs RPSC/ Contracted Services 06/15/2016 ISF - Information Technology IT/ Equipment Lease 06/15/2016 General Fund 06/15/2016 General Fund 06/15/2016 General Fund 06/15/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Supplies - Streets & Bike Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty Supplies - PW Page 29 of 57 Vendor Name Void Amount Buchanan Food Service 219.12 Check Total: 395.55 Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 184.87 Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 235.29 Check Total: 420.16 California Department of Technology 2,204.00 Check Total: 2,204.00 Castino Restaurant Equipment & Supply Inc 75.62 Check Total: 75.62 ChargePoint Inc 705.00 ChargePoint Inc 250.00 Check Total: 955.00 Code Source 1,165.45 Check Total: 1,165.45 Coggins Fence & Supply, Inc. 19.58 Check Total: 19.58 COMMUNICATION LEASING 97.48 COMMUNICATION LEASING 324.97 COMMUNICATION LEASING 422.47 COMMUNICATION LEASING 422.47 Check Total: 1,267.39 Conservation Corps North Bay 9,488.00 Check Total: 9,488.00 Dell Financial Services 92.11 Check Total: 92.11 DRAMATISTS PLAY SERVICE, INC. 15.95 Check Total: 15.95 Eureka Oxygen Co. 114.69 Eureka Oxygen Co. 108.71 Eureka Oxygen Co. 73.82 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 297.22 232504 06/15!2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan FedEx 26.63 16.85 232504 06/15/2016 Capital Projects Fund Street Smart RP FedEx 22.65 232504 06/15/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan FedEx 21.27 232504 06/15/2016 General Fund Postage &Shipping - CH FedEx 210.64 232504 06/15/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping - Theater FedEx 52.76 232504 06/15/2016 General Fund Postage &Shipping -Production FedEx Check Total: 350.80 232505 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall Bld ac Ci il g� ty First Choice 147.85 Check Total: 147.85 232506 06/15/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Fishman Supply Company 727.41 457.19 232506 06/15/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Fishman Supply Company 93.74 232506 06/15/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr /B1dQ acil � �' Fishman Supply Company 121.80 232506 06/15/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr Bldg/Facilty Fishman Supply Company 21.25 232506 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Senior Cntr Fishman Supply Company 48.85 232506 06/15/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr /Bld acil g� ty Fishman Supply Company Check Total: 1,470.24 232507 06/15/2016 Water Capital Project Fund WA -28 Water Meter Installtin Friedman's Home Improvement 2.46 30.15 232507 06/15/2016 Water Capital Project Fund WA -28 Water Meter Installtin Friedman's Home Improvement -0.15 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement 31.930.15 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - B Pool Friedman's Home Improvement 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - B Pool Friedman's Home Improvement -0.15 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable y Friedman's Home Improvement 36.81 6.17 232507 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Friedman's Home Improvement 232507 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Friedman's Home Improvement -0.17 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement 67.86 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 0.32 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint PP Friedman's Home Improvement -0.32 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement 0.22 110.51 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement -0.51 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement 8.700.04 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement -0.04 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement 64.28 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Bld acil g� �' Friedman's Home Improvement 0.30 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Friedman's Home Improvement -0.30 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement 26.78 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement Page 30 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 0.12 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -0.12 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 128.86 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Friedman's Home Improvement 0.60 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -0.60 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Self Insured Losses -Parks Friedman's Home Improvement 27.10 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Self Insured Losses -Parks Friedman's Home Improvement 0.12 232507 06/15/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Friedman's Home Improvement -0.12 Check Total: 535.00 232508 06/15/2016 SEUS - Federal Seized Assets Fed Seizure Pending -Payable Sonoma County Office of the District Attorney 7,836.42 232508 06/15/2016 SEUS - Federal Seized Assets Int Earned - Fed Seized Asset Sonoma County Office of the District Attorney 52.10 Check Total: 7,888.52 232509 06/15/2016 General Fund Dev Svs/Advertising/Promo The Community Voice 360.00 232509 06/15/2016 General Fund Other Services The Community Voice 432.00 232509 06/15/2016 General Fund Other Services The Community Voice 432.00 232509 06/15/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits The Community Voice 132.00 232509 06/15/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS The Community Voice -132.00 232509 06/15/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses The Community Voice 132.00 232509 06/15/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan The Community Voice 192.00 232509 06/15/2016 General Fund Other Services The Community Voice 384.00 Check Total: 1,932.00 232510 06/15/2016 General Fund Econ Dev/Contractual Se Michael B Woolsey 1,756.00 Check Total: 1,756.00 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -1,546.06 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 1,546.06 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -10.84 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 10.84 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 16.60 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -16.60 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 763.20 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric -763.20 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric -16.73 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 16.73 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -39.72 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 39.72 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -31.99 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Gold Ridge/Heat/Light/Power Pacific Gas & Electric 31.99 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 616.16 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -616.16 Page 31 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 263.71 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -263.71 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -2,487.98 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund H Pool /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 2,487.98 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 101.97 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -101.97 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -49.01 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 49.01 232511 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 6,647.51 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 32,969.55 232511 06/15/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Heat/Light/Power Pacific Gas & Electric 1,471.13 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 229.30 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall Annex /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 1,013.55 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 1,368.35 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 6,192.53 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 846.49 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 160.82 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 1,674.16 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 22,462.18 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 4,463.13 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Gold Ridge/Heat/Light/Power Pacific Gas & Electric 778.16 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 1,813.57 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 59.71 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund H Pool /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 2,014.85 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 691.56 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 5,258.10 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 2,499.30 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Ladybug Rec Bld Bldg/Facilty Pacific Gas & Electric 9.61 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Ladybug Rec Bld Bldg/Facilty Pacific Gas & Electric 308.81 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Pac /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 3,252.44 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -9.52 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 274.09 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -274.09 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 9.52 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 17.61 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -17.61 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric -4,181.99 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 4,181.99 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 14.98 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -14.98 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -46.16 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Gold Ridge/Heat/Light/Power Pacific Gas & Electric 46.16 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 786.69 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -786.69 Page 32 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 41.40 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North North /Heat/Li ht/Po g- g Pacific Gas & Electric 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -41.40 -912.48 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 912.48 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund H Pool /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 173.22 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 173.22 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric --17.60 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 17.60 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Li ht/Po g Pacific Gas & Electric -46.26 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 46.2610.22 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric -10.22 232511 06/15/2016 Genera] Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po g Pacific Gas & Electric -1,432.47 23251 I 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 1,432.47 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas &Electric -18.13 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 18.13 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets &Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas &Electric 268.50 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 68.50 -2-9.83 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas &Electric 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 9.83 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund927 Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas &Electric 78 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -927.78_377.15 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 38.88 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North North /Heat/Li ht/Po g- g Pacific Gas & Electric -38 88 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 377.15 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund H Pool /Heat/Li ht/Po g Pacific Gas & Electric 19.27 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas &Electric -19.27 232511 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -40.44 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas &Electric 40.44 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Gold Ridge/Heat/Light/Power Pacific Gas & Electric 243.62 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric -243.62 -47.96 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 47.96 232511 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric Check Total: 96,184.81 232512 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 891.61 Check Total: 891.61 232513 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T 273.25 Check Total: 273.25 232514 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 1,629.98 Page 33 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 1,629.98 232515 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT&T 37.28 Check Total: 37.28 232516 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T 73.66 Check Total: 73.66 232517 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT&T 71.46 Check Total: 71.46 232518 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Telephone AT&T 36.67 Check Total: 36.67 232519 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 71.46 Check Total: 71.46 232520 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Telephone AT&T 173.52 Check Total: 173.52 232521 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T 35.24 Check Total: 35.24 232522 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T 99.57 Check Total: 99.57 232523 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Telephone AT&T 19.26 Check Total: 19.26 232524 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT&T 19.26 Check Total: 19.26 232525 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Telephone AT&T 36.64 Check Total: 36.64 232526 06/15/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Telephone AT&T 36.49 Check Total: 36.49 232527 06/15/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T 733.39 Page 34 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 733.39 232528 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 183.65 Check Total: 183.65 232529 06/15/2016 ISF - Information Technology Telephone - IT AT&T 54.04 Check Total: 54.04 232530 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 106.24 Check Total: 106.24 232531 06/15/2016 General Fund H Pool /Telephone AT&T 17.38 Check Total: 17.38 232532 06/15/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool /Telephone P AT&T 17.38 Check Total: 17.38 232533 06/15/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Telephone AT&T 17.38 Check Total: 17.38 232534 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 71.46 Check Total: 71.46 232535 06/15/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Telephone AT&T 36.67 Check Total: 36.67 232536 06/15/2016 General Fund Sports Center/Telephone AT&T 71.47 Check Total: 71.47 232537 06/15/2016 General Fund hone Ps Main Station /Telephone p AT&T 19.44 Check Total: 19.44 232538 06/15/2016 General Fund Pac /Telephone AT&T 19.26 Check Total: 19.26 232539 06/15/2016 ISF - Information Technology Telephone - IT AT&T 36.67 Check Total: 36.67 232540 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT&T 36.57 Page 35 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 36.57 232541 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT&T 36.77 Check Total: 36.77 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 26.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 26.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr/Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 26.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/ Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 26.52 232542 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 19.39 232542 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 19.40 232542 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 26.52 232542 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 38.79 232542 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 ISF - Information Technology Cellular Phones - IT AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 ISF - Information Technology Cellular Phones - IT AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 ISF - Information Technology Cellular Phones - IT AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund City Manager /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 54.10 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund HR /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund HR /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 83.89 Page 36 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.91 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.90 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Fire / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Fire / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 57.48 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Fire / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Fire / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 41.50 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Fire / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Fire / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Fire / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bikes/Cellular Phon AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bikes/Cellular Phon AT&T MOBILITY 26.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bikes/Cellular Phon AT&T MOBILITY 109.51 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Spay/Ntr Fd Eligible Exp- AS AT&T MOBILITY 39.52 232542 06/15/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Streets & Bikes/Cellular Phon AT&T MOBILITY 24.52 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone AT&T MOBILITY 148.54 232542 06/15/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Cellular Phone AT&T MOBILITY 53.04 Check Total: 3,025.69 232543 06/15/2016 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Diana Barajas 350.00 Check Total: 350.00 232544 06/15/2016 General Fund Supplies - DS CDW Government 216.32 Check Total: 216.32 232545 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S LORI CLEVELAND 1,053.00 Check Total: 1,053.00 232546 06/15/2016 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Moises Cortes 75.00 Check Total: 75.00 232547 06/15/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire Brandon Davidge 90.00 Page 37 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Check Total: 232548 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Gary Zane Friedman 232548 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Gary Zane Friedman Check Total: 232549 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Bettyjane Hotaling Check Total: 232550 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Martial Arts Academy Bujutsu Gakuin Wushu Check Total: 232551 06/15/2016 General Fund Eduardo Perez Check Total: 232552 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Kathleen Robinson Check Total: 232553 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Laguna Plant/ City of Santa Rosa Check Total: 232554 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Laguna Plant/ City of Santa Rosa Check Total: 232555 06/15/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Gay Shelton-Ostadi Check Total: 232556 06/15/2016 General Fund Software maintenance - CH Syserco, Inc Check Total: 232557 06/15/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone Verizon Wireless 232557 06/15/2016 ISF - Information Technology Cellular Phones - IT Verizon Wireless 232557 06/15/2016 General Fund City Hall /Cellular Phone Verizon Wireless 232557 06/15/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Cellular Phone Verizon Wireless 232557 06/15/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Cell Phone Verizon Wireless 232557 06/15/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone Verizon Wireless 232557 06/15/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer/Cell Phone Verizon Wireless 232557 06/15/2016 ISF - Information Technology Telephone - IT Verizon Wireless Check Total: 232558 06/16/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA Page 38 of 57 Void Amount 90.00 968.50 19.50 988.00 4,878.90 4,878.90 65.00 65.00 150.00 150.00 117.00 117.00 762,817.64 762,817.64 762,817.64 762,817.64 457.60 457.60 1,339.00 1,339.00 40.04 76.02 38.01 10.02 68.07 20.04 20.02 144.30 416.52 1,767.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232558 06/16/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA 263.00 Check Total: 2,030.00 232559 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Community Event AJ Printing & Graphics, Inc. 371.00 Check Total: 371.00 232560 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Community Event AJ Printing & Graphics, Inc. 254.83 Check Total: 254.83 232561 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Bartley Pump, Inc 933.12 232561 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Bartley Pump, Inc 4.31 232561 06/16/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Bartley Pump, Inc -4.31 Check Total: 933.12 232562 06/16/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police N Brys 120.00 Check Total: 120.00 232563 06/16/2016 General Fund Faclty Non -Routine Main - PS S Cal -Steam 608.20 Check Total: 608.20 232564 06/16/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Professional Caltest Analytical Laboratory 1,132.00 Check Total: 1,132.00 232565 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint City Electric Supply 413.72 232565 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint City Electric Supply 263.36 Check Total: 677.08 232566 06/16/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Mark Clementi 625.00 Check Total: 625.00 232567 06/16/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Contractual Services Code Source 520.00 Check Total: 520.00 232568 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - RP Comm Cntr Creative Ceramics and Glass 1,632.40 Check Total: 1,632.40 232569 06/16/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Megan Davis 202.50 Check Total: 202.50 232570 06/16/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Contractual S DC Electric Group Inc. 276.76 Page 39 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 232577 06/16/2016 General Fund 232578 06/16/2016 General Fund Equipment Rental - Parks Supplies - JEPA Mtn Page 40 of 57 Check Total: Hertz Equipment Rental Corporation Check Total: Horizon Check Total: Void Amount 276.76 5,516.52 5,516.52 266.92 266.92 299.64 299.64 9,765.89 53,712.41 180,669.00 -488.29 -9,033.45 -2,685.62 231,939.94 1,838.06 11.75 -11.75 1,838.06 93.59 93.59 93.59 93.59 395.43 159.97 159.97 159.97 159.95 1,409.65 1,333.27 1,333.27 2,217.31 2,217.31 Check Total: 232571 06/16/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates Inc. Check Total: 232572 06/16/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint FISHER WIRELESS SERVICES INC Check Total: 232573 06/16/2016 General Fund Pac /Facility Repa Fishman Supply Company Check Total: 232574 06/16/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR -79 Com Ctr Pkg Lot Overlay GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION CO 232574 06/16/2016 Sewer Captial Project Fund WW -17 Eastside Trunk Sewr Ph 3 GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION CO 232574 06/16/2016 Capital Projects Fund TR -26 Snyder Wideng-SW to MedC GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION CO 232574 06/16/2016 Capital Projects Fund Retention Payable - CIP GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION CO 232574 06/16/2016 Capital Projects Fund Retention Payable - CIP GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION CO 232574 06/16/2016 Sewer Captial Project Fund Retention Payable - SWR CIP GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION CO Check Total: 232575 06/16/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service Inc 232575 06/16/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service Inc 232575 06/16/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service Inc Check Total: 232576 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Grainger, Inc. 232576 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Grainger, Inc. 232576 06/16/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Grainger, Inc. 232576 06/16/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr Grainger, Inc. 232576 06/16/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Grainger, Inc. 232576 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Grainger, Inc. 232576 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Grainger, Inc. 232576 06/16/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr Grainger, Inc. 232576 06/16/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Grainger, Inc. 232577 06/16/2016 General Fund 232578 06/16/2016 General Fund Equipment Rental - Parks Supplies - JEPA Mtn Page 40 of 57 Check Total: Hertz Equipment Rental Corporation Check Total: Horizon Check Total: Void Amount 276.76 5,516.52 5,516.52 266.92 266.92 299.64 299.64 9,765.89 53,712.41 180,669.00 -488.29 -9,033.45 -2,685.62 231,939.94 1,838.06 11.75 -11.75 1,838.06 93.59 93.59 93.59 93.59 395.43 159.97 159.97 159.97 159.95 1,409.65 1,333.27 1,333.27 2,217.31 2,217.31 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 232579 06/16/2016 General Fund City Manager/Community Promo Innovative Screen Printing Check Total: 232580 06/16/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Jacobsen West Check Total: 232581 06/16/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty JAMC Janitorial Check Total= 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund Police /Equipment Leas KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund City Hall /Rent/Lease/Ta KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Rent/Lease/Ta KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Rent/Lease/Tax KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund Animal Control / Eqpt Lease KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund Pac/Admin /Rent/Lease/Tax KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Rent/Lease/Ta KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund Streets/Rent/Leases KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund Storm Drains /Rent/Lease/Ta KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund Parks/Equipment Leases KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Equipment Leas KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Rent/Lease/Ta KBA Docusys Inc 232582 06/16/2016 General Fund Rent, Lease & Taxes - SrC KBA Docusys Inc Check Total: 232583 06/16/2016 General Fund Police /Contractual S Language Line Services Check Total: 232584 06/16/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S MACIAS GINI & O'CONNELL LLP Check Total: 232585 06/16/2016 General Fund Supplies - SEA MOTOROLA 232585 06/16/2016 Abandoned Veh Abatement (AVA) AVA Expenses - PS MOTOROLA Check Total: 232586 06/16/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Nardsons Enterprises, Inc. Check Total: 232587 06/16/2016 Water Capital Project Fund WA -28 Water Meter Installtin Pace Supply Check Total: 232588 06/16/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric Page 41 of 57 Void Amount 78.30 78.30 720.62 720.62 369.12 369.12 2,590.48 2,860.08 682.51 315.37 304.50 402.37 68.52 68.52 68.52 68.52 68.52 68.51 411.11 7,977.53 93.87 93.87 22,991.85 22,991.85 7,592.11 3,036.84 10,628.95 385.00 385.00 1,212.56 1,212.56 66.55 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name 232589 06/16/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po 232590 06/16/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po 232591 06/16/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po 232592 06/16/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Heat/Light/Po 232593 06/16/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po 232594 06/16/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po 232595 06/16/2016 ISF - Information Technology Contractual Services 232596 06/16/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty 232597 06/16/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Haz Mat Disposal 232598 06/16/2016 General Fund SEA/Vehicle Repairs 232599 06/16/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint 232600 06/16/2016 General Fund Productions/Marketing 232601 06/16/2016 General Fund Police /Contractual S Page 42 of 57 Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 66.55 Pacific Gas & Electric 87.41 Check Total: 87.41 Pacific Gas & Electric 9.53 Check Total: 9.53 Pacific Gas & Electric 41.00 Check Total: 41.00 Pacific Gas & Electric 141.86 Check Total: 141.86 Pacific Gas & Electric 2.63 Check Total: 2.63 Pacific Gas & Electric 18.56 Check Total: 18.56 Petaluma Community Access 2,805.00 Check Total:. 2,805.00 Platt 279.92 Check Total: 279.92 Rohnert Park Disposal 400.00 Check Total: 400.00 SANTA ROSA BMW 1,109.69 Check Total: 1,109.69 Scott Signs 435.00 Check Total: 435.00 Sonoma Media Investments -Advertising 1,167.75 Check Total: 1,167.75 SpeakWrite Billing Dept. 63.02 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232602 06/16/2016 General Fund 232602 06/16/2016 General Fund 232602 06/16/2016 General Fund 232603 06/16/2016 General Fund 232603 06/16/2016 Capital Projects Fund 232603 06/16/2016 General Fund 232603 06/16/2016 General Fund 232604 06/16/2016 General Fund Account Name Sports Center /Contractual S R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Sports Center /Contractual S Supplies - Park Maint PR -71 Benicia Pool Renovatins Supplies - Park Maint Sales Tax Payable Fire /Contractual S 232605 06/16/2016 Successor Agency Housing Fund Contractual Svc - Housing 232606 06/16/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance 232606 06/16/2016 General Fund Pac /Facility Repa 232606 06/16/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty 232606 06/16/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty 232606 06/16/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr Bldg/Facilty 232606 06/16/2016 General Fund BeneciaPool Bldg/Facilty 232606 06/16/2016 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty 232607 06/16/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR -82 H Pool Heater/Filter/Cir 232608 06/16/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen 232609 06/16/2016 General Fund Box Office - Theatre 232610 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions 232610 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions 232610 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS 232610 06/17/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Page 43 of 57 Vendor Name Check Total: PAMELA STAFFORD PAMELA STAFFORD PAMELA STAFFORD Check Total: Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery Check Total: TRAINING INNOVATIONS, INC. Check Total: United Site Services Check Total: Universal Building Services Universal Building Services Universal Building Services Universal Building Services Universal Building Services Universal Building Services Universal Building Services Check Total: USA Blue Book Check Total: Scott Warnock Check Total: Worldwide Ticketcraft Check Total: CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL Void Amount 63.02 3,527.97 1,803.75 675.00 6,006.72 454.65 454.65 4.20 -4.20 909.30 750.00 750.00 461.69 461.69 1,336.00 1,530.00 870.00 290.00 2,210.00 270.00 340.00 6,846.00 5,113.74 5,113.74 544.00 544.00 960.57 960.57 101.59 98.17 9.23 19.18 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232610 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 30.20 232610 06/17/2016 General Fund City Manager/Community Promo CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 87.37 232610 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 29.90 232610 06/17/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping -Animal Svc CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 46.75 Check Total: 422.39 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 276.00 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 206.61 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 69.42 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 26.76 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 54.45 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 21.97 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund SC/ Concession Purchases CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 335.05 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 62.29 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 288.87 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr Bldg/Facilty CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 85.75 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 85.75 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund H Pool /Concession Purchases CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 500.22 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool /Concession Pu CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 500.22 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 189.13 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 317.01 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 284.12 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 82.11 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Police /Community Pro CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 16.89 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 88.86 232611 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 126.70 232611 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 38.55 Check Total: 3,656.73 232612 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs First Alarm Securities Services 229.38 232612 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs First Alarm Securities Services 109.00 Check Total: 338.38 232613 06/17/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 803.59 232613 06/17/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 699.03 232613 06/17/2016 General Fund Fire /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 408.79 232613 06/17/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 573.52 232613 06/17/2016 General Fund Diesel Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 554.60 232613 06/17/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 956.12 232613 06/17/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 869.90 232613 06/17/2016 General Fund Fire /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 768.41 Check Total: 5,633.96 Page 44 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 232614 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint GCR Tires & Service Check Total: 232615 06/17/2016 Capital Projects Fund OF -55 PS Main HVAC Replcmnt GHD Check Total: 232616 06/17/2016 ISF - Information Technology Contractual Services Granicus Inc Check Total: 232617 06/17/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Michael T. Hardin Investigations 232617 06/17/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Michael T. Hardin Investigations Check Total: 232618 06/17/2016 General Fund Medications - AS Henry Schein Animal Health Check Total: 232619 06/17/2016 General Fund Shelter Food - AS Hill's Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc Check Total: 232620 06/17/2016 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control Check Total: 232621 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232621 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232621 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon 232621 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232621 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232621 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon 232621 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232621 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Horizon 232621 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Horizon Check Total: 232622 06/17/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Innovative Screen Printing Check Total: 232623 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint John Deere Financial 232623 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint John Deere Financial 232623 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable John Deere Financial Check Total: Page 45 of 57 Void Amount 612.82 612.82 668.00 668.00 100.00 100.00 1,750.00 250.00 2,000.00 232.46 232.46 240.36 240.36 60.00 60.00 1,166.26 5.39 -5.39 153.12 0.71 -0.71 13.96 0.07 -0.07 1,333.34 77.22 77.22 236.43 1.10 -1.10 236.43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232624 06/17/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bidg/Facilty Kelly Moore Paint Company, Inc 53.97 Check Total: 53.97 232625 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Nardsons Enterprises, Inc. 279.00 Check Total: 279.00 232626 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - PW National Document Solutions, LLC 31.80 232626 06/17/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - CM National Document Solutions, LLC 38.21 232626 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - HR National Document Solutions, LLC 38.14 Check Total: 108.15 232627 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Water Meter Re National Meter & Automation, Inc. 54.96 Check Total: 54.96 232628 06/17/2016 General Fund Dev Svs / Recruitment Occupational Health Centers of California 57.00 232628 06/17/2016 General Fund Animal Services/Recruitment/Hi Occupational Health Centers of California 70.50 232628 06/17/2016 General Fund RP Comm Ctr/ Recruitment Occupational Health Centers of California 141.00 232628 06/17/2016 General Fund RP Comm Ctr/ Recruitment Occupational Health Centers of California 141.00 Check Total: 409.50 232629 06/17/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS Office Depot 95.43 232629 06/17/2016 General Fund Office Supplies -Animal Control Office Depot 71.66 232629 06/17/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - Sports Cntr Office Depot 27.96 232629 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Office Supplies - Fleet Office Depot 22.82 232629 06/17/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PW Gen Office Depot 129.53 232629 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Office Supplies - SWR Entr Office Depot 216.00 232629 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Office Supplies - SWR Entr Office Depot 6.62 232629 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Office Depot -6.62 232629 06/17/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS Office Depot 50.08 232629 06/17/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - Comm Cntr Office Depot 87.41 232629 06/17/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - Theatre Office Depot 215.41 Check Total: 916.30 232630 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 452.16 232630 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 452.16 232630 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 90.71 232630 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 90.72 232630 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 551.07 232630 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs OFFICE TEAM 551.07 Check Total: 2,187.89 232631 06/17/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S BOLT STAFFING SERVICE, INC. 2,443.47 Page 46 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232632 06/17/2016 General Fund 232632 06/17/2016 General Fund 232632 06/17/2016 General Fund 232632 06/17/2016 General Fund 232632 06/17/2016 General Fund 232632 06/17/2016 General Fund 232632 06/17/2016 General Fund 232632 06/17/2016 General Fund 232633 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund 232633 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund 232634 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund 232634 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund 232635 06/17/2016 General Fund 232636 06/17/2016 Water Capital Project Fund 232636 06/17/2016 Water Capital Project Fund 232637 06/17/2016 Casino Problem Gambling 232638 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Account Name Sports Center/ Recruitment RP Comm Ctr/ Recruitment Recruitment - SrC Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Benicia Pool/ Recruitment H Pool/Recruitment Magnolia Pool /Recruitment Recruitment - SrC Water Conservation Measures Water Conservation Measures Water Conservation Measures Water Conservation Measures RP Comm Ctr/ Recruitment WA -28 Water Meter Installtin WA -28 Water Meter Installtin PGRC/ Contractual Services Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Vendor Name Check Total CA Department of Justice CA Department of Justice CA Department of Justice CA Department of Justice CA Department of Justice CA Department of Justice CA Department of Justice CA Department of Justice Check Total: Tiffany Calrillo Tiffany Calrillo Check Total: Jane Harre Jane Harre Check Total: Occupational Health Centers of California Check Total: Pace Supply Pace Supply Check Total: Petaluma Health Center Check Total: Platinum Chevrolet Check Total: 232639 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Platt 232639 06/17/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Platt 232639 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Platt 232639 06/17/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Platt 232639 06/17/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty Platt 232640 06/17/2016 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty Page 47 of 57 Check Total: Power Industries Void Amount 2,443.47 42.68 170.68 42.64 228.00 21.34 21.34 21.32 32.00 580.00 64.50 64.50 129.00 75.00 75.00 150.00 70.50 70.50 3,339.71 585.89 3,925.60 10,000.00 10,000.00 27.31 27.31 362.95 72.08 39.56 10.30 33.35 518.24 88.69 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232640 06/17/2016 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty Power Industries 98.62 Check Total: 187.31 232641 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Self Insured Losses - Water Powerplan 245.97 Check Total: 245.97 232642 06/17/2016 Water Capital Project Fund WA -28 Water Meter Installtin R&B Company 254.58 Check Total: 254.58 232643 06/17/2016 Refuse Utility Fund Refuse/Contractal/Professnl Sv R3 Consulting Group 10,565.00 Check Total: 10,565.00 232644 06/17/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Redwood Lock & Key 51.00 232644 06/17/2016 General Fund City Hall /Bldg/Facilty Redwood Lock & Key 85.00 Check Total: 136.00 232645 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Softwr License & Maint - Fleet Ron Turley Associates 1,704.38 Check Total: 1,704.38 232646 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet'Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 89.16 232646 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet F1eet,Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 56.90 232646 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet�Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 100.85 232646 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 87.45 232646 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 5.89 232646 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 17.78 Check Total: 358.03 232647 06/17/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Santa Rosa Shoes Inc 300.00 Check Total: 300.00 232648 06/17/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 21.70 232648 06/17/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 81.35 232648 06/17/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 127.13 Check Total: 230.18 232649 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials 146.40 232649 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials -0.67 232649 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 0.67 232649 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 0.61 232649 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials 133.29 232649 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials -0.61 Page 48 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name 232650 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 232650 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 232650 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable 232651 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr 232651 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr 232651 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable 232652 06/17/2016 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty 232653 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures 232653 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures 232654 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 232654 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 232654 06/17/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable 232655 06/17/2016 General Fund Medications - AS 232657 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr 232658 06/17/2016 ISF - Information Technology Telephone - IT 232659 06/17/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr /Heat/Light/Po 232659 06/17/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool /Heat/Light/Po 232660 06/17/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Telephone 232661 06/17/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Telephone Page 49 of 57 Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 279.69 Sonomarin Landscape Materials Inc 156.91 Sonomarin Landscape Materials Inc 0.72 Sonomarin Landscape Materials Inc -0.72 Check Total: 156.91 Syar Industries, Inc. 105.99 Syar Industries, Inc. 0.49 Syar Industries, Inc. -0.49 Check Total: 105.99 ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corporation 321.72 Check Total: 321.72 Denise & Michael Tougeron 150.00 Denise & Michael Tougeron 150.00 Check Total: 300.00 United Forest Products, Inc. 81.19 United Forest Products, Inc. 0.37 United Forest Products, Inc. -0.37 Check Total: 81.19 VORTECH PHARMACEUTICALS 143.80 Check Total: 143.80 Alhambra & Sierra Springs 66.72 Check Total: 66.72 AT&T 2,703.00 Check Total: 2,703.00 AT&T 35.61 AT&T 35.61 Check Total: 71.22 AT&T 36.67 Check Total: 36.67 AT&T 36.67 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 36.67 232662 06/17/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg-North /Telephone AT&T 99.57 Check Total: 99.57 232663 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet'Telephone AT&T 173.52 Check Total: 173.52 232664 06/17/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/ Telephone AT&T 36.68 Check Total: 36.68 232665 06/17/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S BOLT STAFFING SERVICE, INC. 2,068.09 232665 06/17/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S BOLT STAFFING SERVICE, INC. 835.74 Check Total: 2,903.83 232666 06/17/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits BRELJE & RACE CONSULTING 160.00 232666 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS BRELJE & RACE CONSULTING -160.00 232666 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses BRELJE & RACE CONSULTING 160.00 Check Total: 160.00 232667 06/17/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Contractual Services Code Source 515.00 232667 06/17/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Contractual Services Code Source 680.00 232667 06/17/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Contractual Services Code Source 15,865.52 Check Total: 17,060.52 232668 06/17/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr /Heat/Light/Pow Comcast 51.09 Check Total: 51.09 232669 06/17/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr /Heat/Light/Pow Comcast 236.16 Check Total: 236.16 232670 06/17/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Heat/Light/Po Comcast 550.58 Check Total: 550.58 232671 06/17/2016 General Fund Non-Deptmental - Cont Svcs COMMUNICATION LEASING 97.48 232671 06/17/2016 General Fund Non-Deptmental - Cont Svcs COMMUNICATION LEASING 324.97 232671 06/17/2016 General Fund Non-Deptmental - Cont Svcs COMMUNICATION LEASING 422.47 232671 06/17/2016 General Fund Non-Deptmental - Cont Svcs COMMUNICATION LEASING 422.47 Check Total: 1,267.39 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits CSG Consultants Inc 160.00 Page 50 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS CSG Consultants Inc -160.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses CSG Consultants Inc 160.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits CSG Consultants Inc 600.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS CSG Consultants Inc -600.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses CSG Consultants Inc 600.00 232672 06/17/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan CSG Consultants Inc 1,280.00 232672 06/17/2016 Capital Projects Fund Southeast Dist. Specific Plan CSG Consultants Inc 400.00 232672 06/17/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan CSG Consultants Inc 960.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits CSG Consultants Inc 80.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS CSG Consultants Inc -80.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses CSG Consultants Inc 80.00 232672 06/17/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan CSG Consultants Inc 1,320.00 232672 06/17/2016 Capital Projects Fund Southeast Dist. Specific Plan CSG Consultants Inc 400.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits CSG Consultants Inc 160.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS CSG Consultants Inc -160.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses CSG Consultants Inc 160.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits CSG Consultants Inc 160.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS CSG Consultants Inc -160.00 232672 06/17/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses CSG Consultants Inc 160.00 232672 06/17/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan CSG Consultants Inc 10,440.00 Check Total: 15,960.00 232673 06/17/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS Lucas Dotta 18.00 Check Total: 18.00 232674 06/17/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr Bldg/Facilty Fishman Supply Company 34.58 232674 06/17/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr Bldg/Facilty Fishman Supply Company 13.37 232674 06/17/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Fishman Supply Company 7.56 Check Total: 55.51 232675 06/17/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 41.97 232675 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Small Tools Grainger, Inc. 18.25 232675 06/17/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 93.30 232675 06/17/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Grainger, Inc. 52.37 232675 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Emr. /Spec Dept Equ Grainger, Inc. 13.28 232675 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Small Tools Grainger, Inc. 111.97 Check Total: 331.14 232676 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Mark Hendersen 122.83 Check Total: 122.83 232677 06/17/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Equipment Renatl - WW Hertz Equipment Rental Corporation 485.02 Page 51 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232677 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund Equipment Rental - W Hertz Equipment Rental Corporation 876.51 Check Total: 1,361.53 232678 06/17/2016 General Fund Ymca/Soccer Bld/Contracted Svc The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 75.00 232678 06/17/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr /Contractual S The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 60.00 232678 06/17/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr /Bldg/Facilty The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 60.00 232678 06/17/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 75.00 Check Total: 270.00 232679 06/17/2016 General Fund SC/ Concession Purchases Iniguez Cookies & Pastries 30.00 Check Total: 30.00 232680 06/17/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr Gas & Oil Invoice Processing Dept 14.50 Check Total: 14.50 232681 06/17/2016 General Fund City Hall /Rent/Lease/Ta KBA Docusys Inc. 781.94 232681 06/17/2016 General Fund Police /Equipment Leas KBA Docusys Inc. 149.31 Check Total: 931.25 232682 06/17/2016 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Kut-Ups of Rohnert Park 400.00 Check Total: 400.00 232683 06/17/2016 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Jim Lewis 19.87 Check Total: 19.87 232684 06/17/2016 General Fund RP Comm Ctr/ Recruitment Occupational Health Centers of California 70.50 232684 06/17/2016 General Fund Benicia Pool/ Recruitment Occupational Health Centers of California 47.00 232684 06/17/2016 General Fund H Pool/Recruitment Occupational Health Centers of California 47.00 232684 06/17/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Recruitment Occupational Health Centers of California 47.00 Check Total: 211.50 232685 06/17/2016 General Fund Supplies - CH Office Depot 45.61 Check Total: 45.61 232686 06/17/2016 Water Capital Project Fund WA-28 Water Meter Installtin Pace Supply 190.31 232686 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Pace Supply -32.81 Check Total: 157.50 232687 06/17/2016 Refuse Utility Fund Refuse/Contractal/Professnl Sv R3 Consulting Group 6,985.00 Check Total: 6,985.00 Page 52 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232688 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund 232688 06/17/2016 Water Utility Fund 232688 06/17/2016 General Fund 232689 06/17/2016 General Fund 232689 06/17/2016 General Fund 232689 06/17/2016 General Fund Account Name System Repair - WTR Entr System Repair - WTR Entr Sales Tax Payable Dev Svs /Contractual Services Dev Svs /Contractual Services Dev Svs /Contractual Services Vendor Name Shamrock Materials Shamrock Materials Shamrock Materials Check Total_ Shums Coda Associates Inc Shums Coda Associates Inc Shums Coda Associates Inc 232690 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Econ Dev US Bank 232690 06/21/2016 General Fund City Manager/Community Promo US Bank 232690 06/21/2016 General Fund Econ Dev/Paper Supplie US Bank 232690 06/21/2016 General Fund Econ Dev/Paper Supplie US Bank 232690 06/21/2016 General Fund Econ Dev/Paper Supplie US Bank 232691 06/21/2016 General Fund City Manager /Dues & Subscr US Bank 232692 06/21/2016 Casino Public Service Training & Travel - RPSC US Bank 232692 06/21/2016 Casino Public Service RPSC Travel and Meetings US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Manager/Travel & Meetings US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Manager/Travel & Meetings US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Council/Exp Belforte US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Council/ Exp - Mackenzie US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Council/ Exp Stafford US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Council/Exp Callinan US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund Police / Travel & Meetings US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund Finance /Travel & Meetings US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund Econ Dev/Travels & Mee US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Council/Exp Belforte US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Manager/Community Promo US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Manager /Dues & Subscr US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - City Mgr US Bank 232693 06/21/2016 General Fund City Manager/Travel & Meetings US Bank 232694 06/21/2016 'General Fund RP Comm Ctr/ Recruitment US Bank Page 53 of 57 Check Total Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Void Amount 133.29 -0.61 0.61 133.29 430.65 9,280.00 930.00 10,640.65 109.00 11.05 19.00 9.99 9.99 159.03 95.00 95.00 45.00 10.00 55.00 246.25 155.51 25.00 25.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 75.00 201.31 400.00 175.24 163.59 1,621.90 37.50 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232694 06/21/2016 General Fund Sports Center/ Recruitment US Bank 37.50 232694 06/21/2016 General Fund Benicia Pool/ Recruitment US Bank 25.00 232694 06/21/2016 General Fund H Pool/Recruitment US Bank 25.00 232694 06/21/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Recruitment US Bank 25.00 232694 06/21/2016 General Fund Animal Services/Recruitment/Hi US Bank 75.00 232694 06/21/2016 General Fund Sports Center/ Recruitment US Bank 75.00 Check Total: 300.00 232695 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - DS US Bank 19.56 232695 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - DS US Bank -0.70 232695 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 0.70 Check Total: 19.56 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Recruitment - SrC US Bank 100.00 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Recruitment - SrC US Bank 75.00 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Dev Svs / Recruitment US Bank 150.00 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Dev Svs / Recruitment US Bank 75.00 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Dev Svs / Recruitment US Bank 60.00 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Theatre/Recruitment US Bank 75.00 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Benicia Pool/ Recruitment US Bank 37.50 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund H Pool/Recruitment US Bank 37.50 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen US Bank 346.72 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen US Bank 390.00 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen US Bank 200.00 232696 06/21/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen US Bank 75.00 Check Total: 1,621.72 232697 06/21/2016 General Fund City Manager/Community Promo US Bank 100.00 232697 06/21/2016 General Fund Econ Dev/Travels & Mee US Bank 17.06 Check Total: 117.06 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /C/0 -Vehicles/ US Bank 0.41 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -0.41 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /C/0 -Vehicles/ US Bank 0.91 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /C/0 -Vehicles/ US Bank 0.46 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -0.46 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -0.91 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police US Bank 26.89 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police US Bank 26.18 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /CIO -Vehicles/ US Bank 5.25 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /C/0 -Vehicles/ US Bank 4.68 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /C/0 -Vehicles/ US Bank 10.44 Page 54 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Police / Travel & Meetings US Bank 42.34 232698 06/21/2016 General Fund Police / Travel & Meetings US Bank 30.00 Check Total: 145.78 232699 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /Community Pro US Bank 13.65 232699 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -13.65 232699 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /Community Pro US Bank 175.00 Check Total: 175.00 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 20.45 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 238.61 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 742.41 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Fire / Travel & Meetings US Bank 408.20 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Fire i Travel & Meetings US Bank 408.20 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Fire / Travel & Meetings US Bank 408.20 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Fire /Dues & Subscr US Bank 21.00 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 62.80 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 7.25 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 20.45 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - DS US Bank 17.50 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 17.50 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 20.32 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - DS US Bank 40.18 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 40.18 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 142.16 232700 06/21/2016 Capital Projects Fund OF -58 Corp Yard/PS DesignPhase US Bank 142.16 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - Fire US Bank -34.95 232700 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - Fire US Bank 7.43 Check Total: 2,730.05 232701 06/21/2016 General Fund System Repair - Police/I.D. US BANK 6.94 Check Total: 6.94 232702 06/21/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police US Bank 165.26 232702 06/21/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police US Bank 340.20 232702 06/21/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police US Bank 143.28 232702 06/21/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police US Bank 704.65 232702 06/21/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police US Bank 8.30 Check Total: 1,361.69 232703 06/21/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Bldg/Facilty US Bank 20.76 Page 55 of 57 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 232703 06/21/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone US Bank 232703 06/21/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Bldg/Facilty US Bank 232703 06/21/2016 General Fund Bldg Facility costs - PS South US Bank 232704 06/21/2016 General Fund Faclty Non-Routin Main -PS Main US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 232705 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 232706 06/21/2016 General Fund Fire /Community Prom US Bank 232706 06/21/2016 General Fund Bldg Facility costs - PS South US Bank 232706 06/21/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Bldg/Facilty US Bank 232706 06/21/2016 General Fund Fire /Community Prom US Bank 232706 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 232707 06/21/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS US Bank 232707 06/21/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS US Bank 232708 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS US Bank 232708 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS US Bank 232708 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 232708 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - AS US Bank 232709 06/21/2016 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 232709 06/21/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Bldg/Facilty US Bank 232710 06/21/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone US Bank Page 56 of 57 Void Amount 32.61 43.40 43.39 Check Total: 140.16 17.19 Check Total: 17.19 16.45 -16.45 8.92 -8.92 37.64 -37.64 187.96 101.90 508.08 24.44 Check Total: 822.38 189.59 207.20 82.65 16.59 -16.59 Check Total: 479.44 69.39 160.49 Check Total: 229.88 -6.49 19.28 -0.09 0.09 Check Total: 12.79 39.10 86.41 Check Total: 125.51 0.74 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 232710 06/21/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -0.74 232710 06/21/2016 General Fund Police / Cell Phone US Bank 8.50 Check Total: 8.50 232711 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Casino SEA US Bank 19.06 232711 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - SEA US Bank 152.76 232711 06/21/2016 General Fund SEA/Vehicle Repairs US Bank 88.08 Check Total: 259.90 232712 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police US Bank 118.98 232712 06/21/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping - Police US Bank 155.46 232712 06/21/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping - Police US Bank 203.84 Check Total: 478.28 232713 06/21/2016 General Fund Medications - AS US Bank 10.86 232713 06/21/2016 General Fund Medications - AS US Bank 44.86 Check Total: 55.72 232714 06/21/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping - Police US Bank 79.29 232714 06/21/2016 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 98.88 232714 06/21/2016 General Fund Police/Armory - Police US Bank 38.00 232714 06/21/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 12.57 232714 06/21/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police US Bank 12.23 Check Total: 240.97 Report Total: 3,052,576.06 Page 57 of 57 SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BILLS FOR ACCEPTANCE June 28, 2016,E Check Numbers: 232481 Dated: June 14, 2016 $3,991.00 TOTAL $3,991.00 Accounts Payable Checks for Approval User: csayavongsuek Printed: 6/22/2016 - 9:15 AM Check Number Check Date Fund Name 232481 06/14/2016 Successor Agency to the CDC 232481 06/14/2016 Successor Agency to the CDC II Y ,3i rr«x'" Account Name Contractual Services Contractual Services Page 1 of 1 Vendor Name Union Bank Trust Department- Fees Union Bank Trust Department- Fees Check Total: Void Amount 2,013.00 1,978.00 3,991.00 City of Rohnert Park Cash Report As of April 30, 2016 s., To: The Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council From: Betsy Howze, Finance Director Darrin Jenkins, City Manager Prepared By: Lori Newzell Summary of General Fund Cash Total General Fund Cash $ 10,169,322.66 Restricted (External) $ 1,073,459.14 Assigned 7,587,940.00 Subtotal (not available to spend) 8,661,399.14 Unassigned $ 1,507,923.52 Restricted Detail: 500,960.68 Refundable Deposits $ 962,126.80 Housing Program 80,196.00 Senior Center Donations 31,136.34 _ Casino Vehicle Contribution $ 1,073,459.14 Assigned Detail: Operating Reserve $ 3,828,518.00 Contingency Reserve 2,754,259.00 Insured Losses Reserve 998,268.00 Retiree Health Savings Reserve 6,895.00 $ 7,587,940.00 Enterprise Fund Cash Water Utility Operations Fund $ 4,339,093.13 Water Capital Fund 376,068.00 Water Bond Proceeds 8.78 Sewer Utility Operations Fund 8,680,861.00 Sewer Capital Fund 2,313,220.44 JEPA Deposit - Wastewater 500,960.68 Recycled Water Operation Funds 16,690.94 Garbage Utility Operations Fund 682,688.94 Total Enterprise Fund Cash $ 16,909,591.91 Internal Service Fund Cash Information Technology Fund $ 376,422.24 Vehicle/Equipment Replacement Fund 963,240.93 Fleet Services Fund 151,528.63 ISF-Infrastructure 1,592,406.41 Total Internal Service Fund Cash $ 3,083,598.21 Special Revenue Funds Gas Tax Funds: Sec. 2107 Maint/Const $ 2,020,626.17 Gas Tax Funds: Sec. 2107.5 Eng/Admin 6,070.31 Graton Special Enforcement Activity 607,319.33 Graton Mitigation Fund 4,018.48 Casino Public Safety Capital Contribution 1,657,662.05 Problem Gambling MOU 3.2 Fund 107,096.59 Casino Waterway MOU 3.3 Fund 95,218.23 Casino Public Service MOU 3.4.2 Fund 2,602,728.28 Casino Supplemental MOU 3.4 Fund 794,845.99 Casino Vehicle Contribution 314,659.80 Page 1 of 3 City of Rohnert Park Cash Report (Continued) As of April 30, 2016 Special Revenue Funds - (Continued) Alcohol Beverage Sales Ordinance #70 Fund Vehicle Abatement Fund Traffic Safety Fund General Plan Maintenance Fee Revenue Fund Spay and Neuter Fee Special Revenue Fund Federal Asset Forfeiture Special Revenue Fund State Asset Forfeiture Special Revenue Fund PAC Capital Facilities Fund Sports Center Facility Cap Reserve Per Acre For Development Fee Fund Sewer Capacity Charge Fund Refuse Road Impact Fee Fund Measure M Streets Fund Traffic Signals Fund Regional Traffic Fee Fund Explorer Program Fund Cal Disability Act Fund Buildg Standard Sp SB1473 Capital Outlay Fund Public Facilities Finance Admin Fund Public Facilities Finance Fee Fund SLESF Fund DIVCA AB2987/PEG Fees Fund Traffic Congestion Relief Fund 6.6.2 -Wilfred JEPA Fund Prop M Fire Assessment Rent Appeals Board Fund Copeland Creek Drainage Fund Total Special Revenue Funds Capital Project Funds City Capital Projects Wilfred Dowdell Specific Plan Mitigation Program 2007 R Bond Proceeds 1999 TAB Bond Proceeds Total Capital Projects Funds Permanent Funds Performing Arts Center Donations Dorothy Spreckels Endowment Fund (1) Total Permanent Fund Trust & Agency Funds Rohnert Park Foundation Federal Seized Assets State Seized Assets Cash with Fiscal Agent (2002C CSCDA Wastewater Rev Bonds) Total Trust & Agency Funds Total Cash All City Funds 82,144.88 406,297.24 292,762.66 489,444.81 46,314.44 25,862.19 380,332.71 66,420.22 67,481.56 501,835.68 2,732.30 1,061,213.62 626,906.86 1,507,282.17 121,000.00 8,491.65 7,743.39 36.42 13,193.39 732,600.06 3,304,937.27 265,209.83 436,138.37 216,835.16 457,202.69 351,043.47 167,103.29 53,850.19 $ 19,902,661.75 $ (80,571.23) 13,024.24 3,236,172.85 627,545.62 $ 3,796,171.48 $ 685,914.00 500.000.00 $ 1,185,914.00 $ 6,660.00 344,826.35 1,471,048.10 2.20 $ 1,822,536.65 $ 56,869,796.66 (1) Per the 1st amendment to the Dorothy Spreckels 1999 Trust, Section 3.4.1; $500,000 is "to be held as an endowment fund The income of the fund (but no part of the principal or appreciation thereof, realized or unrealized) shall be used for the general charitable purposes of the City of Rohnert Park's Dorothy Rohnert Spreckels Preforming Arts Center." Page 2 of 3 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK -SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS AS OF APRIL 30, 2016 WFS Synovus Bank CD Maturity WFS Comenity Capital Bank Investment Investment Bank Name Type Date % Int. Par Value Market Value Exchange Bk Recreation Checking Ckg N/A 0.030% $ 90,153.63 $ 90,153.63 Exchange Bk Operating Checking Ckg N/A 0.030% 14,152,778 79 14,152,778.79 Total Business Checking Accounts CD 08/29/16 0.030% $ 14,242,932.42 $ 14,242,932.42_ Petty Cash Cash N/A 0.000% $ 3,626.00 $ 3,626.00 WFS Synovus Bank CD 08/15/16 WFS Comenity Capital Bank CD 08/18/16 WFS Ally Bank CD 08/22/16 WFS Discover Bank CD 08/22/16 WFS GE Capital Bank CD 08/22/16 WFS Goldman Sachs Bank CD 08/22/16 WFS Park Natl Bank CD 08/22/16 WFS Peoples United Bank CD 08/22/16 WFS Merrick Bank CD 08/29/16 WFS Bank Leumi USA NY CD 09/12/16 Total CD Investments $ 2,488,000.00 $ 2,490,384.32 . State of Calif-LAIF Pooled N/A So. Co. Investmt. Pool Pooled N/A Total Managed Pools $ 39,587,659.18 $ 39,587,659.18 Subtotal $ 56,322,217.60 $ 56,324,601.92 2002C CSCDA W/W Rev Bonds -Interest Pymt Fd 2.20 2.20 2005A CSCDA W/W Rev Bonds -Project Acct 8.78 8.78 Total Revenue Bonds $ 10.98 $ 10.98 Wilfred Widening Construction Dep M M. N/A JEPA Deposit Ckg N/A Total Dedicated Portfolios $ 56,869,796.66 $ 56,872,180.98 Totals 0800% $ 249,000.00 $ 249,198.20 0.800% 250,000.00 250,202.00 0.900% 248,000 00 248,280.49 0.900% 248,000.00 248,280 49 0.850% 248,000 00 248,243.04 0.800% 249,000.00 249,206.92 0.850% 250,000.00 250,244 25 0.850% 248,000.00 248,243.29 0.850% 250,000.00 250,254.50 0.800% 248,000.00 248,231.14 0.840% $ 2,488,000.00 $ 2,490,384.32 . 0.525% $ 7,349,263.43 $ 7,349,263.43 0.698% 32,236,395.75 32,238,395.75 0.612% $ 39,587,659.18 $ 39,587,659.18 0.476% $ 56,322,217.60 $ 56,324,601.92 0.000% 2.20 2.20 0013% 8.78 8.78 0.010% $ 10.98 $ 10.98 Valuation Source Note (1) Note (1) Note (2) Note (1) Note (1) Note (1) Note (1) Note (1) Note (1) Note (1) Note (1) Note (1) Note (1) Note (3) Note (4) Note (5) Note (5) 0.030% $ 46,607 40 $ 46,607.40 Note (6) 0.070% 500,960.68 500,960.68 Note (7) 0.050% $ 547,568.08 $ 547,568.08 $ 56,869,796.66 $ 56,872,180.98 Note (1) Investments in Medium Term Notes, Certificates of Deposits, checking and savings accounts. Note (2) Petty Cash kept in cash drawers at each City cash collection site. Note (3) These are funds invested in the Local Agency Investment Fund, State of California. Current Market Value and Par Value are typically equal. Interest is received quarterly. Note (4) These are funds invested in the Sonoma County Investment Pool. Current Market Value and Par Value are typically equal. Interest is received quarterly. Note (5) These funds are being held by Union Bank of California. Note (6) These funds are held as a deposit from Graton Tribe for Wilfred Widening project Note (7) These funds are held as a deposit per section 6 1.1 of the Graton Wastewater JEPA. Page 3 of 3 POOLED INVESTMENT SUMMARY BY TYPE April 30, 2016 # of % of Avg. Average Days Investment Type Invmnts Portfolio YTM Par Value Market Value Until Maturity Business Checking 2 25.04% 0.030% $ 14,242,932.42 $ 14,242,932.42 1 Petty Cash 1 0.01% 0.000% 3,626 3,626 0 CDs -Banks 10 4.37% 0.000% 2,488,000 2,490,384 116 Managed Pools(LAIF/SCIP) 2 69.61% 0.612% 39,587,659 39,587,659 1 Cash with Trustee 2 0.00% 0010% 1098 10.98 1 Dedicated Portfolios 2 0.96% 0.050% 547,568.08 547,568.08 1 19 100.00% $ 56,869,796.66 $ 56,872,180.98 Page 3 of 3 Meeting Date: Department: Submitted By: Prepared By: Agenda Title: ITEM NO. 6C1 Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT June 28, 2016 Public Works and Community Services John McArthur, Director of Public Works & Community Services Terrie Zwillinger, Project Coordinator Appropriation of Bond Funds for the Animal Shelter HVAC Replacement Project No. 2016-12 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution to Appropriate 2007R Tax Allocation Bond (TAB) Proceeds to the City's Capital Improvement Project 2016-12 BACKGROUND: The Animal Shelter has two HVAC units that heat and cool the building. These units are in critical need of replacement. The Animal Shelter HVAC Replacement Project was identified as a priority project in the City's Public Facilities Project Priority List for 2007R Tax Allocation Bond (TAB) expenditures. The funding for construction of the project was included in the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) for the January 2016 period. The funds from the 2007R TAB Proceeds for this and other previously identified facility projects have been approved by City Council, the Oversight Board, and the State Department of Finance for expenditure. ANALYSIS: One of the two HVAC units failed at the beginning of May, 2016. This unit is critical to provide cooling to the exam room for the animals. Therefore, the unit needed to be replaced on an emergency basis. A contract with RJ Mechanical was executed on May 16, 2016 in the amount of $11,145.00 and the unit was replaced on May 24, 2016. In light of the emergency situation, the failed HVAC unit was replaced in FY 15/16. The funds that are tied to the Capital Improvement Projects are proposed in the FY 16/17 Budget, and need to be appropriated in FY 15/16. During the FY 16-17 Budget Study Sessions held on April 25th and 26ffi, the Council had no questions on the project. Therefore, we request that the funds be appropriated in FY 15-16 to fund the replacements. The second unit will soon be advertised for replacement via the City's informal bidding process. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This project is consistent with Strategic Plan Goal D2 Improve Transportation and Infrastructure. 1 ITEM NO. 6C 1 OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Finance Director to appropriate $75,000 of 007R Tax Allocation Bond (TAB) Proceeds to the City's Capital Improvement Project 2016-12. Staff recommends this option. 2. Option 1: The emergency project could be funded through the General Fund since there are no other funding sources identified for this project. However, this project is identified in the Capital Improvement Projects list for FY 16/17 and using General Fund monies is not a good use of these funds. Staff does not recommend this option. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The Animal Shelter HVAC Replacement Project was originally proposed in the City's Capital Improvement Program as project 2016-12 in the amount of $75,000. Due to the emergency nature of the replacement, staff is requesting to move the appropriation of the funds to FY 15-16. Any funds unspent in FY 15-16 will be carried forward to FY 16-17. Department Head Approval Date: 06/02/16 Finance Director Approval Date: 6/6/16 City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 06/6/16 Attachments: 1. Resolution 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-64 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO INCREASE APPROPRIATION BY $75,000 TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2016-12 ANIMAL SHELTER HVAC REPLACEMENT PROJECT FUNDED BY 2007R TAX ALLOCATION BOND PROCEEDS AND ANY OTHER TRANSACTIONS NECESSARY TO FUND THE PROJECT WHEREAS, on September 22, 2015, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park ("City") approved a list of proposed public improvements to be funded from bonds proceeds ("Proposed Public Improvements"); and WHEREAS, on September 24, 2015 the Oversight Board, by adoption of Resolution No. 2015-04, found that the Proposed Public Improvements are consistent with the Bond's covenants and directed the staff of the Successor Agency to include all or a portion of the expenditures from the Excess Bond Proceeds for the Proposed Public Improvements on the ROPS 15-16B (January -June 2016) period; and WHEREAS, on September 24, 2015, the Oversight Board approved and authorized the execution of the Agreement Regarding Expenditure of Excess Bond Proceeds ("Bond Agreement") for expenditure of excess bond proceeds directed by successor Agency staff to include the Bond Agreement on the ROPS for the January -June 2016 (ROPS 15-16B); and WHEREAS, on November 5, 2015, the Department of Finance approved the Bond Agreement; and WHEREAS, at the beginning of May 2016 one of the two HVAC units critical to provide cooling to the exam room for the animals failed at the Animal Shelter; and WHEREAS, the failed HVAC unit needed to be replaced on an emergency basis; and WHEREAS, the funds for the replacement tied to the Capital Improvement Projects in FY 16/17 need to be appropriated in FY 15/16 to appropriately fund the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it hereby authorizes the Director of Finance to appropriate $75,000 of 2007 R bond proceeds to the Capital Improvements Project 2016-12 Animal Shelter HVAC Replacement project account number 324-1612-400-9901 and any other transaction necessary to fund the project. 1 2016-64 DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: ( 2 2016-64 �Oy Ncer YpRK 62 Mission Statement CALIFORN%P Ve Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Communityfor Today and Tomorrow. " CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Public Works and Community Services ITEM NO. 6C2 Submitted By: John McArthur, Director of Public Works & Community Services Prepared By: Maya Labourdette, Management Analyst Agenda Title: Lease Agreement with Community Child Care Council of Sonoma County (4Cs) for Building Space at Gold Ridge Recreation Center RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an amended and restated site lease agreement with the Community Child Care Council of Sonoma County (4Cs) for use of City - owned space at the Gold Ridge Recreation Center site (effective July 1, 2016) and supersede Resolution No. 2013-147. BACKGROUND: The City owns the land of the former Gold Ridge Elementary School Site at 1455 Golf Course Drive. In 2008, the elementary school was closed and the facility was turned back over to the City in early 2013. 4Cs is a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting and providing quality, accessible and affordable preschool and child care services for children, families and child care professionals through education, resources, and direct services. Established in 1972, 4Cs is the County's largest child care resource and referral agency. 4Cs also operates 11 state -funded preschools located throughout Sonoma County, including the 4Cs Gold Ridge State Preschool Program. On October 22, 2013, the City Council approved a lease agreement with 4Cs for the use of the southern -most sub -unit of the portable building, as well as the restroom and the adjacent playground area to operate a part -day, part -year preschool program for up to 48 three and four year old children. Prior to opening the preschool program, 4Cs completed $20,600 in improvements to the leased building, which the City agreed to amortize from the base rent over the five year lease term. The preschool program continues to be in operation providing much needed preschool services to low-income families. 4Cs has since received program expansion funding from the California Department of Education and was recently awarded a grant from First 5 Sonoma County to improve preschool facilities, both of which could be utilized to expand preschool services in Rohnert Park. Staff has thereby been contacted by 4Cs about expanding their program and establishing a new or amended lease for an extended term and additional building space at the Gold Ridge site. 1 ITEM NO. 6C2 ANALYSIS: 4Cs currently operates a part day, part year preschool program serving 48 low-income preschool - aged children at the Gold Ridge Recreation Center. They plan to expand their existing services at Gold Ridge by adding a full day, full year preschool program serving an additional 48 low- income children whose parents are working or are enrolled in full-time educational programs. In order to accommodate their program expansion, 4Cs is proposing to utilize First 5 funding to renovate the two additional available classrooms located in the portable building they currently occupy. The renovation construction should not impact neighbors or groups that use the other rooms at the Gold Ridge site because all work will be contained within one building and the parking lot is large enough to accommodate any work trucks and facility users simultaneously. The neighborhood surrounding the Gold Ridge site has been very welcoming of the 4Cs program, and they have expressed appreciation that the former school property is being used to serve children. The City has appreciated a collaborative relationship with 4Cs and their presence at the site helps provide a reduction in vandalism. A full day, full year program would increase the benefits currently received by the City, the neighborhood, and the families receiving services. Furthermore, the renovation project leverages outside funds for facility improvements to the City -owned property. Existing Lease: The current lease is for the 1,650 square feet for southern -most sub -unit of the portable building at the Gold Ridge Recreation Center. The lease has a five year term and includes an amortization schedule for capital improvements completed by 4Cs, for a base rent of nine - hundred twenty eight dollars ($928) per month. As of June 30, 2016, there is a balance of $9,624 on the amortization schedule. The existing lease would be superseded by the adoption of the amended and restated site lease effective July 1, 2016. Existing Lease Terms: Term: 5 years (set to expire 10/31/2018, with an option to extend an additional 3 years) Building: 1,650 ft' Capital Improvements: $20,600 (balance at 6/30/16 of $9,624) Base Rent: $1,271/month (includes utilities) Base Rent Based On: $0.77/ft2 ($0.65 for facility + $0.12 for utilities) Capital Amortization: $(343/month) Net Rent: $928/month Amended and Restated Lease: In the proposed amended and restated site lease agreement, 4Cs would lease the entire 4,050 square foot portable building (as shown in Attachment 1: Site Map). The amended and restated lease would be a 10 -year term effective 7/1/2016. Base rent for the proposed agreement would be calculated at the same rate of $.77 per square foot. This is based on current market rates of $0.50 to $0.64 per square foot for rental facilities zoned Public Institutional (such as the Gold Ridge site), plus an additional $0.12 per square foot for water, sewer and electrical utilities. 2 ITEM NO. 6C2 The condition of the Gold Ridge facility has greatly deteriorated over the years and the rental space desired by 4Cs is in need of extensive capital improvements that are estimated to cost $231,000. The building improvements will include permitted renovations to add a full kitchen, a bathroom for adults, a bathroom for preschool -aged children, a laundry room, a storage room, new flooring, paint and cosmetic improvements. Renovations will bring facility up to child care licensing standards. 4Cs is proposing to pay for and perform the needed facility work contingent upon an adjustment being made to the base rent that would be commensurate with the value of the pending building improvements. Amended Lease Terms: Term: 10 years (7/1/2016-6/30/2026) Building: 1,650 + 2,400 = 4,050 ft2 Capital Improvements: $231,000 + current balance of $9,624 = $240,624 Base Rent: $3,119/month (includes utilities) Base Rent Based On: $0.77/ft2 ($0.65 for facility + $0.12 for utilities) Capital Amortization: $(2,005/month) Net Rent $1,114/month ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: The Gold Ridge Elementary School was in operation at the Gold Ridge Recreation Center from 1984 to 2008. During this time, the school served approximately 300 students grades K-6. In order to accommodate these students, the school used three large portable buildings; two of these portable buildings have since been removed from the site. 4Cs intends to renovate and utilize the one remaining portable building without adding to its current square footage. 4Cs would serve the existing 48 children in the part -day, part -year preschool program whereby 24 children are served in the morning session and 24 children are served in the afternoon session, and expand the program to include serving an additional 48 children in a full-day, full -year program. Approximately 76 children would be on-site at any given time when both programs are in session; this is considerably less than even a conservative estimate of the number of children served at Gold Ridge Elementary School. The amended and restated lease agreement with 4Cs would be based a project that involves renovation of an existing facility, and the number of students served in the program would not exceed the historical usage of the property. Therefore, the Project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the CEQA pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the CEQA Guidelines. (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15301, 15302). OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1) Adopting a resolution to execute an amended and restated site lease with 4Cs for additional space at the Gold Ridge site would bring more rental revenue to the City, and provide much needed improvements to the facility. The amended and restated site lease would continue the successful collaboration between the City and 4Cs, and expand much needed preschool services to the community. Staff recommends this option. 2) The City could chose not to enter into an amended lease agreement with 4Cs. This option would limit the rental revenue generated at the Gold Ridge site. It would also be a missed 3 ITEM NO. 6C2 opportunity to leverage funds for facility improvements. Finally, it would limit preschool options for low-income, working families living or employed in the Rohnert Park area. Staff does not recommend this option. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The recommended action is in alignment with Strategic Plan GOAL B: Achieve and maintain financial stability and GOAL D: Continue to Develop a Vibrant Community. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: Adoption of a resolution to authorize the City Manager to execute an amended and restated site lease agreement with 4Cs would provide the City with $75,360 to the General Fund over the 10 year lease term (an increase of $54,920 over the current lease term). Additionally, it would leverage $231,000 from 4Cs acquired funding to make facility improvements to the proposed leased site. Finally, the full -year presence of 4Cs at the Gold Ridge site would potentially be a deterrent to vandalism and help mitigate the recurring blight issues and the costs incurred to remedy this blight. Department Head Approval Date: Finance Director Approval Date: City Attorney Approval Date: City Manager Approval Date: Attachments: 6/1/2016 (J. McArthur) 6/6/2016 (B. Howze) 6/6/2016 (A. Barnhill) 6/16/2016 (D. Jenkins) 1) Site Map of Gold Ridge Recreation Center 2) Resolution with attached Exhibit A: Lease Agreement Legend EXHIBIT 6 IF Leased Building .�.•��•J�.. •fir •S' ...� 1' MAP OF PREMISES . . . . . . . . . . . . r� � 5 i � l y, F" w � . i � r• � • ysy •ee - t RESOLUTION NO. 2016-65 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED AND RESTATED SITE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMUNITY CHILD CARE COUNCIL OF SONOMA COUNTY FOR CITY -OWNED SPACE LOCATED AT 1455 GOLF COURSE DRIVE EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2016 AND SUPERSEDE RESOLUTION NO. 2013-147 WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park ("City) owns the property located at 1455 Golf Course Drive, where the Gold Ridge Recreation Center is located; and WHEREAS, the Community Child Care Council of Sonoma County (4Cs), a non-profit organization, began leasing space at the Gold Ridge site in November 2013 to operate a part -day, part -year preschool program serving 48 low-income three and four year olds; and WHEREAS, the City has an existing lease with 4Cs for 1,650 square feet with a net rent of nine -hundred twenty eight dollars ($928); and WHEREAS, 4Cs desires leasing an additional 2,400 square feet to expand its preschool services to include a full-day, full year program to serve an additional 48 low-income preschool age children; and WHEREAS, 4Cs has received funding to provide capital improvements to the building they are requesting to lease; and WHEREAS, the Project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the CEQA pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the CEQA Guidelines. (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15301, 15302); and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that an amended and restated site lease agreement would be beneficial to the City by providing additional revenue, leveraging funds for needed facility improvements, and mitigating blight at the facility; and WHEREAS, the amended and restated site lease agreement will be for a period of ten (10) years with a monthly base rent of three -thousand one hundred nineteen dollars ($3,119), less capital improvement amortization of two -thousand five dollars ($2,005), for a net rent of one - thousand one hundred fourteen dollars ($1,114); and WHEREAS, the amended and restated site lease agreement with 4Cs will supersede the existing lease agreement effective July 1, 2016. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby authorize and approve an amended and restated site lease agreement by and between the Community Child Care Council of Sonoma County (4Cs), a non-profit corporation, and the City of Rohnert Park, a municipal corporation, for the City -owned facility located at 1455 Golf Course Drive in substantially similar form as provided for in "Exhibit A," attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, subject to minor modifications as approved by the City Attorney. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute all documents pertaining to the Lease Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park and to take all action necessary or reasonably required to carry out, give effect to, and/or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Resolution. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) (2) 2016-65 "Exhibit A" Amended and Restated Site Lease Agreement with Community Child Care Council of Sonoma County (3) 2016-65 AMENDED AND RESTATED SITE LEASE AGREEMENT This Amended and Restated Site Lease Agreement (this "Lease") is made and entered into as of this 1St day of July 2016 (the "Agreement Date"), by and between the City of Rohnert Park, a municipal corporation ("Landlord" or "City") and the Community Child Care Council of Sonoma County (4Cs), a non-profit corporation ("Tenant"). Landlord and Tenant are hereafter collectively referred to as the "Parties." RECITALS A. Landlord owns real property located at 1455 Golf Course Drive, Rohnert Park, California (the "Property"), as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. B. The Property includes certain rentable space (the "Premises"), as depicted in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. C. Landlord and Tenant previously entered into that certain Site Lease Agreement dated of November 8, 2013, whereby Tenant agreed to lease a portion of the Premises ("Original Lease"). D. Landlord and Tenant now desire to amend and restate the Original Lease to incorporate the lease of two additional classrooms, or an additional 2,400 square feet, with such new leased area depicted on Exhibit B as the Premises, conditioned upon the terms herein. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Agency and the Tenant hereby agree as follows: ARTICLE I. BASIC LEASE PROVISIONS 1.1. Landlord's contact information: City of Rohnert Park City Manager 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 1.2. Tenant's contact information: Page 1 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 Community Child Care Council of Sonoma County Melanie Dodson, Executive Director 131-A Stony Circle, Suite 300 Santa Rosa, Ca 95401 1.3. Rented Area - The Premises, commonly described as Gold Ridge Recreation Center, depicted in Exhibit B. 1.4. Term — Ten (10) years from Agreement Date, unless earlier terminated in accordance with this Lease. 1.5. Expiration Date - The last day of the month in which the term ends. 1.6. Termination of Lease Agreement - This Agreement and all obligations hereunder may be terminated at any time, with or without cause, by either party upon sixty (60) days' written notice. The Parties agree that the property will be intended for use as a licensed adult day program and subject to regulations enforced by the Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing. At any time, should Tenant show evidence to City that the facility cannot meet the requirements for a licensed day program, Tenant may terminate the agreement with sixty (60) days' notice. The cost of any improvements made as part of this Agreement shall remain the responsibility of the Tenant. 1.7. Option(s) to Extend Term - The Parties may jointly agree to extend the Term for a maximum of three additional years, pursuant to the terms herein. The party seeking to extend the Term must give the other party written notice of its intent to extend the Term not less than ninety (90) days prior to the Expiration Date. 1.8. Base Rent - $3,119.00/month. Tenant shall submit recurring monthly rental payments to Landlord as outlined in Section 4.1. Tenant's net base rent is calculated at $.77/sq. ft. less $2,005.00/month for $240,624 in Tenant Improvements for a total Net Base Rent payment of $1,114.00/month for the 10 -year term of the agreement. Tenant's base rent shall include services for water, sewer, and electrical usage. 1.9. Security Deposit - Equal to one month's rent (pre -paid). Cleaning/Repair Deposit: $500.00. 1.10. Permitted Areas of Use -Building area described is the entire portable building located in the north-west corner of the property (see Exhibit B: Map of Premises); also includes restroom and use of the outside playground area. ARTICLE II. DEFINITIONS As used in this Lease, the following terms shall have the definitions set forth below. Additional terms are defined in the remainder of this Lease. Page 2 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 2.1. Alterations — means any decorations, modifications, additions, or improvements made in, on, about, under or contiguous to the Premises by or for the benefit of Tenant including but not limited to, telecommunications and/or data cabling, lighting, HVAC, and electrical fixtures, pipes and conduits, partitions, cabinetwork, and carpeting. 2.2. Additional Rent — an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of overdue amount of Rent as described in Section 4.13. 2.3. Applicable Laws — is defined in Section 5.4 2.4. Building — the buildings, accessory structures and other improvements located at 1455 Golf Course Drive, Rohnert Park, Ca 94928. 2.5. Environmental Laws — defined in Section 6.5 2.6. Event of Default — failure of tenant to pay Rent as subscribed in Section 4.14 2.7. Hazardous Material is defined in Section 6.5. 2.8. Premises - the rented premises shown on Exhibit B. 2.9. Property - real property located at 1455 Golf Course Drive, Rohnert Park, Ca 94928. 2.10. Rent —the monthly amount payable per Section 1.9. 2.11. "Rules and Regulations" - the Rules and Regulations set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto as such may be modified or amended from time to time by Landlord. 2.12. Term - the term of this Lease as set forth in Section 1.4 as such may be modified pursuant to the terms hereof. 2.13 Tenant Improvements — Those capital improvements to the Premises shown in Exhibit E hereto. ARTICLE III. PREMISES AND TERM 3.1. Leased Premises - Subject to and upon the terms and conditions set forth herein, Landlord hereby leases the Premises to Tenant and Tenant hereby leases the Premises from Landlord. Tenant acknowledges that Landlord has made no representation or warranty regarding the condition of the Premises, the Building or the Property and the Premises are being leased AS- IS with all faults. The Parties agree that, based upon their own inspection and estimates, the total estimated square footage of the Premises is 4,050 square feet, notwithstanding any minor Page 3 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 variations in measurement or other minor variations that may have occurred in the calculation thereof. 3.2. Tenant Improvements. Tenant intends to improve the Premises by constructing the Tenant Improvements. The Parties agree that the Tenant Improvements shall be constructed as provided for in this Lease, including Sections 14.4 and 14.5 below. The Parties estimate the value of the Tenant Improvements as $231,000, with a balance of $9,624 from the Original Lease, and that in consideration thereof the Rent payable under this Lease shall be adjusted as more particularly provided for in Section 1.8. The Parties further agree that: (a) the actual costs to complete the Tenant Improvements may significantly exceed the estimate and/or value added to the Premises; (b) the estimate in no way limits Tenant's financial obligation or entitles Tenant to any other adjustment in the Rent; and (c) that Tenant is solely responsible for the costs, expenses and liability of the Tenant Improvements including applicable permitting, planning, and inspection fees. 3.3. Term - The Term shall be for the period set forth in Section 1.4 as the same may be extended in accordance with the terms herein. 3.4. No Representation - Tenant acknowledges that neither Landlord nor any of Landlord's agents has made any representation or warranty as to the suitability or fitness of the Premises for the conduct of Tenant's business, and that neither Landlord nor any agent of Landlord has agreed to undertake any alterations or additions or to construct any tenant improvements to the Premises except as expressly provided in this Lease. ARTICLE IV. RENT, OPERATING EXPENSES, AND DEPOSITS 4.1. Monthly - Tenant shall pay to Landlord for each calendar month of the Term, the monthly Rent set forth in Section 1.9. Each monthly installment of Rent shall be due and payable to Landlord in advance on the first (1st) day of each calendar month during the Term without abatement, deduction, claim or offset except as otherwise expressly provided herein, and without prior notice, invoice or demand, at Landlord's address or such other place as Landlord may designate from time to time. 4.2. Proration - Monthly installments for any fractional calendar month at the beginning or end of the Term shall be prorated based on the number of days in such month. 4.3. Additional Rent — All Additional Rent shall be due and payable upon date of incurrence. 4.4. Late Charge - Tenant acknowledges that the late payment of Rent will cause Landlord to incur administrative costs and other damages, the exact amount of which would be impractical or extremely difficult to ascertain. Landlord and Tenant agree that if Landlord does not receive any payment of Rent within ten (10) calendar days after such payment is due; Tenant shall pay to Landlord as Additional Rent an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the overdue amount as a late charge for each month or partial month that such amount remains unpaid. The Parties acknowledge that this late charge represents a fair and reasonable estimate of the costs that Page 4 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 Landlord will incur by reason of the late payment by Tenant. Landlord's acceptance of any late payment and/or late charge therefore shall not be deemed to prevent Landlord from exercising any of the other rights and remedies available to Landlord for any other Event of Default under this Lease. ARTICLE V. USE OF PREMISES 5.1. Permitted Use - The Premises shall be used solely for the purpose as specifically zoned in the City's Zoning Ordinance and for no other purpose without the written consent of Landlord, which may be granted or withheld in Landlord's sole discretion. Tenant shall not do or suffer or permit anything to be done in or about the Premises or the Property, nor bring or keep anything therein that would in any way subject Landlord to any liability, increase the premium rate of or affect any fire, casualty, rent, or other insurance relating to the Property or any of the contents of the Building, or cause a cancellation of or give rise to any defense by the insurer to any claim under, or conflict with any policies for such insurance. If any act or omission of Tenant results in an increase in insurance premiums for Landlord, Tenant shall pay to Landlord upon demand the amount of such increase. 5.2. Signage - Tenant shall obtain the prior approval of the Landlord, which approval may be withheld in Landlord's reasonable discretion, before placing any sign or symbol on doors or windows or elsewhere in or about the Premises so as to be visible from the public areas or exterior of the Building, or upon any other part of the Building or Property, including building directories. Any signs or symbols which have been placed without Landlord's approval may be removed by Landlord. Upon expiration or termination of this Lease, all signs installed by Tenant shall be removed and any damage resulting there from shall be promptly repaired by Tenant, or such removal and repair at Landlord's sole discretion may be done by Landlord and the cost charged to Tenant. 5.3. Rules and Regulations - Tenant shall comply with the Rules and Regulations attached hereto as Exhibit C and any amendments or additions thereto promulgated by Landlord from time to time for the safety, care and cleanliness of the Premises, Building and Property. Tenant shall not use or permit any person to use the Property, the Building, or the Premises for any purpose that is contrary to the Rules and Regulations, that violates any Applicable Law, that constitutes waste or nuisance, or that would unreasonably annoy or interfere with other occupants or the Building or the Property. Landlord shall not be responsible to Tenant for the nonperformance or noncompliance by any other tenant or occupant of the Building of or with any of the Rules and Regulations. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this Lease and the provisions of the Rules and Regulations, the provisions of this Lease shall control. 5.4. Compliance with Laws - Tenant shall procure and maintain all governmental approvals, licenses and permits required for the proper and lawful conduct or Tenant's permitted use of the Premises, including without limitation, compliance with all federal, State and local regulatory agencies requirements. Tenant shall comply with and shall not use the Premises, the Building or the Property, or suffer or permit anything to be done in or about the same which would in any Page 5 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 way conflict with any of the following (collectively "Applicable Laws"): (i) the provisions of all recorded covenants, conditions and restrictions applicable to the Building or the Property, or (ii) any federal, state, county, local or other governmental agency rules, regulations, statutes, ordinances, orders, standards, requirements or laws now in force or hereafter enacted, promulgated or issued which are applicable to the Building Services, Property, Premises, the Building, or the use or occupancy thereof including without limitation, programming content and distribution, instructional standards, building, zoning, and public safety and fire code regulations. 5.5. Repairs and Replacements - Tenant shall repair and maintain the Premises, in an order and condition in compliance with Applicable Laws and Tenant shall, at Tenant's sole expense, promptly make all repairs, replacements, alterations, or improvements necessary to comply with all Applicable Laws to the extent that such Applicable Laws are triggered by or relate to (i) Tenant's particular use of the Promises, and/or (ii) any improvements or alterations made by or on behalf of Tenant to the Premises or the Building. If Tenant fails to maintain or keep the Premises in good repair, Landlord may, at Landlord's option and after providing Tenant no less than thirty (30) days' prior written notice, perform any such required maintenance and repairs and within ten days after receipt of Landlord's invoice thereof, Tenant shall pay Landlord's costs incurred in connection with such repairs, plus a percentage of such costs sufficient to reimburse Landlord for all overhead, general conditions, fees and other costs and expenses in connection therewith. Except to the extent Tenant is expressly obligated to do so pursuant to this Lease, Landlord shall, at Landlord's sole expense, make all repairs, replacements, alterations, or improvements necessary to comply with all Applicable Laws as in effect as of the Effective Date to the extent that (i) such Applicable Laws relate to the exterior or structural portion of the Building, and (ii) the requirement to undertake such repairs, replacements, alterations, or improvements is not triggered as a result of Tenant's particular use of the Premises. 5.6. Parking - Landlord hereby grants to Tenant a nonexclusive license and right, in common with Landlord and all persons conducting business in the Building and their respective customers, guests, licensees, invitees, employees and agents, to use the parking area located on the Property for vehicular parking, on a "first-come, first-served" basis. The nonexclusive license and right granted pursuant to this Section shall be subject to the Rules and Regulations. ARTICLE VI. ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS 6.1. Use of Hazardous Materials - Tenant shall not cause or permit any Hazardous Material, as defined in Section 6.5, below to be generated, brought onto, used, stored, or disposed of in or about the Premises, the Building or the Property by Tenant or Tenant's agents, employees, contractors, subtenants or invitees (collectively "Tenant Parties"), except for limited quantities of standard office and janitorial supplies, which Tenant shall use, store and dispose of in strict compliance with all Environmental Laws, as defined in Section 6.5 below. Tenant shall comply with all Environmental Laws. 6.2. Notice of Release or Investigation — If, during the Term (including any extensions), Tenant becomes aware of (a) any actual or threatened release of any Hazardous Material on, Page 6 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 under, or about the Premises, the Building or the Property, or (b) any inquiry, investigation, proceeding, or claim by any government agency or other person regarding the presence of Hazardous Material on, under, or about the Premises, the Building, or the Property, Tenant shall give Landlord written notice of the release or investigation within three (3) days after learning of it and shall simultaneously furnish to Landlord copies of any claims, notices of violation, reports, or other writings received by Tenant that concern the release or investigation. 6.3. Indemnification - Tenant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to Landlord), indemnify and hold harmless Landlord and Landlord's elected and appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, and representatives (collectively, "Indemnitees") from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, fines, penalties, claims, demands, suits, actions, causes of action, legal or administrative proceedings, judgments, costs and expenses (including without limitation reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses, court costs, expert witness fees and post judgment collection costs) (collectively, "Claims") resulting or arising from or in connection with any release of any Hazardous Material in or about the Premises, the Building, or the Property (unless such release is caused by Indemnitees) or any other violation of any Environmental Law by Tenant, or Tenant Parties. This indemnification includes: (i) losses attributable to diminution in value of Premises or the Building; (ii) loss or restriction of use of rentable space in the Building; (iii) adverse effect on the marketing of any space in the Building; and (iv) all other liabilities, obligations, penalties, fines, claims, actions (including remedial or enforcement actions, administrative or judicial proceedings, orders, or judgments), damages (including consequential and punitive damages), and costs (including attorney, consultant, and expert fees and expenses) resulting from the release or violation. This indemnity shall not extend to Claims to the extent they are caused by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of Indemnitees. The provisions of this Section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Lease. 6.4. Remediation Obligations - If the presence of any Hazardous Material brought onto the Premises or the Building by Tenant or Tenant Parties results in contamination of the Building, Tenant shall promptly take all necessary actions to remove or remediate such Hazardous Materials, whether or not they are present at concentrations exceeding state or federal maximum concentration or action levels, or any governmental agency has issued a cleanup order, at Tenant's sole expense, to return the Premises and the Building to the condition that existed before the introduction or such Hazardous Material. Tenant shall first obtain Landlord's approval of the proposed removal or remedial action. This provision does not limit the indemnification obligation set forth in Section 6.3. 6.5. Definition of Hazardous Material and Environmental Laws - As used in this Lease, the term "Hazardous Material" means any hazardous or toxic substance, material, or waste at any concentration that is or becomes regulated by the United States, the State of California, or any government authority having jurisdiction over the Building Hazardous Material includes: (a) any "hazardous substance," as defined in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S. Code §§ 9601-9675); (b) "hazardous waste," as defined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (42 U.S. Code §§ 6901- 6992k); (c) any pollutant, contaminant, or hazardous, dangerous, or toxic chemical, material, or substance, within the meaning of any other applicable federal, state, or local law, regulation, ordinance, or requirement (including consent decrees and administrative orders imposing Page 7 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 liability or standards of conduct concerning any hazardous, dangerous, or toxic waste, substance, or material, now or hereafter in effect); (d) petroleum products; (e) radioactive material, including any source, special nuclear, or byproduct material as defined in 42 U.S. Code § § 2011- 2297g-4; (f) asbestos in any form or condition; and (g) polychlorinated biphenyls ("PCBs") and substances or compounds containing PCBs. As used in this Lease, the term "Environmental Laws" means all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, rules, orders and directives pertaining to Hazardous Materials, including without limitation, the laws, statutes, and regulations cited in this Section 6.5, as any of the foregoing may be amended from time to time. ARTICLE VII. OBLIGATIONS FOR UTILITIES AND SERVICES 7.1. Building Services - Landlord shall supply Utility Services and Maintenance Services described below in accordance with this Article VII. Utility Services and the Maintenance Services are collectively referred to as "Building Services." Except as otherwise provided herein, the cost of all Building Services shall be paid by Tenant as Additional Rent in the manner set forth in Section 4.3. 7.1.1 Utility Services -Landlord shall furnish the utility services listed in this Section ("Utility Services") except to the extent that Tenant has separately contracted for the provision of such services. On a schedule to be selected by Tenant ("'Scheduled Utility Hours") Landlord shall supply: (i) electricity for lighting and power suitable for use of the Premises for ordinary general office purposes; (ii) air conditioning and heating as required in Landlord's reasonable judgment for the comfortable use and occupancy of the Premises for ordinary general office purposes; (iii) water for drinking and lavatory purposes; and (iv) regular sewer service. If Landlord determines Tenant's electrical usage is excessive, Landlord may at its option require Tenant to pay as Additional Rent the cost as reasonably determined by Landlord incurred by such extraordinary usage. In addition, Landlord may install separate meter(s) for the Premises for water and electrical services, at Landlord's expense, and Tenant thereafter shall pay all charges for the metered service based on actual usage. If Landlord elects to install a separate meter for water and/or electrical service to the Premises, then following the installation of such meter(s), an average monthly usage will be determined, using three months metered usage. If the three-- month metered usage shows that Tenant paid more in monthly charges prior to the installation of meters than Tenant would have paid had a meter(s) been installed, then Landlord will give Tenant a "utility credit" for the amount of any excess payment, which shall be applied against future utility charges. If the three-month metered usage shows that Tenant has paid less in monthly charges prior to the installation of meters than Tenant would have paid had a meter(s) been installed, then Tenant shall pay any additional amount that is owed based on such underpayment. If such Building Services (including without limitation HVAC service) are requested by Tenant during times other than the Scheduled Utility Hours, Landlord shall use reasonable efforts to furnish such additional Building Services upon reasonable notice from Tenant, and Tenant shall pay Landlord's charges for such Services on demand as Additional Rent. Such charges shall be based on Landlord's actual costs together with such reasonable administration charges as Landlord may impose in connection therewith, with after-hours HVAC services being charged on a per -hour basis at the hourly rate established by Landlord from time to time for the Building (which hourly rate may be based on the cost of utilities, wear and tear on Page 8 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 the HVAC systems and Landlord's administration), Tenant shall cooperate with any present or future government conservation requirements and with any reasonable conservation practices established by Landlord. 7.1.2 Maintenance Services - Landlord shall provide maintenance of all exterior areas of the Building and the Property, (collectively, "Maintenance Services") including without limitation: (i) painting, maintenance and repair of the Building exterior, (ii) maintenance and repair of the Building infrastructure's mechanical, electrical, HVAC and plumbing equipment and systems, and the Building structural components including the roof, foundation, floors and walls, and (iii) maintenance of all public and common areas of the Building and the Property including parking lots, walkways, driveways, utility systems, fire sprinklers, and corridors. Tenant shall be responsible for janitorial service to the Premises and window cleaning. 7.2. Interruption of Services - Tenant agrees that Landlord shall not be liable for damages, by abatement of Rent or otherwise, for failure to furnish or delay in furnishing any Building Service or for diminution in the quality or quantity of any service when the failure, delay, or diminution is entirely or partially caused by: (a) breakage, repairs, replacements, or improvements; (b) strike, lockout, or other labor trouble; (c) inability to secure electricity, gas, water, or other fuel at the Building after reasonable effort to do so; (d) accident or casualty; (e) act or default of Tenant or other parties; or (f) any other cause beyond Landlord's reasonable control. Such failure, delay, or diminution shall not be considered to constitute an eviction or a disturbance of Tenant's use and possession of the Premises or relieve Tenant from paying Rent or performing any of its obligations under this Lease. Landlord may comply with mandatory or voluntary controls or guidelines promulgated by any government entity relating to the use or conservation of energy, water, gas, light, or electricity without creating any liability of Landlord to Tenant under this Lease as long as compliance with voluntary controls or guidelines does not materially and unreasonably interfere with Tenant's use of the Premises. 7.3. Compliance with Applicable Laws - Landlord and Tenant shall each comply with (and shall cause their respective employees, agents and contractors to comply with) all Applicable Laws, including without limitation all Environmental Laws, whenever either parry undertakes any work of construction, alteration or improvement in the Premises or the Building. 7.4. Statutory Notice Possessory Interest Tax - Tenant is advised that under California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 107.6, execution of this Agreement may create a possessory interest in Tenant subject to property taxation. Tenant hereby agrees that if such possessory interest is created and is subject to property taxation, Tenant shall be solely responsible for the payment of said property taxes levied on any such interest. ARTICLE VIII. ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS 8.1. Alterations and Improvements — Except for the Tenant Improvements, Tenant may not make any Alterations to the Premises or Building without the prior written approval of Landlord. Any Landlord -approved Alterations shall be done at Tenant's expense, in a good and Page 9 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 workmanlike manner, in conformity with plans and specifications reviewed and approved by Landlord, and in compliance with all Applicable Laws. Tenant shall obtain all necessary governmental approvals and permits for such Alterations. Tenant shall give Landlord not less than ten (10) business days' notice prior to the commencement of construction so that Landlord may post a notice of non -responsibility on the Premises. In no event shall any Alteration: (i) affect the exterior of the Building, (ii) affect any structural portion of the Building, including without limitation, the roof, (iii) require any change to the basic floor plan of the Premises or any change to the structural or mechanical components of the Premises, (iv) diminish the value of the Premises, (v) result in an increase in demand for Building Services, (vi) cause an increase in the premiums for hazard or liability insurance carried by Landlord, or (vii) overload the floor load capacity or unduly burden the plumbing, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, electrical or other basic systems that serve the Building. 8.2. Liens - Tenant shall not permit any mechanics', suppliers' lien or other liens, to be filed against the Building or the Property or against Tenant's leasehold interest in the Premises. Landlord has the right at all times to post and keep posted on the Premises any notice that it considers necessary for protection from such liens. If Tenant fails to cause the release of record of any lien(s) filed against the Premises or Tenant's leasehold estate therein, by payment or posting of a proper bond within ten (10) days from the date of the lien filing(s), then Landlord may, at Tenant's expense, cause such lien(s) to be released by any means Landlord deems proper, including but not limited to payment of or defense against the claim giving rise to the lien(s). All sums reasonably disbursed, deposited or incurred by Landlord in connection with the release of the lien(s), including but not limited to all costs, expenses and attorney's fees, shall be due and payable by Tenant to Landlord as Additional Rent on demand by Landlord. ARTICLE IX. INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY 9.1. Indemnity - To the fullest extent permitted by law, Tenant shall defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to Landlord), indemnify and hold Indemnitees harmless from and against any and all Claims arising out of or relating directly or indirectly to this Lease or the Premises (including without limitation, Claims for or relating to loss of or damage to property, injury or death of any person, and economic losses and consequential or resulting damage of any kind), including any Claim arising from or in connection with or in any way attributable to: (i) the use or occupancy, or manner of use or occupancy of the Premises, the Building or the Property by Tenant or the Tenant Parties, (ii) any act, error, omission or negligence of Tenant or Tenant Parties or any invitee, guest or licensee of Tenant in, on or about the Property including without limitation Claims which directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, are caused by, arise in connection with, result from, relate to, or are alleged to be caused by, arise in connection with, or relate to, any act or omission of Tenant or Tenant Parties, (iii) any activity, work, or thing done, omitted, permitted, allowed or suffered by Tenant or Tenant Parties in, at, or about the Premises, Page 10 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 the Building or the Property, and/or (iv) any breach or default in performance of any obligation on Tenant's part in the performance of any covenant or agreement to be performed under this Lease, except to the extent caused by the sole gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees. The provisions of this Section shall not be construed or interpreted as restricting, limiting or modifying Tenant's insurance obligations under this Lease and are independent of such obligations. Tenant's compliance with insurance requirements set forth in this Lease shall not restrict, limit or modify Tenant's indemnification obligations hereunder. The provisions of this Section shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Lease. 9.2. Tenant's Insurance - Tenant shall, at its sole expense, procure and maintain throughout the Term (plus any later periods where Tenant may be in occupancy of the Premises) all of the insurance coverage, of the type and amounts as described in Exhibit D, attached. ARTICLE X. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING 10.1. Landlord's Consent Required - Tenant shall not directly or indirectly, voluntarily or involuntarily, by operation of law or otherwise, assign, mortgage, pledge, encumber or otherwise transfer this Lease, or permit all or any part of the Premises to be subleased or used or occupied for any purpose by anyone other than Tenant without the prior written consent of Landlord, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any assignment or sublease without Landlord's prior written consent shall, at Landlord's option, be void and shall constitute an Event of Default entitling Landlord to terminate this Lease and to exercise all other remedies available to Landlord under this Lease and at law. 10.2. No Release of Obligations - The consent by Landlord to an assignment or subletting hereunder shall not relieve Tenant or any assignee or subtenant from the requirement of obtaining Landlord's express prior written consent to any other or further assignment or subletting. No subtenant may assign its sublease, or further sublet its subleased premises, without Landlord's prior written consent, which consent may be withheld in Landlord's sole discretion. Neither an assignment or subletting nor the collection of rent by Landlord from any person other than Tenant shall be deemed a waiver of any of the provisions of this Article or release Tenant from its obligations to comply with this Lease, and Tenant shall remain fully and primarily liable for all of Tenant's obligations under this Lease. ARTICLE XI. DAMAGE AND DESTRUCTION 11.1. Repair and Restoration; Termination Rights - If all or part of the Premises is damaged by fire or other casualty, or if the Building is so damaged that access to or use and occupancy of the Premises is materially impaired, within forty-five (45) days of the date of the damage, Landlord shall notify Tenant of the estimated time, in Landlord's reasonable judgment, required for repair or restoration ("Repair Period"). If the estimated Repair Period is one hundred eighty (180) days Page 11 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 or less, Landlord shall proceed promptly and diligently to repair or restore the Premises or the portion of the Building necessary for Tenant's occupancy, and this Lease shall remain in effect, except that for the time unusable, Tenant shall receive a Rent abatement for that part of the Premises rendered unusable in the conduct of Tenant's business. If the estimated Repair Period is in excess of one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of the casualty, Landlord, at its option, shall either (a) commence to repair the damage, in which case this Lease shall continue in full force and effect, or (b) terminate this Lease as of the date specified by Landlord in a notice of termination, and this Lease shall terminate on the date specified in the notice. 11.2. Damage Near End of Term - Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in this Article, if the Premises or the Building are damaged during the last twelve (12) months of the Term, Landlord and Tenant shall each have the option to terminate this Lease by giving written notice to the other of the exercise of that option within thirty (30) days after the damage or destruction, and this Lease shall terminate as of the date specified in such notice which shall not be before the date of such notice nor more than 30 days after the date of such notice. 11.3. Rent Apportionment - If Landlord or Tenant elects to terminate this Lease under this Article XI, Tenant shall pay Rent, prorated on a per diem basis and paid up to the date of the casualty. If the Premises are wholly untenantable and this Lease is not terminated, Rent shall abate on a per diem basis from the date of the casualty until Premises are ready for occupancy by Tenant or the default is cured. If part of the Premises are untenantable, Rent shall be prorated on a per diem basis and abated in proportion to the portion of the Premises which is unusable until the damaged part is ready for Tenant's occupancy. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any damage was caused by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of Tenant, its employees or agents, then, in such event, Tenant acknowledges that Rent shall not abate or be diminished. 11.4. Waiver of Statutory Provisions - The provisions of this Lease, including those in this Article XI, constitute an express agreement between Landlord and Tenant that applies in the event of any damage to the Premises, Building, or Property. Tenant, therefore, fully waives the provisions of any statute or regulation, including California Civil Code sections 1932(2) and 1933(4), relating to any rights or obligations concerning any such casualty. ARTICLE XII. SURRENDER OF PREMISES; HOLDING OVER 12.1. Surrender of Premises - On expiration of this Lease, Tenant shall surrender the Premises in the same condition as when the Term commenced, ordinary wear and tear excepted. Except for furniture, equipment and trade fixtures (other than those which are affixed to the Premises so that they cannot be removed without material damage to the Premises) all alterations, additions or improvements, whether temporary or permanent in character, made in or upon the Premises, either by Landlord or Tenant, shall be Landlord's property and at the expiration or earlier termination of this Lease shall remain on the Premises without compensation to Tenant; provided that, upon reasonable written request of Landlord, Tenant shall, at its expense and without delay, remove any alterations, additions or improvements (including, without limitation, all telecommunications equipment and cabling, and all alterations and improvements made by Page 12 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 Tenant) made to the Premises by Tenant and designated by Landlord to be removed, and shall repair any damage to the Premises or the Building caused by such removal. If Tenant fails to complete such removal or to repair the Premises, Landlord may complete such removal and repair, and Tenant shall reimburse Landlord therefore. If Tenant fails to remove such property as required under this Lease, Landlord may dispose of such property in its sole discretion without any liability to Tenant, and further may charge the cost of any such disposition to Tenant. 12.2. Hold Over Tenancy - If Tenant remains in possession of the Premises after the expiration or earlier termination of this Lease with Landlord's written consent, Tenant shall be deemed, at Landlord's option, to occupy the Premises as a tenant from month-to-month. During such tenancy (and prior to any termination by Landlord), Tenant agrees to pay Landlord, monthly in advance, an amount equal to the greater of (i) the then fair market rental (as reasonably determined by Landlord) for the Premises, or (ii) one hundred thirty percent (130%) of all Rent and Additional Rent which would become due the last month of the Term, together with all other amounts payable by Tenant to Landlord under this Lease. Except as provided in the preceding sentence, such month-to-month tenancy shall be on the same terms and conditions of this Lease except that any rights or options pertaining to additional space in the Building contained in this Lease shall be deemed to be terminated and shall be inapplicable thereto. Landlord's acceptance of Rent after such holding over with Landlord's written consent shall not result in any other tenancy or in a renewal of the initial term of this Lease. If Tenant remains in possession of the Premises after the expiration or earlier termination of this Lease without Landlord's written consent, Tenant's continued possession shall be on the basis of a tenancy at sufferance and Tenant shall pay Rent during the holdover period in an amount equal to the greater of: (i) one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the then fair market rental (as reasonably determined by Landlord) for the Premises, or; (ii) two hundred percent (200%) of all Base Rent which would become due the last month of the Term, together with all other amounts payable by Tenant to Landlord. ARTICLE XIII. LANDLORD'S RESERVED RIGHTS 13.1. Rights Reserved to Landlord - Without notice and without liability to Tenant, and without effecting an eviction or disturbance of Tenant's use or possession, Landlord shall have the right to: (i) make changes in the legal status of the Building or the Property as Landlord shall deem appropriate in its sole discretion, provided such changes do not substantially interfere with Tenant's use of the Premises for the Permitted Use; (ii) enter the Premises at reasonable times and with reasonable advance notice (and at any time in the event of an emergency), to inspect or repair the Premises or the Building and to perform any acts related to the safety, protection, reletting, or improvement of the Premises or the Building; (iii) install and maintain signs on and in the Building and the Property; and (iv) make such rules and regulations as, in the reasonable judgment of Landlord, may be needed from time to time for the safety of the tenants, the care and cleanliness of the Premises, the Building and the Property and the preservation of good order therein. Landlord shall at all times retain a key with which to unlock all of the doors in the Premises, except Tenant's vaults and sales. Tenant shall pay Landlord the cost of re -keying the room upon occupancy of the room. If any emergency necessitates immediate access to the Premises, Landlord may use whatever force is necessary to enter the Premises and any such entry Page 13 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 to the Premises shall not constitute a forcible or unlawful entry into the Premises, a detainer of the Premises or an eviction of Tenant from the Premises or any portion thereof. ARTICLE XIV. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES 14.1. Tenant's Default - It shall be an "Event of Default" hereunder if Tenant: (a) fails to pay when due any monthly installment of Rent, including without limitation, any Additional Rent, or fails to pay any other amount owed by Tenant to Landlord under this Lease as and when due and such failure continues for five (5) days following written notice thereof to Tenant by Landlord; (b) fails to provide any certificate, instrument or assurance as required by this Lease if the failure continues for ten (10) days after written notice of the failure to Tenant; (c) makes a general assignment for the benefit of its creditors or files a petition for bankruptcy or other reorganization, liquidation, dissolution or similar relief or have a proceeding filed against Tenant seeking any relief mentioned in this subsection (c) which is not discharged within sixty (60) days thereafter; (d) has a trustee, receiver or liquidator appointed for Tenant; (e) abandons or vacate the Premises for more than three (3) consecutive months; (f) assigns this Lease or subleases any portion of the Premises; or (g) fails to comply with any other provision of this Lease in the manner required hereunder and such failure continues for thirty (30) days after written notice thereof to Tenant by Landlord (or if the noncompliance cannot by its nature be cured within the 30 -day period, if Tenant fails to commence to cure such noncompliance within the 30 -day period and thereafter diligently prosecute such cure to completion). 14.2. Remedies on Default - Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, Landlord shall have the right to pursue any one or more of the following remedies in addition to any other remedies now or later available to Landlord at law or in equity. These remedies are not exclusive but instead are cumulative. (a) Continue Lease - Landlord may continue this Lease in full force and effect. In such case, so long as Landlord does not terminate Tenant's right to possession, this Lease will continue in effect and Landlord shall have the right to collect Rent when due, and may undertake efforts to relet the Premises, or any part of them, to third parties for Tenant's account. Tenant shall be liable to Landlord for all reasonable costs Landlord incurs in reletting the Premises including without limitation, expenses of remodeling the Premises required by the reletting. Reletting can be for a period shorter or longer than the remaining term of this Lease. Tenant shall pay to Landlord the Rent due under this Lease on the date the Rent is due, less the Rent Landlord receives from any reletting. No act by Landlord allowed by this Section shall terminate this Page 14 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 Lease unless Landlord terminates Tenant's right to possession. After an Event of Default and for as long as Landlord does not terminate Tenant's right to possession of the Premises, if Tenant obtains Landlord's consent, Tenant shall have the right to assign or sublet its interest in this Lease, but Tenant shall not be released from liability. (b) Terminate Lease - Landlord may terminate this Lease and Tenant's right to possession of the Premises at any time following an Event of Default. No act by Landlord other than giving written notice to Tenant shall terminate this Lease. Acts of maintenance, efforts to relet the Premises or the appointment of a receiver to protect Landlord's interest under this Lease shall not constitute a termination of Tenant's right to possession. On termination, Landlord shall have the right to recover from Tenant all of the following: (i) The worth, at the time of the award, of any unpaid Rent that had been earned at the lime of termination of this Lease; (ii) The worth, at the time of the award, of the amount of unpaid Rent that would have been earned after the date of termination of this Lease until the time of the award exceeds the amount of the unpaid Rent that Tenant proves could have been reasonably avoided; (iii) Any other amount necessary to compensate Landlord for all detriment proximately caused by Tenant's failure to perform obligations under this Lease, including, without limitation, brokerage commissions, advertising expenses, expenses of remodeling the Premises for a new tenant, and any special concessions made to obtain a new tenant; and (iv) Any other amounts, in addition to or in lieu of those listed above that may be permitted by law. (c) Receiver - Landlord shall have the right to have a receiver appointed to collect Rent. Neither the filing of a petition for the appointment of a receiver nor the appointment itself shall constitute an election by Landlord to terminate this Lease. 14.3. Landlord's Default - Landlord's failure to perform any of its obligations under this Lease shall constitute a Landlord Event of Default hereunder if the failure continues for thirty (30) days after written notice of the failure from Tenant to Landlord. If the required performance cannot be completed within thirty (30) days, Landlord's failure to perform shall not constitute a Landlord Event of Default if Landlord undertakes to cure the failure within such thirty -(30) day period and diligently and continuously attempts to complete the cure as soon as reasonably possible. Tenant waives any right to terminate this Lease and to vacate the Premises upon Landlord's default under this Lease. Tenant's sole remedy on Landlord's default is an action for damages or injunctive or declaratory relief. 14.4. Tenant Improvements - The Tenant shall be solely responsible for the completion of the improvements described in this Lease. The Tenant shall assume responsibility for all phases of improvements commencing on the Agreement Date and concluding on the final acceptance date of the improvement. The Tenant shall bear responsibility for said improvements up to final acceptance by the City, including: all losses and damages directly or indirectly resulting from the performance of the improvements; unforeseen difficulties, accidents, or occurrences of other Page 15 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 causes predicated on active or passive negligence of the Tenant's contractor engaged in performance of the improvements; losses due to fire, flooding, vandalism, or other catastrophic events. 14.5. Improvement Completion and Final Inspection - The City, and/or the City's authorized representatives, will perform an inspection to verify that the improvements are satisfactorily complete and will notify the Tenant in writing of any incomplete or deficient work. The Tenant will take immediate steps to remedy the stated deficiencies and give notice of correction to the City. Upon receiving a notice of correction, the City or the City's authorized representatives, will re -inspect the Improvements. The Tenant must correct all noted deficient items within a reasonable period of time. Once all noted deficiencies are corrected, the City will accept the Improvements with a Notice of Acceptance. Upon issuance of the Notice of Acceptance, the City shall incorporate all accepted improvements into the building and property and shall maintain as described in Section 7.1.2 above. ARTICLE XV. MISCELLANEOUS 15.1. No Waiver - No receipt and retention by Landlord of any payment tendered by Tenant in connection with this Lease shall constitute an accord and satisfaction, or a compromise or other settlement, notwithstanding any accompanying statement, instruction or other assertion to the contrary unless Landlord expressly agrees to an accord and satisfaction, or a compromise or other settlement, in a separate writing duly executed by Landlord. Landlord will be entitled to treat any such payments as being received on account of any item or items of Rent, interest, expense or damage due in connection herewith, in such amounts and in such order as Landlord may determine at its sole option. Failure of any party to exercise any right in one or more instance shall not be construed as a waiver of the right to strict performance or as an amendment to or modification of this Lease. Any waiver of any condition or provision set forth in this Lease shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach of such condition or provision or of any other condition or provision, nor shall any such waiver be deemed a continuing waiver. 15.2. Severability - The Parties intend this Lease to be legally valid and enforceable in accordance with all of its terms to the fullest extent permitted by law. If an arbitrator or a court of competent jurisdiction holds any provision hereof to be invalid or unenforceable in whole or in part for any reason, the validity and enforceability of the remaining clauses, or portions of them, shall not be affected unless an essential purpose of this Lease would be defeated by loss of the invalid or unenforceable provision. 15.3. Governing Law; Venue; Construction - This Lease shall be construed according to the laws of the State of California without regard to principles of conflict of laws. Any action or proceeding that relates to, or arises from, this Lease shall be brought in a state court of competent jurisdiction located in Sonoma County. The captions used for the Sections and Articles of this Lease have been inserted for convenience only and shall not be used to alter or interpret the content of this Lease. Page 16 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 15.4. Binding Effect: Survival - The covenants, conditions, warranties and agreements contained in this Lease shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns. The representations and warranties of Landlord and Tenant and the indemnification obligations of Landlord and Tenant set forth herein shall survive the expiration or termination of this Lease as shall all other provisions hereof which are intended to survive such expiration or termination. 15.5. Time - Time is of the essence of each provision of this Lease. 15.6. Entire Agreement; Amendments - This Lease and Exhibits A, B, C, D, and E attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, constitutes the final, complete, and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement between Landlord and Tenant pertaining to the lease of the Premises and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous understandings or agreements of the parties. This Lease may not be amended or modified except in a writing signed by both Parties. 15.7. Notices - All notices delivered pursuant to this Lease shall be in writing and delivered to Landlord or Tenant at the applicable address designated in Section 1.1 or to such other address as may hereafter be designated by either party by written notice delivered to the other party in accordance with this Section. Such notices shall be effective on the earlier to occur of actual receipt or: (i) if mailed, three (3) days after posting at a United States post office, (ii) upon receipt if mailed by certified mail with return receipt requested, and (iii) upon delivery if delivered by overnight delivery service and delivery is confirmed by the delivery service. 15.8. Force Majeure - Except as otherwise provided in this Lease, the time for performance of an obligation other than payment of money under this Lease shall be extended for the period during which a party is prevented from performing due to Unavoidable Delay. "Unavoidable Delay" shall mean any and all delay beyond the applicable party's reasonable control, including without limitation, delays caused by the other party; governmental restrictions, regulations, controls, preemptions or delays; orders of civil, military or naval authorities; strikes, labor disputes, lock -outs, shortages of labor or materials or reasonable substitutes therefore; Acts of God; fire, earthquake, floods, explosions or other casualties; extreme weather conditions or other actions of the elements; enemy action, civil commotion, riot or insurrection. 15.9. Attorneys' Fees: Prejudgment Interest - If the services of an attorney are required by any party to secure the performance hereof or otherwise upon the breach or default of the other party, or if any judicial remedy or arbitration is necessary to enforce or interpret any provision of this Lease, or if the services of an attorney are required upon the bankruptcy of a party to this Lease to compel or object to assumption or rejection of this Lease, seek relief from the automatic stay or object to an action to recover a preference or fraudulent transfer, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees, costs, expert witnesses fees, post judgment collection costs, and other expenses, in addition to any other relief to which such party may be entitled. Any award of damages following judicial remedy or arbitration as a result of the breach of this Lease or any of its provisions shall include an award of prejudgment interest from the date of the breach at the maximum amount of interest allowed by law. Page 17 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 15. 10. Authority - Each party warrants and represents that it has full authority to enter into this Lease, that this Lease constitutes a binding obligation of such party, and that the individual(s) signing on behalf of such parry are duly authorized to bind such party hereto. 15.11. Landlord Approval - Whenever the consent or approval of Landlord is required hereunder, such consent or approval may be granted or withheld by the City Manager or his or her designee, unless the City Manager determines in his or her discretion that such matter shall be referred to Landlord's governing body for consideration. 15.12 Counterparts - This Lease may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original, and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. The signature page of any counterpart may be detached there from without impairing the legal effect of the signature(s) thereon provided such signature page is attached to any other counterpart identical thereto except having additional signature pages executed by any other party. This Lease shall take effect when signed by all Parties. 15.13 Amendment and Restatement. This Lease amends and restates the Original Lease in its entirety. Except for the provisions of the Original Lease, such as Section 9.1 regarding indemnity, that survive termination of the Original Lease, the Original Lease is of no further force and effect. NOW THEREFORE, Landlord and Tenant executed this Lease as of the date first written above. LANDLORD: TENANT: CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMMUNITY CHILD CARE COUNCIL OF SONOMA COUNTY (40) By: / By: Name: (Date) Name: (Date) Title: Title: ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Page 18 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 City Attorney List of Exhibits Exhibit A: Property Description Exhibit B: Map of Premises Being Leased Exhibit C: Rules and Regulations for Property Exhibit D: Insurance Requirements Exhibit E: Tenant Improvements Exhibit F: Tenant Improvement Amortization Schedule Page 19 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Gold Ridge Recreation Center, 1455 Golf Course Drive, (approximately 4,050 sq. ft.), Rohnert Park, California, and more commonly described as the portable building for a total of 4,050 sq. ft. The building is zoned Public Institutional. Use of restroom and adjacent playground area is permitted at no extra charge per the terms of this lease agreement PARCEL 1 Commencing at the southwest corner. of Subdivision No. 12, Rancho Cotati, recorded in Book 28 of Maps at Page 7, Sonoma County Records; thence from said point of commencement, North 00" 08' 19" East, 2,063.94 feet; thence South 89' 5B' 48" East, 1,327.29 feet; thence South 00° 01' 12" West, 30.00 feet to the paint of beginning; thence from said point of beginning, along the southerly right of way line of Holly Avenue, South 89° 58' 48" Fast, 324.36 feet to a tangent curve to the right having a radius of 25.00 feet and an internal angle of 90°- 39' 58"; thence leaving said southerly right of way line of Holly Avenue and along said curve to the right, 39.56 feet; thence South 00' 41' 1G" West, 202.55 feet; thence South 00° 01' 16" West, 744.21 feet to a tangent curve to the right having a radius of 25.00 feet and an internal angle of 82° 57' 36"; thence along said curve 36.20 feet to a reverse curve to the left having a radius of 643.00 feet and an internal angle of 25" 09' 27"; _$hence along said curve 282.33 feet to a reverse curve to the right having a radius of 570.00 feet and an internal angle of 300 08' 17"; thence along said curve 299.83 feet to point "A"; thence from Point "A", Borth 00° 01' 12" East, 675.16 feet to a tangent curve to the left having a radius of 172.00 feet and an internal angle of 22° 41' 33"; thence among said curve 168.12 feet to a reverse curve to the right having a radius of 25.00 feet and an internal angle of 112' 41' 33"; thence along said curve 49.17 feet; thence North 00° 01' 12" East, 72.00 feet, thence South 89° 5B' 48" East, 212.25 feet; thence North 00° 01' 12" East, 330.00 feet to the point of beginning - Containing 12.54 acres, more or less. Page 20 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (continued) PARCEL 2 Commencing at the above described Point "Ar"; thence from said paint of commencement South 27° 58' 46" East, 65.99 feet to the point of beginning; thence from said point of beginning, on a curve to the left whose center bears North 04° 39' 51" festa 630.00 feet and having an internal angle of 25° 27' 36", a distance of 279.95 feet to a reverse curve to the right having a radius of 557.00 feet and an internal angle of X04 08' 43"; thence along said curve 293.06 feet.; thence -South 89° 58' 44" East., 55.45 feet; thence South 00° 01' 16" best, 123.00 feet; thence South 08° 12' 36" East, 10+4.30 feet; thence South 6D' 31' 30" East, 30.04 feet to a tangent curve to the left having a radius of 45.00 feet and an internal angle of 59° 57' 48"; thence along said curve 47.10 feet; thence South 59' 30' 42" West, 30.04 feet; thence South 00"" 30' 24" East, 185.00 feet; thence South 60° 31' 30" East, 30.04 feet to a tangent curve to the left having a radius of 45.40 feet and an internal angle of 59° 57',48"; thence along said curve 47.10 feet; thence South 59° 30' 42" Fest, 30.04 feet; thence South 00° 30' 24°" East, 92.50 feet; thence South 37' 32' 15" West, 17.78 feet; thence South 89' 29' 36" West, 375.61 feet; thence North 00' 3D' 24" West, 81.00 feet; thence [forth 61'° iib' 56" West, 46.79 feet to a tangent curve to the left having a radius of 45.00 feet and an internal angle of 58° 42' 56"; thence along said curve 46.12 feet; thence forth 600 08' 08" East, 46.79 feet; thence North 00' 30' 24" West, 152.00 feet.; thence Forth 61° 08' 56" Fest, 46.79 feet to a tangent curve to the left, having a radius of 45.00 feet and an internal angle of 58° 42' 56" thence along said curve 46.12 feet; thence North 600 08' 08" East, 46..79 feet; thence..North 00° 30' 24" West, 58.45 feet; thence North 51° 04' 17" West, 35.50 feet; thence South 89" 29' 36" gest., 198.60 feet; thence North 040 39' 51" West, 10.99 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 6.03 acres, more or less. Page 21 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 EXy MOP OF PREMISES a �f C;oo�.le-earth -0-Aw I ,�� EXHIBIT C RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR PROPERTY Alcohol No alcohol is permitted on the premises. No -Smoking Smoking is prohibited in and around all City facilities pursuant to Ordinance No. 813 adopted April 28, 2009. Music and Noise Levels User groups are requested to keep loud noise at a courteous level in the building and parking lot areas. Minors Activities for minors (18 and under) must be supervised by responsible adult for the entire period of the activity. Securing the facility The Tenant shall be responsible for securing the Facility upon exit. Zoning Ordinance All other applicable zoning ordinance/restrictions for said property Page 23 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 EXHIBIT D INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS (1) Commercial general liability insurance including contractual liability coverage, written on an "occurrence" policy form, covering bodily injury, property damage and personal injury arising out of or relating (directly or indirectly) to Tenant's operations, assumed liabilities, or use or occupancy of the Premises, the Building or the Property naming the Landlord as an additional insured, with minimum coverage in the amount of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage and Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) in the aggregate; (2) Property insurance protecting Tenant against loss or damage by fire and such other risks as are insurable under then available standard forms of "special risk" insurance policies, covering Tenant's personal property and trade fixtures in or about the Premises or the Property, and any improvements or Alterations in the Premises, in an amount of one hundred percent (100%) of actual replacement cost or highest insurable value; (c) Workers' compensation and employers liability insurance of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000); and (d) If Tenant operates owned, leased or non -owned vehicles on the Property, comprehensive automobile liability insurance with a minimum coverage of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence, combined single limit. The foregoing policies shall protect Tenant as named insured, and Landlord and the other Indemnitees as additional insured's. Landlord reserves the right to increase the foregoing amount of required liability coverage from time to time (but not more than once each calendar year) and to require that Tenant cause any Tenant Parties conducting activities in or about or occupying the Premises to obtain and maintain similar types and amounts of insurance. Each insurance policy must include an endorsement to provide that the policy and the coverage provided shall be primary, that Landlord, although an additional insured, shall nevertheless be entitled to recovery under such policy for any damage to Landlord by reason of acts or omission of Tenant, and that any coverage carried by Landlord shall be noncontributory with respect to policies carried by Tenant. Each such insurance policy or a certificate thereof, including appropriate endorsements, shall be delivered to Landlord by Tenant on or before the Agreement Date, and thereafter renewal policies, certificates, and appropriate endorsements at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration dates of expiring policies. Tenant shall cause its insurance companies issuing general liability, property (first party) insurance, and workers' compensation insurance to waive any subrogation rights that those companies may have against Landlord, as long as the insurance is not invalidated by the waiver. Page 24 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 EXHIBIT E TENANT IMPROVEMENTS Description Cost 1. Renovate existing portable building to accommodate the following improvements: 2. Install new kitchen 3. Install new laundry room 4. Install new storage room 5. Install new adult restroom 6. Install new children's restroom with four preschool age appropriate sized toilets 7. Replace flooring 8. Paint interior 9. Upgrade electrical, plumbing, and cosmetic repairs as needed Subtotal: 231,000 10. 11. 12. Total: $2319000 Page 25 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 L`VTTTDT'r L' TENANT IMPROVEMENTS AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE Tenant Improvement Amortization Schedule 4C's Lease Agreement - Gold Ridge Recreation Center Loan amount Annual interest rate Loan period in years Start date of loan Monthly payment Number of payments Total interest Total cost of loan Enter values $240,624.00 0.000% 10 7/1/2016 $2,005.00 120 $240,624.00 (Final Payment = 2,029.00 ) Payment Beginning Ending Date Balance Payment Principal Interest Balance 1 7/1/2016 240624.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 238619.00 2 8/1/2016 238619.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 236614.00 3 9/1/2016 236614.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 234609.00 4 10/1/2016 234609.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 232604.00 5 11/1/2016 232604.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 230599.00 6 12/1/2016 230599.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 228594.00 7 1/1/2017 228594.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 226589.00 8 2/1/2017 226589.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 224584.00 9 3/1/2017 224584.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 222579.00 10 4/1/2017 222579.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 220574.00 11 5/1/2017 220574.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 218569.00 12 6/1/2017 218569.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 216564.00 13 7/1/2017 216564.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 214559.00 14 8/1/2017 214559.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 212554.00 15 9/1/2017 212554.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 210549.00 16 10/1/2017 210549.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 208544.00 17 11/1/2017 208544.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 206539.00 Page 26 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 18 12/1/2017 206539.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 204534.00 19 1/1/2018 204534.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 202529.00 20 2/1/2018 202529.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 200524.00 21 3/1/2018 200524.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 198519.00 22 4/1/2018 198519.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 196514.00 23 5/1/2018 196514.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 194509.00 24 6/1/2018 194509.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 192504.00 25 7/1/2018 192504.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 190499.00 26 8/1/2018 190499.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 188494.00 27 9/1/2018 188494.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 186489.00 28 10/1/2018 186489.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 184484.00 29 11/1/2018 184484.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 182479.00 30 12/1/2018 182479.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 180474.00 31 1/1/2019 180474.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 178469.00 32 2/1/2019 178469.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 176464.00 33 3/1/2019 176464.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 174459.00 34 4/1/2019 174459.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 172454.00 35 5/1/2019 172454.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 170449.00 36 6/1/2019 170449.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 168444.00 37 7/1/2019 168444.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 166439.00 38 8/1/2019 166439.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 164434.00 39 9/1/2019 164434.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 162429.00 40 10/1/2019 162429.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 160424.00 41 11/1/2019 160424.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 158419.00 42 12/1/2019 158419.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 156414.00 43 1/1/2020 156414.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 154409.00 44 2/1/2020 154409.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 152404.00 45 3/1/2020 152404.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 150399.00 46 4/1/2020 150399.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 148394.00 47 5/1/2020 148394.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 146389.00 48 6/1/2020 146389.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 144384.00 49 7/1/2020 144384.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 142379.00 50 8/1/2020 142379.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 140374.00 51 9/1/2020 140374.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 138369.00 52 10/1/2020 138369.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 136364.00 53 11/1/2020 136364.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 134359.00 54 12/1/2020 134359.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 132354.00 55 1/1/2021 132354.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 130349.00 56 2/1/2021 130349.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 128344.00 57 3/1/2021 128344.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 126339.00 58 4/1/2021 126339.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 124334.00 Page 27 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 59 5/1/2021 124334.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 122329.00 60 6/1/2021 122329.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 120324.00 61 7/1/2021 120324.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 118319.00 62 8/1/2021 118319.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 116314.00 63 9/1/2021 116314.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 114309.00 64 10/1/2021 114309.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 112304.00 65 11/1/2021 112304.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 110299.00 66 12/1/2021 110299.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 108294.00 67 1/1/2022 108294.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 106289.00 68 2/1/2022 106289.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 104284.00 69 3/1/2022 104284.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 102279.00 70 4/1/2022 102279.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 100274.00 71 5/1/2022 100274.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 98269.00 72 6/1/2022 98269.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 96264.00 73 7/1/2022 96264.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 94259.00 74 8/1/2022 94259.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 92254.00 75 9/1/2022 92254.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 90249.00 76 10/1/2022 90249.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 88244.00 77 11/1/2022 88244.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 86239.00 78 12/1/2022 86239.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 84234.00 79 1/1/2023 84234.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 82229.00 80 2/1/2023 82229.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 80224.00 81 3/1/2023 80224.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 78219.00 82 4/1/2023 78219.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 76214.00 83 5/1/2023 76214.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 74209.00 84 6/1/2023 74209.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 72204.00 85 7/1/2023 72204.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 70199.00 86 8/1/2023 70199.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 68194.00 87 9/1/2023 68194.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 66189.00 88 10/1/2023 66189.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 64184.00 89 11/1/2023 64184.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 62179.00 90 12/1/2023 62179.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 60174.00 91 1/1/2024 60174.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 58169.00 92 2/1/2024 58169.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 56164.00 93 3/1/2024 56164.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 54159.00 94 4/1/2024 54159.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 52154.00 95 5/1/2024 52154.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 50149.00 96 6/1/2024 50149.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 48144.00 97 7/1/2024 48144.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 46139.00 98 8/1/2024 46139.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 44134.00 99 9/1/2024 44134.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 42129.00 Page 28 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 100 10/1/2024 42129.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 40124.00 101 11/1/2024 40124.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 38119.00 102 12/1/2024 38119.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 36114.00 103 1/1/2025 36114.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 34109.00 104 2/1/2025 34109.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 32104.00 105 3/1/2025 32104.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 30099.00 106 4/1/2025 30099.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 28094.00 107 5/1/2025 28094.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 26089.00 108 6/1/2025 26089.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 24084.00 109 7/1/2025 24084.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 22079.00 110 8/1/2025 22079.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 20074.00 111 9/1/2025 20074.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 18069.00 112 10/1/2025 18069.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 16064.00 113 11/1/2025 16064.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 14059.00 114 12/1/2025 14059.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 12054.00 115 1/1/2026 12054.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 10049.00 116 2/1/2026 10049.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 8044.00 117 3/1/2026 8044.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 6039.00 118 4/1/2026 6039.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 4034.00 119 5/1/2026 4034.00 2005.00 2005.00 0.00 2029.00 120 6/1/2026 2029.00 2029.00 2029.00 0.00 0.00 Page 29 of 29 1306485v1B 80078/0042 ROj;NEFLT TA 1{ �R7,iF(33�"�71P- ITEM NO. 6C3 Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Mary Grace Pawson, Development Services Director Prepared By: Mary Grace Pawson, Development Service Director Agenda Title: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with CSG Consultants Inc. for Development Review Services and Related Actions RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with CSG Consultants Inc. for Development Review Services and Authorizing the Finance Director to Make Appropriations and Increase Budgeted Revenue to Account for Developer Reimbursements. BACKGROUND: The City's General Plan envisions significant residential and non-residential development in the Northeast, University District, Southeast, Wilfred Dowdell and Northwest Specific Plan Areas (SPAS). In addition, development is planned in the Stadium Lands, Sonoma Mountain Village and Central Rohnert Park Planned Development Areas (PDs). The City has been experiencing resurgence in development activity, and in 2013 it retained CSG Consultants Inc. (CSG), to assist with engineering development review and provide timely response. CSG is nearing the limit of its budget under its current contract with amendments. The proposed Master Agreement and Task Order will allow for their continued service with engineering development review. ANALYSIS: The City's Development Services Department is currently processing a significant number of engineering applications as outlined in Table 1 on the following page. While City engineering staff is active in the processing of this work, staff does not have sufficient resources to complete the required volume of reviews in a timely fashion. The City's 2016-17 budget anticipates this workload and plans for the use of outside consultant resources to allow for timely processing of development applications. The proposed $150,000 Task Order can be accommodated within Development Services 2016-17 budget. CSG has been engaged in the engineering review of all of these development applications for over three years and brings a unique understanding of each project. Retaining CSG provides the City and the applicants with continuity and value. CSG's rates are competitive with other engineering firms currently performing work for the City. The proposed Task Order with CSG is in alignment with Purchasing Policy Section 3.6.6(D) which allows the city to engage professional services via a negotiated process. ITEM NO. 60 Table 1 — Current Engineering Development Review Activities SPA or PD Applicant Current Activities University District Brookfield Homes Design review during construction for the Vast Oak Phase 1 Subdivision; Water Tank Plan Review; Rohnert Park Expressway Widening and Traffic Signals Plan Review; Vast Oak Phase 2A Subdivision Plan Review Southeast SPA Redwood Equities In -tract Improvement Plan Review; Water Tank Plan Review; Final Map Review; Review of CC&Rs and various required agreements Stadium Lands PDA Bellwether Properties Site Grading and Off-site Roadway Construction Wilfred Dowdell SPA Oxford Suites Site Grading; management of PF credit agreement Central Rohnert Park Rohnert Crossings Development Area Plan Review PDA STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: By retaining consultants to provide additional service capacity when necessary, the City is ensuring the effective delivery of public services thus aligning with Goal C of the Strategic Plan. Additionally, this allows staff to better assist major planned developments which aligns with Goal D of the Strategic Plan. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Authorize the Master Agreement and Task Order 2016-01 with: CSG Consultants, Inc. (recommended action). This option preserves continuity and understanding and provides the resources necessary to ensure timely review of development submittals. 2. Secure proposals from other consulting firms for engineering development review. Because of the volume of work in Development Services, staff is securing proposals from several other consultants for support. However, staff recommends retaining CSG for work on the projects in Table 1 because of their strong familiarity with these projects. 3. Perform all engineering development review with City staff. This option is not recommended because staff does not have sufficient resources to review all the development applications currently being considered, which will result in delays. This option also has the potential to delay the City's capital improvement program because engineering staff would be focused on providing development review. Additionally, the use of a consultant offers flexibility to the City to engage their services only if and when there is work to be done. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The fiscal impact of the proposed action is $150,000. The expenses incurred under this Task Order are anticipated in Development Services' 2016-10 budget and will be reimbursed from developer deposits and payments. The proposed action has no impact on the City's General Fund. 2 ITEM NO. 60 Department Head Approval Date: 05/19/2016 Finance Director Approval Date: 05/25/2016 City Attorney Approval Date: 05/25/2016 City Manager Approval Date: 06/13/2016 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement For Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with CSG Consultants Inc., and Authorizing the Finance Director to Make Appropriations and Increase Budgeted Revenue to Account for Developer Reimbursements 2. Exhibit A to Resolution - Master Agreement for Consultant Services 3. Exhibit B to Resolution - CSG Consultants Inc. Task Order 2016-01 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-66 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES AND TASK ORDER 2016-01 WITH CSG CONSULTANTS INC. FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SERVICES AND AUTHORIZING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE APPROPRIATIONS AND INCREASE BUDGETED REVENUE TO ACCOUNT FOR DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENTS WHEREAS; the City is experiencing a significant volume of new development that requires engineering review; and WHEREAS, CSG Consultants Inc. is an engineering consultant with significant experience in engineering review of development projects and specific experience with development activity in the City's University District, Southeast and Wilfred Dowdell Specific Plan Areas and its Stadium Lands and Central Rohnert Park Planned Development Areas, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3.6.6 of the City's Purchasing Policy, the City has secured a proposal from CSG Consultants Inc. for engineering development review services and has negotiated with CSG Consultants Inc. to arrive at a proposed scope of services and budget that meet the City's needs for engineering support; WHEREAS, the cost of the Consultant's services are reimbursed to the City by various applicants for processing their applications and do not represent a cost to the City's general fund or any other City fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute a Master Services Agreement and Task Order 2016-01 with CSG Consultants, Inc., a California Corporation, for development review services in an amount not to exceed an additional one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all actions to effectuate this authorization for and on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park, including execution, if necessary, in substantially similar form to the Master Agreement attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit "A," and Task Order 2016-01 attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit `B", subject to minor modifications by the City Manager or City Attorney. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon receipt of developer reimbursements, the Finance Director is authorized to make appropriations and increase budgeted revenue as necessary to cover the costs of Task Order 2016-01. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A and Exhibit B AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) (2) 2016-66 Exhibit A to Resolution MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES This MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES ("Agreement") is entered into as of the 28th day of June, 2016, by and between the City of Rohnert Park ("City"), a California municipal corporation, and CSG Consultants Inc., ("Consultant"), a California Corporation, with reference to the following facts, understandings and intentions. Recitals WHEREAS, City desires to obtain engineering development review services, and WHEREAS, Consultant hereby warrants to City that Consultant is skilled and able to provide such services described in Section 3 of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, City desires to retain Consultant pursuant to this Agreement to provide the services described in Section 3 of this Agreement, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Agreement NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals and all defined terms set forth above are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if set forth herein in full. 2. Project Coordination. Authorized representatives shall represent City and Consultant in all matters pertaining to this Agreement. A. City. The City Manager or his/her designee shall represent City for all purposes under this Agreement, except where approval for the City is specifically required by the City Council. The City Engineer is hereby designated as the project manager ("Project Manager"). The Project Manager shall supervise the progress and execution of this Agreement. B. Consultant. The Consultant shall assign Mark Lander, PE to have overall responsibility for the progress and execution of this Agreement for Consultant. 3. Scope and Performance of Services A. Scope of Services. Subject to such policy direction and approvals as City may determine from time to time, Consultant shall perform the type of services generally set out in the Scope of Work attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant shall be assigned to provide particular services pursuant to the requirements of a task order that has been issued in conformance with the City's Purchasing Policy ("Task Order") executed by Consultant and City. B. Time of Performance. The services of Consultant are to commence upon receipt of a written notice to proceed from City, but in no event prior to 1 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 receiving a fully executed agreement from City and obtaining and delivering the required insurance coverage, and satisfactory evidence thereof, to City. Consultant shall perform its services in accordance with the schedule attached to the Task Order. Any changes to these dates in either this Section 3 or the Task Order shall be approved in writing by the Project Manager. C. Standard of Quality. City relies upon the professional ability of Consultant as a material inducement to entering into this Agreement. All work performed by Consultant under this Agreement shall be performed 1) with due diligence, using its best efforts to perform and coordinate all activities in a timely manner; 2) in accordance with all applicable legal requirements; and 3) with the standard of quality ordinarily to be expected of competent professionals in Consultant's field of expertise. Consultant shall correct, at its own expense, all errors made in the provision of services under this Agreement. In the event that Consultant fail to make such correction in a timely manner, City may make the correction and charge the cost thereof to Consultant. 4. Compensation and Method of Pam. A. Compensation. The compensation to be paid to Consultant, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall: (1) for services provided directly under this Agreement be at the rate and schedules more particularly described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, or (2) for services authorized by Task Orders, be at the rate and schedules specified by said Task Order. However, in no event shall the amount City pays to Consultant for services provided directly under this Agreement exceed fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00); nor shall the amount City pays to Consultant for work done by Task Order exceed the total compensation specified by the Task Order. Whether working under this Master Agreement or a Task Order, the services of the Consultant shall not commence without a written notice to proceed from the City. City's obligation to pay compensation to Consultant as provided herein is contingent upon Consultant's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto. Payment by City under this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of unsatisfactory work, even if such defects were known to the City at the time of payment. City shall pay Consultant as compensation in full for such services and expenses for the different elements of the scope of work as follows: B. Timing of Payment. (1) Consultant shall submit itemized monthly statements for work performed. All statements shall include adequate documentation demonstrating work performed during the billing period and shall conform to Federal Funding invoicing requirements, if applicable. Except as otherwise provided herein, City shall make payment, in full, within thirty (30) days after approval of the invoice by City. (2) Payments due and payable to Consultant for current services must be within the current budget and within an available, unexhausted and unencumbered appropriation of the City. In the event the City has not appropriated sufficient funds for payment of Consultant 2 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 services beyond the current fiscal year, this Agreement shall cover only those costs incurred up to the conclusion of the current fiscal year; payment for additional work is conditional upon future City appropriation. C. Changes in Compensation. Consultant will not undertake any work that will incur costs in excess of the amount set forth in Section 4(A) of this Agreement without prior written amendment to this Agreement. City shall have the right to amend the Scope of Work within the Agreement by written notification to the Consultant. In such event, the compensation and time of performance shall be subject to renegotiation upon written demand of either party to the Agreement. Consultant shall not commence any work exceeding the Scope of Work without prior written authorization from the City. Failure of the Consultant to secure City's written authorization for extra or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in the contract price or time due, whether by way of compensation, restitution, quantum meruit, etc. for work done without the appropriate City authorization. D. Taxes. Consultant shall pay all taxes, assessments and premiums under the federal Social Security Act, any applicable unemployment insurance contributions, Workers Compensation insurance premiums, sales taxes, use taxes, personal property taxes, or other taxes or assessments now or hereafter in effect and payable by reason of or in connection with the services to be performed by Consultant. E. No Overtime or Premium Pay. Consultant shall receive no premium or enhanced pay for work normally understood as overtime, i.e., hours that exceed forty (40) hours per work week, or work performed during non-standard business hours, such as in the evenings or on weekends. Consultant shall not receive a premium or enhanced pay for work performed on a recognized holiday. Consultant shall not receive paid time off for days not worked, whether it be in the form of sick leave, administrative leave, or for any other form of absence. F. Litigation Support. Consultant agrees to testify at City's request if litigation is brought against City in connection with Consultant's work product. Unless the action is brought by Consultant or is based upon Consultant's negligence, City will compensate Consultant for the preparation and the testimony at Consultant's standard hourly rates, if requested by City and not part of the litigation brought by City against Consultant. S. Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date of its execution by both parties and shall continue in full force and effect until December 31, 2019, unless earlier terminated in accordance with this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement may be extended for successive one-year term(s) upon mutual, written approval by the City Manager or his/her designee and Consultant. Work authorized by a separate Task Order as contemplated by this Agreement shall be performed in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Task Order. 6. Inspection. Consultant shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to ascertain that the services of Consultant are being performed in accordance with the requirements and intentions of this Agreement. All work done and all materials furnished, if 3 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 any, shall be subject to the Project Manager's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve Consultant of any of its obligations to fulfill the Agreement as prescribed. 7. Ownership of Documents. Title, including the copyright and all intellectual property rights, to all plans, specifications, maps, estimates, reports, manuscripts, drawings, descriptions, designs, data, photographs, reports and any other final work products compiled, prepared or obtained by the Consultant under the Agreement shall be vested in City, none of which shall be used in any manner whatsoever, by any person, firm, corporation, or agency without the expressed written consent of the City. Consultant shall assume no responsibility for the unintended use by others of such final work products which are not related to the scope of the services described under this Agreement. Basic survey notes and sketches, charts, computations, and other data prepared or obtained under the Agreement shall be made available, upon request, to City without restriction or limitations on their use. Consultant may retain copies of the above- described information but agrees not to disclose or discuss any information gathered, discussed or generated in any way through this Agreement without the written permission of City during the term of this Agreement, unless required by law. 8. Employment of Other Consultants, Specialists or Experts. Consultant will not employ or otherwise incur an obligation to pay other consultants, specialists or experts for services in connection with this Agreement without the prior written approval of the City. 9. Conflict of Interest. A. Consultant covenants and represents that neither it, nor any officer or principal of its firm, has, or shall acquire any investment, income, business entity, interest in real property, or other interest, directly or indirectly, which would conflict in any manner with the interests of City, hinder Consultant's performance of services under this Agreement, or be affected in any manner or degree by performance of Consultant's services hereunder. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of the Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it as an officer, employee, agent, or subcontractor without the express written consent of the City. Consultant agrees at all times to avoid conflicts of interest, or the appearance of any conflicts of interest, with the interests of the City in the performance of the Agreement. (1) Consultant is not a designated employee within the meaning of the Political Reform Act because Consultant: (2) will conduct research and arrive at conclusions with respect to its rendition of information, advice, recommendation, or counsel independent of the control and direction of the City or of any City official, other than normal contract monitoring; and (3) possesses no authority with respect to any City decision beyond the rendition of information, advice, recommendation, or counsel. (2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18700(a)(2).) 10. Liability of Members and Employees of CitX. No member of the City and no other officer, elected official, employee or agent of the City shall be personally liable to 4 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Consultant or otherwise in the event of any default or breach of the City, or for any amount which may become due to Consultant or any successor in interest, or for any obligations directly or indirectly incurred under the terms of this Agreement. The City has no liability or responsibility for any accident, loss, or damage to any work performed under this Agreement whether prior to its completion or acceptance or otherwise. 11. Indemnity. A. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall, at its own expense, indemnify, protect, defend (by counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City) and hold harmless City and any and all of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers ("Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all liability (including liability for claims, demands, damages, obligations, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including attorneys fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs and expert witness fees) of any nature ("Liability"), whether actual, alleged or threatened, which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the performance or failure to comply with this Agreement, regardless of any fault or alleged fault of the Indemnified Parties. For design professionals (as that term is defined by statute) acting within the scope of their professional capacity, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall, at its own expense, indemnify, protect, defend (by counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City) and hold harmless any Indemnified Parties from and against any and all Liability, whether actual, alleged or threatened, which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant, or as may be provided by statute in Civil Code § 2782.8, as may be amended from time to time. The only exception to Consultant's responsibility to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from Liability is due to the active negligence or willful misconduct of City or its elective or appointive boards, officers, agents and employees. B. Scope of Obligation. Consultant's duty to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless as set forth in this Section 11 shall include the duty to defend (by counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City) as set forth in California Civil Code § 2778. This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages or compensation payable by or for Consultant under worker's compensation, disability or other employee benefit acts or the terms, applicability or limitations of any insurance held or provided by Consultant and shall continue to bind the parties after termination/completion of this agreement. This indemnification shall be regardless of and not in any way limited by the insurance requirements of this contract. This indemnification is for the full period of time allowed by law and shall survive the termination of this agreement. Consultant waives any and all rights to express or implied indemnity against the Indemnified Parties concerning any Liability of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with the Agreement or Consultant's failure to comply with any of the terms of this Agreement. Consultant's duty to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless as set forth in this Section 11 shall not be excused because of the Consultant's inability to evaluate Liability, or because the 5 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Consultant evaluates Liability and determines that the Consultant is not or may not be liable. The Consultant must respond within thirty (30) calendar days to any tender by the City, unless the time for responding has been extended by an authorized representative of the City in writing. If the Consultant fails to timely accept such tender, in addition to any other remedies authorized by law, as much of the money due or that may become due to the Consultant under this Agreement as shall reasonably be considered necessary by the City may be retained by the City until disposition has been made of the matter subject to tender, or until the Consultant accepts the tender, whichever occurs first. Consultant agrees to fully reimburse all costs, including but not limited to attorney's fees and costs and fees of litigation incurred by the City in responding to matters prior to Consultant's acceptance of the tender. 12. Independent Contractor. It is expressly agreed that Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed by Consultant, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of City and shall have responsibility for and control over the details and means of providing its services under this Agreement. Consultant shall furnish, at its own expense, all labor, materials, equipment, tools, transportation and services necessary for the successful completion of the services under this Agreement. As an independent contractor, Consultant shall obtain no rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to City's employees, and Consultant hereby expressly waives any claim it may have to any such rights. Consultant, its officers, employees and agents shall not have any power to bind or commit the City to any decision. 13. Compliance with Laws. A. General. Consultant shall use the standard of care in its profession to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has and shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, insurance and approvals which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. City is not responsible or liable for Consultant's failure to comply with any or all of the requirements contained in this paragraph or in this Agreement. B. Workers' Compensation. Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the California Labor Code which require every employee to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and Consultant certifies that it will comply with such provisions before commencing performance of the Agreement and at all times in the performance of the Agreement. C. Prevailing Wage. Consultant and Consultant's subconsultants (if any) shall, to the extent required by the California Labor Code, pay not less than the latest prevailing wage rates to workers and professionals as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations of the State of California pursuant to California Labor Code, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 2. Copies of the applicable wage determination are on file at the City's office of the City Clerk. 6 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 D. Injury and Illness Prevention Program. Consultant certifies that it is aware of and has complied with the provisions of California Labor Code § 6401.7, which requires every employer to adopt a written injury and illness prevention program. E. Business Licenses. Except as otherwise allowed by City in its sole discretion, Consultant and all subconsultants shall have acquired, at Consultant's expense, a business license from the City in accordance with Chapter 5.04 of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code, prior to City's issuance of an authorization to proceed with the Services. Such license(s) shall be kept valid throughout the term of this Agreement. City may withhold compensation from Consultant until such time as Consultant complies with this section. F. Waiver of Subro ag tion. Consultant and Consultant's insurance company agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents and volunteers for losses paid under Consultant's workers' compensation insurance policy which arise from the work performed by Consultant for City. 14. Confidential Information. All data, documents, discussions or other information developed or received by or for Consultant in performance of this Agreement are confidential and not to be disclosed to any person except as authorized by City, or as required by law. 15. Assignment; Subcontractors; Employ A. Assignment. Consultant shall not assign, delegate, transfer, or convey its duties, responsibilities, or interests in this Agreement or any right, title, obligation, or interest in or to the same or any part thereof without the City's prior written consent, which shall be in the City's sole discretion. Any assignment without such approval shall be void and, at the City's option, shall immediately cause this Agreement to terminate. B. Subcontractors; Employ. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services of Consultant hereunder. No subcontractor of Consultant shall be recognized by the City as such; rather, all subcontractors are deemed to be employees of the Consultant, and Consultant agrees to be responsible for their performance. Consultant shall give its personal attention to the fulfillment of the provisions of this Agreement by all of its employees and subcontractors, if any, and shall keep the work under its control. If any employee or subcontractor of Consultant fails or refuses to carry out the provisions of this Agreement or appears to be incompetent or to act in a disorderly or improper manner, it shall be discharged immediately from the work under this Agreement on demand of the Project Manager. 16. Insurance. Without limiting Consultant's indemnification provided herein, Consultant shall, at its own expense, procure and maintain insurance that complies with the requirements set forth in Exhibit C to this Agreement, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Consultant shall upon thirty (30) days' notice comply with any changes in the amounts and terms of insurance as may be required from time -to -time by City's risk manager. 17. Termination of Agreement; Default. 7 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 A. This Agreement and all obligations hereunder may be terminated at any time, with or without cause, by the City upon five (5) days' written notice to Consultant. B. If Consultant fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement within the time and in the manner herein provided or otherwise violates any of the terms of this Agreement, in addition to all other remedies provided by law, City may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice. In such event, Consultant shall be entitled to receive as full payment for all services satisfactorily rendered and expenses incurred hereunder, an amount which bears the same ratio to the total fees specified in the Agreement as the services satisfactorily rendered hereunder by Consultant bear to the total services otherwise required to be performed for such total fee; provided, however, that the City shall deduct from such amount the amount of damages, if any, sustained by City by virtue of the breach of the Agreement by consultant. C. In the event this Agreement is terminated by City without cause, Consultant shall be entitled to any compensation owing to it hereunder up to the time of such termination, it being understood that any payments are full compensation for services rendered prior to the time of payment. D. Upon termination of this Agreement with or without cause, Consultant shall turn over to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by Consultant or its subcontractors, if any, or given to Consultant or its subcontractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials shall become the permanent property of the City. Consultant, however, shall not be liable for the City's use of incomplete materials nor for the City's use of complete documents if used for other than the project contemplated by this Agreement. 18. Suspension. The City shall have the authority to suspend this Agreement and the services contemplated herein, wholly or in part, for such period as it deems necessary due to unfavorable conditions or to the failure on the part of the Consultant to perform any provision of this Agreement. Consultant will be paid for satisfactory services performed prior to the date of suspension. During the period of suspension, Consultant shall not receive any payment for services or expenses incurred by Consultant by reason of such suspension. 19. Merger; Amendment. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the agreement between City and Consultant and shall supersede all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by written instrument, signed by both the City and Consultant. All provisions of this Agreement are expressly made conditions. 20. Interpretation. This Agreement shall be interpreted as though it was a product of a joint drafting effort and no provisions shall be interpreted against a party on the ground that said party was solely or primarily responsible for drafting the language to be interpreted. 21. Litigation Costs. If either party becomes involved in litigation arising out of this Agreement or the performance thereof, the court in such litigation shall award reasonable costs 8 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 and expenses, including attorneys' fees, to the prevailing party. In awarding attorneys' fees, the court will not be bound by any court fee schedule, but shall, if it is in the interest of justice to do so, award the full amount of costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees paid or incurred in good faith. 22. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. Upon receipt of a written notice from City to proceed with work required by a Task Order, Consultant shall immediately commence work to perform the services required by that Task Order according to the time requirements set in the Task Order. 23. Written Notification. Any notice, demand, request, consent, approval or communication that either party desires or is required to give to the other party shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by prepaid, first class mail. Any such notice, demand, etc. shall be addressed to the other party at the address set forth below. Either party may change its address by notifying the other party of the change of address. Notice shall be deemed communicated within 72 hours from the time of mailing if mailed as provided in this section. If to City: City Clerk City of Rohnert Park - City Hall 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Phone: 707-588-2225 Fax: 707-792-1876 Email: cityclerk@rpcity.org If to Consultant: CSG Inc Attn: Mr. Mark Lander, PE 6200 Stoneridge Mall Rd. Suite 300 Pleasanton, CA 94588 markl@csgengr.com 24. Consultant's Books and Records. A. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services, or expenditures and disbursements charged to City and all documents and records which demonstrate performance under this Agreement for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of termination or completion of this Agreement. B. Any records or documents required to be maintained pursuant to this Agreement shall be made available for inspection or audit, at any time during regular business hours, upon written request by the City Attorney, City Auditor, City Manager, or a designated representative of any of these officers. Copies of such documents shall be provided to City for inspection when it is practical to do so. Otherwise, unless an alternative is mutually 9 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 agreed upon, the records shall be available at Consultant's address indicated for receipt of notices in this Agreement. C. The City may, by written request by any of the above-named officers, require that custody of the records be given to the City and that the records and documents be maintained in the City Manager's office. 25. Agreement Binding. The terms, covenants, and conditions of this Agreement shall apply to, and shall bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assigns, and subcontractors of both parties. 26. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant is an equal opportunity employer and agrees to comply with all applicable state and federal regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Consultant will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, age, sex, creed, color, sexual orientation, marital status or national origin. Consultant will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are treated during such employment without regard to race, religion, age, sex, creed, color, sexual orientation, marital status, or national origin. Such action shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; lay-offs or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. Consultant further agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 27. Non -Exclusive Agreement. This is a non-exclusive agreement. City reserves the right to provide, and to retain other consultants to provide, services that are the same or similar to the services described in this Agreement. 28. City Not Obligated to Third Parties. The City shall not be obligated or liable for payment hereunder to any party other than Consultant. 29. Remedies/Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any term, covenant, condition, right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, right or remedy that such party may have hereunder. All remedies permitted or available under this Agreement, or at law or in equity, are cumulative and alternative. As a condition precedent to commencing legal action involving a claim or dispute against the City arising from this Agreement, the Consultant must present a written claim to City in accordance with the Rohnert Park Municipal Code 30. Severability. If any one or more of the provisions contained herein shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, then such provision or provisions shall be deemed severable from the remaining provisions hereof, and such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had not been contained herein. 31. Exhibits. The following exhibits are attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by this reference: 10 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 A. Exhibit A: Scope of Work and Schedule of Performance B. Exhibit B: Compensation C. Exhibit C: Insurance Requirements 32. Execution. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument and shall become binding upon the parties when at least one copy hereof shall have been signed by both parties hereto. In approving this Agreement, it shall not be necessary to produce or account for more than one such counterpart. 33. News Releases/Interviews. All Consultant and subconsultant news releases, media interviews, testimony at hearings and public comment shall be prohibited unless expressly authorized by City. 34. Applicable Law; Venue. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted according to California law. In the event that suit shall be brought by either parry hereunder, the parties agree that a trial of such action shall be held exclusively in a state court in the County of Sonoma, California. 35. Authorijy. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of one of the parties represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign and deliver the Agreement on behalf of such party and that this Agreement is binding on such party in accordance with its terms. 36. Statement of Economic Interest. If City determines Consultant comes within the definition of Consultant under the Political Reform Act (Government Code §87100), Consultant shall complete and file and shall require any other person doing work under this Agreement to complete and file a "Statement of Economic Interest" with the Clerk of the City of Rohnert Park disclosing Consultant and/or such other person's financial interests. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. Signatures on Next Page 11 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CONSULTANT By: City Manager Date: Per Resolution No. 2016 --adopted by the Rohnert Park City Council at its meeting of June 28, 2016. APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney ATTEST: By: City Clerk 12 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 By: _ Title: Date: CONSULTANT By: _ Title: Date: Exhibit A to Resolution EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES Enzineerinz Development Review Services Anticipated services to be provided include as -needed staff augmentation for engineering development review associated with land development activity in the City. It is anticipated that the majority of the work will involve the University District and Southeast Specific Plan Areas, but work on other new and ongoing applications may also be performed. Work may include but not be limited to the following activities: 1. Review of new or proposed amendments to specific plans, tentative maps, planned development zoning, and other development entitlement applications. 2. Assist City with development of conditions of approval, development agreements, and other requirements associated with development applications. Assist City in negotiations with developers regarding terms of agreements or conditions. 3. Review and recommend approval of improvement plans, subdivision maps, and other documents. Review documents for conformance to approved tentative map, specific plans, and conditions of approval. Confirm that plans conform to City standard design criteria, including draft or proposed standards as needed, and infrastructure or other master plans. Coordinate plan review with other City departments. Confirm that developer has obtained necessary permits or approvals from other public agencies as needed, and that plans conform to North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board and Sonoma County Water Agency requirements for storm water treatment and retention and City of Santa Rosa requirements for recycled water use. 4. Review and recommend approval of engineering bond estimates and subdivision guarantees. Assist staff in preparing subdivision improvement agreements, other agreements, and staff reports. 5. As requested, work with and manage City's consultant reviewing hydrology to determine proper mitigations and needs to avoid increasing flooding risks to existing residents. 6. As requested, work with and manage City's consultant reviewing hydrology and developer to submit required Conditional Letters of Map Revision (CLOMARs), and subsequent Letters of Map Revision (LOMARs) as needed. 7. As requested, calculate and provide fees to developer. Provide fee offset information for proposed infrastructure to be developed under the Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP). 8. As requested, provide analysis of water use and impact of well pumping use in the City. 9. Draft engineering reports and resolutions for Council approval as needed. 10. Meet with developers, consultants, or other agencies on behalf of staff. Exhibit A 13 of 20 Exhibit A to Resolution EXHIBIT B FEE SCHEDULE CSG will invoice at the beginning of every month for services rendered during the previous month. Compensation shall be based upon hourly rates based on the CSG's rate schedule, with the exception that rates will not exceed $170 per hour. As part of the service provided (at no additional cost), CSG will coordinate the pickup and return of all plans via CSG staff or a licensed courier. Fees for proposed staff are as follows: Title Billing Rate Mark Lander, P E. Principal Engineer $170/hour Frank Navarro, P.E., Principal Engineer $170/hour Sophie Truong, P.E., P.L.S., Principal Engineer $170/hour Eric Gonzales, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer $170/hour Additional CSG staff will be invoiced per the firm's 2016 Billing Rate Schedule below. Senior Principal Engineer $170 Principal Engineer $170 Project Manager $170 Senior Engineer $170 Senior Structural Engineer $170 Associate Engineer $150 Assistant Engineer $130 Design Supervisor $120 Senior CAD Designer $120 Engineering Technician $110 Resident Engineer $165 Assistant Resident Engineer / Office Engineer $135 Construction Inspector $120 Rates reflect and include administrative costs and routine expenses such as local mileage, copying, fax, telephone, mail, in-house printing, software, and computer usage, etc. Reproduction and sub consultants are billed at cost plus 15%. Hourly rates will remain effective through June 30, 2017, for the following staff Associate Engineer, Assistant Engineer, Design Supervisor, Senior CAD Designer, Engineering Technician, Resident Engineer, Assistant Resident Engineer/Office Engineer, and Construction Inspector. Hourly rates for Senior Principal Engineer, Principal Engineer, Project Manager, Senior Engineer, and Senior Structural Engineer will remain at $170/hour through the expiration date of the amendment. Exhibit B 14 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Requests for expedited plan review will be reviewed with the City on a case by case basis. All hourly rates include overhead costs including, but not limited to, salaries, benefits, Workers Compensation Insurance, office expenses, etc. Should the scope of work change or circumstances develop which necessitate special handling, we will negotiate and agree upon applicable rates with the City prior to proceeding. Exhibit C 15 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Exhibit A to Resolution EXHIBIT C INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS for Consultant Services Agreement Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Consultant will maintain insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below. Consultant will use existing coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth here, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. Consultant acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds available to City in excess of the limits and coverage required in this agreement and which is applicable to a given loss, will be available to City. Consultant shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance: General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office "Commercial General Liability" policy form CG 00 01 or the exact equivalent. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per occurrence. Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage form CA 0001 including symbol 1 (Any Auto) or the exact equivalent. Limits are subject to review, but in no event to be less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per accident. If Consultant owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a non - owned auto endorsement to the general liability policy described above. If Consultant or Consultant's employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, Consultant shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person. Workers Compensation on a state -approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by law with employer's liability limits no less than $1,000,000 (One Million Dollars) per accident or disease. Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance (Over Primary) if used to meet limit requirements, shall provide coverage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages. Any such coverage provided under an umbrella liability policy shall include a drop down provision providing primary coverage above a maximum $25,000 self-insured retention for liability not covered by primary but covered by the umbrella. Coverage shall be provided on a "pay on behalf' basis, with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. Policy shall contain a provision obligating insurer at the time insured's liability is determined, not requiring actual payment by the insured first. There shall be no cross liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another. Coverage shall be applicable to City for injury to employees of Consultant, subconsultants or others involved in the Work. The scope of coverage provided is subject to approval of City following receipt of proof of insurance as required herein. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per occurrence. Professional Liability or Errors and Omissions Insurance as appropriate shall be written on a policy form coverage specifically designed to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the consultant and "Covered Professional Services" as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this agreement. The policy limit shall be no less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per claim and in the Exhibit C 16 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 aggregate. The policy must "pay on behalf of the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend. The policy retroactive date shall be on or before the effective date of this agreement. Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by insurers that are admitted carriers in the state of California and with an A.M. Best's rating of A- or better and a minimum financial size M. General conditions pertaining to provision of insurance coverage by Consultant. Consultant and City agree to the following with respect to insurance provided by Consultant. 1. Consultant agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insureds the City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 20 10 or an approved equivalent. If completed operations coverage is excluded, the policy must be endorsed to include such coverage. Consultant also agrees to require all contractors, and subcontractors to do likewise. 2. No liability insurance coverage provided to comply with this Agreement shall prohibit Consultant, or Consultant's employees, or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. Consultant agrees to waive subrogation rights against City regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all contractors and subcontractors to do likewise. 3. The worker's compensation policy is to be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation. The insurance company, in its endorsement, agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers for losses paid under the terms of this policy which arise from the work performed by the named insured for the City. 4. All insurance coverage and limits provided by Contractor and available or applicable to this agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any other agreement relating to the City or its operations limits the application of such insurance coverage. 5. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing. 6. No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve to eliminate so-called "third party action over" claims, including any exclusion for bodily injury to an employee of the insured or of any contractor or subcontractor. 7. All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional requirements by the City, as the need arises. Consultant shall not make any reductions in scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period) that may affect City's protection without City's prior written consent. 8. Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of insurance evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured endorsement to Consultant's general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or prior to the execution of this Agreement. In the event such proof of any insurance is not delivered as required, or in the event such insurance is Exhibit C 17 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 canceled at any time and no replacement coverage is provided, City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain any insurance it deems necessary to protect its interests under this or any other agreement and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by City shall be charged to and promptly paid by Consultant or deducted from sums due Consultant, at City option. 9. Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any cancellation of coverage. Consultant agrees to require its insurer to modify such certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will "endeavor" (as opposed to being required) to comply with the requirements of the certificate. 10. It is acknowledged by the parties of this agreement that all insurance coverage required to be provided by Consultant or any subcontractor, is intended to apply first and on a primary, noncontributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self insurance available to City. 11. Consultant agrees to ensure that subcontractors, and any other parry involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with subcontractors and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review. 12. Consultant agrees not to self -insure or to use any self-insured retentions or deductibles on any portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it will not allow any contractor, subcontractor, Architect, Engineer or other entity or person in any way involved in the performance of work on the project contemplated by this agreement to self -insure its obligations to City. If Consultant's existing coverage includes a deductible or self-insured retention, the deductible or self- insured retention must be declared to the City. At that time the City shall review options with the Consultant, which may include reduction or elimination of the deductible or self-insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions. 13. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increased benefit to City. 14. For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this Agreement will be deemed to have been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be deemed to be in furtherance of or towards performance of this Agreement. 15. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any insurance requirement in no way imposes any additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder in this or any other regard. 16. Consultant will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its employees or agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this agreement. This obligation applies whether or not the agreement is canceled or terminated for any reason. Termination of this obligation is not effective until City executes a written statement to that effect. Exhibit C 18 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 17. Consultant shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Consultant's insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City within five days of the expiration of the coverages. 18. The provisions of any workers' compensation or similar act will not limit the obligations of Consultant under this agreement. Consultant expressly agrees not to use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. 19. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue, and is not intended by any party or insured to be limiting or all-inclusive. 20. These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other provision in this agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as such. 21. The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this Agreement to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs the provisions of this Section. 22. Consultant agrees to be responsible for ensuring that no contract used by any party involved in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or Consultant for the cost of additional insurance coverage required by this agreement. Any such provisions are to be deleted with reference to City. It is not the intent of City to reimburse any third party for the cost of complying with these requirements. There shall be no recourse against City for payment of premiums or other amounts with respect thereto. 23. Consultant agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against Consultant arising out of the work performed under this agreement. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City. Exhibit C 19 of 20 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Exhibit A to Resolution CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTANT I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the and a duly authorized representative of the firm of , whose address is and that neither I nor the above firm I here represent has: a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above consultant) to solicit to secure this Agreement. b) Agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the Agreement; or C) Paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above consultant) any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with, procuring or carrying out the Agreement; Except as here expressly stated (if any); I acknowledge that this certificate is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. Date 20 of 20 12578020A 80078/0012 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Signature Exhibit B to Resolution CSG TASK ORDER NO. 2016-01 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AND CSG Consultants Inc. AUTHORIZATION TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SERVICES SECTION 1— PURPOSE The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct CSG Consultants Inc. to proceed with the work specified in Section 2 below in accordance with the provisions of the MASTER AGREEMENT between the City of Rohnert Park ("City") and CSG Consultants Inc. ("Consultant") hereto dated June 28, 2016. SECTION 2 — SCOPE OF WORK The items authorized by this Task Order are presented in Attachment "A" - Scope of Services. SECTION 3 — COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT Compensation shall be as provided in the MASTER AGREEMENT between the parties hereto referenced in SECTION 1 above. The total cost for services as set forth in SECTION 2 shall be actual costs (time and materials) based on Consultants' standard labor charges in accordance with the provisions of the MASTER AGREEMENT and as shown in Attachment "B" for an amount not -to -exceed $ 150,000. SECTION 4 — TIME OF PERFORMANCE The work described in SECTION 2 shall be completed by June 20, 2017 or as extended by the City Manager. SECTION 5 — ITEMS AND CONDITIONS All items and conditions contained in the MASTER AGREEMENT for professional services between City and Consultant are incorporated by reference. Approved this 28th day June, 2016. Signatures on Next Page Exhibit B to Resolution CITY OF R014NERT PARK Darrin Jenkins, City Manager (Date) Per Resolution No. 2016- adopted by the Rohnert Park City Council at its meeting of June 28, 2016. ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney 2 CSG CONSULTANTS INC. Cyrus Kianpour, President CSG CONSULTANTS INC. Nourdin Khayata, Secretary (Date) (Date) Exhibit B to Resolution EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES Enzineerinz Development Review Services Anticipated services to be provided include as -needed staff augmentation for engineering development review associated with land development activity in the City. It is anticipated that the majority of the work will involve the University District and Southeast Specific Plan Areas, but work on other new and ongoing applications may also be performed. Work may include but not be limited to the following activities: 1. Review of new or proposed amendments to specific plans, tentative maps, planned development zoning, and other development entitlement applications. 2. Assist City with development of conditions of approval, development agreements, and other requirements associated with development applications. Assist City in negotiations with developers regarding terms of agreements or conditions. 3. Review and recommend approval of improvement plans, subdivision maps, and other documents. Review documents for conformance to approved tentative map, specific plans, and conditions of approval. Confirm that plans conform to City standard design criteria, including draft or proposed standards as needed, and infrastructure or other master plans. Coordinate plan review with other City departments. Confirm that developer has obtained necessary permits or approvals from other public agencies as needed, and that plans conform to North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board and Sonoma County Water Agency requirements for storm water treatment and retention and City of Santa Rosa requirements for recycled water use. 4. Review and recommend approval of engineering bond estimates and subdivision guarantees. Assist staff in preparing subdivision improvement agreements, other agreements, and staff reports. 5. As requested, work with and manage City's consultant reviewing hydrology to determine proper mitigations and needs to avoid increasing flooding risks to existing residents. 6. As requested, work with and manage City's consultant reviewing hydrology and developer to submit required Conditional Letters of Map Revision (CLOMARs), and subsequent Letters of Map Revision (LOMARs) as needed. 7. As requested, calculate and provide fees to developer. Provide fee offset information for proposed infrastructure to be developed under the Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP). 8. As requested, provide analysis of water use and impact of well pumping use in the City. 9. Draft engineering reports and resolutions for Council approval as needed. 10. Meet with developers, consultants, or other agencies on behalf of staff. Exhibit B to Resolution EXHIBIT B FEE SCHEDULE CSG will invoice at the beginning of every month for services rendered during the previous month. Compensation shall be based upon hourly rates based on the CSG's rate schedule, with the exception that rates will not exceed $170 per hour. As part of the service provided (at no additional cost), CSG will coordinate the pickup and return of all plans via CSG staff or a licensed courier. Fees for proposed staff are as follows: Title Billing Rate Mark Lander, P E. Principal Engineer $170/hour Frank Navarro, P.E., Principal Engineer $170/hour Sophie Truong, P.E., P.L.S., Principal Engineer $170/hour Eric Gonzales, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer $170/hour Additional CSG staff will be invoiced per the firm's 2016 Billing Rate Schedule below. Senior Principal Engineer $170 Principal Engineer $170 Project Manager $170 Senior Engineer $170 Senior Structural Engineer $170 Associate Engineer $150 Assistant Engineer $130 Design Supervisor $120 Senior CAD Designer $120 Engineering Technician $110 Resident Engineer $165 Assistant Resident Engineer / Office Engineer $135 Construction Inspector $120 Rates reflect and include administrative costs and routine expenses such as local mileage, copying, fax, telephone, mail, in-house printing, software, and computer usage, etc. Reproduction and sub consultants are billed at cost plus 15%. Hourly rates will remain effective through June 30, 2017, for the following staff Associate Engineer, Assistant Engineer, Design Supervisor, Senior CAD Designer, Engineering Technician, Resident Engineer, Assistant Resident Engineer/Office Engineer, and Construction Inspector. Hourly rates for Senior Principal Engineer, Principal Engineer, Project Manager, Senior Engineer, and Senior Structural Engineer will remain at $1701hour through the expiration date of the amendment. Requests for expedited plan review will be reviewed with the City on a case by case basis. All hourly rates include overhead costs including, but not limited to, salaries,. benefits, Workers Compensation Insurance, office expenses, etc. Should the scope of work change or circumstances develop which necessitate special handling, we will negotiate and agree upon applicable rates with the City prior to proceeding �L,JJN r pAR,V .� Mission Statement � sz "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CAL lF6 AK''P CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Mary Grace Pawson, Director of Development Services Prepared By: Mary Grace Pawson, Director of Development Services ITEM NO. 6C4 Agenda Title: Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with Dudek for Planning and Environmental Services and Related Actions RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with Dudek for Planning and Environmental Services and Authorizing the Finance Director to Make Appropriations and Increase Budgeted Revenue to Account for Developer Reimbursements. BACKGROUND: The City's General Plan envisions significant residential and non-residential development in the Northeast, University District, Southeast, Wilfred Dowdell and Northwest Specific Plan Areas (SPAS). In addition, development is planned in the Stadium Lands, Sonoma Mountain Village and Central Rohnert Park Planned Development Areas (PDs). The City has been experiencing a resurgence in development activity, and in 2012 it retained Dudek, to assist with planning and environment review services in order to provide timely response to applicants. Dudek is nearing the limit of its budget under its current contract with amendments. The proposed Master Agreement and Task Order will allow for their continued service in planning and environmental support. ANALYSIS: The City's Development Services Department is currently processing a significant number of planning applications as outlined in Table 1 on the following page. While City planning staff is active in the processing of this work, staff does not have sufficient resources to complete the required volume of reviews in a timely fashion. The City's 2016-17 budget anticipates this workload and plans for the use of outside consultant resources to allow for timely processing of development applications. The proposed $250,000 Task Order can be accommodated within Development Services 2016-17 budget. Dudek has been engaged in planning and environmental review for the City for four years and brings a unique understanding of several of the City's Specific Plans and Planned Development Areas. Retaining Dudek provides the City and the applicants with continuity and value. Dudek's rates are competitive with planning and environmental consulting firms. This proposed Task Order with Dudek is in alignment with Purchasing Policy Section 3.6.1) which allows the city to engage professional services via a negotiated process. ITEM NO. 6C4 Table 1 — Current Planning and Environmental Review Activities SPA or PD Applicant Current Activities University District Brookfield Homes Ongoing review of Vast Oak Phase 1 for conformance with approved Development Area Plans. Consultation on offsite infrastructure projects and relationship to the program Environmental Impact Report. Southeast SPA Redwood Equities Ongoing review of Vast Oak Phase 1 for conformance with approved Development Area Plans. Stadium Lands PDA Residences at 5 Master Plan Update, Final Development Plan Creeks Review and Environmental Review of proposed modifications to the Stadium Lands Planned Development. Central Rohnert Park Rohnert Crossings Final Development Plan Review and PDA Environmental Review consistent with the adopted Central Rohnert Park PDA EIR Central Rohnert Park Learning Experience Environmental Review consistent with the PDA adopted Central Rohnert Park PDA EIR Sonoma Mountain Amended Preliminary Review of application and possible plan Village Development Plan update STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This action is consistent with Strategic Plan Goal D — Continue to Develop a Vibrant Community. This action will allow the Development Services Department to continue to provide timely service to applicants. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: Authorize the Master Agreement and Task Order 2016-01 with Dudek (recommended action). This option preserves continuity and understanding and provides the resources necessary to ensure timely review of development submittals. 2. Secure proposals from other consulting firms for planning and environmental review. Because of the volume of work in Development Services, staff is securing proposals from several other consultants for support. However, staff recommends retaining Dudek for work on the projects in Table 1 because of their strong familiarity with these projects. Perform all planning and environmental review with City staff. This option is not recommended because staff does not have sufficient resources to review all the development applications currently being considered, which will result in delays. The use of a consultant offers flexibility to the City to engage their services only if and when there is work to be done. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The fiscal impact of this action is $250,000. Staff is requesting this relatively large contract amount because the developers for the Residences at Five Creeks and Rohnert Crossings may be processing environmental documents and entitlements on 2 ITEM NO. 6C4 a similar schedule and it will be important to have adequate resources available to support the work. The funding source is development deposit accounts or reimbursement agreements. These are costs fully reimbursed by developers and applicants in compliance with the City's cost recovery policy (at no cost to City) and would be charged to the respective developments and projects. The requested action authorizes the Finance Director to increase budgeted revenue and appropriations as necessary to match the funding received from developers and applicants and costs incurred under this contract. Department Head Approval Date: 05/19/2016 Finance Director Approval Date: 05/25/2016 City Attorney Approval Date: 05/26/2016 City Manager Approval Date: 06/16/2016 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order 2016-01 with Dudek for Planning and Environmental Services and Authorizing the Finance Director to Make Appropriations and Increase Budgeted Revenue to Account for Developer Reimbursements 2. Exhibit A to Resolution - Master Agreement for Consultant Services 3. Exhibit B to Resolution — Dudek Consultants Inc. Task Order 2016-01 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-67 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES AND TASK ORDER 2016-01 WITH DUDEK FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AND AUTHORIZING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE APPROPRIATIONS AND INCREASE BUDGETED REVENUE TO ACCOUNT FOR DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENTS WHEREAS; the City is experiencing a significant volume of new development that requires planning and environmental review; WHEREAS, Dudek is a planning consultant with significant experience in planning and environmental review of development projects and specific experience with development activity in the City's University District and Southeast Specific Plan Areas and its Stadium Lands, Sonoma Mountain Village and Central Rohnert Park Planned Development Areas; WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3.6.D of the City's Purchasing Policy, the City has secured a proposal from Dudek for planning and environmental review services and has negotiated with Dudek to arrive at a proposed scope of services and budget that meet the City's needs for planning and environmental support; and WHEREAS, the cost of the Consultant's services are reimbursed to the City by various applicants for processing their applications and do not represent a cost to the City's general fund or any other City fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute a Master Services Agreement and Task Order 2016-01 with Dudek, a California Corporation, for development review services in an amount not to exceed an additional two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all actions to effectuate this authorization for and on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park, including execution, if necessary, in substantially similar form to the Master Agreement attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit "A," and Dudek Task Order 2016-01 attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit "B", subject to minor modifications by the City Manager or City Attorney. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon receipt of developer reimbursements, the Finance Director is authorized to make appropriations and increase budgeted revenue as necessary to cover the costs of Task Order 2016-01. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A and Exhibit B AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) (2) 2016-67 Exhibit A to Resolution MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES This MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES ("Agreement") is entered into as of the 28th day of June, 2016, by and between the City of Rohnert Park ("City"), a California municipal corporation, and Dudek ("Consultant"), a California Corporation, with reference to the following facts, understandings and intentions. Recitals WHEREAS, City desires to obtain planning and environmental review services, and WHEREAS, Consultant hereby warrants to City that Consultant is skilled and able to provide such services described in Section 3 of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, City desires to retain Consultant pursuant to this Agreement to provide the services described in Section 3 of this Agreement, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Agreement NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals and all defined terms set forth above are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if set forth herein in full. 2. Project Coordination. Authorized representatives shall represent City and Consultant in all matters pertaining to this Agreement. A. City. The City Manager or his/her designee shall represent City for all purposes under this Agreement, except where approval for the City is specifically required by the City Council. The Planning Manager is hereby designated as the project manager ("Project Manager"). The Project Manager shall supervise the progress and execution of this Agreement. B. Consultant. The Consultant shall assign Cathy Spence -Wells to have overall responsibility for the progress and execution of this Agreement for Consultant. 3. Scope and Performance of Services A. Scope of Services. Subject to such policy direction and approvals as City may determine from time to time, Consultant shall perform the type of services generally set out in the Scope of Work attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant shall be assigned to provide particular services pursuant to the requirements of a task order that has been issued in conformance with the City's Purchasing Policy ("Task Order") executed by Consultant and City. lof 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 B. Time of Performance. The services of Consultant are to commence upon receipt of a written notice to proceed from City, but in no event prior to receiving a fully executed agreement from City and obtaining and delivering the required insurance coverage, and satisfactory evidence thereof, to City. Consultant shall perform its services in accordance with the schedule attached to the Task Order. Any changes to these dates in either this Section 3 or the Task Order shall be approved in writing by the Project Manager. C. Standard of Quality. City relies upon the professional ability of Consultant as a material inducement to entering into this Agreement. All work performed by Consultant under this Agreement shall be performed 1) with due diligence, using its best efforts to perform and coordinate all activities in a timely manner; 2) in accordance with all applicable legal requirements; and 3) with the standard of quality ordinarily to be expected of competent professionals in Consultant's field of expertise. Consultant shall correct, at its own expense, all errors made in the provision of services under this Agreement. In the event that Consultant fail to make such correction in a timely manner, City may make the correction and charge the cost thereof to Consultant. 4. Compensation and Method of Pam. A. Compensation. The compensation to be paid to Consultant, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall: (1) for services provided directly under this Agreement be at the rate and schedules more particularly described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, or (2) for services authorized by Task Orders, be at the rate and schedules specified by said Task Order. However, in no event shall the amount City pays to Consultant for services provided directly under this Agreement exceed fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00); nor shall the amount City pays to Consultant for work done by Task Order exceed the total compensation specified by the Task Order. Whether working under this Master Agreement or a Task Order, the services of the Consultant shall not commence without a written notice to proceed from the City. City's obligation to pay compensation to Consultant as provided herein is contingent upon Consultant's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto. Payment by City under this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of unsatisfactory work, even if such defects were known to the City at the time of payment. City shall pay Consultant as compensation in full for such services and expenses for the different elements of the scope of work as follows: B. Timing of Payment. (1) Consultant shall submit itemized monthly statements for work performed. All statements shall include adequate documentation demonstrating work performed during the billing period and shall conform to Federal Funding invoicing requirements, if applicable. Except as otherwise provided herein, City shall make payment, in full, within thirty (30) days after approval of the invoice by City. (2) Payments due and payable to Consultant for current services must be within the current budget and within an available, unexhausted 2 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 and unencumbered appropriation of the City. In the event the City has not appropriated sufficient funds for payment of Consultant services beyond the current fiscal year, this Agreement shall cover only those costs incurred up to the conclusion of the current fiscal year; payment for additional work is conditional upon future City appropriation. C. Changes in Compensation. Consultant will not undertake any work that will incur costs in excess of the amount set forth in Section 4(A) of this Agreement without prior written amendment to this Agreement. City shall have the right to amend the Scope of Work within the Agreement by written notification to the Consultant. In such event, the compensation and time of performance shall be subject to renegotiation upon written demand of either parry to the Agreement. Consultant shall not commence any work exceeding the Scope of Work without prior written authorization from the City. Failure of the Consultant to secure City's written authorization for extra or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in the contract price or time due, whether by way of compensation, restitution, quantum meruit, etc. for work done without the appropriate City authorization. D. Taxes. Consultant shall pay all taxes, assessments and premiums under the federal Social Security Act, any applicable unemployment insurance contributions, Workers Compensation insurance premiums, sales taxes, use taxes, personal property taxes, or other taxes or assessments now or hereafter in effect and payable by reason of or in connection with the services to be performed by Consultant. E. No Overtime or Premium Pay. Consultant shall receive no premium or enhanced pay for work normally understood as overtime, i.e., hours that exceed forty (40) hours per work week, or work performed during non-standard business hours, such as in the evenings or on weekends. Consultant shall not receive a premium or enhanced pay for work performed on a recognized holiday. Consultant shall not receive paid time off for days not worked, whether it be in the form of sick leave, administrative leave, or for any other form of absence. F. Litigation Support. Consultant agrees to testify at City's request if litigation is brought against City in connection with Consultant's work product. Unless the action is brought by Consultant or is based upon Consultant's negligence, City will compensate Consultant for the preparation and the testimony at Consultant's standard hourly rates, if requested by City and not part of the litigation brought by City against Consultant. 5. Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date of its execution by both parties and shall continue in full force and effect until December 31, 2019, unless earlier terminated in accordance with this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement may be extended for successive one-year term(s) upon mutual, written approval by the City Manager or his/her designee and Consultant. Work authorized by a separate Task Order as contemplated by this Agreement shall be performed in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Task Order. 3 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 6. Inspection. Consultant shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to ascertain that the services of Consultant are being performed in accordance with the requirements and intentions of this Agreement. All work done and all materials furnished, if any, shall be subject to the Project Manager's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve Consultant of any of its obligations to fulfill the Agreement as prescribed. 7. Ownership of Documents. Title, including the copyright and all intellectual property rights, to all plans, specifications, maps, estimates, reports, manuscripts, drawings, descriptions, designs, data, photographs, reports and any other final work products compiled, prepared or obtained by the Consultant under the Agreement shall be vested in City, none of which shall be used in any manner whatsoever, by any person, firm, corporation, or agency without the expressed written consent of the City. Consultant shall assume no responsibility for the unintended use by others of such final work products which are not related to the scope of the services described under this Agreement. Basic survey notes and sketches, charts, computations, and other data prepared or obtained under the Agreement shall be made available, upon request, to City without restriction or limitations on their use. Consultant may retain copies of the above-described information but agrees not to disclose or discuss any information gathered, discussed or generated in any way through this Agreement without the written permission of City during the term of this Agreement, unless required by law. 8. Employment of Other Consultants, Specialists or Experts. Consultant will not employ or otherwise incur an obligation to pay other consultants, specialists or experts for services in connection with this Agreement without the prior written approval of the City. 9. Conflict of Interest. A. Consultant covenants and represents that neither it, nor any officer or principal of its firm, has, or shall acquire any investment, income, business entity, interest in real property, or other interest, directly or indirectly, which would conflict in any manner with the interests of City, hinder Consultant's performance of services under this Agreement, or be affected in any manner or degree by performance of Consultant's services hereunder. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of the Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it as an officer, employee, agent, or subcontractor without the express written consent of the City. Consultant agrees at all times to avoid conflicts of interest, or the appearance of any conflicts of interest, with the interests of the City in the performance of the Agreement. (1) Consultant is not a designated employee within the meaning of the Political Reform Act because Consultant: (2) will conduct research and arrive at conclusions with respect to its rendition of information, advice, recommendation, or counsel independent of the control and direction of the City or of any City official, other than normal contract monitoring; and 4 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 (3) possesses no authority with respect to any City decision beyond the rendition of information, advice, recommendation, or counsel. (2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18700(a)(2).) 10. Liability of Members and Employees of City. No member of the City and no other officer, elected official, employee or agent of the City shall be personally liable to Consultant or otherwise in the event of any default or breach of the City, or for any amount which may become due to Consultant or any successor in interest, or for any obligations directly or indirectly incurred under the terms of this Agreement. The City has no liability or responsibility for any accident, loss, or damage to any work performed under this Agreement whether prior to its completion or acceptance or otherwise. 11. Indemnity. A. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall, at its own expense, indemnify, protect, defend (by counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City) and hold harmless City and any and all of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers ("Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all liability (including liability for claims, demands, damages, obligations, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including attorneys fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs and expert witness fees) of any nature ("Liability"), whether actual, alleged or threatened, which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the performance or failure to comply with this Agreement, regardless of any fault or alleged fault of the Indemnified Parties. For design professionals (as that term is defined by statute) acting within the scope of their professional capacity, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall, at its own expense, indemnify, protect, defend (by counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City) and hold harmless any Indemnified Parties from and against any and all Liability, whether actual, alleged or threatened, which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant, or as may be provided by statute in Civil Code § 2782.8, as may be amended from time to time. The only exception to Consultant's responsibility to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from Liability is due to the active negligence or willful misconduct of City or its elective or appointive boards, officers, agents and employees. B. Scope of Obli ag tion. Consultant's duty to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless as set forth in this Section 11 shall include the duty to defend (by counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City) as set forth in California Civil Code § 2778. This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages or compensation payable by or for Consultant under worker's compensation, disability or other employee benefit acts or the terms, applicability or limitations of any insurance held or provided by Consultant and shall continue to bind the parties after termination/completion of this agreement. This indemnification shall be regardless of and not in any way limited by the insurance requirements of this contract. This indemnification is for the full period of time allowed by law and shall survive the termination of this agreement. Consultant waives any and 5 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 all rights to express or implied indemnity against the Indemnified Parties concerning any Liability of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with the Agreement or Consultant's failure to comply with any of the terms of this Agreement. Consultant's duty to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless as set forth in this Section 11 shall not be excused because of the Consultant's inability to evaluate Liability, or because the Consultant evaluates Liability and determines that the Consultant is not or may not be liable. The Consultant must respond within thirty (30) calendar days to any tender by the City, unless the time for responding has been extended by an authorized representative of the City in writing. If the Consultant fails to timely accept such tender, in addition to any other remedies authorized by law, as much of the money due or that may become due to the Consultant under this Agreement as shall reasonably be considered necessary by the City may be retained by the City until disposition has been made of the matter subject to tender, or until the Consultant accepts the tender, whichever occurs first. Consultant agrees to fully reimburse all costs, including but not limited to attorney's fees and costs and fees of litigation incurred by the City in responding to matters prior to Consultant's acceptance of the tender. 12. Independent Contractor. It is expressly agreed that Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed by Consultant, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of City and shall have responsibility for and control over the details and means of providing its services under this Agreement. Consultant shall furnish, at its own expense, all labor, materials, equipment, tools, transportation and services necessary for the successful completion of the services under this Agreement. As an independent contractor, Consultant shall obtain no rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to City's employees, and Consultant hereby expressly waives any claim it may have to any such rights. Consultant, its officers, employees and agents shall not have any power to bind or commit the City to any decision. 13. Compliance with Laws. A. General. Consultant shall use the standard of care in its profession to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has and shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, insurance and approvals which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. City is not responsible or liable for Consultant's failure to comply with any or all of the requirements contained in this paragraph or in this Agreement. B. Workers' Compensation. Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the California Labor Code which require every employee to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and Consultant certifies that it will comply with such provisions before commencing performance of the Agreement and at all times in the performance of the Agreement. C. Prevailing_ Wage. Consultant and Consultant's subconsultants (if any) shall, to the extent required by the California Labor Code, pay not less than the latest 6 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 prevailing wage rates to workers and professionals as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations of the State of California pursuant to California Labor Code, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 2. Copies of the applicable wage determination are on file at the City's office of the City Clerk. D. Injury and Illness Prevention Program. Consultant certifies that it is aware of and has complied with the provisions of California Labor Code § 6401.7, which requires every employer to adopt a written injury and illness prevention program. E. Business Licenses. Except as otherwise allowed by City in its sole discretion, Consultant and all subconsultants shall have acquired, at Consultant's expense, a business license from the City in accordance with Chapter 5.04 of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code, prior to City's issuance of an authorization to proceed with the Services. Such license(s) shall be kept valid throughout the term of this Agreement. City may withhold compensation from Consultant until such time as Consultant complies with this section. F. Waiver of Subro ag tion. Consultant and Consultant's insurance company agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents and volunteers for losses paid under Consultant's workers' compensation insurance policy which arise from the work performed by Consultant for City. 14. Confidential Information. All data, documents, discussions or other information developed or received by or for Consultant in performance of this Agreement are confidential and not to be disclosed to any person except as authorized by City, or as required by law. 15. Assignment; Subcontractors; Employ A. Assi _gement. Consultant shall not assign, delegate, transfer, or convey its duties, responsibilities, or interests in this Agreement or any right, title, obligation, or interest in or to the same or any part thereof without the City's prior written consent, which shall be in the City's sole discretion. Any assignment without such approval shall be void and, at the City's option, shall immediately cause this Agreement to terminate. B. Subcontractors; Employees. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services of Consultant hereunder. No subcontractor of Consultant shall be recognized by the City as such; rather, all subcontractors are deemed to be employees of the Consultant, and Consultant agrees to be responsible for their performance. Consultant shall give its personal attention to the fulfillment of the provisions of this Agreement by all of its employees and subcontractors, if any, and shall keep the work under its control. If any employee or subcontractor of Consultant fails or refuses to carry out the provisions of this Agreement or appears to be incompetent or to act in a disorderly or improper manner, it shall be discharged immediately from the work under this Agreement on demand of the Project Manager. 16. Insurance. Without limiting Consultant's indemnification provided herein, Consultant shall, at its own expense, procure and maintain insurance that complies with the requirements set forth in Exhibit C to this Agreement, which is attached hereto and incorporated 7 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 by reference. Consultant shall upon thirty (30) days' notice comply with any changes in the amounts and terms of insurance as may be required from time -to -time by City's risk manager. 17. Termination of Agreement; Default. A. This Agreement and all obligations hereunder may be terminated at any time, with or without cause, by the City upon five (5) days' written notice to Consultant. B. If Consultant fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement within the time and in the manner herein provided or otherwise violates any of the terms of this Agreement, in addition to all other remedies provided by law, City may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice. In such event, Consultant shall be entitled to receive as full payment for all services satisfactorily rendered and expenses incurred hereunder, an amount which bears the same ratio to the total fees specified in the Agreement as the services satisfactorily rendered hereunder by Consultant bear to the total services otherwise required to be performed for such total fee; provided, however, that the City shall deduct from such amount the amount of damages, if any, sustained by City by virtue of the breach of the Agreement by consultant. C. In the event this Agreement is terminated by City without cause, Consultant shall be entitled to any compensation owing to it hereunder up to the time of such termination, it being understood that any payments are full compensation for services rendered prior to the time of payment. D. Upon termination of this Agreement with or without cause, Consultant shall turn over to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by Consultant or its subcontractors, if any, or given to Consultant or its subcontractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials shall become the permanent property of the City. Consultant, however, shall not be liable for the City's use of incomplete materials nor for the City's use of complete documents if used for other than the project contemplated by this Agreement. 18. Suspension. The City shall have the authority to suspend this Agreement and the services contemplated herein, wholly or in part, for such period as it deems necessary due to unfavorable conditions or to the failure on the part of the Consultant to perform any provision of this Agreement. Consultant will be paid for satisfactory services performed prior to the date of suspension. During the period of suspension, Consultant shall not receive any payment for services or expenses incurred by Consultant by reason of such suspension. 19. Merger; Amendment. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the agreement between City and Consultant and shall supersede all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by written instrument, signed by both the City and Consultant. All provisions of this Agreement are expressly made conditions. 8 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 20. Interpretation. This Agreement shall be interpreted as though it was a product of a joint drafting effort and no provisions shall be interpreted against a party on the ground that said parry was solely or primarily responsible for drafting the language to be interpreted. 21. Litigation Costs. If either party becomes involved in litigation arising out of this Agreement or the performance thereof, the court in such litigation shall award reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, to the prevailing party. In awarding attorneys' fees, the court will not be bound by any court fee schedule, but shall, if it is in the interest of justice to do so, award the full amount of costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees paid or incurred in good faith. 22. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. Upon receipt of a written notice from City to proceed with work required by a Task Order, Consultant shall immediately commence work to perform the services required by that Task Order according to the time requirements set in the Task Order. 23. Written Notification. Any notice, demand, request, consent, approval or communication that either party desires or is required to give to the other party shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by prepaid, first class mail. Any such notice, demand, etc. shall be addressed to the other party at the address set forth below. Either party may change its address by notifying the other party of the change of address. Notice shall be deemed communicated within 72 hours from the time of mailing if mailed as provided in this section. If to City: City Clerk City of Rohnert Park - City Hall 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Phone: 707-588-2225 Fax: 707-792-1876 Email: cityclerk@rpcity.org If to Consultant: Dudek Attn: Cathy Spence -Wells, Principal 853 Lincoln Way suite 208 Auburn, CA 95063 cspence-wells@dudek.com 24. Consultant's Books and Records. A. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services, or expenditures and disbursements charged to City and all documents and records which demonstrate performance under this Agreement for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of termination or completion of this Agreement. 9 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 B. Any records or documents required to be maintained pursuant to this Agreement shall be made available for inspection or audit, at any time during regular business hours, upon written request by the City Attorney, City Auditor, City Manager, or a designated representative of any of these officers. Copies of such documents shall be provided to City for inspection when it is practical to do so. Otherwise, unless an alternative is mutually agreed upon, the records shall be available at Consultant's address indicated for receipt of notices in this Agreement. C. The City may, by written request by any of the above-named officers, require that custody of the records be given to the City and that the records and documents be maintained in the City Manager's office. 25. Agreement Binding. The terms, covenants, and conditions of this Agreement shall apply to, and shall bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assigns, and subcontractors of both parties. 26. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant is an equal opportunity employer and agrees to comply with all applicable state and federal regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Consultant will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, age, sex, creed, color, sexual orientation, marital status or national origin. Consultant will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are treated during such employment without regard to race, religion, age, sex, creed, color, sexual orientation, marital status, or national origin. Such action shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; lay-offs or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. Consultant further agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 27. Non -Exclusive Agreement. This is a non-exclusive agreement. City reserves the right to provide, and to retain other consultants to provide, services that are the same or similar to the services described in this Agreement. 28. City Not Obligated to Third Parties. The City shall not be obligated or liable for payment hereunder to any party other than Consultant. 29. Remedies/Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any term, covenant, condition, right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, right or remedy that such party may have hereunder. All remedies permitted or available under this Agreement, or at law or in equity, are cumulative and alternative. As a condition precedent to commencing legal action involving a claim or dispute against the City arising from this Agreement, the Consultant must present a written claim to City in accordance with the Rohnert Park Municipal Code 30. Severability. If any one or more of the provisions contained herein shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, then such provision or provisions shall be deemed severable from the remaining provisions hereof, and such invalidity, 10 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 illegality, or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had not been contained herein. 31. Exhibits. The following exhibits are attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by this reference: A. Exhibit A: Scope of Work and Schedule of Performance B. Exhibit B: Compensation C. Exhibit C: Insurance Requirements 32. Execution. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument and shall become binding upon the parties when at least one copy hereof shall have been signed by both parties hereto. In approving this Agreement, it shall not be necessary to produce or account for more than one such counterpart. 33. News Releases/Interviews. All Consultant and subconsultant news releases, media interviews, testimony at hearings and public comment shall be prohibited unless expressly authorized by City. 34. Applicable Law; Venue. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted according to California law. In the event that suit shall be brought by either party hereunder, the parties agree that a trial of such action shall be held exclusively in a state court in the County of Sonoma, California. 35. Authorijy. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of one of the parties represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign and deliver the Agreement on behalf of such parry and that this Agreement is binding on such party in accordance with its terms. 36. Statement of Economic Interest. If City determines Consultant comes within the definition of Consultant under the Political Reform Act (Government Code §87100), Consultant shall complete and file and shall require any other person doing work under this Agreement to complete and file a "Statement of Economic Interest" with the Clerk of the City of Rohnert Park disclosing Consultant and/or such other person's financial interests. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. Signatures on Next Page 11 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CONSULTANT By: City Manager Date: Per Resolution No. 2016 --adopted by the Rohnert Park City Council at its meeting of June 28, 2016. APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney ATTEST: By: City Clerk 12 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 By: _ Title: Date: CONSULTANT By: _ Title: Date: Exhibit A to Resolution EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES Planning and Environmental Review Services A. Development Review Planning Services Consultant will provide contract staffing services to assist the City of Rohnert Park staff with the project management and entitlement processing tasks for development projects under review at the City. Service covered under this section is for service that is reimbursed by private development and applicants under the City's cost recovery program. Tasks to be performed shall be specifically requested by City before and work is initiated and may include: Environmental Document Preparation and Management Provide oversight and direction to project applicants and environmental consultants throughout completion of the EIR process, serving as primary contact between the City, the applicant and EIR consultant. Review and comment on the environmental documents on behalf of the Planning Division. Compile all EIR review comments completed by the various City departments and assist with the interdepartmental coordination of EIR-related comments as needed. Oversight and management of the EIR preparation; ensure routing of submittals to the appropriate departments and agencies; and provide EIR status/schedule updates. Ensure departmental files provide a legally -adequate EIR administrative record. Complete or review environmental documentation to ensure compliance with CEQA and other state regulations. 2. Application Review and Coordination Assist staff in ongoing processing and management of the applications; update and organize all project files; review and comment on all project submittals; and be responsible for scheduling regular meetings on an individual and group basis between City staff, applicant and other agencies as needed to ensure steady progress of the application processing. This would include communication and coordination with each of the City departments and agencies in a manner that will provide consistent responses and direction to the project applicant. 3. Development Agreement Provide support to City staff with Development Agreement negotiations and completion of draft DAs. 4. Staff Report Preparation Prepare staff reports for Park and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission and City Council hearing, resolutions, conditions of approval and findings, as directed by the Development Service Director. 5. Public Hearing Preparation Prepare public presentation materials, including staff reports and exhibits for the Commission and Council hearings. Exhibit A 13 of 21 6. Annexation Prepare annexation applications and coordinate process through LAFCO. 7. Project Implementation Review and provide input on all supporting plans, programs and actions to ensure that the project is consistent with City policies and environmental mitigation requirements. Coordinate update of Specific Plan, General Plan Diagram and Zoning Map to reflect final decision on development projects. 8. Other Work As directed. B. Biological Resources Studies, Permitting and Services Consultant will provide biological services to assist the City of Rohnert Park staff with the project management and entitlement processing tasks for development projects under review at the City. Service covered under this section is for service that will be reimbursed by private development and applicants under the City's cost recovery program. Tasks to be performed shall be specifically requested by City before and work is initiated and may include: Biological Resources Assessments Review background information (soils, aerial photos, topographic maps, other environmental documents). Obtain report from the California Natural Diversity Data Base for special status species occurrences in the region. Perform query of the California Native Plant Society database for rare plants with potential to occur in the project area. Obtain a database report from the USFWS for special -status species with potential to occur in the project area and critical habitat. Conduct field survey of site to inventory vegetation types and wildlife habitat. Prepare a list of observed plants and animals. Prepare exhibits including habitat maps, species occurrence data, critical habitat, and ground photos. Identify the location of any special status species populations. Prepare Biological Resources Assessment report documenting results of research and field survey(s). 2. Special -status Plant and Animal Surveys Biologists will survey the site for the occurrence of special -status species according to applicable regulatory guidance for surveys within the Santa Rosa Plain Conservation Strategy Area. Prepare a list of species observed and field map locations of any rare plant populations or special -status animal species observed. Prepare exhibits to identify the locations of species mapped during the field survey. Incorporate the results of the survey into survey report include recommendations for appropriate mitigation strategies for any species identified. 3. Wetland Delineations and Verifications Wetland delineations will be conducted to the standards established by the San Francisco District Corps office. Obtain and evaluate background data, such as aerial photographs, soils maps, and other pertinent information. Conduct a wetland delineation according to the Corps' 1987 manual using the three parameter method described in the manual. Create a wetland delineation map showing the features identified as waters of the United States during the delineation site visit. 14 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Prepare a Wetland Delineation Report for submission to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Work with the Corps to finalize verification of the Wetland Delineation map. 4. Resource Agency Consultation and Permitting Resource specialists will work on behalf of the City with applicable state and federal agencies to consult regarding Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act and other regulations to obtain information and permits, as needed. 5. Other Work As directed. 15 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Exhibit A to Resolution EXHIBIT B FEE SCHEDULE PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Principal.......................................................................................... $210.00/hr Environmental Specialist/ Planner VI ........................................ $195.00/hr Environmental Specialist/ Planner V .......................................... $175.00/hr Environmental Specialist/ Planner IV ........................................ $165.00/hr Environmental Specialist/ Planner III ......................................... $155.00/hr Environmental Specialist/ Planner II .......................................... $135.00/hr Environmental Specialist/ Planner I ........................................... $125.00/hr Analyst III........................................................................................ $115.00/hr Analyst II......................................................................................... $105.00/hr AnalystI............................................................................................ $95.00/hr Planning Assistant II....................................................................... $85.00/hr Planning Assistant I......................................................................... $75.00/hr OFFICE SERVICES Technical/Drafting/CADD Services Senior Designer.............................................................................. $145.00/hr Designer........................................................................................... $135.00/hr Assistant Designer......................................................................... $130.00/hr GIS Specialist IV............................................................................. $155.00/hr GIS Specialist III............................................................................. $145.00/hr GIS Specialist II.............................................................................. $135.00/hr GIS Specialist I................................................................................ $125.00/hr CADD Operator III........................................................................ $125.00/hr CADD Operator II......................................................................... $120.00/hr CADD Operator I........................................................................... $105.00/hr CADD Drafter.................................................................................. $95.00/hr CADD Technician............................................................................ $85.00/hr SUPPORT SERVICES Technical Editor 111......................................................................... $145.00/1 -kr Technical Editor 11.......................................................................... $130.00/hr Technical Editor 1........................................................................... $115.00/hr Publications Specialist 111.............................................................. $105.00/hr Publications Specialist 11................................................................. $95.00/hr Publications Specialist 1................................................................... $85.00/hr Clerical Administration II............................................................... $85.00/hr Clerical Administration I................................................................ $80.00/hr Material and Outside Services - Subcontractors, rental of special equipment, special reproductions and blueprinting, outside data processing and computer services, etc., are charged at 1.15 times the direct cost. Travel Expenses - Mileage at current IRS allowable rates. Annual Increases - Unless identified otherwise, these standard rates will increase 3% annually. Exhibit B 16 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Exhibit A to Resolution IWXa1:�111[�' INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS for Consultant Services Agreement Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Consultant will maintain insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below. Consultant will use existing coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth here, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. Consultant acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds available to City in excess of the limits and coverage required in this agreement and which is applicable to a given loss, will be available to City. Consultant shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance: General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office "Commercial General Liability" policy form CG 00 01 or the exact equivalent. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per occurrence. Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage form CA 0001 including symbol 1 (Any Auto) or the exact equivalent. Limits are subject to review, but in no event to be less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per accident. If Consultant owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a non - owned auto endorsement to the general liability policy described above. If Consultant or Consultant's employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, Consultant shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person. Workers Compensation on a state -approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by law with employer's liability limits no less than $1,000,000 (One Million Dollars) per accident or disease. Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance (Over Primary) if used to meet limit requirements, shall provide coverage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages. Any such coverage provided under an umbrella liability policy shall include a drop down provision providing primary coverage above a maximum $25,000 self-insured retention for liability not covered by primary but covered by the umbrella. Coverage shall be provided on a "pay on behalf' basis, with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. Policy shall contain a provision obligating insurer at the time insured's liability is determined, not requiring actual payment by the insured first. There shall be no cross liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another. Coverage shall be applicable to City for injury to employees of Consultant, subconsultants or others involved in the Work. The scope of coverage provided is subject to approval of City following receipt of proof of insurance as required herein. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per occurrence. Professional Liability or Errors and Omissions Insurance as appropriate shall be written on a policy form coverage specifically designed to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the consultant and "Covered Professional Services" as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this agreement. The policy limit shall be no less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per claim and in the Exhibit B 17 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 aggregate. The policy must "pay on behalf of the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend. The policy retroactive date shall be on or before the effective date of this agreement. Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by insurers that are admitted carriers in the state of California and with an A.M. Best's rating of A- or better and a minimum financial size M. General conditions pertaining to provision of insurance coverage by Consultant. Consultant and City agree to the following with respect to insurance provided by Consultant. 1. Consultant agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insureds the City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 20 10 or an approved equivalent. If completed operations coverage is excluded, the policy must be endorsed to include such coverage. Consultant also agrees to require all contractors, and subcontractors to do likewise. 2. No liability insurance coverage provided to comply with this Agreement shall prohibit Consultant, or Consultant's employees, or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. Consultant agrees to waive subrogation rights against City regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all contractors and subcontractors to do likewise. 3. The worker's compensation policy is to be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation. The insurance company, in its endorsement, agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers for losses paid under the terms of this policy which arise from the work performed by the named insured for the City. 4. All insurance coverage and limits provided by Contractor and available or applicable to this agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any other agreement relating to the City or its operations limits the application of such insurance coverage. 5. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing. 6. No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve to eliminate so-called "third party action over" claims, including any exclusion for bodily injury to an employee of the insured or of any contractor or subcontractor. 7. All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional requirements by the City, as the need arises. Consultant shall not make any reductions in scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period) that may affect City's protection without City's prior written consent. 8. Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of insurance evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured endorsement to Consultant's general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or prior to the execution of this Agreement. In the event such proof of any insurance is not delivered as required, or in the event such insurance is canceled at any time and no replacement coverage is provided, City has the right, but not the duty, 18 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 to obtain any insurance it deems necessary to protect its interests under this or any other agreement and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by City shall be charged to and promptly paid by Consultant or deducted from sums due Consultant, at City option. 9. Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any cancellation of coverage. Consultant agrees to require its insurer to modify such certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will "endeavor" (as opposed to being required) to comply with the requirements of the certificate. 10. It is acknowledged by the parties of this agreement that all insurance coverage required to be provided by Consultant or any subcontractor, is intended to apply first and on a primary, noncontributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self insurance available to City. 11. Consultant agrees to ensure that subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with subcontractors and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review. 12. Consultant agrees not to self -insure or to use any self-insured retentions or deductibles on any portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it will not allow any contractor, subcontractor, Architect, Engineer or other entity or person in any way involved in the performance of work on the project contemplated by this agreement to self -insure its obligations to City. If Consultant's existing coverage includes a deductible or self-insured retention, the deductible or self- insured retention must be declared to the City. At that time the City shall review options with the Consultant, which may include reduction or elimination of the deductible or self-insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions. 13. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increased benefit to City. 14. For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this Agreement will be deemed to have been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be deemed to be in furtherance of or towards performance of this Agreement. 15. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any insurance requirement in no way imposes any additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder in this or any other regard. 16. Consultant will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its employees or agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this agreement. This obligation applies whether or not the agreement is canceled or terminated for any reason. Termination of this obligation is not effective until City executes a written statement to that effect. 19 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 17. Consultant shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Consultant's insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City within five days of the expiration of the coverages. 18. The provisions of any workers' compensation or similar act will not limit the obligations of Consultant under this agreement. Consultant expressly agrees not to use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. 19. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue, and is not intended by any party or insured to be limiting or all-inclusive. 20. These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other provision in this agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as such. 21. The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this Agreement to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs the provisions of this Section. 22. Consultant agrees to be responsible for ensuring that no contract used by any party involved in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or Consultant for the cost of additional insurance coverage required by this agreement. Any such provisions are to be deleted with reference to City. It is not the intent of City to reimburse any third party for the cost of complying with these requirements. There shall be no recourse against City for payment of premiums or other amounts with respect thereto. 23. Consultant agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against Consultant arising out of the work performed under this agreement. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City. 20 of 21 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Exhibit A to Resolution CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTANT I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the and a duly authorized representative of the firm of , whose address is and that neither I nor the above firm I here represent has: a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above consultant) to solicit to secure this Agreement. b) Agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the Agreement; or C) Paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above consultant) any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with, procuring or carrying out the Agreement; Except as here expressly stated (if any); I acknowledge that this certificate is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. Date 21 of 21 12578020A 80078/0012 OAK #4844-6469-8375 v103 Signature Dudek TASK ORDER NO. 2016-01 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AND Dudek AUTHORIZATION TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SERVICES SECTION 1— PURPOSE The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct Dudek to proceed with the work specified in Section 2 below in accordance with the provisions of the MASTER AGREEMENT between the City of Rohnert Park ("City") and Dudek ("Consultant") hereto dated June 28, 2016. SECTION 2 — SCOPE OF WORK The items authorized by this Task Order are presented in Attachment "A" - Scope of Services. SECTION 3 — COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT Compensation shall be as provided in the MASTER AGREEMENT between the parties hereto referenced in SECTION 1 above. The total cost for services as set forth in SECTION 2 shall be actual costs (time and materials) based on Consultants' standard labor charges in accordance with the provisions of the MASTER AGREEMENT and as shown in Attachment `B" for an amount not -to -exceed $ 250,000. SECTION 4 — TIME OF PERFORMANCE The work described in SECTION 2 shall be completed by June 20, 2017 or as extended by the City Manager. SECTION 5 — ITEMS AND CONDITIONS All items and conditions contained in the MASTER AGREEMENT for professional services between City and Consultant are incorporated by reference. Approved this 28th day June, 2016. Signatures on Next Page CITY OF ROHNERT PARK DUDEK Darrin Jenkins, City Manager (Date) Name, Title (Date) Per Resolution No. 2016- adopted by the Rohnert Park City Council at its meeting of June 28, 2016. DUDEK Name, Title (Date) ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney 2 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES Plannin.- and Environmental Review Services A. Development Review Planning Services Consultant will provide contract staffing services to assist the City of Rohnert Park staff with the project management and entitlement processing tasks for development projects under review at the City. Service covered under this section is for service that is reimbursed by private development and applicants under the City's cost recovery program. Tasks to be performed shall be specifically requested by City before and work is initiated and may include: Environmental Document Preparation and Management Provide oversight and direction to project applicants and environmental consultants throughout completion of the EIR process, serving as primary contact between the City, the applicant and EIR consultant. Review and comment on the environmental documents on behalf of the Planning Division. Compile all EIR review comments completed by the various City departments and assist with the interdepartmental coordination of EIR-related comments as needed. Oversight and management of the EIR preparation; ensure routing of submittals to the appropriate departments and agencies; and provide EIR status/schedule updates. Ensure departmental files provide a legally -adequate EIR administrative record. Complete or review environmental documentation to ensure compliance with CEQA and other state regulations. 2. Application Review and Coordination Assist staff in ongoing processing and management of the applications; update and organize all project files; review and comment on all project submittals; and be responsible for scheduling regular meetings on an individual and group basis between City staff, applicant and other agencies as needed to ensure steady progress of the application processing. This would include communication and coordination with each of the City departments and agencies in a manner that will provide consistent responses and direction to the project applicant. 3. Development Agreement Provide support to City staff with Development Agreement negotiations and completion of draft DAs. 4. Stae(fReport Preparation Prepare staff reports for Park and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission and City Council hearing, resolutions, conditions of approval and findings, as directed by the Development Service Director. 5. Public Hearing Preparation Prepare public presentation materials, including staff reports and exhibits for the Commission and Council hearings. 6. Annexation Prepare annexation applications and coordinate process through LAFCO. 7. Pro'e� ct Implementation Review and provide input on all supporting plans, programs and actions to ensure that the project is consistent with City policies and environmental mitigation requirements. Coordinate update of Specific Plan, General Plan Diagram and Zoning Map to reflect final decision on development projects. 8. Other Work As directed. B. Biological Resources Studies, Permitting and Services Consultant will provide biological services to assist the City of Rohnert Park staff with the project management and entitlement processing tasks for development projects under review at the City. Service covered under this section is for service that will be reimbursed by private development and applicants under the City's cost recovery program. Tasks to be performed shall be specifically requested by City before and work is initiated and may include: Biological Resources Assessments Review background information (soils, aerial photos, topographic maps, other environmental documents). Obtain report from the California Natural Diversity Data Base for special status species occurrences in the region. Perform query of the California Native Plant Society database for rare plants with potential to occur in the project area. Obtain a database report from the USFWS for special -status species with potential to occur in the project area and critical habitat. Conduct field survey of site to inventory vegetation types and wildlife habitat. Prepare a list of observed plants and animals. Prepare exhibits including habitat maps, species occurrence data, critical habitat, and ground photos. Identify the location of any special status species populations. Prepare Biological Resources Assessment report documenting results of research and field survey(s). 2. �ecial-status Plant and Animal Surveys Biologists will survey the site for the occurrence of special -status species according to applicable regulatory guidance for surveys within the Santa Rosa Plain Conservation Strategy Area. Prepare a list of species observed and field map locations of any rare plant populations or special -status animal species observed. Prepare exhibits to identify the locations of species mapped during the field survey. Incorporate the results of the survey into survey report include recommendations for appropriate mitigation strategies for any species identified. 3. Wetland Delineations and Verifications Wetland delineations will be conducted to the standards established by the San Francisco District Corps office. Obtain and evaluate background data, such as aerial photographs, soils maps, and other pertinent information. Conduct a wetland delineation according to the Corps' 1987 manual using the three parameter method described in the manual. Create a wetland delineation map showing the features identified as waters of the United States during the delineation site visit. Prepare a Wetland Delineation Report for submission to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Work with the Corps to finalize verification of the Wetland Delineation map. 4. Resource Agency Consultation and Permitting Resource specialists will work on behalf of the City with applicable state and federal agencies to consult regarding Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act and other regulations to obtain information and permits, as needed. 5. Other Work As directed. EXHIBIT B FEE SCHEDULE PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Principal............................................................................................... $210.00/hr Environmental Specialist/Planner VI..................................................$195.00/hr $13 5.00/hr Environmental Specialist/Planner V...................................................$175.00/hr Environmental Specialist/Planner IV .................................................. $165.00/hr Environmental Specialist/Planner III..................................................$155.00/hr Environmental Specialist/Planner U...................................................$135.00/hr ....... ...................... .......................... $135.00/hr Environmental Specialist/Planner I.....................................................$125.00/hr Analyst III............................................................................................$115.00/hr .............................................................................$125.00/hr Analyst II.............................................................................................$105.00/hr ...................... $120.00/hr AnalystI................................................................................................$95.00/hr Planning Assistant II.............................................................................$85.00/hr Planning Assistant I...............................................................................$75.00/hr OFFICE SERVICES Technical/Drafting/CADD Services Senior Designer .................................... .................... ........... ................ $145.00/hr Designer............................................................................................... $13 5.00/hr Assistant Designer...............................................................................$130.00/hr GIS Specialist IV.................................................................................$155.00/hr GIS Specialist III.................................................................................$145.00/hr GIS Specialist II ........................... ....... ...................... .......................... $135.00/hr GIS Specialist I....................................................................................$125.00/hr CADD Operator III .............................................................................$125.00/hr CADD Operator II ......................................................... ...................... $120.00/hr CADD Operator I................................................................................$105.00/hr CADD Drafter..........................._..............................._...........................$95.00/hr CADD Technician....................................................._...........................$85.00/hr SUPPORT SERVICES Technical Editor 111..............................................................................$145.00/hr Technical Editor 11...............................................................................$130.00/hr Technical Editor 1................................................................................$115.00/hr Publications Specialist 111....................................................................$105.00/hr Publications Specialist 11.......................................................................$95.00/hr Publications Specialist 1........................................................................$85.00/hr Clerical Administration H.....................................................................$85.00/hr Clerical Administration I.......................................................................$80.00/hr Material and Outside Services — Subcontractors, rental of special equipment, special reproductions and blueprinting, outside data processing and computer services, etc., are charged at 1.15 times the direct cost. Travel Expenses — Mileage at current IRS allowable rates. Annual Increases — Unless identified otherwise, these standard rates will increase 3% annually. �OliNE k7 Pp �� Mission Statement �� �� "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow. " 'Cp L1F010;0' CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGFNDA RFPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Information Systems Submitted By: Don Schwartz, Assistant City Manager Prepared By: Tracy Rankin, Human Resources Analyst ITEM NO. 6C5 Agenda Title: Consider Approving Job Description and Salary Range for Information Systems Analyst, and Change in Salary Range for Information Systems Operations Manager RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing and approving job description and salary range for Information Systems Analyst and change in salary range for Information Systems Operations Manager. BACKGROUND: The City hired a consultant in 2015 to evaluate the existing structure and service model of the Information Systems Department, including its staffing levels. During this evaluation, it was noted that the Information Systems Operations Manager was performing all of the complex technical management and support functions for the City's network systems and that Information Systems operations were significantly understaffed. As part of the FY 2016-17 budget, Council approved a recommendation to add a higher level position between the IS Technician and the IS Operations Manager to assume these duties and allow the Information Systems Operations Manager to focus on the management needs of the department. The initial cost estimate for this position as presented and approved by City Council during this year's budget discussions was $120,693. After a salary study was conducted, the proposed cost estimate for the position is $131,515, a net increase of $10,822. In addition, in order to maintain internal equity, staff is proposing an increase to the salary of the Information Systems Operations Manager, with a net increase of $5,795. ANALYSIS: Staff initiated a job analysis and salary survey of comparator cities with comparable positions to determine the appropriate salary range for an Information Systems Analyst. Staff determined that the comparator cities' average range for this position was $5,881 - $7,658. Based on the salary survey, staff recommends placement of the Information Systems Analyst in the Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) unit in range 89-X $5,952 - $7,234, which is the current range for the Information Systems Operations Manager. In order to maintain internal equity, staff also recommends moving the Information Systems Operations Manager from RPEA range 89-X to range 92-X: ITEM NO. 6C5 CURRENT: Position Title Mo Salary Range Unit Range Information Systems Operations Manager $5,952 - $7,234 RPEA 89-X PROPOSED: Position Title Mo Salary Range Unit Range Information Systems Operations Manager $6,246 - $7,592 RPEA 92-X Information Systems Analyst $5,952 - $7,234 RPEA 89-X Human Resources advised RPEA of the proposed Information Systems Analyst position by providing the draft job description for review. RPEA had no objection to the job description. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: Goal A: Practice participative leadership at all levels. Strategies: Evaluate and monitor department goals and results. The recommended addition of an Information Systems Analyst position to assume responsibility for complex network administration functions would allow the Information Systems Operation Manager to more easily focus on overall department management and ensuring that department goals are met. Goal C: Ensure the effective delivery of public services. Strategies: Integrate technology into operations where appropriate and identify opportunities to leverage technology and other resources to maximize efficiency. The addition of an Information Systems Analyst position would allow for performance of duties at the appropriate position and salary level, and provide a dedicated resource to manage network systems and operations. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: Option 1: The City would add an Information Systems Analyst to assume the higher level network systems administration duties currently being performed by the Information Systems Operations Manager. The new job description would be adopted and salary range based on the salary survey, and the salary range for the Information Systems Operations Manager would be increased accordingly to maintain internal equity. Recommended. Option 2: The City would set the Information Systems Analyst at a lower salary. Not Recommended. Based on the results of the salary survey, a lower salary range would not be competitive and may preclude a successful recruitment of a qualified candidate. 2 ITEM NO. 6C5 FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: As previously identified and approved in the 16/17 operating budget, the initial cost estimate to add the Information Systems Analyst position to the Information Services was $120,693. Based on the salary survey for this position, the adjusted cost estimate to add this position is $131,515, a net increase of $10,822. Increasing the salary range for the Information Systems Operations Manager will result in an additional net increase of $5,795, for an overall increase of $16,617. These additional amounts can be absorbed in the Information Systems budget. Staff recommends that the Council approve the addition of an Information Systems Analyst position at the salary range proposed, and a change in salary range for the Information Systems Operations Manager in the FY 2016-17 budget. Department Head Approval Date: N/A Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 6/20/16 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Resolution Authorizing and Approving Job Description and Salary Range for Information Systems Analyst and Change in Salary Range for Information Systems Operations Manager 2. Job Description for Information Systems Analyst RESOLUTION NO. 2016-68 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING JOB DESCRIPTION AND SALARY RANGE FOR INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANALYST, AND CHANGE IN SALARY RANGE FOR INFORMATION SYSTEMS OPERATIONS MANAGER WHEREAS, staff has analyzed staffing needs, options and costs and recommends adding a new Information Systems Analyst position to assume responsibility for the complex technical management and support functions for the City's network systems and has created a job description for this position that meets the needs of the City; and WHEREAS, staff has conducted a salary survey and recommends placement of the Information Systems Analyst position in existing Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) range 89-X of $5,952 - $7,234 per month; and WHEREAS, in order to maintain internal equity, staff also recommends moving the Information Systems Operations Manager position from RPEA range 89-X to range 92-X of $6,246 - $7,592. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby authorize and approve the Information Systems Analyst job description and salary range as provided for in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Information Systems Operations Manager position is approved at RPEA range 92-X; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that these changes as approved shall be allocated in the FY 2016-17 budget. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) EXHIBIT "A" City of Rohnert Park INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANALYST (Existing RPEA Range 89-X - $5,952 - $7,234) DEFINITION Performs a variety of complex technical management and support functions for City network systems; researches, analyzes and provides solutions to information systems problems; coordinates the evaluation, acquisition, installation and maintenance of hardware and software; provides end-user support to meet the information processing needs of City program areas; responsible for citywide networks, personal computers, telephones switches and systems, voicemail, and various administrative applications; performs other duties as required. The position requires a basic understanding of the 7 layers of the Network OSI reference model with the ability to troubleshoot basic network issues. The ability to troubleshoot and make repairs with uninterrupted attention until the systems are 100% back in compliance with production needs is required, as well as a proven analytical and problem -solving ability to effectively prioritize and execute tasks in a high-pressure, customer service -based environment. Incumbent will also work closely with Level 1 support on escalated issues. DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS The Information Systems Analyst class has overall responsibility for technical management and support functions for the City's network systems. Incumbent works with a great deal of independence and exercises considerable independent judgment in the performance of these duties. Incumbent will be responsible for overall customer satisfaction as it relates to their use of PCs, laptops, and other peripherals. This individual must be very customer -focused and have the ability to resolve technical issues in a timely and professional manner via phone, email, and, if necessary, in person. Good verbal and written communication skills are essential. The breadth of responsibility and complexity of technical problem resolution and related activities distinguish this class from the Information Systems Technician class. SUPERVISION RECEIVED/EXERCISED This class receives general supervision from the Information Systems Operations Manager and may function in a lead capacity within the Information Systems Department. May serve as Acting Information Systems Operations Manager when designated to act in the absence of the Information Systems Operations Manager. ESSENTIAL JOB DUTIES (These duties are a representative sample; position assignments may vary) Install and support LANs, WANs, network segments, Internet, and intranet systems. Install and support server operating systems, including Windows Active Directory, VMware, and other systems. Install and maintain network hardware and software. City of Rohnert Park Information Systems Analyst Page 2 of 4 • Analyze and isolate issues. • Monitor networks to ensure security and availability to specific users. • Evaluate and modify system's performance. • Identify user needs. • Determine network and system requirements. • Maintain integrity of the network, server deployment, and security. • Ensure network connectivity throughout a company's LAN/WAN infrastructure is on par with technical considerations. • Install and support network management software and other network -related tools. • Install and support backup, security, antivirus software, and other security -related tools. • Perform network -address assignment. • Assign routing protocols and routing table configuration. • Assign configuration of authentication and authorization of directory services. • Maintain network facilities in individual machines, such as drivers and settings of personal computers, as well as printers. • Maintain network servers such as file servers. • Administer servers, desktop computers, printers, routers, switches, firewalls, phones, personal digital assistants, smartphones, software deployment, security updates, and patches. • May assist IS staff with developing user policies, procedures, and instructions. • Develops hardware and software specifications and cost proposals. • Supports telephone systems including voice -mail, local, and long-distance services, trunks, internal wiring, and switch programming. Maintains system user instructions. • Maintains accurate records and system documentation; prepares periodic and special reports as required. • Work closely with Information Systems Operations Manager and may act as a project manager for projects sponsored by other or affecting several departments. CITY EMPLOYEES ARE EXPECTED TO: • Provide outstanding and friendly customer service • Create and maintain a respectful and collaborative working environment • Communicate honestly and behave in a manner that is ethical, legal and fiscally responsible • Demonstrate care for the organization, customers and co-workers • Practice and encourage initiative and innovation to improve the workplace QUALIFICATIONS Education/Training/Experience Sufficient education, training and experience to successfully perform the duties of the Information Systems Analyst. A typical way of obtaining the required qualifications is: City of Rohnert Park Information Systems Analyst Page 3 of 4 Possess the equivalent of a Bachelor's Degree in Information Systems, Computer Science or a closely related field from an accredited college or university; Three to five years of progressively responsible experience in a computer environment similar to that used by the City, including network design and administration, database applications, web -based and email -based applications, networked computers and printers; and Relevant work experience may be substituted for education on a year -for -year basis. License/Certificate: • Possession of a Class C California driver's license by date of appointment • Possession of a certificate in networking technology or systems administration is highly desirable; examples include current MCSE, CCNA, or equivalent Special Reauirements: Per California State Law, smoking is not permitted inside City facilities/vehicles or within 20 feet of main entrances, exits, and operable windows Knowledge of: • Principles and techniques of personal computer and network systems, hardware and software installation, troubleshooting and maintenance • Operating principles, methods, practices, options, and limitations of wide range of computer hardware related to a networked environment • Principles and methods of systems analysis and application design methods and techniques, and their application in a municipal government setting • Uses and limitations of a wide variety of software applications, including word processing, spreadsheets, presentation graphics, desktop publishing and e- mail/calendar • Basic local and wide area network systems, including topologies and protocols • Telephone, voicemail, document imaging and networking programs • Research techniques, resources, methods and procedures • Cabling practices and techniques; record keeping practices and principles • Forms and documentation design methodologies • Methods of instruction specifically regarding technical concepts and hardware/software usage • Principles and practices of project management Ability to: • Install, configure, test and maintain a variety of computer systems and network software, hardware and peripheral equipment City of Rohnert Park Information Systems Analyst Page 4 of 4 • Analyze information systems needs and problems and develop new or modifying applications to meet such needs • Analyze hardware and software acquisition requirements, evaluate available alternatives, including their fiscal impacts, and recommend cost effective solutions • Effectively troubleshoot complex hardware and software problems to resolution • Explain technical concepts to non-technical users and instruct others in the use of hardware and software applications • Prepare clear and concise documentation, user procedures and report of work performed • Use initiative and independent judgment within established policy guidelines • Work independently with minimal direction • Maintain confidentiality of information • Learn and support new software and hardware in a demanding multi -tasking environment • Read and comprehend computer hardware and software documentation to solve technical problems • Interact effectively with those contacted in the course of work Working Conditions The Information Systems Analyst works primarily indoors in an office environment. Field assignments require the incumbent to drive to and from office buildings to install, maintain, and/or repair equipment. Incumbent communicates orally face-to-face, or uses the telephone, and, in writing, using a keyboard. When working in the office, the incumbent will sit for several hours at a time using a keyboard and video display. When installing equipment and/or making equipment repairs, the incumbent will use common hand tools such as a screwdriver, wire cutters and pliers. The incumbent must be able to discriminate among and match colors when installing cables and when adjusting colors on monitors. Equipment installation also involves working with arms above shoulder level, bending and stooping repeatedly or continually over time, and performing installation work in small, cramped closets, under desks, behind cabinets and while sitting on the floor. The incumbent will lift and move monitors, printers, servers, and other equipment weighing up to 40 pounds short and long distances without assistance. FLSA Status: Exempt Employee Unit: Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) Approved By: Approved: Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Human Resources Submitted By: Victoria Perrault, Human Resources Director Prepared By: Tracy Rankin, Human Resources Analyst ITEM NO. 6C6 Agenda Title: Consideration and Adoption of Resolution Approving the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised June 26, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the attached resolution approving the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised June 26, 2016. BACKGROUND: Council approved the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges document dated May 11, 2016 on May 24, 2016, pursuant to Resolution No. 2016-44. Since that date, the following position and salary changes have been approved and/or require updating: Description Action Approval Negotiated increase to base Apply 3% increase to 07/01/14-06/30/17 Outlines of Certain Conditions salary effective 6/26/16 affected pay ranges of Employment, Fringe Benefits and Salary Adjustments — Management and Confidential Units 07/01/14-06/30/17 Memoranda of Agreement — Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA); Rohnert Park Public Safety Managers' Association (RPPSMA); Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA); Service Employees' International Union SEIU PT Swim Instructor Existing position; Darrin Jenkins, City Manager revision to pay range from Miscellaneous Part -Time Community Services Range 41 to 45 Information Systems New position; add to pay Pending approval by City Council on 6/28/16 Analyst rates and ranges upon approval by City Council RPEA Unit Existing Range 89-X $5,952 - $7,234 Monthly 1 ITEM NO. 6C6 Description Action Approval Information Systems Existing position; Pending approval by City Council on 6/28/16 Operations Manager revision to pay range from RPEA Unit 89-X to 92-X upon approval by City Council ANALYSIS: California Public Employees' Retirement Law at Section 570.5 of the California Code of Regulations Title 2 requires the City Pay Rates and Ranges document published on the City's internet site to be approved, in its entirety, by the City Council each time a modification is made. Attached as Exhibit A to this staff report is the updated City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised June 26, 2016 that incorporates the changes listed above. Staff recommends that the Council adopt the updated Pay Rates and Ranges by resolution. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This is not applicable. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: This is not applicable. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: There is no fiscal impact. Department Head Approval Date: N/A Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 6/20/2016 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Resolution Approving the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised June 26, 2016 2. Exhibit "A" City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised June 26, 2016 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-69 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK APPROVING THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CURRENT PAY RATES AND RANGES REVISED JUNE 26, 2016 WHEREAS, the California Public Employees' Retirement Law, at Section 570.5 of the California Code of Regulations Title 2, requires the City of Rohnert Park to publish the City's Current Pay Rates and Ranges on the City's internet site and the City Council to approve the Pay Rates and Ranges in its entirety each time a modification is made; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously approved the City Pay Rates and Ranges document dated May 11, 2016 on May 24, 2016 pursuant to Resolution No. 2016-44 and several positions have been subsequently approved and/or require updating; and WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the updated City Pay Rates and Ranges document revised June 26, 2016 attached hereto as Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby approve the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised June 26, 2016 attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by this reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby directed to execute documents pertaining to same for and on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES:( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) 19 Exhibit A t20KNERT P,qR �'�4LIF0RN�'J,r► 62 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CURRENT PAY RATES & RANGES Revised June 26, 2016 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Management Unit (Unrepresented) N/R CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually City Council (COUN) N/A $101,228.40 2 $189.77 $411.16 $8,856.97 N/R CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually City Manager (CMGR) N/A $9,764.40 $117,172.80 5 $16,222.50 $194,670.00 (By Employment Contract) $123,031.44 RANGE 105 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Director of Public Safety (SDIR) N/A $14,279.75 $171,356.98 (By Employment Contract) RANGE 103 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Assistant City Manager (ACM) M 1 $63.33 $5,066.17 $10,976.71 $131,720.52 (By Employment Contract) 2 $66.49 $5,319.55 $11,525.70 $138,308.40 3 $69.82 $5,585.77 $12,102.50 $145,230.00 4 $73.31 $5,864.82 $12,707.11 $152,485.32 5 $76.98 $6,158.13 $13,342.62 $160,111.44 RANGE 100 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Director of Development Services (DODS) M 1 $55.56 $4,444.85 $9,630.50 $115,566.00 Director of Public Works and Community 2 $58.34 $4,666.85 $10,111.51 $121,338.12 Services (PWCS) 3 $61.25 $4,900.26 $10,617.24 $127,406.88 4 $64.31 $5,145.09 $11,147.69 $133,772.28 5 $67.53 $5,402.27 $11,704.92 $140,459.04 RANGE 98 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually City Engineer (CENG) M 1 $53.52 $4,281.79 $9,277.21 $111,326.52 Finance Director/City Treasurer (FDIR) 2 $56.20 $4,495.71 $9,740.71 $116,888.52 Human Resources Director (HRDIR) 3 $59.01 $4,720.57 $10,227.90 $122,734.80 4 $61.96 $4,956.84 $10,739.81 $128,877.72 5 $65.06 $5,204.51 $11,276.44 $135,317.28 RANGE 94 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually City Clerk (CCLERK) M 1 $44.13 $3,530.68 $7,649.81 $91,797.72 Deputy City Engineer (DCENG) 2 $46.34 $3,707.05 $8,031.94 $96,383.28 Planning Manager (PLMG) 3 $48.66 $3,892.45 $8,433.64 $101,203.68 Civilian Fire Marshal (CFM) 4 $51.09 $4,086.88 $8,854.91 $106,258.92 5 $53.64 $4,291.30 $9,297.81 $111,573.72 Rohnert Park Public Safety Managers' Association (RPPSMA) RANGE 95 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually P.S. Commander (PSCMDR) P 1 $48.67 $3,893.40 $8,435.70 $101,228.40 2 $51.10 $4,087.83 $8,856.97 $106,283.64 3 $53.65 $4,292.25 $9,299.87 $111,598.44 4 $56.33 $4,506.65 $9,764.40 $117,172.80 5 $59.15 $4,731.98 $10,252.62 $123,031.44 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Confidential Unit (Unrepresented) RANGE 70 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Human Resources Technician Trainee (HRTT) X 1 $17.87 $1,429.48 $3,097.21 $37,166.52 2 $18.76 $1,500.79 $3,251.71 $39,020.52 3 $19.70 $1,575.90 $3,414.45 $40,973.40 4 $20.69 $1,654.81 $3,585.43 $43,025.16 5 $21.72 $1,737.53 $3,764.65 $45,175.80 RANGE 72 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Human Resources Technician (HRT) X 1 $23.37 $1,869.21 $4,049.96 $48,599.52 2 $24.54 $1,962.86 $4,252.87 $51,034.44 3 $25.76 $2,060.79 $4,465.05 $53,580.60 4 $27.05 $2,163.95 $4,688.56 $56,262.72 5 $28.40 $2,272.34 $4,923.40 $59,080.80 RANGE 74 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Administrative Assistant - Confidential (AACU) X 1 $24.45 $1,956.21 $4,238.45 $50,861.40 2 $25.68 $2,054.14 $4,450.63 $53,407.56 3 $26.96 $2,156.82 $4,673.11 $56,077.32 4 $28.31 $2,264.73 $4,906.92 $58,883.04 5 $29.72 $2,377.87 $5,152.06 $61,824.72 RANGE 76 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Payroll/Fiscal Specialist (PFS) X 1 $25.77 $2,061.27 $4,466.08 $53,592.96 2 $27.06 $2,164.43 $4,689.59 $56,275.08 3 $28.41 $2,272.81 $4,924.43 $59,093.16 4 $29.83 $2,386.43 $5,170.60 $62,047.20 5 $31.32 $2,505.75 $5,429.13 $65,149.56 RANGE 78 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Senior Payroll/Fiscal Specialist (SPFS) X 1 $27.05 $2,163.95 $4,688.56 $56,262.72 2 $28.40 $2,272.34 $4,923.40 $59,080.80 3 $29.82 $2,385.96 $5,169.57 $62,034.84 4 $31.32 $2,505.28 $5,428.10 $65,137.20 5 $32.88 $2,630.78 $5,700.02 $68,400.24 RANGE 80 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Executive Assistant to the City Manager X 1 $29.11 $2,328.91 $5,045.97 $60,551.64 (EACM) 2 $30.57 $2,445.38 $5,298.32 $63,579.84 3 $32.09 $2,567.55 $5,563.03 $66,756.36 4 $33.70 $2,695.91 $5,841.13 $70,093.56 5 $35.39 $2,830.92 $6,133.65 $73,603.80 RANGE 84 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Human Resources Analyst (HRA) X 1 $32.09 $2,567.55 $5,563.03 $66,756.36 2 $33.70 $2,695.91 $5,841.13 $70,093.56 3 $35.39 $2,830.92 $6,133.65 $73,603.80 4 $37.16 $2,972.58 $6,440.59 $77,287.08 5 $39.02 $3,121.38 $6,762.98 $81,155.76 RANGE 88 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Accounting Services Supervisor (ASSP) X 1 $35.37 $2,829.49 $6,130.56 $73,566.72 2 $37.14 $2,971.15 $6,437.50 $77,250.00 3 $38.99 $3,119.47 $6,758.86 $81,106.32 4 $40.94 $3,275.40 $7,096.70 $85,160.40 5 $42.99 $3,438.93 $7,451.02 $89,412.24 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Confidential Unit (Unrepresented) RANGE 92 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Supervising Accountant (SUPAC) X 1 $37.12 $2,969.25 $6,433.38 $77,200.56 2 $38.97 $3,117.57 $6,754.74 $81,056.88 3 $40.92 $3,273.50 $7,092.58 $85,110.96 4 $42.96 $3,437.03 $7,446.90 $89,362.80 5 $45.11 $3,609.12 $7,819.76 $93,837.12 RANGE 94 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Senior Analyst (SRAN) X 1 $39.56 $3,164.64 $6,856.71 $82,280.52 2 $41.54 $3,322.94 $7,199.70 $86,396.40 3 $43.62 $3,489.32 $7,560.20 $90,722.40 4 $45.80 $3,663.79 $7,938.21 $95,258.52 5 $48.09 $3,847.29 $8,335.79 $100,029.48 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) RANGE 61 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Office Assistant I (OA1) X 1 $17.87 $1,429.48 $3,097.21 $37,166.52 2 $18.76 $1,500.79 $3,251.71 $39,020.52 3 $19.70 $1,575.90 $3,414.45 $40,973.40 4 $20.69 $1,654.81 $3,585.43 $43,025.16 5 $21.72 $1,737.53 $3,764.65 $45,175.80 RANGE 63 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Animal Health Technician (AHT) X 1 $18.76 $1,500.79 $3,251.71 $39,020.52 2 $19.70 $1,575.90 $3,414.45 $40,973.40 3 $20.69 $1,654.81 $3,585.43 $43,025.16 4 $21.72 $1,737.53 $3,764.65 $45,175.80 5 $22.81 $1,824.53 $3,953.14 $47,437.68 RANGE 64 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Community Services Program Coordinator (CSPC) X 1 $19.16 $1,532.64 $3,320.72 $39,848.64 Public Safety Records Clerk (PSRC) 2 $20.11 $1,609.18 $3,486.55 $41,838.60 3 $21.12 $1,689.52 $3,660.62 $43,927.44 4 $22.18 $1,774.14 $3,843.96 $46,127.52 5 $23.29 $1,863.03 $4,036.57 $48,438.84 RANGE 66 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Accounting Specialist 1/11- Level I (ASP1) X 1 $20.11 $1,609.18 $3,486.55 $41,838.60 2 $21.12 $1,689.52 $3,660.62 $43,927.44 3 $22.18 $1,774.14 $3,843.96 $46,127.52 4 $23.29 $1,863.03 $4,036.57 $48,438.84 5 $24.45 $1,956.21 $4,238.45 $50,861.40 RANGE 68 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Secretary I (SEC1) X 1 $21.12 $1,689.52 $3,660.62 $43,927.44 2 $22.18 $1,774.14 $3,843.96 $46,127.52 3 $23.29 $1,863.03 $4,036.57 $48,438.84 4 $24.45 $1,956.21 $4,238.45 $50,861.40 5 $25.68 $2,054.14 $4,450.63 $53,407.56 RANGE 70 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Accounting Specialist 1/11- Level II (ASP2) X 1 $22.18 $1,774.14 $3,843.96 $46,127.52 Technical Director (TECH) 2 $23.29 $1,863.03 $4,036.57 $48,438.84 3 $24.45 $1,956.21 $4,238.45 $50,861.40 4 $25.68 $2,054.14 $4,450.63 $53,407.56 5 $26.96 $2,156.82 $4,673.11 $56,077.32 RANGE 74 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Administrative Assistant (AABS) X 1 $24.45 $1,956.21 $4,238.45 $50,861.40 Community Development Assistant (SECS) 2 $25.68 $2,054.14 $4,450.63 $53,407.56 Community Services Specialist (CSSP) 3 $26.96 $2,156.82 $4,673.11 $56,077.32 Information Systems Technician I (IST1) 4 $28.31 $2,264.73 $4,906.92 $58,883.04 5 $29.72 $2,377.87 $5,152.06 $61,824.72 RANGE 76 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Property Technician (PRPT) X 1 $25.77 $2,061.27 $4,466.08 $53,592.96 2 $27.06 $2,164.43 $4,689.59 $56,275.08 3 $28.41 $2,272.81 $4,924.43 $59,093.16 4 $29.83 $2,386.43 $5,170.60 $62,047.20 5 $31.32 $2,505.75 $5,429.13 $65,149.56 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) RANGE 78 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Information Systems Technician II (IST2) X 1 $26.96 $2,156.82 $4,673.11 $56,077.32 $5,295.23 2 $28.31 $2,264.89 $4,907.26 $58,887.16 $2,566.13 3 $29.73 $2,378.03 $5,152.40 $61,828.84 $33.68 4 $31.21 $2,496.72 $5,409.56 $64,914.72 4 5 $32.77 $2,621.75 $5,680.45 $68,165.40 RANGE 81 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly $77,237.64 Animal Shelter Supervisor (ALSS) X 1 $29.10 $2,327.96 $5,043.91 $60,526.92 Code Compliance Officer (CCO) 2 $30.56 $2,444.43 $5,296.26 $63,555.12 Community Services Supervisor (CSSV) 3 $32.08 $2,566.60 $5,560.97 $66,731.64 Crime Analyst (CRA) 4 $33.69 $2,694.96 $5,839.07 $70,068.84 PT Fire Inspector (PTFI) 5 $35.37 $2,829.49 $6,130.56 $73,566.72 Purchasing Agent (PAGT) Theatre Manager (THMG) Planner 1/11 - Level I (PLNR1) RANGE 83 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Works Inspector (PWIN) X 1 $30.55 $2,443.95 $5,295.23 $63,542.76 Senior Engineering Technician (SRET) 2 $32.08 $2,566.13 $5,559.94 $66,719.28 3 $33.68 $2,694.48 $5,838.04 $70,056.48 4 $35.36 $2,829.01 $6,129.53 $73,554.36 5 $37.13 $2,970.68 $6,436.47 $77,237.64 RANGE 85 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Environmental Coordinator (EVC) X 1 $32.08 $2,566.60 $5,560.97 $66,731.64 Project Coordinator (PJC) 2 $33.69 $2,694.96 $5,839.07 $70,068.84 Property and Records Supervisor (PARS) 3 $35.37 $2,829.49 $6,130.56 $73,566.72 4 $37.14 $2,971.15 $6,437.50 $77,250.00 5 $38.99 $3,119.47 $6,758.86 $81,106.32 RANGE 87 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Accountant (ACCT) X 1 $33.69 $2,694.96 $5,839.07 $70,068.84 Management Analyst (MANA) 2 $35.37 $2,829.49 $6,130.56 $73,566.72 Planner 1/11 - Level II (PLNR2) 3 $37.14 $2,971.15 $6,437.50 $77,250.00 4 $38.99 $3,119.47 $6,758.86 $81,106.32 5 $40.94 $3,275.40 $7,096.70 $85,160.40 RANGE 89 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually X 1 $35.37 $2,829.49 $6,130.56 $73,566.72 2 $37.14 $2,971.15 $6,437.50 $77,250.00 *Information Systems Analyst (ISAN) - new position 3 $38.99 $3,119.47 $6,758.86 $81,106.32 *pending approval by City Council on 6/28/16 4 $40.94 $3,275.40 $7,096.70 $85,160.40 5 $42.99 $3,438.93 $7,451.02 $89,412.24 RANGE 92 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Community Services Manager (CSMG) X 1 $37.12 $2,969.25 $6,433.38 $77,200.56 2 $38.97 $3,117.57 $6,754.74 $81,056.88 *Information Systems Operations Manager (ISOM) 3 $40.92 $3,273.50 $7,092.58 $85,110.96 *pending approval by City Council on 6/28/16 4 $42.96 $3,437.03 $7,446.90 $89,362.80 5 $45.11 $3,609.12 $7,819.76 $93,837.12 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) RANGE 94 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Building Official (BDBO) X 1 $39.93 $3,194.11 $6,920.57 $83,046.84 2 $41.92 $3,353.84 $7,266.65 $87,199.80 3 $44.02 $3,521.65 $7,630.24 $91,562.88 4 $46.22 $3,697.54 $8,011.34 $96,136.08 5 $48.53 $3,882.47 $8,412.01 $100,944.12 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Service Employees' International Union (SEIU - Local 1021) - Maintenance Workers RANGE 52W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Maintenance Worker Trainee (MWT) 1 $15.03 $1,202.72 $2,605.90 $31,270.80 2 $15.79 $1,263.10 $2,736.71 $32,840.52 3 $16.58 $1,326.32 $2,873.70 $34,484.40 4 $17.41 $1,392.88 $3,017.90 $36,214.80 5 $18.28 $1,462.76 $3,169.31 $38,031.72 RANGE 60W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Landscape Maintenance Worker (LMW) 1 $17.87 $1,429.48 $3,097.21 $37,166.52 2 $18.76 $1,500.79 $3,251.71 $39,020.52 3 $19.70 $1,575.90 $3,414.45 $40,973.40 4 $20.69 $1,654.81 $3,585.43 $43,025.16 5 $21.72 $1,737.53 $3,764.65 $45,175.80 RANGE 64W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Meter Technician (PWMT) 1 $19.57 $1,565.92 $3,392.82 $40,713.84 2 $20.55 $1,644.36 $3,562.77 $42,753.24 3 $21.58 $1,726.60 $3,740.96 $44,891.52 4 $22.66 $1,813.12 $3,928.42 $47,141.04 5 $23.80 $1,903.92 $4,125.15 $49,501.80 RANGE 70W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Maintenance Worker I (MW1) 1 $23.95 $1,915.80 $4,150.90 $49,810.80 2 $25.15 $2,011.83 $4,358.96 $52,307.52 3 $26.41 $2,112.61 $4,577.32 $54,927.84 4 $27.73 $2,218.14 $4,805.98 $57,671.76 5 $29.11 $2,328.91 $5,045.97 $60,551.64 RANGE 74W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Fleet Mechanic (FMEC) 1 $26.43 $2,114.51 $4,581.44 $54,977.28 Maintenance Worker II (MW2) 2 $27.75 $2,220.05 $4,810.10 $57,721.20 3 $29.14 $2,330.81 $5,050.09 $60,601.08 4 $30.59 $2,447.28 $5,302.44 $63,629.28 5 $32.12 $2,569.45 $5,567.15 $66,805.80 *6 $33.71 $2,696.94 $5,843.36 $70,120.34 RANGE 78W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Electrician (ELEC) 1 $29.05 $2,324.16 $5,035.67 $60,428.04 2 $30.50 $2,440.15 $5,286.99 $63,443.88 3 $32.03 $2,562.32 $5,551.70 $66,620.40 4 $33.63 $2,690.20 $5,828.77 $69,945.24 5 $35.31 $2,824.74 $6,120.26 $73,443.12 RANGE 79W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Arborist (ARB) 1 $29.79 $2,383.10 $5,163.39 $61,960.68 Fleet Services Supervisor (FSS) 2 $31.28 $2,502.42 $5,421.92 $65,063.04 Supervising Maintenance Worker (SMW) 3 $32.84 $2,627.45 $5,692.81 $68,313.72 4 $34.48 $2,758.66 $5,977.09 $71,725.08 5 $36.21 $2,896.52 $6,275.79 $75,309.48 RANGE 83W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually General Services Supervisor (GSSR) 1 $32.83 $2,626.50 $5,690.75 $68,289.00 Utilities Services Supervisor (PWUSS) 2 $34.47 $2,757.71 $5,975.03 $71,700.36 3 $36.19 $2,895.57 $6,273.73 $75,284.76 4 $38.01 $3,040.56 $6,587.88 $79,054.56 5 $39.91 $3,192.68 $6,917.48 $83,009.76 'Inactive salary step; acting pay previously incorporated into base salary CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA) RANGE 68 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Safety Dispatcher (PSD) XD 1 $25.17 $2,013.25 $4,362.05 $52,344.60 $75,064.34 2 $26.42 $2,113.56 $4,579.38 $54,952.56 3 $27.73 $2,218.14 $4,805.98 $57,671.76 4 $29.10 $2,327.96 $5,043.91 $60,526.92 5 $30.54 $2,443.48 $5,294.20 $63,530.40 PT Public Safety Dispatcher (PTD) - Hourly 1 $23.91 2 $25.10 3 $26.34 4 $27.65 5 $29.02 *6 $30.47 RANGE 69 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Community Services Officer (CSO) S -CSO 1 $23.07 $1,845.44 $3,998.46 $47,981.52 2 $24.22 $1,937.67 $4,198.28 $50,379.36 3 $25.42 $2,033.70 $4,406.34 $52,876.08 4 $26.68 $2,134.48 $4,624.70 $55,496.40 5 $28.01 $2,240.41 $4,854.22 $58,250.62 RANGE 81 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Safety Officer Trainee (PSOT) S 1 $25.46 $2,036.55 $4,412.52 $52,950.24 RANGE 83 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Safety Communications Supervisor XD 1 $33.39 $2,671.19 $5,787.57 $69,450.84 (PSCS) 2 $35.05 $2,804.29 $6,075.97 $72,911.64 3 $36.79 $2,943.58 $6,377.76 $76,533.12 4 $38.61 $3,089.05 $6,692.94 $80,315.28 5 $40.53 $3,242.60 $7,025.63 $84,307.56 RANGE 83.5 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually New -hire Public Safety Officer (NEWB) S 1 $29.37 $2,349.83 $5,091.29 $61,095.48 2 $30.83 $2,466.30 $5,343.64 $64,123.68 RANGE 83.75 CLASS STEP **Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually New -hire Fire Public Safety Officer S 1 $20.34 $2,159.32 $4,678.52 $56,142.21 (NEWF) 2 $21.35 $2,266.32 $4,910.35 $58,924.24 RANGE 84 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Safety Officer (PSO) S 1 $32.36 $2,588.94 $5,609.38 $67,312.56 2 $33.97 $2,717.77 $5,888.51 $70,662.12 3 $35.65 $2,852.31 $6,180.00 $74,160.00 4 $37.42 $2,993.50 $6,485.91 $77,830.92 5 $39.27 $3,141.82 $6,807.27 $81,687.24 RANGE 86 Fire Assignment Public Safety Officer (FPSO) CLASS STEP **Hourly S 1 $22.41 2 $23.53 3 $24.69 4 $25.91 5 $27.20 Biweekly Monthly Annually $2,379.10 $5,154.72 $61,856.65 $2,497.43 $5,411.11 $64,933.26 $2,621.03 $5,678.91 $68,146.86 $2,750.77 $5,960.01 $71,520.11 $2,887.09 $6,255.36 $75,064.34 *Inactive salary step; only applies to existing employees affected by prior pay reduction/restoration "'Hourly rate based on 2,760 hours annually CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA) RANGE 89 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Fire Marshal (PSFM) S 1 $37.78 $3,022.02 $6,547.71 $78,572.52 Public Safety Sergeant (PSGT) 2 $39.65 $3,171.77 $6,872.16 $82,465.92 3 $41.61 $3,329.12 $7,213.09 $86,557.08 4 $43.68 $3,494.55 $7,571.53 $90,858.36 5 $45.84 $3,667.12 $7,945.42 $95,345.04 RANGE 91 CLASS STEP "Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Fire Assignment Sergeant (FSGT) S 1 $26.16 $2,777.00 $6,016.83 $72,201.97 2 $27.46 $2,914.58 $6,314.93 $75,779.16 3 $28.82 $3,059.18 $6,628.22 $79,538.66 4 $30.25 $3,211.22 $6,957.65 $83,491.80 5 $31.74 $3,369.80 $7,301.24 $87,614.89 *Inactive salary step; only applies to existing employees affected by prior pay reduction/restoration "'Hourly rate based on 2,760 hours annually CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Miscellaneous Part -Time (MISPT2) - Community Services Department RANGE 38 STEP Hourly PT Community Services Leader (PTCSL) 1 $10.00 PT Facility Attendant (PTFA) 2 $10.26 PT Lifeguard (PTLC) 3 $10.77 PT Pool Cashier (PTPC) 4 $11.31 5 $11.88 RANGE 41 STEP Hourly DT C..,im InstF .teF (PTIL) 1 $10.44 2 $10.96 3 $11.51 4 $12.08 5 $12.69 RANGE 43 STEP Hourly PT Senior Community Services Leader (PTSCSL) 1 $10.76 2 $11.30 3 $11.87 4 $12.46 5 $13.08 RANGE 45 STEP Hourly PT Senior Lifeguard (PTSRL) 1 $11.58 PT Sports Center Coordinator (PTSC) 2 $12.16 PT Aquatics Office Assistant (PTAOA) 3 $12.77 PT Swim Instructor (PTIL) 4 $13.41 5 $14.08 RANGE 53 STEP Hourly PT Pool Manager (PTPMGR) 1 $12.46 2 $13.08 3 $13.73 4 $14.42 5 $15.14 RANGE 59 STEP Hourly PT Community Services Coordinator (PTCSC) 1 $13.73 2 $14.42 3 $15.14 4 $15.90 5 $16.70 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Miscellaneous Part -Time Hourly Positions Administrative/Office Hourly PT Administrative Assistant (PTAA) $10.50 - $28.50 PT Office Assistant (PT01) $10.00 - $19.00 PT Information Systems Assistant (PTIS) $20.00 - $25.00 PT Technical Advisor (PTTA) $14.25 - $47.50 Temporary Management Analyst (TMAN) $25.00 - $40.00 PT Administrative Intern (PTAI) $10.00 - $19.00 Community Services Hourly PT Custodian (PTC) $11.40 - $14.00 Development Services Hourly PT Building Inspector (PTBI) $31.15 - $37.86 Performing Arts Center Hourly PT Box Office Assistant (PTBA) $10.45 - $11.40 PT Assistant Box Office Manager (PTHBM) $10.00 - $12.00 PT Arts Center House Manager (PTHM) $10.00 - $12.00 PT Theater Technician (PTTT) $10.00 - $13.30 Public Safety Hourly PT Animal Shelter Assistant (ASA) $11.40 - $14.25 PT Community Services Leader (PTCSL) $10.00 - $11.88 PT Public Safety Records Clerk (PTPSRC) $15.00 - $20.00 Public Works Hourly Seasonal Maintenance Assistant (SMA) $11.40 - $14.00 Stipends by Unit Public Safety Amount/Percentage Euthanasia Certification 7% CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Pensionable Stipends by Unit All Units Amount/Percentage Acting Pay 5%-10% *Longevity 2%-10% By Employment Contract Amount/Percentage POST Certification Pay (Director of Public Safety) - Executive 10% Confidential Amount/Percentage Bilingual $100/month Educational Incentive - BA/BS, MA/MS $50/month Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) Amount/Percentage Bilingual $100/month Educational Incentive - MA/MS $50/month Rohnert Park Public Safety Managers' Association (RPPSMA) Amount/Percentage POST Certification Pay (Commanders) - Supervisory 7.0% POST Certification Pay (Commanders) - Management 8.5% Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA) Amount/Percentage Acting Supervisor/Watch Commander 5%-10% Acting Lieutenant 10%-15% Bilingual 2.5% Canine Handler 3.0% Detective 5.0% Educational - AA/AS (Sergeant, PSO, CSO) 1.8% Educational - AA/AS (Dispatcher, Comm Sup) 2.4% Educational - BA/BS (Sergeant, PSO, CSO) 2.8% Educational - BA/BS (Dispatcher, Comm Sup) 3.6% EMT 2.0% Field Training Officer 5.0% Non -Sworn Training Officer 5.0% Fire Specialty 2.0% Fire Engineer 2.5% Fire Captain 4.0% *Fire Marshal 15.0% PSO Captain 3.0% Master Officer 5.0% Motorcycle Duty 3.0% **Intermediate POST Certification 4.5% **Advanced POST Certification 7.0% **POST Supervisory Certification (Sergeant) 9.0% POST Field Evidence Tech Certification (CSO) 2.5% Property Technician (CSO) 5.0% Shift Differential 5.0% Special/Extra Assignments 5.0% ***Uniform Allowance $240/year Service Employees' International Union (SEIU) Amount/Percentage Certification and License Program - Level 1 2.6% Certification and License Program - Level II 4.5% Certification and License Program - Level III 6.0% Educational Incentive Pay - Level I $75/month Educational Incentive Pay - Level II $100/month Educational Incentive Pay - Level III $135/month 'Inactive stipend; closed to new hires ""Only one POST stipend paid per employee "'Only pensionable for classic PERS members ITEM NO. 6C7 Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Communityfor Today and Tomorrow. " CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Mary Grace Pawson, Development Services Director Prepared By: Art da Rosa, Deputy City Engineer Agenda Title: Approving and Adopting the Plans and Specifications for Wilfred Avenue Rehabilitation (Project Number 2016-09), Awarding the Construction Contract to Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc., and Finding the Project Exempt from CEQA RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution Approving and Adopting the Plans and Specifications for Wilfred Avenue Rehabilitation (Project Number 2016-09), Awarding the Construction Contract to Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc., and Finding the Project Exempt from CEQA. BACKGROUND: The City has an agreement with the Graton Rancheria on the maintenance of Wilfred Avenue. In order to keep Wilfred Avenue is good riding condition, the City designed and advertised the Wilfred Avenue Rehabilitation Project, as part of the long-term preventative maintenance strategy for this important piece of infrastructure. The scope of service includes: • Rehabilitation of Wilfred Avenue via micro -surfacing; • Minor dig -out repair in selected areas; • Re -stripe Wilfred Avenue. The project limit is along Wilfred Avenue from Stony Point Road to Redwood Highway. ANALYSIS: The City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code Title 3 Chapter 3.04 provides that the City's purchasing functions shall be governed by the city's purchasing policy. An invitation to bid was posted / published on May 24, 2016, in consistency with City of Rohnert Park Purchasing Policy, Section 3.6.6F Contracts for Public Projects, which defers to the Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Procedures (UCCAP) set forth in the Uniform Public Construction Cost Account Act. The engineer's estimate for the project was $220,110. The City received two (2) bids listed as follows: Contractor Bid Amount Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc. $287,000.00 Dryco Construction $303,281.00 ITEM NO. 6C7 Staff reviewed the bids for responsiveness and contractor responsibility and recommends award to Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc. with a bid of $287,000. The contractor is found to be responsible and responsive. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This action is consistent Strategic Plan Goal D — Continue to Develop a Vibrant Community. Specifically the action aligns with the City's vision to improve transportation and infrastructure. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: The scope of work is pavement rehabilitation via micro - surfacing, dig -out repair and restriping of existing roadway. The re -pavement will not expand the footprint of the road, rather it will rehabilitate roadway that has deteriorated. It is therefore categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") under the CEQA Guidelines sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15032 (Replacement or Reconstruction). OPTIONS CONSIDERED: None. The recommended action is necessary to proceed with the construction of the Wilfred Avenue Rehabilitation Project. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The Fiscal Impact of this action is $330,050 (the amount of the low bid together with a 15% allowance for contract change orders). The project has a total budget of $568,000 including $20,000 in Fiscal Year 2015-16 to cover design activity and $548,000 in Fiscal Year 2016-017 to cover construction. While staff is requesting award of the construction contract at the end of Fiscal Year 2015-16, no construction costs or payments will be incurred until next fiscal year. The cost of low bid, including a change order allowance can be accommodated within the available budget. The Wilfred Avenue Rehabilitation Project has two funding source: Wilfred Maintenance JEPA (Fund 177) and the Casino Mitigation MOU (Fund 183) at a breakdown of 85.5% Fund 177 and 14.5% Fund 183. Department Head Approval Date: 06/16/2016 City Attorney Approval Date: 06/16/2016 Finance Director Approval Date: 06/20/2106 City Manager Approval Date: 06/20/2016 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Resolution Approving and Adopting the Plans and Specifications for Wilfred Avenue Rehabilitation (Project Number 2016-09), Awarding the Construction Contract to Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc., and Finding the Project Exempt from CEQA 2. Exhibit A - Construction Contract Agreement 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-70 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR WILFRED AVENUE REHABILITATION (PROJECT NUMBER 2016-09), AWARDING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO VALLEY SLURRY SEAL INTERNATIONAL, INC., AND FINDING THE PROJECT EXEMPT FROM CEQA WHEREAS, the Wilfred Avenue Rehabilitation (Project Number 2016-09 and hereinafter "Project") includes the rehabilitation of the existing pavement surface on Wilfred Avenue from Stony Point Road to Redwood Highway; and WHEREAS, the plans and specifications for the Project were prepared by City staff and approved by the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code Title 3 Chapter 3.04 provides that the city's purchasing functions shall be governed by the city's purchasing policy; and WHEREAS, consistent with City of Rohnert Park Purchasing Policy Section 3.6.6F Contracts for Public Projects which defers to the Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Procedures (UCCAP) set forth in the Uniform Public Construction Cost Account Act, an invitation to bid was posted/published on May 24, 2106, for the Project; and WHEREAS, Two (2) bids were received on the bid opening date of June 15, 2016; and WHEREAS, Development Services staff determined that Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc. submitted the lowest cost bid and is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder with a bid amount of $287,000.00; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park as follows: 1. The above recitals are true and correct and material to this Resolution. 2. The plans and specifications for the Wilfred Avenue Rehabilitation Project No. 2016-09 are hereby approved and adopted. 3. The City Council finds that the Project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the scope of the project is pavement rehabilitation, and is therefore categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15032 (Replacement or Reconstruction), and therefore directs staff to file a Notice of Exemption for the project. 4. In making its findings the City Council relied upon and hereby incorporates by reference all of the bid materials, correspondence, staff reports and all other related materials. 5. In accordance with California Public Contract Code Section 20160 and following any other applicable laws, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park hereby finds the bid of Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc. for the Project to be the lowest, responsive bid and waives any irregularities in such bid in accordance with applicable law. 6. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract with Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc., in substantially similar form to Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, for the sum of the base bid for the Two Hundred Eighty Seven Dollars ($287,000) for construction of the Project in accordance with the bid documents and applicable law upon submission by Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc. of all documents required pursuant to the Project bid documents. 7. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute change orders in an amount not to exceed 15% of the base bid or forty three thousand fifty dollars ($43,050). 8. City staff is hereby directed to issue a Notice of Award to Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc. for this project. 9. This Resolution shall become effective immediately. 10. All portions of this resolution are severable. Should any individual component of this Resolution be adjudged to be invalid and unenforceable by a body of competent jurisdiction, then the remaining resolution portions shall continue in full force and effect, except as to those resolution portions that have been adjudged invalid. The City Council of the City of Rohnert Park hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution and each section, subsection, clause, sentence, phrase and other portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more section, subsection, clause, sentence, phrase or other portion may be held invalid or unconstitutional. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: (2) 2016-70 BELFORTE: Exhibit A CONTRACT WILFRED AVENUE REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. 2016-09 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this th day of , 2016, by and between Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc. hereinafter called "Contractor", and the City of Rohnert Park, hereinafter called "City". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City Council of said City has awarded a contract to Contractor for performing the work hereinafter mentioned in accordance with the sealed proposal of said Contractor. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED, as follows: 1. Scope of Work: The Contractor must perform all the work and furnish all the labor, materials, equipment and all utility and transportation services required to complete all of the work of construction and installation of the improvements more particularly described in the Resolution adopted by the City Council of said City on , 2016, the items and quantities of which are more particularly set forth in the Contractor's bid therefor on file in the office of the City Clerk, except work to be performed by subcontractors as set forth in the Contractor's bid and for which the Contractor retains responsibility. 2. Time of Performance and Liquidated Damages: The Contractor must begin work within ten (10) calendar days after official notice by the City Engineer to proceed with the work and must diligently prosecute the same to completion within thirty (30) working days of that Notice. The Contractor acknowledges and agrees that time is of the essence with respect to Contractor's work and that Contractor shall diligently pursue performance of the work. In the event the Contractor does not complete the work within the time limit so specified or within such further time as said City Council must have authorized, the Contractor must pay to the City liquidated damages in the amount of Five Hundred dollars ($500.00) per day for each and every day's delay in finishing the work beyond the completion date so specified. Additional provisions with regard to said time of completion and liquidated damages are set forth in the specifications, which provisions are hereby referred to and incorporated herein by reference. 3. Payments: Payments will be made by City to the Contractor for said work performed at the times and in the manner provided in the specifications and at the unit prices stated in Contractor's bid. The award of the contract is for a total amount of $287,000.00. 4. Component Parts and Interpretation: This contract must consist of the following documents, each of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk and all of which are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference thereto: a) This Agreement b) Notice Inviting Sealed Proposals C) Instruction and Information to Bidders d) Accepted Proposal, with all attachments and certifications e) Faithful Performance Bond f) Labor and Material Bond g) Special Provisions h) Standard Specifications i) Design Standards j) Plans, Profiles and Detailed Drawings In the event of conflict between these documents, the following order of precedence will govern: this contract; change orders; supplemental agreements and approved revisions to plans and specifications; special conditions; standard specifications; detail plans; general plans; standard plans; reference specifications. In the absence of a controlling or contrary provision in the foregoing, the Standard Specifications (2010 edition) of the California Department of Transportation shall apply to this project. 5. Independent Contractor. Contractor is and will at all times remain as to City a wholly independent contractor. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, or agents will have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, except as expressly set forth in the Contract Documents. Contractor may not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors are in any manner officers, employees, agents or subcontractors of City. 6. Prevailing Wages: Copies of the determination of the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the prevailing rate of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute this Contract will be on file in, and available at, the office of the Director at 601 Carmen Drive, Camarillo, California 93010. Contractor must post at the work site, or if there is no regular work site then at its principal office, for the duration of the Contract, a copy of the determination by the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the specified prevailing rate of per diem wages. (Labor Code § 1773.2.) Contractor, and any subcontractor engaged by Contractor, may pay not less than the specified prevailing rate of per diem wages to all workers employed in the execution of the contract. (Labor Code § 1774.) Contractor is responsible for compliance with Labor Code section 1776 relative to the retention and inspection of payroll records. Contractor must comply with all provisions of Labor Code section 1775. Under Section 1775, Contractor may forfeit as a penalty to City up to $200.00 for each worker employed in the execution of the Contract by Contractor or any subcontractor for each calendar day, or portion 2 thereof, in which the worker is paid less than the prevailing rates. Contractor may also be liable to pay the difference between the prevailing wage rates and the amount paid to each worker for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for which each worker was paid less than the prevailing wage rate. Nothing in this Contract prevents Contractor or any subcontractor from employing properly registered apprentices in the execution of the Contract. Contractor is responsible for compliance with Labor Code section 1777.5 for all apprenticeable occupations. This statute requires that contractors and subcontractors must submit contract award information to the applicable joint apprenticeship committee, must employ apprentices in apprenticeable occupations in a ratio of not less than one hour of apprentice's work for every five hours of labor performed by a journeyman (unless an exception is granted under § 1777.5), must contribute to the fund or funds in each craft or trade or a like amount to the California Apprenticeship Council, and that contractors and subcontractors must not discriminate among otherwise qualified employees as apprentices solely on the ground of sex, race, religion, creed, national origin, ancestry or color. Only apprentices defined in Labor Code section 3077, who are in training under apprenticeship standards and who have written apprentice contracts, may be employed on public works in apprenticeable occupations. If federal funds are used to pay for the Work, Contractor and any subcontractor agree to comply, as applicable, with the labor and reporting requirements of the Davis -Bacon Act (40 USC § 276a-7), the Copeland Act (40 USC § 276c and 18 USC § 874), and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 USC § 327 and following). 7. Hours of Labor: Contractor acknowledges that under California Labor Code sections 1810 and following, eight hours of labor constitutes a legal day's work. Contractor will forfeit as a penalty to City the sum of $25.00 for each worker employed in the execution of this Contract by Contractor or any subcontractor for each calendar day during which such worker is required or permitted to work more than eight hours in any one calendar day and 40 hours in any one calendar week in violation of the provisions of Labor Code section 1810. 8. Apprentices: Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 (Chapter 1411, Statutes of 1968) and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any Subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or Subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticeable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the Contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases must not be less than one to five except: A. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request for certificate, or 3 B. When the number of apprentices in training in that area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or C. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or D. When the assignment of an apprentice to any work performed under a public works Contract would create a condition which would jeopardize his life or the life, safety, or property of fellow employees or the public at large, or if the specified task to which the apprentice is to be assigned is of such a nature that training cannot be provided by a journeyman, or E. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his Contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship program if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticeable trade on such Contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and any Subcontractor under him must comply with the requirements of Section 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. 9. Labor Discrimination: Attention is directed to Section 1735 of the Labor Code, which reads as follows: "A contractor must not discriminate in the employment of persons upon public works on any basis listed in subdivision (a) of Section 12940 of the Government Code, as those bases are defined in Sections 12926 and 12926.1 of the Government Code, except as otherwise provided in Section 12940 of the Government Code. Every contractor for public works who violates this section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a violation of this chapter. 10. Workmen's Compensation Insurance: In accordance with the provisions of Article 5, Chapter 1, Part 7, Division 2 (commencing with Section 1860) and Chapter 4, Part 1, Division 4 (commencing with Section 3700) of the Labor Code of the State of California, the Contractor is required to secure the payment of compensation to his employees and must for that purpose obtain and keep in effect adequate Workmen's Compensation Insurance. 4 The undersigned Contractor is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workmen's compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract. 11. Indemnity and Insurance: To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor must indemnify, hold harmless, release and defend City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, volunteers, and consultants from and against any and all actions, claims, demands, damages, disability, losses, expenses including, but not limited to, attorney's fees and other defense costs and liabilities of any nature that may be asserted by any person or entity including Contractor, in whole or in part, arising out of Contractor's activities hereunder, including the activities of other persons employed or utilized by Contractor including subcontractors hired by the Contractor in the performance of this Agreement excepting liabilities due to the active negligence of the City. This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages or compensation payable by or for Contractor under Worker's Compensation, disability or other employee benefit acts or the terms, applicability or limitations of any insurance held or provided by Contractor and must continue to bind the parties after termination/completion of this Agreement. Contractor shall procure and maintain throughout the time for performance of the work under this Contract the insurance required by the Special Provisions. The requirement that Contractor procure and maintain insurance shall in no way be construed to limit the Contractor's duty to indemnify City as provided in the paragraph above. Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes no additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights hereunder. 12. City Right of Termination and Right to Complete the Work. The City may terminate the Contract when conditions encountered during the work make it impossible or impracticable to proceed, or when the City is prevented from proceeding with the Contract by act of God, by law, or by official action of a public authority. In addition, the occurrence of any of the following is a default by Contractor under this Contract: A. Contractor refuses or fails to prosecute the Work or any part thereof with such diligence as will insure its completion within the time specified or any permitted extension. B. Contractor fails to complete the Work on time. C. Contractor is adjudged bankrupt, or makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, or a receiver is appointed on account of Contractor's insolvency. D. Contractor fails to supply enough properly skilled workers or proper materials to complete the Work in the time specified. 5 E. Contractor fails to make prompt payment to any subcontractor or for material or labor. F. Contractor fails to abide by any applicable laws, ordinances or instructions of City in performing the Work. G. Contractor breaches or fails to perform any obligation or duty under the Contract. Upon the occurrence of a default by Contractor, the Director will serve a written notice of default on Contractor specifying the nature of the default and the steps needed to correct the default. Unless Contractor cures the default within 10 days after the service of such notice, or satisfactory arrangements acceptable to City for the correction or elimination of such default are made, as determined by City, City may thereafter terminate this Contract by serving written notice on Contractor. In such case, Contractor will not be entitled to receive any further payment, except for Work actually completed prior to such termination in accordance with the provisions of the Contract Documents. In event of any such termination, City will also immediately serve written notice of the termination upon Contractor's surety. The surety will have the right to take over and perform pursuant to this Contract; provided, however, that if the surety does not give City written notice of its intention to take over and perform this Contract within five days after service of the notice of termination or does not commence performance within 10 days from the date of such notice, City may take over the Work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or by any other method it may deem advisable for the account and at the expense of Contractor. Contractor and the surety will be liable to City for any and all excess costs or other damages incurred by City in completing the Work. If City takes over the Work as provided in this Section, City may, without liability for so doing, take possession of, and utilize in completing the Work, such materials, appliances, plant, and other property belonging to Contractor as may be on the site of the Work and necessary for the completion of the Work. 13. Substitution of Securities for Withheld Amounts: Pursuant to California Public Contracts Code Section 22300, securities may be substituted for any moneys withheld by a public agency to ensure performance under a contract. At the request and sole expense of the Contractor, securities equivalent to the amount withheld must be deposited with the public agency, or with a state or federally chartered bank as the escrow agent, who must pay such moneys to the Contractor upon satisfactory completion of the contract. Securities eligible for substitution under this section must include those listed in the California Public Contracts Code Section 22300 or bank or savings and loan certificates of deposit. The Contractor must be the beneficial owner of any securities substituted for moneys withheld and must receive any interest thereon. Alternatively, the Contractor may request and the City shall make payment of retentions earned directly to the escrow agent at the expense of the Contractor. At the expense of the 0 Contractor, the Contractor may direct the investment of the payments into securities and the Contractor shall receive the interest earned on the investments upon the same terms provided for in Section 22300 for securities deposited by the Contractor. Upon satisfactory completion of the Contract, the Contractor shall receive from the escrow agent all securities, interest, and payments received by the escrow agent from the City, pursuant to the terms of this section. Any escrow agreement entered into pursuant to this section must contain as a minimum the following provisions: a. The amount of securities to be deposited; b. The terms and conditions of conversion to cash in case of the default of the Contractor; and C. The termination of the escrow upon completion of the contract. 14. General Provisions A. Authority to Execute. Each Party represents and warrants that all necessary action has been taken by such Party to authorize the undersigned to execute this Contract and to bind it to the performance of its obligations. B. Assignment. Contractor may not assign this Contract without the prior written consent of City, which consent may be withheld in City's sole discretion since the experience and qualifications of Contractor were material considerations for this Contract. C. Binding Effect. This Agreement is binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and permitted assigns of the Parties. D. Integrated Contract. This Contract, including the Contract Documents, is the entire, complete, final and exclusive expression of the Parties with respect to the Work to be performed under this Contract and supersedes all other agreements or understandings, whether oral or written, between Contractor and City prior to the execution of this Contract. E. Modification of Contract. No amendment to or modification of this Contract will be valid unless made in writing and approved by Contractor and by the City Council or City Manager, as applicable. The Parties agree that this requirement for written modifications cannot be waived and that any attempted waiver will be void. F. Counterparts, Facsimile or other Electronic Signatures. This Contract may be executed in several counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, and all of which, when taken together, constitute one and the same instrument. Amendments to this Contract will be considered executed when the signature of a party is delivered by facsimile or other electronic transmission. Such facsimile or other electronic signature will have the same effect as an original signature. G. Waiver. Waiver by any Party of any term, condition, or covenant of this Contract will not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant. Waiver by any 7 Parry of any breach of the provisions of this Contract will not constitute a waiver of any other provision, or a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of any provision of this Contract. Acceptance by City of any Work performed by Contractor will not constitute a waiver of any of the provisions of this Contract. H. Interpretation. This Contract will be interpreted, construed and governed according to the laws of the State of California. Each parry has had the opportunity to review this Contract with legal counsel. The Contract will be construed simply, as a whole, and in accordance with its fair meaning. It will not be interpreted strictly for or against either party. I. Severability. If any term, condition or covenant of this Contract is declared or determined by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Contract will not be affected and the Contract will be read and construed without the invalid, void or unenforceable provision. J. Venue. In the event of litigation between the parties, venue in state trial courts will be in the County of Sonoma. In the event of litigation in a U.S. District Court, venue will be in the Northern District of California. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Rohnert Park has caused these presents to be executed by its officers, thereunto duly authorized, and Contractor has subscribed same, all on the day and year first above written. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Valley Slurry Seal International, Inc. City Manager Date Name/Title Date Per Resolution No. 2016- adopted by the Rohnert Park City Council at its meeting of 2016. ATTEST: City Clerk 91 APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ROj;NEFLT TA 1{ �R7,iF(33�"�71P- ITEM NO. 6C8 Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Mary Grace Pawson PE, Director of Development Services Agenda Title: Authorize the City Manager to Execute Task Order 2016-01 with Green Valley Consulting Engineers for Construction Management and Inspection Services for the University District Project and Related Actions RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Task Order 2016-01 with Green Valley Consulting Engineers for Construction Management and Inspection Services for the University District Project and Authorizing the Finance Director to Make Appropriations and Increase Budgeted Revenue to Account for Developer Reimbursements BACKGROUND: The City originally entered into a Master Agreement with Green Valley Consulting Engineers (Green Valley) for Design Professional Services on January 26, 2011, pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 2011-07 adopted on January 25, 2011. In February 2016, a new Master Agreement with Green Valley was authorized and approved by Council Resolution No. 2016-16. Under the 2011 agreement and after a qualifications -based selection process, the City approved Task Order No. 2014-02 on August 8, 2014, for On -Call Construction Management and Inspection Services for the University District Project. At this point, Task Order No. 2014-02 has reached its funding limit, however construction work at the University District development is continuing to accelerate. This construction season, the developer will be completing the in -tract improvements for the 399 -lot Vast Oak West development; constructing the new Twin Creeks Park; and completing the widening of Rohnert Park Expressway from Snyder Lane to Petaluma Hill Road. All of these improvements require city inspection and acceptance, and the construction must be coordinated with the City's capital improvement projects in the same area. City staff does not currently have the resources to perform the inspection work for the University District Project. Because the 2016 Master Agreement with Green Valley is now in effect, staff recommends that the City enter into a new Task Order that will allow Green Valley to continue to provide engineering services for this ongoing project. The Development Agreement for the University District Specific Plan Area provides the City with the authority to recover its costs, including the costs of outside consultants when they are necessary. Because of this, the City can use consultants, like Green Valley, to augment our staff resources without having adverse impacts on the City's General Fund. ANALYSIS: While the City has competitively solicited and secured on-call construction management and inspection services from a number of providers, Green Valley is considered the most qualified to continue to provide these services for the University District Project. The firm ITEM NO. 6C8 has been able to effectively represent the City's interest while working with the developer to undertake its work in a reasonably coordinated fashion. In addition, Green Valley has not worked for the developer and has no conflicts of interest and its hourly rates particularly for inspection services are very competitive. The University District Developer will be constructing both onsite and offsite improvements with as many as six contractors at any time, and City staff is recommending that the construction management team include a construction manager and between 3 and 5 full-time inspectors to manage the work that is currently under construction. The estimated value of this construction is approximately $10 million and the estimated cost of the construction management services is $632,500 equivalent to 6.3% of the costs of construction, which is reasonable based on industry standards. These costs are covered by developer reimbursements. This proposed Task Order with Green Valley is in alignment with Purchasing Policy Sections 3.6(B) and (D), which allows the city to engage professional services via a negotiated process and secure their ongoing services via master services agreements. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: By hiring outside professionals, the City is ensuring the effective delivery of public services thus aligning with Goal C of the Strategic Plan. Additionally, this allows staff to better assist major planned developments which aligns with Goal D of the Strategic Plan. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Authorize the Task Order with Green Valley Consultants (recommended option). This option allows staff to retain continuity of inspection services and project understanding and will allow resources to remain available as work proceeds. 2. Award the construction management and inspection services to another firm. This option is not recommended because staff has solicited proposals and Green Valley is the most qualified to continue with this work. 3. Perform construction management and inspection services using city staff. This option is not recommended as it would require hiring additional staff to perform these services. The use of a consultant offers flexibility to the City to engage their services only if and when there is work to be done. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The fiscal impact of the proposed action is $632,500. The expenses incurred under the Task Order will be reimbursed by the Developer, Brookfield Homes, per the Development Agreement for the University District Specific Plan. Department Head Approval Date: 06/15/2016 Finance Director Approval Date: 06/20/2016 City Attorney Approval Date: 06/16/2016 City Manager Approval Date: Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Task Order 2016-01 with Green Valley Consulting Engineers for Construction Management and Inspection Services for the University District Project and Authorizing the Finance Director to Make Appropriations and Increase Budgeted Revenue to Account for Developer Reimbursements 2. Exhibit A to Resolution: Task Order No. 2016-01 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-71 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE TASK ORDER 2016-01 WITH GREEN VALLEY CONSULTING ENGINEERS FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE UNIVERSITY DISTRICT PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE APPROPRIATIONS AND INCREASE BUDGETED REVENUE TO ACCOUNT FOR DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENTS WHEREAS, the City entered into a Master Agreement with Green Valley Consulting Engineers for Design Professional Services on January 26, 2011, pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 2011-07 adopted on January 25, 2011; WHEREAS, under the 2011 agreement and after a qualifications -based selection process, the City entered into a Task Order No. 2014-02 with Green Valley Consulting Engineers for On -Call Construction Management and Inspection Services for University District Sheet; WHEREAS, Task Order No. 2014-02 has reached its funding limits; WHEREAS, consistent with the Purchasing Policy, the City entered into a new Master Agreement with Green Valley Consulting Engineers for Design Professional Services on March 1, 2016, pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 2016-16 adopted on February 23, 2016; WHEREAS, the City desires to enter into a new Task Order under the new Master Agreement to allow Green Valley to continue to provide engineering services for the University District Project based upon their skill, experience and expertise with this project; WHEREAS, the University District Project is proceeding with additional public improvements, all of which require city management, inspection and acceptance; WHEREAS, staff requested and has received a proposal from Green Valley Consulting Engineers for continued construction management and inspection services; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered Task Order No 2016-01 at its duly noticed regular meeting of June 28, 2016. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute Task Order No. 2016-01 by and between Green Valley Consulting Engineers, a California Corporation, and the City of Rohnert Park, a municipal corporation, for Construction Management and Inspection Services for the University District Project in an amount not to exceed six hundred thirty-two thousand five hundred dollars ($632,500). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all actions to effectuate the Task Order for and on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park, including execution, if necessary, in substantially similar form to the Task Order attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit "A," subject to minor modifications by the City Manager or City Attorney. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon receipt of developer reimbursements, the Finance Director is authorized to make appropriations and increase budgeted revenue as necessary to cover the costs of the Task Order. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES:( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) (2) 2016-71 GREEN VALLEY TASK ORDER NO. 2016-01 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AND GREEN VALLEY CONSULTING ENGINEERS AUTHORIZATION TO PROVIDE ON-CALL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE UNIVERSITY DISTRICT PROJECT SECTION 1— PURPOSE The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct Green Valley Consulting Engineers to proceed with the work specified in Section 2 below in accordance with the provisions of the Master Agreement For Consultant Services ("Master Agreement") between the City of Rohnert Park ("City") and Green Valley Consulting Engineers ("Consultant") hereto dated March 1, 2016. The items authorized by this Task Order are presented in Attachment "A" - Scope of Services, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. SECTION 3 — COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT Compensation shall be as provided in the Master Agreement between the parties hereto referenced in SECTION 1 above. The total cost for services as set forth in SECTION 2 shall be actual costs (time and materials) based on Consultant's standard labor charges in accordance with the provisions of the Master Agreement and as shown in Attachment `B", which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, for an amount not -to -exceed six hundred thirty-two thousand five hundred dollars ($632,500). SECTION 4 — TIME OF PERFORMANCE The work described in SECTION 2 shall be completed by March 30, 2017, or as extended by the City Manager or his/her designee. SECTION 5 — ITEMS AND CONDITIONS All items and conditions contained in the Master Agreement For Consultant Services between City and Consultant are incorporated by reference. Approved this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK GREEN VALLEY CONSULTING ENGINEERS Darrin Jenkins, City Manager (Date) Elizabeth L. Ellis, President (Date) Per Resolution No. 2016- adopted by the Rohnert Park City Council at its meeting of , 2016. ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ATTACHMENT "A" to Task Order No. 2016-01 SCOPE OF SERVICES On -Call Construction Management and Inspection Services by Green Valley Consulting Engineers for the University District Project Scope of Services Task No 1 - Pre -Construction and Initial Construction Activities Green Valley's pre -construction services will include logistics, coordination, and meetings with the Contractor, City, utility companies, and other project stake holders. It is our understanding that the Construction Manager will be responsible for leading the meeting. Additional services to be provided at this stage include: ➢ Pre -construction digital photos of the project site ➢ Set up the project files in accordance with the City's standard formats for administration ➢ Development of written and verbal communication protocol (and associated forms) with the Construction Manager and City Staff Task No. 2 - Daily Field Inspection & Documentation Green Valley will provide daily, on-site inspections of the construction activities to ensure that the contract work conforms to the contract documents and Governing Construction Standards. The on-site inspector will provide documentation of the work on daily inspection reports. Daily inspection reports may be submitted to the City on a weekly basis for the previous week's work. Green Valley will also document the work in progress with digital photos. Other important tasks of the on-site inspector include public relations and safety measures, especially traffic control measures during construction. If requested, our Inspector will confirm that all design permit requirements are met and will act as the liaison between the Contractor, Construction Manager, and other stakeholders. Specifically, we can assist with the following work: ➢ Measurement of work, pay requests, change order support, and related contract issues ➢ Preparation and processing payment recommendations to the City using Microsoft Office formats ➢ Review of Certified Payroll reports ➢ Coordination of all required testing as specified by the Contract documents ➢ Quality Control/Assurance of construction approach and written communications We know that documentation and communication is critical to the success of construction projects and we are committed to keeping the Construction Manager, City staff and other stakeholders informed regarding critical construction details, progress of the work and costs of the project. We will document all construction issues with the following reports: ➢ Progress Meeting Minutes ➢ Daily inspection Reports; Weekly statement of Working days ➢ Monthly Status Report The Monthly Status Report will provide the City with information on construction activities for the month, change order cost summary, pay estimate cost summary and contract time summary. Task No. 3 - Requests for Information (RFI) The Contractor will be required to submit all Requests for Information in writing. The Inspector will work under the direction of the appointed Construction Manager to follow up as needed with the Contractor to clarify requests, obtain needed information and provide direction as required to proceed with the work. Task No. 4 - Closeout & Record Drawings We will work with the City and the Contractor to keep a "record set" of drawings to document changes and as -built conditions of original design plans. Once construction is completed to the satisfaction of the City, we compile all pertinent files and related information and submit to the City for their permanent records. We will furnish the City the following: ➢ Record drawings ➢ Project Photos ➢ All contract files and records ➢ Electronic files Based on Full time inspection. Mondav through Fridav at 8 hours Der day ATTACHMENT "B" TO TASK ORDER NO.2016-01 CITY OF ROH NERT PARK -June 2016 WORK ESTIMATE -Green Valley Consulting Engineersfor On -Call Construction Management and Inspection Servicesfor the University District Project Green Task Information Task Task Information Const. Manager/PE Construction Project Mang Inspector II - Construction Admin. Direct Q r Inspector II Assistant Costs Total Total Costs Hours Remarks $197 $185 $155 $125 $75 1 Project/Construction Management 700 80 780 $143,900 CM at approx. 5 hr/day for 7 months 2 Daily Field Inspection & Documentation 120 120 3400 3,640 $447,200 3.5 Full-time inspectors for 6 months Inspector Vehicle $22,800 $22,800 Based on $95/Day for 120 days for inspector's vehicle for 2 vehicles Reimbursible Expenses(photos, copies, etc. $0 Total Hours 700 120 120 3,400 80 Project Total $137 900 $22 200 $18 600 $425 000 $6,000 $22,800 $632,500.00 TOTAL NOT COST Based on Full time inspection. Mondav through Fridav at 8 hours Der day �L,JJN r pA,,,V .� Mission Statement � sz "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." �AtlF6 AK''P CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Mary Grace Pawson, Development Services Director Prepared By: Mary Grace Pawson, Development Services Director Agenda Title: Presentation on Proposed Community Separator Ballot Measure by Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Department RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive a presentation from Sonoma County Permit and Resources Management Department on proposed Community Separator Ballot Measure ITEM NO. 7 BACKGROUND: Since 1978, Sonoma County's General Plan has mapped "critical community separators" in an effort to contain urban development, preserve community identity, protect rural character and maintain open space. In 1996, the voters of Sonoma County approved a ballot measure that requires voter approval to: • change land uses or increase density/intensity within the mapped community separators; • reduce the size of the mapped community separators. These voter approval restrictions expire in 2016. In December 2015, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors approved a work plan to develop a new ballot measure for consideration in November 2016. This measure would protect community separator restrictions for another 30 years. This work plan included community outreach and an effort to identify expanded community separator lands with an emphasis on priority greenbelts. ANALYSIS: Currently, mapped community separator lands are located adjacent to the City's urban growth boundary, along the northern and western limits as far as the Laguna de Santa Rosa (see Attachment 1 — City of Rohnert Park General Plan Diagram). The westerly community separator lands also extend along a portion of the City of Cotati's western border. As a result of public input, Sonoma County is proposing to expand the community separator land around Rohnert Park, generally to the east and south (see slides 13-15 of the attached presentation). The proposed expansions to the community separator lands are illustrated in orange and are generally east of Petaluma Hill Road and south of Railroad Avenue. The proposed expansion to the community separator lands are outside of the City's sphere of influence and urban growth boundary. As illustrated in slides 12 and 13 of the attached presentation, when the existing and proposed community separators around Rohnert Park and Cotati are combined, the two communities are almost fully surrounded by community separator land, providing the two cities with the most complete community separator in the County. ITEM NO. 7 The proposed expansions to the community separator lands would cover the 53 -acre parcel, east of Petaluma Hill Road, which Brookfield Homes has dedicated to the City. The City is planning to construct a water tank and the Copeland Creek regional detention basin on this property. City staff has had one meeting with County staff on this proposal. County staff has indicated that among the criteria for proposing new community separator lands is a requirement that there be no impact within existing urban growth boundaries. County staff has also indicated that the City's proposed use of its property east of Petaluma Hill Road would be compatible with a community separator designation. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: N/A. The presentation is informational OPTIONS CONSIDERED: None at this time. This item is informational. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: There are no fiscal impacts associated with receiving this report. Department Head Approval Date: 06/16/2016 Finance Director Approval Date: NA City Attorney Approval Date: NA City Manager Approval Date: 06/22/16 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. City of Rohnert Park General Plan Diagram 2. Copy of Sonoma County Presentation 2 TODD RD MILLBRAE AVE SANTA ROSA URBAN BOUNDARY W R a\\\00'�r°ccs COMMUNITY \\ : 3 e\` SEPARATOR $ ' CII OOL RpHry�B �T T \ I\ P f, m °°f o °9 0 3 SOS V' O� C COTATI/ SPHERE OF INFLUENCE j N 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 ill Rural Estate Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential - High Density Residential Industrial Commercial - N = Commercial - R Commercial - R/ High Density Residential New k♦dossing il Cross Influenc 1 HOLLY AVE nnnnnnnnu■■■n■■�I Coleman Creek I: 0 PARK 00 -: ROHNERr PARS VALLEY HI \_. ■�-SpFerQ-o�Frr�Gi CURSE DR - MUNICIPgL GOLFCOURSE --niu■7■ :,IIS_ �■■ '0 Year UG RAILROAD AVE GOIORIDGE r j ' lIONEVBE 1AR1 ELEMENTARY . SCHOOL - MARGUERITE FA ed ELESM{NTARY OOL --- — — — — — — — — — — i — hange Huws51 ■ li ELEANOR A4 GOLF COURSE DR ROHNERTPARK MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE - VIII Five Creek � jrl)� Af'J._ W'I [VLRGREEN - @LEMENTARYi� Community N9� X SCHOOL lad Fields - fD DOROFHEA m 'AEKGLE PARK ■I Crane Creek � PARK (j ' 4 2 ■ OP C, p + CREEKSIDE -- , MIDDLE SCHOOL s City Center ROHNERT PARK EXPY SUNRISE PARK. ` COMMUNITY CENTER L m SPORTS CE ER , L PERFORMING ARTS CE NTER� J Ca n'4 r P%Op"Creek �P RANCHO COTATE OLEG O - V STK 1W SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL � AVAFIN E scHaDL aiDDL it I N U CATERPILLAR SONG UNIME STATE W PARK RSITV MOUNTAIN DRAOOWS - Op LESCHOOL „l Y BENICIA G- _ PARK O K■■�� p 4� WALDOAOHNERT 2 V•� - _9 ELEMENTARY G: SCHOOL •� ol P ` . FO .!JtMAGNDFA PARK COTATI ONT VISTA \•� +■■■r'\ SCHOOL LA FIESTA yn SCHOOL --- LRY V, SCHOOL LADYBUG O �\ ARK P •1\\ 0 •1� i\ Mixed Use Office Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation - Open Space - Environmental Conservation Open Space - Agriculture and Resource Management Community Separator - Public/Institutional/Medium Density Residential All maps are intended to be consistent with the General Plan Diagram. Additional adjustments to other maps may be made for consistency. Base data from County of Sonoma GIs department and the City of Rohnert Park Revised 09/2014 11117'60°9h Cree¢ CCeek hou L\G 300 ........ Sphere of Influence 20 Year Urban Growth Boundary City Limits Existing/Proposed Major Arterial (4-6 lanes) ........ Minor Arterial (2 lanes) ----- Major Collector (4 lanes) ........ Minor Collector (2 lanes) General Plan Figure 2.2-1 Diagram Adopted: 11/7/2000 Diagram Revisions: 11/7/2000 1/23/01 Reso 2001-24 7/24/01 Reso 2001-161 8/28/01 Reso 2001-192 10/22/02 Reso 2002-247 10/14/03 Resos 2003-236 and 2003-238 9/25/05 Reso 2005-296 5/23/06 Reso 2006-142 6/13/06 Reso 2006-161 6/10/08 Reso 2008-87 8/24/10 Reso 2010-102 12/7/10 Reso 2010-133 Reso 2010-135 11/12/13 Reso 2013-153 And 2013-155 4/8/14 Reso 2014-33 11/25/14 Reso 2014-156 0 al VALLEY HI \_. ■�-SpFerQ-o�Frr�Gi t --niu■7■ :,IIS_ �■■ '0 Year UG RAILROAD AVE 11117'60°9h Cree¢ CCeek hou L\G 300 ........ Sphere of Influence 20 Year Urban Growth Boundary City Limits Existing/Proposed Major Arterial (4-6 lanes) ........ Minor Arterial (2 lanes) ----- Major Collector (4 lanes) ........ Minor Collector (2 lanes) General Plan Figure 2.2-1 Diagram Adopted: 11/7/2000 Diagram Revisions: 11/7/2000 1/23/01 Reso 2001-24 7/24/01 Reso 2001-161 8/28/01 Reso 2001-192 10/22/02 Reso 2002-247 10/14/03 Resos 2003-236 and 2003-238 9/25/05 Reso 2005-296 5/23/06 Reso 2006-142 6/13/06 Reso 2006-161 6/10/08 Reso 2008-87 8/24/10 Reso 2010-102 12/7/10 Reso 2010-133 Reso 2010-135 11/12/13 Reso 2013-153 And 2013-155 4/8/14 Reso 2014-33 11/25/14 Reso 2014-156 rid City of Rohnert Park City Council June 28, 2016 permit ONOM COMMUNITY SEPARATORS History Functions ❑ Project ❑ Public Input HISTORY 1978 General Plan mapped Critical Community Separators Established in 1989 General Plan Open Space Element 1992 LAFCO Policy Deny annexation in Community Separators 1996 BOS called for Ballot Measure 1996 First Ballot Measure Approved Added protections for Separators adjoining UGBs 1998 Second Ballot Measure Approved Expanded Petaluma/Novato Separator BALLOT MEASURE Requires voter approval for: Changes in land use to increase density or intensity yReduction in the size of Community Separators Restrictions Expire in 2016 and 2018 EXISTING COMMUNITY SEPARATORS Adjacent to Cities Li Petaluma/Novato Petaluma/Rohnert Park ❑ Rohnert Park/Santa Rosa ❑ Santa Rosa/Sebastopol Windsor/Larkfield Windsor Healdsburg n Northeast Santa Rosa Glen Ellen/Agua Caliente GENERAL PLAID ❑ Separate cities and other communities F Contain urban development ❑ Provide visual relief from urbanization ❑ Preserve community identity ❑ Maintain open space ❑ Protect rural character COMMUNITY SEPARATORS Avoid increases in residential density Maintain less thanl unit per 10 acres F Avoid Commercial/Industrial Uses Other than Permitted in Ag/Resource Zones ❑ Design Review required Agricultural structures are exempt Avoid extension of sewer and water ❑ Preserve open space and trees COMMUNITY SEPARATORS Designated in the General Plan Open Space and Resource Conservation Element Designation Does Not Expire Policies Do Not Expire Development Allowed per Zoning ❑ Scenic Resource (SR) Zoning -- Requires design review BOARD DIRECTION Work plan approved December 2015 Ballot measure November 2016 ❑ 30 -year sunset n Expand Community Separators Emphasize acquisition areas (Priority Greenbelts) BALLOT MEASURE Proposed ballot measure 30 -year life "Unhooked" from Urban Growth Boundaries Exceptions include building purely affordable housing and correcting mapping errors r" .� ED Community Separator andel* J .� PriorityGreen belt �. c I Urban 5ervieeArea 40 s y. w'"�y.. .! �•� !a l k `_rte. -r. -_,a to 00 1— .6"/ 1 ,•,��� _ < .0-1 Jill"� - .:!'. I ai"Tr �J � ��' - ���. �+I , a+ J• r+, Or ._�• � e - A S r'.e r j._ � t - _ r ( � '' lam.• #''s , do + I ♦ f _--. k Oak I r HeAldsburQ ' i7 F` i ��` i16% i J or, w J IF 111 4,.or i. sem} CilMelI'4lyl1le -• 10 129 " S.lNit:ia'�. rl� f r p - r T'R4 o's ter r T. A ALT, 'f _ Pul !- ' YnrmtViile ay P irF r ' - Six r1IQ'- EI Verariv Napa Novato Sonoma County (Existing) 317 - rez$ yid' �.r°` 'I '' i -- *� - � • _,j�' � .. Area low fX. � �y "4; le �' 1r � ��r � "' ��� T �-• �-•r� � P„�M 3 +GGG r_- _ !rte• � ..���_ Healcfsbur •�` :_ '. t:. s �.s callstoga Angwin r•'fit.��s �.��`"'f Windsor 41 r� I�• r Guerneville ~, �' �f Sf Helena + 11,'. ,5 s� r r •i r 128 Santa Y YOU } P'r r F j Bodega Rollller+.. Bay �� Park r 6 Hol, 4� Ttfer--� EI Vreranc Napa `sorlonl-1 � .Pe �u � i °, ,k JJ +M it r ; evat�7 va(l F'csintRege5.. Nation. -:1 'ii..`f Sonoma County (Proposed) 1 r rt ,� fir. , •r � t r "-y �r. , .� ... '�` ''' `i' ' � �'' //` f//f f � '�"' - "" • r/'�'' +art Or "� tS �� •,F'Tx a. • � � I / { ani"'T, ` _.q�• �i. r Rt r {r - Inert Park 1J 5A Q^ '�`r, -, "."•w a p, I+ �. "r.r' m ... ', 5.•.4a X = ' r �x i r,$° A, a. ,ytfi.,. r . �* s TE t - - 11 Ike oNl• ; FY •e ���. �--k-- '• -_ y � //, ,� , / - - .�, 'fin. Az �+� L,?..t . F" sri HERE, QeLorme Eai Ro h nert Park • f /Z .�j'f /� / �" `r / i f/ /f / ,j�//�, 3" Rohnert Park/Santa Rosa a 7- IL V. A • f /Z .�j'f /� / �" `r / i f/ /f / ,j�//�, 3" Rohnert Park/Santa Rosa a 7- IL • f /Z .�j'f /� / �" `r / i f/ /f / ,j�//�, 3" Rohnert Park/Santa Rosa a e C3 Petaluma/Rohnert Park/Cotati GENERAL PLAN POLICIES Strengthen city -centered growth policies Policy OSRC-1 c ❑ Ensure internal consistency F Amend for clarity L -w 0 PUBLIC INPUT Workshops Hearings Voting (ballot Webpage measure) ❑ www.sonoma-county.or Comm unitySeparators ❑ PRMD-CommunitySeparatorsO-sonoma-county.or permit ONOM URBAN COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP June 27, 2016 RE: Community Separators Renewal Measure and General Plan Additions Dear Rohnert Park City Council, 'There's a train coming to town' which brings a once in a lifetime opportunity for appropriate development. Urban Community Partnership, a grassroots multi -disciplinary non-profit, believes that transforming our approach to development is key to assuring financially resilient municipalities while promoting a healthier quality of life and reduced environmental impacts. We support developments that will create financially strong communities that are uniquely livable places to live, play and work in. The image below is an Economic Model of Santa Rosa showing a 3D illustration of tax revenue in terms of revenue -per -acre. It is evident that community prosperity is being driven at the core of our cities and towns. The secret sauce of what makes Sonoma County epic is here in these walkable, workable, livable communities with easy access to our beautiful open spaces. fmw I: a In addition to the esthetic argument of why we need to preserve our open space, we believe it's important to consider a development's viability in terms of: is it paying for itself? Or, are we getting deeper in the hole regarding long term infrastructure costs, which will take money away from other community benefits. Think of roads vs. early childhood education. Low density, infrastructure hogging developments do not pencil out and we give up so much for very little return. Currently about 28% of property tax revenue being generated in the urban growth boundaries, goes to the County and 45% to the local schools. What is good for the Cities and Towns is great for the County. In -fill development generates the greatest return on investment and needs to be our regional focus. 127 W 6th Street Santa Rosa CA 95401 urbancommunitypartnership.org 707.479.5373 URBAN COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP In January, UCP facilitated an economic analysis of development patterns in Santa Rosa using Geographical Information Systems modeling with Urban3. The results of the "story map" can be viewed on http://www.urbancommunitypartnership.org/blog In response to what we learned from the Santa Rosa Pilot Study we are expanding the story mapping to the rest of Sonoma County along the SMART train, the Roseland Annex and Sebastopol downtowns. We also learned that it would be valuable to drill down on specific sites to include case studies. These case studies will explore highest and best use, moderate & low potency development options and illustrate how development choices & policy affect the communities various sustainability targets, social equity, educational attainment, health outcomes and livability goals. Research shows in -fill development has a positive correlation on the Human Development Index. HI L8 i 4 Somme County on the American Human Development tnd,, ALL PEOPLE 2013 201, DATA Downtown Santa Rosa 5u 4.47 ■ cadeat, Degree 75.5 years ■ Highkh.l Less than High Sch®1 1.;�3i2n E]rnin3= kh.el Em 11—t $22,628 & 75.20% Race & Ethnicitv­ ■alalallfalal■�� ■ Whit¢ .■........ ■■■■!■■■■■ N AFnean American ■■alalialalEN. Asian American alal.aliN■■�� � Halir¢amancan ■■r�arre_ ■Ira Dtne. iiii�trsYrril�a We aim to help decision makers and community members connect the dots. It's all linked and we see re -aligning the way we think about our built environment as a critical component of the solution to meet community needs and achieve regional economic stability. Development choices and policy affect our ability to grow in a way that strengthens our future. UCP asks that you support the renewal of community separators and the ballot measure in the November 2016 General Election, and that you support approval of the General Plan amendment - for community separator designation- as proposed by county planning staff. This renewal supports appropriate development. We thank you for your consideration and thoughtfulness, Urban Community Partnership Robin Stephani I Paul Fritz I Mitch Conner I Peter Stanley I Karen Weeks I Danielle O'Leary I David Petritz I Scott Johnson Send to City Council Members: Gina Belforte I Jake Mackenzie I Joseph Callinan I Pam Stafford I Amy Ahanotu cc Jeff Beiswenger I Darren Jenkins 127 W 6th Street Santa Rosa CA 95401 urbancommunitypartnership.org 707.479.5373 Supplemental Items for City Council Meeting: �$ ID Sonoma LAFCO: copies from administrative record Regarding City of Rohnert Park SOI removal request ENCLOSURES: Stipulated Judgement; page 7; II. Sphere of Influence: #14; (the City) authorizing resolution, shall enuciate good cause Log of GP Amendmants: 10/22/02 File #2002-037GP, Description: South of Valley House Drive LAFCO cover letter from Mayor of City of Rohnert Park Rohnert Park GPA and Sphere of Influence Amendment City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Staff Report PC Resolution No. 2002-37 and Exhibit A Resolution of the City Council of the City Rohnert Park City Council Resolution No. 2002-247 and Exhibit A Resolution of the City Council of the City Rohnert Park City Council Resolution No. 2002-248 and Exhibit A 1 2 31 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 J( 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 .22 23 24 25 26 27 28 K. The City shall continue to pursue funding for the installation of water meters on all residential uses within the City. The City will replace its current flat fee structure with a fee structure that is based upon consumption and that penalizes excessive use so as to reduce water consumption within the. City. II. Sphere of Influence: The Land Use Framework Guiding Principles on page 2-12 of the General Plan shall be interpreted and applied to embody the following, which interpretations and applications shall be treated as part of the General Plan: The City shall take all steps necessary to make application to the Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to amend the City's sphere of influence through the removal of all lands located south of Valley House Drive that were added to the City's sphere of influence by LAFCO in April 2002. A diagram of the lands to be removed is attached as Exhibit 1. The City shall submit the application to LAFCO no later than November 1, 2002'and, in its authorizing resolution, shall enunciate good cause for the application including long-term protection of Penngrove area groundwater resources, agricultural lands, groundwater recharge, traffic, and open space. In the event LAFCO does approve the amendment, this Judgment will be a final Judgment. In the event that LAFCO does not approve the amendment, this Judgment and Settlement Agreement shall be of no force and effect, and the litigation shall be reinstated as of the date of LAFCO's action. Actions required by the Agreement and this Judgment to have been taken before such date shall not be affected by LAFCO's failure to approve the amendment, and shall remain in full force and effect. Nothing in this paragraph or Judgment shall be construed to affect the potential extension of the existing Bodway Parkway south to Valley House Drive. Cf7111fIIYfna %1iiTlTwtnt+f 17 LOG OF AMENDMENTS TO THE JULY 2000 ADOPTED ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN (continued) 2002 10/22/02 File #2002-037GP, Resolution No. 2002-247 Description: South of Valley House. (1) Map revision: removing approximately 170.49 acres in the Southeast Specific Plan Area from the City's Sphere of Influence and amending and conforming related General Plan figures including changing approximately 80 acres of APN_ 047-111-050 from Industrial to Open Space- -gric flivaa and Re so Management and amending the boundary of the Southeast. Specific Plan to remove APPA 046-051-014, 047-111-029, 047-111-046, and 047- 111-050. (2) Text revision: amending the following tables and figures to reflect the above changes to the sphere -of -influence: Table 2.3-1: General Plan Buildout: Net Acreage of New Development, Figure 2.3-1: Land Uses: 1999 vs. Buildout, Table 2.3-3: General Plan Buildout: Population and Jobs, and Table 2.4-3: Land Use Program: Southeast Specific Plan Area. (3) Text revision: revising Policy OS -2 as follows: "Encourage dedication of the open space buffers along the Westside of Petaluma Hill Road as part of the University District and Northeast Specific Plans." (4) Text revision: deleting Policy HS -1 IA that refers to new development south of Valley House Road and east of Bodway Parkway in relation to the Petaluma River drainage basin. City of ROHNERT P A R K February 5, 2003 RECEIVED FEB 0 5 2003 SQ1V0fV1A COUNTY Chairman Boyett and Commissioners LOCM. AGUNCY Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission FOWATic iV C;UMNil'SION Vicki Vidak-Martinez 575 Administration Drive, Room 102A mayor Santa Rosa, California 95403 Gregory A. Nordin RE: FILE 02-22 Amendment No. 5 to Rohnert Park Sphere of Influence ince- Oyor Armando F. Fkxes Counalmember Dear Chairman Boyett and Commissioners: Jake Ma:kerizie Thank you in advance for your consideration of the City of Rohnert Park's application to Coma7member remove approximately 170 acres located southeast of Rohnert Park from its sphere of Amie L. Spradin influence. Only 80 of the 170 acres are within the City's urban growth boundary — the area Counaimember within which development will be contained until the year 2020. The General Plan designated the remaining 90 +/- acres as a greenbelt or urban buffer area suitable for "Open Space for Agriculture and Resource Management." No urban development within Stphen R. Dordey the City of Rohnert Park was ever envisioned on those 90 +/- acres. The 80 -acre portion Acdn9ChyUwW was previously designated for urban uses. However, in response to a court's tentative ruling, the Council reevaluated the matter and determined that the industrial uses are not Betsy Strauss necessary to ensure satisfaction of the City's fair -share housing needs. The Council QyAv—ey concluded that an alternative proposed in the General Plan EIR which excluded this land from the City's sphere is feasible. From 1997 through 2001 a wide range of alternatives for development and conservation were considered as part of Rohnert Park's General Plan preparation process. More specifically, in 1997 and 1998, eight different land use alternatives were considered by the Planning Commission. In 1999, the City identified three new alternatives as part of its plan for orderly development through the year 2020. Four of the eight alternatives discussed in 1997 and 1998 excluded this 170 -acre area from the City's sphere of influence. Two of the three alternatives identified in 1999 excluded the 170 -acre area. The third alternative excluded more than one-half of the area. The EIR prepared for the General Plan identified several areas of controversy regarding the potential impacts of the proposed General Plan including: (1) traffic congestion along Petaluma Hill Road; (2) traffic congestion in Cotati; and (3) water resources. Each of the alternatives that excluded the 170 -acre .area reduced the impact of these environmental issues. The City Council adopted the General Plan in July 2000, and rejected these alternatives because only the General Plan, as proposed, could achieve most of the City's goals, including providing the City's fair share of the regional housing needs. However, when the Penngrove Community challenged the City's General Plan EIR, it called into question the basis for the City Council's rejection of the alternatives that excluded the southeast comer of the area from the City's sphere of influence. Judge Antolini announced in court that he 9750 C+onmerce Boulevard. Rohnert Park CA. 94928-2486. (707) W-2227. Fax (707) 588-2274 wwvw.rrzcitie.org February 5, 2003 Page 2 File 02-22 Amendment No. 5 RP Sphere of Influence did not see sufficient basis in the record of the City's General Plan proceedings to reject these alternatives. The Court's opinion caused the City to take a second look at this question. The City Council determined that removal of the 170 -acre southeast area (1) will not impact the City's ability to provide for its fair share housing needs since housing is not planned for the property; and (2) is consistent with one of the goals of the General Plan Land Use Element — to promote a balanced land use program and increase the ability of people to live and work in the city — since removal of this area reduces the City's jobs to employed residents ratio from 1.21 to 1.06. (More detail about the Council's findings is included in Resolution No 2002-247 approving a General Plan Amendment to Remove Approximately 170.49 acres in the Southeast Specific Plan Area from the City's Sphere of Influence). In addition, removal of the 170 -acre southeast area addresses two of three principal environmental issues identified in the City's EIR: water (the area is identified as a groundwater recharge area in the County's Penngrove Area Plan); traffic congestion on Petaluma Hill Road and traffic congestion in Cotati (reduced intensity of urban development will reduce vehicle miles traveled on Petaluma Hill Road and Railroad Avenue). The Commission is charged with planning and shaping the logical and orderly development and coordination of local government agencies so as to provide for the present and future needs of the county and its communities. The planning vehicle is the sphere of influence. In determining the appropriate sphere of influence for a community, the Commission is required to take into consideration certain important state policies such as the preservation of agricultural and open space lands; discouraging urban sprawl; and efficiently extending government services. The Commission made certain required findings regarding each of these state policies and others when it approved Rohnert Park's new sphere of influence in 2002. The requested amendment is a minor adjustment to the previously approved sphere of influence. The requested amendment removes 170 acres of the 1,178 acres included in the previously approved sphere of influence. The amendment strengthens the findings LAFCO is required to make: it preserves open space; does not extend urban growth unnecessarily; and coordinates urban growth with the ability to provide urban services (water supply and transportation infrastructure). Thank you for your attention. Please consider the information in this letter as well as Resolution No. 2002-248 and Resolution No. 2002-247, which were submitted with the City's application. Sinrely, V, Vicki Vidak-Martinez Mayor c: City Council Acting City Manager City Attorney Planning Director File: 2002-037 Date: 10/26/02 Item: 4 City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Staff Report Project Description: Consideration of a General Plan Amendment to remove approximately 170.69 acres from the City's Sphere of Influence, with this area to revert back to its prior Open Space -Agriculture designation, and to amend related General Plan text and figures. Project Location: The property is located within the area bounded by Valley House Drive to the north, Petaluma Hill Road to the east, Railroad Avenue to the south, and the existing Rohnert Park City Limits to the west (APN 046-051-014, 047-111- 029, 047-111-046, and 047-111-050.) Applicant: City of Rohnert Park Project Setting The 170.69 -acre unincorporated area to be removed from the City's sphere -of -influence is located in the Southeast Specific Plan Area. It is currently undeveloped agricultural land that is zoned by Sonoma County as Diverse Agriculture and is within the Penngrove Specific Plan Area. Valley House Drive, Petaluma Hill Drive, and Railroad Avenue border the area. Additional agricultural lands are located to the north, east, south, and west. Agilent Technology owns lands to the west and Clement Carinalli owns the lands immediately to the north across Valley House Drive, which is also part of the Southeast Specific Plan Area. The Canon Manor residential area is located further to the north and borders the northern boundary of the Southeast Specific Plan Area. Background The subject area is shown in the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 as part of the Southeast Specific Plan Area. Approximately 80 acres are designated as Industrial and are within the City's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The remaining 90+ acres are designated as Open -Space -Agriculture & Resource Management and are outside the UGB. The entire area was added to the City's sphere -of -influence (SOI) in an action taken by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) on March 6, 2002. The Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 was approved by the City Council in July of 2000 and a lawsuit entitled South County Resource Preservation Committee and John E. King v. City of Rohnert Park was subsequently filed alleging the City :violated the California Environmental Quality Act. On September 5, 2002, the parties to the lawsuit reached a Settlement Agreement without any admission of liability and to avoid the expense of further litigation. 1 File: 2002-037 ' Date: 10/26/02 Item: 4 As part of Settlement Agreement, the City will be applying to LAFCO to have the subject lands removed from the Rohnert'Park SOI. The reasons for the removal, as stated in the Settlement Agreement, include the long-term protection of the Penngrove area groundwater resources, agricultural lands, groundwater recharge, traffic, and open space. Project Analysis Prior to submitting an application to LAFCO to remove the subject 170.69 -acre area from the City's SOI, it is appropriate for the City to amend its General Plan accordingly. The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment, therefore, is to amend the General Plan Diagram (Figure 2.2-1) to remove the subject lands from inside the City's SOI and to change the land use designation for the portion of the area designated Industrial to Open Space -Agricultural and Resource Management as is shown for the buffer area outside the UGB and surrounding unincorporated areas. The amendment also includes the same SOI boundary adjustment for all appropriate General Plan figures and amendments to the following tables and figures to reflect removal of the Industrial and Open Space areas: Page 2-24, Table 2.3-1: General Plan Buildout: Net Acreage of New Development ■ Page 2-25, Figure 2.3-1: Land Uses: 1999 vs. Buildout ■ Page 2-27, Table 2.3-3: General Plan Buildout: Population and Jobs ® Page 2-38, Table 2.4-3: Land Use Program: Southeast Specific Plan Area Policy OS -2 also is amended to delete reference to the open space buffer in the Southeast Specific Plan area. Policy HS -11A, which refers to new development south of Valley House Road and east of Bodway Parkway in relation to the Petaluma River Drainage 'Basin, is deleted. Environmental Review The project is within the scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) approved for the Rohnert Park 2000 General Plan and this EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15168(e) of CEQA). The General Plan EIR considered a range of development alternatives and the proposed amendment is within the ranges of development that were considered. Further, the EIR found significant unavoidable environmental impacts relative to the conversion of open space, increased traffic, and air quality, and significant irreversible environmental changes in the areas of open space and farmland conversion, air quality, water consumption, energy sources and construction -related impacts. The EIR also identified an impact on housing demand based on a projected 1.21 jobs/housing ratio under the approved General Plan. The reduction in approximately 100 acres of industrially designated land will be beneficial in terms of reducing these impacts and providing additional mitigation beyond that identified in the EIR. Findings Recommended findings for approving the proposed amendment are included in the attached resolution. 2 File: 2002-037 Date: 10/26/02 Item: 4 Public Notification A public hearing notice denoting the time, date, and location of the proposal's hearing was published in the Press Democrat and the notice was mailed and posted pursuant to State Planning Law. Alternative Actions The following alternatives are available to the Commission: Adopt the attached resolution recommending to the City Council approval of the General Plan Amendment as proposed. 2. Direct staff to prepare a resolution recommending to the City Council that the General Plan Amendment not be adopted. 3. Direct staff to further evaluate specific issues and postpone action on the Amendment to a later date. Staff Recommendation Based on the analysis and findings of this report and the attached resolution, staff recommends that the Planning Commission, by motion adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2002-37, recommending approval of the amendments to the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 .ren-ioving the 170.69 -acre subject area from the City's sphere -of - influence as shown ou the -Clty's General Plan, with this area to revert back to its pz�ar en Space-Agricultiue &e i nation,n�ti a.o ami�ieizadeteC'r�eneral Plan text and figures. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Kaufman Planning and Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2002-37 Vicinity Maps APN: 046-051-014GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REMOVE 047-111-029 APPROXIMATELY 170.69 ACRES FROM THE CITY'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE, WITH THIS AREA TO REVERT 047-111-046 BACK TO ITS PRIOR OPEN SPACE -AGRICULTURE 047-111-050 DESIGNATION, AND TO AMEND RELATED GENERAL PLAN TEXT AND FIGURES Seale: let Site Date: 9/26/02 File No.: PL2002- 037GPA PC Resolution No. 2002-37 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 170.69 ACRES FROM THE CITY'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND TO AMEND RELATED GENERAL PLAN TEXT AND FIGURES WHEREAS, on July 25, 2001 the City Council approved Resolution No. 2000-152 adopting a comprehensive update of the City's General Plan. WHEREAS, a lawsuit entitled South County Resource Preservation Committee and .John E. King v. City of Rohnert Park was subsequently filed alleging the City violated the California Environmental Quality Act. WHEREAS, On September 5, 2002, the parties to the lawsuit reached a Settlement Agreement without any admission of liability and to avoid the expense of further litigation. WHEREAS, The reasons for the removal, as stated in the Settlement Agreement, include the long-term protection of the Penngrove area groundwater resources, agricultural lands, groundwater recharge, traffic, and open space WHEREAS, Planning Application No. 2002-037, the proposed General Plan Amendment, was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, on September 26, 2002 the Planning Commission reviewed Planning Application No. 2002-037, the proposed General Plan Amendment, during a scheduled public hearing at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to the project; and, WHEREAS, at the September 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the Commission considered all the facts relating to Planning Application No. 2002-037, the proposed General Plan Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. Findin =s. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval to the City Council of Planning Appiication No. 2002-037, the proposed General Plan Amendment, makes the following finding, to wit: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the elements of the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000. Specifically, the Amendment is consistent with the Land Use Framework Guiding Principles, which include Compact Urban 1 PC Resolution No. 2002-37 Form: All growth is contiguous to existing City Limits and within 4,000 feet of existing (as of 1999) development. The compact form of growth is supplemented by maintenance of urban densities, to help preserve open space protect agriculture, and ensure efficient provision of services, and the corresponding Land Use Policy LU -A which also refers to the maintenance of the compact urban form and working with other agencies to ensure that land surrounding the city is maintained in open space. In addition, the Amendment, by reducing the area available for urban development, is consistent with and promotes the following General Plan goals: a. GM -E: Promote' contiguous urban development and maintain a compact urban form over successive stages of the city's development. b. GM -H: Minimize the impacts—physical, visual and fiscal --of growth and annexation on existing homes and businesses. c. CD -E: Preserve and enhance the visual character of scenic corridors. d. CD -F: Maintain a distinct urban edge, while creating a gradual transition between urban uses and open spaces. e. TR -J: Reduce peak -hour traffic congestion and associated impacts, including air pollution, energy consumption, and noise. f. OS -A: Maintain a greenbelt around the city that provides a physical and visual space between Rohnert Park-Cotati and Santa Rosa, Petaluma, and Penngrove. g. OS -B: Maintain land surrounding the city as open space for the enjoyment of ZD scenic beauty, recreation, and protection of natural resources of the community. h. OS -D: Maintain and enhance the Petaluma Hill Road scenic corridor. i. PD -D: Ensure that adequate wastewater facilities and services are available to meet the needs of existing and new development. j. PF -E: Provide sufficient quantities of water for Rohnert Park residents and businesses, while ensuring that safe groundwater yield is not exceeded. k. PF -F: Utilize purchased water supplies and reduce reliance on groundwater drawn from municipal wells, except for emergency use. 1. EC -G: Undertake steps to minimize the depletion of groundwater resources. in. EC -H: Where feasible, given flood control requirements, maintain the natural condition of waterways and flood plains, and protect watersheds to ensure adequate groundwater recharge and water quality. 2. That a duly noticed public hearing has been held to receive and consider public testimony regarding the proposed General Plan Amendment. Section 3. Environmental Clearance. The project is within the scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) approved for the Rohnert Park 2000 General Plan and this 2 PC Resolution No. 2002-37 EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15168(e) of CEQA). NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment, Planning Application No. 2002- 037 as outlined in Exhibits A and A-1, incorporated herein by reference. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 26th day of September 2002, by the City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission by thollowing vote: Park Planning Commission Attest: Maria McConnell, Recording Secretary ` AYES: S NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MILITELLO '�MOCHEL MOLDENKE --- NILSON 44ORDIN . -_'/ 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2002-037 EXHIBIT A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1. City of Rohnert Park's sphere -of -influence line is amended on the figures listed below to remove APNs 046-051-014, 047-111-029, 047-111-046, and 047-111-050 (See Exhibit A-1): Figure 2.2-1: General Plan Diagram Figure 2.4-1: Specific Plan Areas Figure 2.5-2: Urban Growth Boundary and Annexation Areas Figure 3.1-1: Section View of Ridgelines Figure 3.1-2: Urban Form and Structure Figure 3.2-6: Sound Walls Figure 4.1-1: Master Street Plan Figure 4.1-2: Traffic Levels of Service Under General Plan Buildout Figure 4.4-1: Bicycle System Figure 5.1-1: Open Space Figure 5.1-2: Open Space First Priority Acquisition Areas Figure 5.2-1: Parks and Schools Figure 5.3-1: School Districts Figure 6.2-1: Habitat Areas and Special Status Species Figure 6.2-2: Creek Protection Zones Figure 7.1-1: Geology Figure 7.1-2: Liquefaction Susceptibility Figure 7.2-1: Soil Types, Capability, Expansiveness, and Erosion Potential Figure 7.2-2: Drainage and Flood Zones Figure 8.2-1: Noise Contours under General Plan Buildout 2. Figure 2.2-1: General Plan Diagram - Change approximately 80 acres of APN 047- 111-050 from Industrial to Open Space -Agricultural and Resource Management. 3. Figure 2.4-1: Specific Plan Areas - The boundary of the Southeast Specific Plan is amended to remove APN 046-051-014, 047-111-029, 047-111-046, and 047-111- 050. 4. Figure 5.1-1: Open Space - Change approximately 80 acres of APN 047-111-050 to Open Space/Agriculture and Resource Management. 5. Amend the following tables and figures to reflect the above changes to the sphere - of -influence: Table 2.3-1: General Plan Buildout: Net Acreage of New Development Figure 2.3-1: Land Uses: 1999 vs. Buildout Table 2.3-3: General Plan Buildout: Population and Jobs Table 2.4-3: Land Use Program: Southeast Specific Plan Area 1 6. Revise Policy OS -2 as follows: "Encourage dedication of the open space buffers along the westside of Petaluma Hill Road as part of the University District, and Northeas#.-cirtl=f Delete last sentence of the explanatory text. Delete Policy HS -11A that refers to new development south of Valley House Road and east of Bodway Parkway in relation to the Petaluma River drainage basin. 2 v c��►-�� �,o� s�. ��cz �v� I,pN�,:�'��-1E1-05 5.4(v AC. APN' p,PN oAr4-111-0:)-99r AM, 0*61-05l-oto -04(o 3-4.8h A t... r 2 S.2 INC.-; ' ,9,�S 4) kc -Z -Z� J Z �atl�RcA� p.V£ta�E n r i 80+ acres designated as Industrial in Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 EXHIBITA-1 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 247 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 170.49 ACRES IN THE SOUTHEAST SPECIFIC PLAN AREA FROM THE CITY'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND TO AMEND RELATED GENERAL, PLAN TEXT AND FIGURES WHEREAS, on July 25, 2000 the City Council approved Resolution No. 2000-152 adopting a comprehensive update of the City's General Plan. WHEREAS, a lawsuit entitled South County Resource Preservation Committee and John E. King v. City of Rohnert Park ("Litigation") was subsequently filed alleging that the Environmental Impact Report that analyzed the environmental impacts of the City's General Plan was not prepared and certified as complete in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. WHEREAS, on September 5, 2002, the parties to the Litigation reached a Settlement Agreement without any admission of liability and to avoid the expense of further litigation. WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement contemplates the City submittal of an application to LAFCO to remove certain acreage within the Southeast Specific Plan Area from the City's sphere of influence; WHEREAS, prior to submitting an application for amendment to the sphere of influence, the City Council wishes to amend the General Plan to be consistent with the action it requests of 40 LAFCO; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. 2002-037, the proposed General Plan Amendment, was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. WHEREAS, at the September 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, upon hearing and considering all oral and written testimony and arguments of all persons desiring to be heard, the Commission considered all the facts relating to Planning Application No. 2002-037 and recommended approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park has reviewed and considered all oral and written comments raised during the public hearings and the information contained in the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 Environmental Impact Report and related staff reports for the proposed General Plan Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. Findings. The City Council, in approving Planning Application No. 2002- 037, the proposed General Plan Amendment, makes the following finding, to wit: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the elements of the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000. Specifically, the Amendment is consistent with tlae Land Use Framework Guiding Principles, which include Compact Urban Forrn: All growth is contiguous to existing City Limits and within q, 000 feet of existing (as of 1999) development. The compact form of growth is supplemented by maintenance of urban densities, to help preserve open space protect agriculture, and ensure efficient provision of services, and the corresponding Land Use Policy LU -A which also refers to the maintenance of the compact urban form and working with other agencies to ensure that land surrounding the city is maintained in open space. In addition, the Amendment, by reducing the area proposed for industrial and allowing the area which is the subject of this General Plan Amendment to remain in open space, promotes goals relating to a groundwater recharge area as identified in the Penngrove Specific Plan. The ✓'' Amendment is consistent with and promotes the following General Plan goals: a. GM -E: Promote contiguous urban development and maintain a compact urban form over successive stages of the city's development. b. GM -H: Minimize the impacts—physical, visual and fiscal—of growth and annexation on existing homes and businesses. c. CD -E: Preserve and enhance the visual character of scenic corridors. d. CD -F: Maintain a distinct urban edge, while creating a gradual transition between urban uses and open spaces. e. TR -J: Reduce peak -hour traffic congestion and associated impacts, including air pollution, energy consumption, and noise. f. OS -A: Maintain a greenbelt around the city that provides a physical and visual space between Rohnert Park-Cotati and Santa Rosa, Petaluma, and P enngrove. g. OS -B: Maintain land surrounding the city as open space for the enjoyment of scenic beauty, recreation, and protection of natural resources of the community. h. OS -D: Maintain and enhance the Petaluma Hill Road scenic corridor. I. PD -D: Ensure that adequate wastewater facilities and services are available to meet the needs of existing and new development. j. PF -E: Provide sufficient quantities of water for Rohnert Park residents and businesses, while ensuring that safe groundwater yield is not exceeded. k. PF -F: Utilize purchased water supplies and reduce reliance on groundwater drawn from municipal wells, except for emergency use. 1. EC -G: Undertake steps to minimize the depletion of groundwater resources. m. EC -H: Where feasible, given flood control requirements, maintain the natural condition of waterways and flood plains, and protect watersheds to ensure adequate groundwater recharge and water quality. 2. That a duly noticed public hearing has been held to receive and consider public testimony regarding the proposed General Plan Amendment. A 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with General Plan Land Use Goal LTJ -C — Promote a balanced land use program and increase the ability of people to live and work in the city -- in that the analysis in the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 projected, at buildout, that jobs in the City would exceed the number of employed residents by a ratio of 1.21; by removing approximately 80 acres of industrial land from the City's Sol, there would be a. subsequent redaction in the number of projected jobs at buildout bringing the number of jobs to employed residents to a more balanced ratio of 1.06 (job estimation for the 80 acres is 3,900 based on four employees/1,000 sq.ft. of development). 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment proposes the removal of area from the City's sphere of influence which has not been included in the sites available to meet the City's Quantified Goals and Objectives as set forth in Table 9.5-1 of the Housing Element. 5. The proposed General Plan Amendment affects only the City's sphere of influence. The property removed from the sphere of influence by this General Plan Amendment has not been proposed for annexation to the City, the property owners are not participating financially in the development of the Public Facilities 1 Financing Plan for the Specific Plan Areas, and no development is contemplated on the property in the near future. Either within or outside the City's sphere of influence, the property remains subject to the jurisdiction of the County of Sonoma. Section 3. Environmental Clearance. The project is within the scope of the Environmental 'Impact Report (EIR) approved for the Rohnert Park 20010 General Plan and this EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15168(0) of CEQ.A). The General, Plan EIR considered a range of development alternatives and the proposed amendment is within the ranges of development that were considered. Further, the EIR found significant unavoidable environmental impacts relative to the conversion of open space, increased traffic, and air quality, and significant irreversible environmental changes in the areas of open space and farmland conversion, air quality, water consumption, energy sources and construction -related impacts. The EIR also identified an impact on housing demand based on a projected 1.21-jobs/housing ratio under the approved General Plan. The reduction in approximately 80 acres of industrially designated land will be beneficial in terms of reducing these impacts and providing additional rnitigation beyond that identified in the EM. Section 4. General Plan Amendment. The City Council does hereby approve General Plan Amendment, Planning Application No. 20102-037 removing approximately 170.49 acres in the Southeast Specific Plan ,Area from the City's Sphere of Influence and amending and conforming related General Plan text and figures as described in Exhibits A and A-1, incorporated herein by reference. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 22nd day of October 2002 by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park. Attest: Mayor, City of Rohnert Park CITY MACKENZM: AYE REILLY: AYE VACANCY: N/A VIDAK-MARTINEZ: AYE FLORES: AYE AYES: (4) NOES: (0) ABSENT: (0) ABSTAIN: (0) �® CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION EXHIBIT A GEl\TERAL PLAN AMENDMENT Planning Application No. 2002-037 1. City of Rohnert Park's sphere -of -influence line is amended on the figures listed below to remove APNs 046-051-014, 047-111-029, 047-111-046, and 047-111-050 (See Exhibit A-1): Figure 2.2-1: General Plan Diagram Figure 2.4-1: Specific Plan Areas Figure 2.5-2: Urban Growth Boundary and Annexation Pjeas Figure 3.1-1: Section View of Ridgelines Figure 3.1-2: Urban Form and Structure Figure 3.2-6: Sound Walls Figure 4.1-1: Master Street Plan Figure 4.1-2: Traffic Levels of Service Under General Plan Buildout Figure 4.4-1: Bicycle System Figure 5.1-1: Open Space Figure 5.1-2: Open Space First Priority Acquisition Areas Figure 5.2-1: Parks and Schools Figure 5.3-1: School Districts Figure 6.2-1: Habitat Areas and Special Status Species Figure 6.2-2: Creek Protection Zones Figure 7.1-1: Geology Figure 7.1-2: Liquefaction Susceptibility Figure 7.2-1: Soil Types, Capability, Expansiveness, and Erosion Potential Figure 7.2-2: Drainage and Flood Zones Figure 8.2-1: Noise Contours under General Plan Buildout 2. Figure 2.2-1: General Plan Diagram - Change approximately 80 acres of APN 047- 111-050 from Industrial to Open Space -Agricultural and Resource Management. 3. Figure 2.4-1: Specific Plan Areas - The boundary of the Southeast Specific Plan is amended to remove APN 046-051-014, 047-111-029, 047-111-046, and 047-111- 050. 4. Figure 5.1-1: Open Space - Change approximately 80 acres of APN 047-111-050 to Open Space/Agriculture and Resource Management. 5. Amend the following tables and figures to reflect the above changes to the sphere - of -influence: Table 2.3-1: General Plan Buildout: Net Acreage of New Development Figure 2.3-1: Land Uses: 1999 vs. Buildout Table 2.3-3: General Plan Buildout: Population and Jobs Table 2.4-3: Land Use Program: Southeast Specific Plan Area 1 6. Revise Policy ,OS -2 as follows: "Encourage dedication of the open space buffers along the westside of Petaluma Hill Road as part of -the University District, and Northeast^;-".Liathea-,t—Spoil." Delete last sentence of the explanatory text. 7. Delete Policy HS -11A that refers to new development south of Valley House Road and east of Bodway Parkway in relation to the Petaluma River drainage basin. 2 Rp.��Ro�.� A�lEtauE i 0 80+ acres designatt-d as industrial in Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 EXHIBIT a -i RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 248 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA, DIRECTING STAFF TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE SONOMA COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 170.49 ACRES IN THE SOUTHEAST SPECIFIC PLAN AREA FROM THE CITY'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE WHEREAS, on July 25, 2000 the City Council approved Resolution No. 2000- 152 adopting a comprehensive update of the City's General Plan. WHEREAS, a lawsuit entitled South County Resource Preservation Committee and John E. King v. City of Rohnert Park was subsequently filed alleging that the environmental analysis prepared for the General Plan and certified as complete by the City did not comply with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. WHEREAS, on September 5, 2002, the parties to the lawsuit reached a Settlement Agreement without any admission of liability and to avoid the expense of further litigation. The Settlement Agreement requires the City to submit an application to amend its sphere of influence (SOI) to remove approximately 170.49 acres within the Southeast Specific Plan Area ("Subject A=7% more particularly described on Exhibit A to this resolution. WHEREAS, on October 22, 2002, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park approved a General Pian Amendment to remove approximately 170.49 acres, bounded by Valley House Road to the north, Petaluma Hill Road to the east, Railroad Avenue to the south, and the existing Rohnert Park City Limits to the west, from the City's Sphere of Influence and to amend related General Plan text and figures. WHEREAS, Section 56428 of the Government Code allows for the amendment of a local agency's SOI by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), provided the local agency files a written request with the LAFCO Executive Officer for said amendment. WHEREAS, City Staff has completed the necessary application and supporting materials for the SOI amendment application. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park as follows: Section 1. :The proposed amendment to the Sphere of Influence is consistent with the goal of the Hertzberg -Cortese -Knox Act to discourage urban sprawl and preserve open space and agricultural lands in that (a) the amendment removes property at the most southeasterly edge of the proposed ultimate boundaries of the City of Roltnert Paris which property is in open space and is designated in the City's General Plan for Open Space - Agriculture and resource Management and allows the entire area to remain under County of Sonoma's Open Space — Agriculture and Resource Management land use designation; (b) the property is not necessary to meet the City's Quantified Goals and Objectives set forth in its Housing Element; and (c) over one-half of the property is outside the Cityss Urban Growth Boundary and designated for Open Space -Agriculture and Resource Management (non -urban use) and more appropriately belongs within the jurisdiction of the County'of Sonoma because of its consistency with the surrounding County — zoned lands. Section 2. The proposed amendment to the Sphere of Influence is consistent with the goal of the Hertzberg -Cortese -Knox Act to provide for efficient urban development patterns in that there is land zoned for industrial use to the west of the property and within the City's incorporated boundaries which has not yet developed with urban industrial uses. Section 3. The proposed amendment to the Sphere of Influence is consistent with the goal of the Hertzberg -Cortese -Knox Act to develop existing vacant lands within the City before development outside the jurisdiction of the City in that there is existing vacant industrial property to the west of the property which has not yet developed with urban industrial uses. Section 4. The proposed amendment to the Sphere of Influence will preserve and enhance groundwater recharge and resources by removing the property, designated as a groundwater recharge area in the Penngrove Specific Plan, from industrial development, which tends to produce a substantial miount of impervious surfaces. Section 5. The proposed amendment to the Sphere of Influence is consistent with General Plan Program 21-A which requires the City to work to mitigate the impact of implementation of the General Plan on traffic in the Penngrove area in that removal of this property from the Sphere of Influence will reduce the number of vehicle trips onto Petaluma Hall Road as a result of the implementation of the General Plan, Section 6. The proposed amendment to the Sphere of Influence is consistent with General Plan Goal OS -C — Minimize conflicts between agricultural and urban uses — by providing a wider buffer between urban uses to the north and west from agricultural and open space uses to the south and east. Section 7. The proposed amendment to the Sphere of Influence is consistent with the goal of the Hertzberg -Cortese -Knox Act to preserve open space and ,agricultural lands in that the removal of the property from the Sphere of Influence provides a wider buffer and separation between urban uses to the north and west from open space and agricultural lands to the south and east. Section 8. The proposed amendment to the Sphere of Influence is consistent with the goals of the General Plan of the County of Sonoma to protect lands currently in agricultural production and to retain large parcel sizes for agricultural use. Section 9. The EIR prepared for the General Plan demonstrates that the amendment to the Sphere of Influence is consistent with the present capacity of the City of Rohnert Park to provide water and wastewater services to the property. Section 10. The proposed amendment to the Sphere of Influence supports and enhances the community of Penngrove, which shares certain similar social and economic goals including preservation of the historic agricultural use of land; preservation of groundwater; reduction of traffic; and preservation of open space. Section 11. The City Manager is directed to sign the Indemnification Agreement required by LAFCO, as negotiated by the City Attorney, and directs Staff to submit an application to LAFCO with the appropriate filing fee to remove approximately 170.49 acres, bounded by Valley House Road to the north, Petaluma Hill Road to the east, Railroad Avenue to the south, and the existing Rohnert Park City Limits to the west (APNs 046-051-014, 047-111-029, 047-111-046, and 047-111-050), from the City's sphere of influence. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 22nd day of October 2002 by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park. Attest: MACKENZIE: AYE REILLY: AYE VACANCY: N/A VIDAK-MARTINEZ: AYE FLORES: AYE AYES: (4) NOES: (0) ABSENT: (0) ABSTAIN: (0) 3 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Department: Planning Department ***City Clerk Use Only*** Meeting Date Held Until Submitted By: Nancy Kaufinan, Planning and 10/22/02 Community Development Director Item No. Agenda Title: File: 2002-040: Consideration of an Application to the Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to amend Deadline Date for: Sphere of Influence for the City of Rohnert Park by removing Council Action: the area bounded by Valley House Drive to the north, Petaluma Hill Road to the east, Railroad Avenue to the south, and the existing Rohnert Park City Limits to the west (APN 046-051-014, 047-111-029, 047-111-046, and 047-111-050) ("Subject Area") Requested Council Action. Approval of Resolution directing the City Manager to sign the required Indemnification Agreement, and directing staff to submit the application to LAFCO with the appropriate filing fee. Summary: The Subject Area is shown in the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 as part of the Southeast Specific Plan Area. Approximately 80 acres were designated as Industrial in the General Plan 2000 and are within the City's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The remaining 90+ acres are designated as Open -Space -Agriculture & Resource Management and are outside the UGB. The entire area was added to the City's sphere -of -influence (SOI) in an action taken by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) on March 6, 2002. The Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 was approved by the City Council in July of 2000 and a lawsuit entitled South County Resource Preservation Committee and John E. King v. City of Rohnert Park was subsequently filed alleging that the EIR prepared for General Plan 2000 did not conform to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. On September 5, 2002, the parties to the lawsuit reached a Settlement Agreement without any admission of liability and to avoid the expense of further litigation. As part of Settlement Agreement, the City is to apply to LAFCO to have the Subject Area removed from the Rohnert Park SOI. The reasons for the removal, as stated in the Settlement Agreement, include the long-term protection of the Penngrove area groundwater resources, agricultural lands, groundwater recharge, traffic, and open space. The project is within the scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) approved for the Rohnert Park 2000 General Plan and this EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. The removal of the Subject Area is consistent with one of the alternative projects described and analyzed in the General Plan EIR, which also did not include the housing area shown north of Valley House Road. This alternative was rejected by the City Council, at the time, due to the need to include sufficient land within the City's SOI to meet its housing goals and objectives. The Subject Area, however, is designated Industrial or Open -Space -Agriculture & Resource Management and does not include residentially designated lands; hence, the Subject Area does not contribute to meeting the City's Regional Housing Needs and its removal from the City's SOI will not impact the City's ability to meet those needs. The reduction in approximately 80 acres of previously designated industrial lands will be beneficial in terms of reducing impacts identified in the EIR and providing additional mitigation beyond that previously identified. Planning staff will be making a brief presentation on the application at the October 22, 2002 meeting. Please contact me if you require any further information or have questions regarding this application. Planning Application No. 2001-040 Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution directing the City Manager to sign the required Indemnification Agreement, and directing staff to submit the application to LAFCO with the appropriate filing fee 2. Draft Application to Amend the Sphere of Influence for the City of Rohnert Park CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: ( ) Approval ( ) Not Recommended ( ) Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Council ( ) City Comments: City Manager's Signature. City Clerk Use Only Council Action Vote: ( ) Consent Item ( ) Regular Time Public Hearing Required Date: CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT ***City Clerk Use Only*** Meeting Date Held Until 10/22/02 Department: Planning Department Submitted By: Nancy Kaufman, Planning and Community Development Director Item No. Agenda Title: File: 2002-037: Public Hearing to consider a General Plan Amendment to remove approximately 170.49 acres bounded by Valley Nouse Deadline Date for: Dr. to the north, Petaluma Hill Rd. to the east, Railroad Ave. to the Council Action: south, and the existing Rohnert Park City Limits to the west from the City's Sphere of Influence and amend related General Plan text and figures (APN 046-051-014, 047-111-029, 047-111-046, and 047-111-050) Re uested Council Action. Adopt Resolution approving the proposed General Plan Amendments Summary: The 170.49 -acre unincorporated area to be removed from the City's sphere -of -influence is located in the Southeast Specific Plan Area bounded by Valley House Drive to the north, Petaluma Hill Road to the east, Railroad Avenue to the south, and the existing Rohnert Park City Limits to the west (Note: The acreage is a correction from earlier reports to the Planning Commission. APN 047-111-046 is 9.39 acres per the assessor roles; not 9.59 as shown on the map in the Settlement Agreement). It is currently undeveloped agricultural land that is zoned by Sonoma County as Diverse Agriculture and is within the Penngrove Specific Plan Area. Approximately 80 acres are designated as Industrial and are within the City's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The remaining 90± acres are designated as Open -Space -Agriculture & Resource Management and are outside the UGB. The entire area was added to the City's sphere -of -influence (SOI) in an action taken by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) on March 6, 2002. The Agreement and Judgment that settled John -E. ding and South County Resources Preservation Council v. City of Rohnert Park- requires the City to submit an application to LAFCO to amend its sphere of influence to exclude this 170,49 -acre unincorporated area. In response to this challenge to the EIR prepared for General Plan 2000, the Court indicated in its preliminary statements from the bench that it was considering overturning the City's decision rejecting an alternative General Plan Diagram that excluded the 400 acres in the southeast from the SOI. The court indicated that the City's findings dial not adequately justify the City's conclusion that those 400 acres were needed to accommodate fair share housing needs. The Court suggested settlement negotiations and the parties started lengthy settlement discussions. Staff has taken a closer look at the fair share issue, and determined that the industrial portion of the Southeast Specific Plan Area was not necessary to satisfy [lie Housing Element's goals and objectives. - Accordingly, this amendment to the General Plan elunmates the industrial and open -space property south of Valley House Avenue from the SOI without affecting fair share needs and in accordance with the Court's concerns about the City's compliance with CEQA. The action proposed by this amendment to the General Plan only affects the line which represents the logical and reasonable development of the City. The affected property has not been proposed for annexation, the property owners are not participating financially in any infrastructure programs the. City is pursuing, and no development is contemplated on the property in the near future. (This contrasts with the two other Specific Plan Areas and the lands to the north of Valley House Road on the eastern edge of Rohnert Park each of which is participating in the infrastructure financing program and each of which has presented preliminary plans for development for City Council re -view). Regardless of whether the property lies within or outside of the sphere of influence, the affected property will remain under the jurisdiction of the County. Prior to submitting an application to LAFCO to remove the subject 170.49 -acre area from the City's SOl it is appropriate for the City to amend its General Plan accordingly, The purpose of this Proposed General Plan Amendment, therefore, is to amend the General flan Diagram (Figure 2.2-1) to: (1) remove the subject lands from inside the City's SOL and (2) to change the land use designation for the portion of the area designated Industrial to Open Space -Agricultural and Resource Management as is shown for the buffer area outside Planning File: 2002 -037 -General Plan Amendment the UGB and surrounding unincorporated areas. The amendment also includes the same SOI boundary adjustment for all appropriate General Plan figures, and amendments to tables, figures, and two policies to reflect removal of the Industrial and Open Space areas. These amendments are outlined in the attached September 26 staff report to the Planning Commission. The project is within the scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIA) approved for the Rohnert Park 2000 General Plan and this EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. The General Plan EIR considered a range of development alternatives and the proposed amendment is within the ranges of alternatives that were considered. The reduction in approximately 80 acres of industrially designated lands will be beneficial in terms of reducing impacts identified in the EIR and providing additional mitigation beyond that previously identified. Findings relating to the environmental review are included in the draft resolution. No supplemental or subsequent EIR is necessary. On September 26, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendments. Three persons spoke regarding the plan. The first speaker was Steve Miller, CEO and President of 108 Holdings, representing the owners of the subject property, 'Mr. Miller submitted a letter (attached) objecting to the General Plan amendment and raising legal concerns with the amendment and the process. Staff has reviewed this letter, which claims that the industrial property is necessary to achieve a Jobs/housing balance and respectfully disagrees with this conclusion for the following reason: the analysis in the Rohnert Park General Plan 20:00 projected, at buildout, that jobs in the City would exceed the number of employed residents by a ratio of 1.21; by removing approximately 80 acres of industrial land from the City's SOI, there would be a subsequent reduction in the number of projected jobs at buildout bringing the number of jobs to employed residents to a more balanced ratio of 1.06 (job estimation for the 80 acres is 3,900 based on four employees/1,000 sq -ft. of development). The two other speakers were from the Penngrove area and expressed concern regarding water availability and the timing of the property purchase by 108 Holdings. An additional comment letter was received on September 16, 2002 From Paul D. Stutrud (also attached). Planning staff will be making a brief presentation on the application at the October 22, 2002 meeting. Please contact me if you require further information or have questions regarding this application. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Letter dated 9/16/02 from Paul D. Stutrud 3. Letter dated 9/26/02 from Steven E. Miller 4. 9/26/02 Planning Commission minutes 5. 9/26/02 Planning Commission staff report CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: ( ) Approval ( ) Not Recommended ( ) Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Council ( ) City Comments: City Manager's Signature: ( ) Consent Item Public Hearing Required Date: City Clerk Use Only Council Action Vote: ( ) Regular "rime 4 Date: r°'r I � i I I CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CAR© Agenda Item #; �`h{-jf�/ Phone; ', Topic: '�*S Brief Summary of Comments; 4 See Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Hate, Agenda Item #: -2— Name: Address: - Topre:�_s�_I'lk Brief Summary of Comments: See reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date;,I Agenda Item Name: Address: Phone: Brief Summary of Comments; See ,Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARL? Date, Z Agenda Item Name: s Address: Phone.,.{ Topic: W414(k�' Brief Summary of Comments: I P See Reverse Meeting Date: Department: Submitted By: Prepared By: Agenda Title: ITEM NO. 8 Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT June 28, 2016 Development Services Mary Grace Pawson, PE, Director of Development Services Eydie Tacata, Management Analyst Development Services Cost Recovery Annual Report — FY 2015-16 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: (1) Hold a Public Hearing to consider the Development Services Cost Recovery Annual Report for FY 2015-16, accept and file; (2) Discuss and provide direction to staff regarding recommendations of revised fees to be presented at a future meeting. BACKGROUND: The Rohnert Park Municipal Code, Chap. 3.32 Cost Recovery — Fee Service Charge System (Cost Recovery Ordinance) provides for the establishment of user fees for "recovery of the costs of the city in providing certain services, products and regulatory activities." It also calls for a review of these fees at a public hearing and an annual report to include: 1. The services for which cost recovery fees are charged; 2. The amount of the cost recovery fee charged for each service; 3. The percentage of actual costs recovered by each cost recovery fee; and 4. Recommendations for modifications to the services for which cost recovery fees are charged, the amounts of cost recovery fees or the percentage of costs recovered in order to assure that the cost recovery fees continue to recover the reasonable and proportional share of costs from applicants requesting services. This staff report and the attached fee schedules include the required information. The report also provides an overall review of the department's cost recovery program and revenues for the past fiscal year. DISCUSSION: Development Services provides consultations, plan review, permitting and inspections for residential, commercial, and industrial development within Rohnert Park. The department recovers its costs for these services in accordance with fee schedules established by cost -of - services studies and approved by the City Council. The cost -of -services data helps the City to set fees that are sustainable, fair, and comply with State law which requires that fees do not exceed ITEM NO. 8 the actual cost to provide services. The studies developed fully -burdened hourly rates that include salary and benefit costs of the staff providing services; overhead costs, which include each staff's share of operating expenses and internal services (i.e. services by departments that are vital to the smooth functioning of the City, such as City Manager, City Clerk, Human Resources, and Finance, but which do not serve Development Services' customers directly); and indirect costs such as information services, liability insurance, and building maintenance. These hourly rates were used to calculate fees that allow Development Services to pass most or all of the cost of services to applicants who benefit from the services. This also reduces potential unintended subsidies from the City or taxpayers for user -requested services. The building plan check and inspection cost -of -services study was initially conducted in 2010, and the resulting fee schedule was adopted by the City Council in 2011. The cost -of -services studies for planning and engineering services were conducted in 2010 and 2008, respectively. Subsequent updates to all three fee schedules were approved in 2012 and 2015. Most of the fees in the fee schedules are set at 100% cost recovery level, with the exception of a few fees adjusted in consultation with the City Council and other stakeholders in response to market concerns. Fiscal Year 2015-16 Review Development Services' cost recovery fee program is expected to generate almost $1.2 million at the end of Fiscal Year 2015-16 ("FY 2015-16") from the services provided to permit and development applicants and is represented in the attached fee schedules. The table below summarizes the department's cost recovery fee revenues for FY 2015-16 as well as prior years: Development Services Fee Revenues Revenue Accounts FY 13-14 1 FY 14-15 FY 15-16 FY 15-16 1 FY 16-17 Actual Actual Budgeted Fee Program Revenues YTD (Actual Revenues through 6/3/16) Variance from budget (at 6/3/16) Budgeted Fee Program Revenues Building - Plan Check $104,129 $224,239 $230,000 $211,489 -8.0% $246,986 Building - Permits/Inspection $309,701 $404,050 $403,193 $420,026 4.2% $1,207,708 Planning -Flat fee applications $81,591 $56,221 $90,000 $21,846 -42.4% $110,168 Engineering - Plan Check/Permits $300,332 $156,717 $125,000 $330,219 164.2% $230,000 Planning - Zoning Clearance $16,065 $19,634 1 $16,000 1 $16,235 1 1.5% 1 $16,000 Planning - Cost Recovery $60,874 $58,755 $40,700 $32,901 -19.2% $73,384 Engineering - Cost Recovery $42,346 $47,189 $41,500 $133,366 221.4% $50,000 TOTAL FEE REVENUE Department budget $811,818 $1,044,375 $966,806 $1,988,689* $946,393 $1,381,476 $1,196,082 $1,443,366 26.4% $1,934,246 $2,976,142 6J Percentage of department budget offset by fee revenue 77.7% 48.6% 68.5% 82.9% 65.7% * Department expenditures for FY 14-15 were authorized through mid year budget amendments to increase consultant services as well as staffing (and related expenses) to ramp up services for development. 2 ITEM NO. 8 As shown in the table above, in FY 2015-16 to date, Development Services has exceeded its fee revenue target by more than 26% and will recover almost 83% of its budgeted operational costs through fees for service through these fee schedules. The remaining 17% of the department's operational budget for this year is fully covered by a combination of direct billing for processing projects with reimbursement agreements (typically, specific plans and other complex development projects); capital project funding to offset services provided on major construction projects; water and sewer enterprise funds for staff support to utilities; transfers from other restricted funds (for example, General Plan Maintenance Fee Funds to offset department expenses for the ongoing implementation of the General Plan), and rent for certain facilities on City land (i.e. cellular towers, parking lots). The specific development projects that assisted Development Services in exceeding its revenue goals include Oxford Suites, The Reserve at Dowdell, Sportsman's Warehouse, the Costco fueling facility, and approximately 50 new homes in the University District, that have been approved through the building plan check process. Engineering plan check/permit revenues, which includes encroachment permit fees earned from reviewing and inspecting construction work in the City right-of-way, and "engineering cost recovery" revenues, which includes administrative fees for engineering consultants who review and inspect major grading and site improvements, both far exceed the anticipated budget targets. This is due primarily to the grading and site improvement activity in the University District and to a lesser extent, the Southeast Specific Plan Area. (It should be noted that administrative fees for consultant services are established in the development agreements negotiated between the City and the developer for these particular projects.) Planning flat fee applications and "planning cost recovery" revenues appear unlikely to meet the budget, although this is not unexpected. Planning revenues are more difficult to predict — and therefore budget — compared to engineering and building revenues. This is because many planning services are provided in the very early stages of a project, and we do not always know what projects will actually materialize as applications for City to be processed. On the other hand, engineering and building services are provided to projects well after planning applications have gone through the department. Development Services expects that planning revenues will increase in Fiscal Year 2016-17 as the division works on processing applications from the Residences at 5 Creeks (Stadium Area Master Plan), The Learning Experience (Central Rohnert Park PDA), and a modified preliminary development plan for Sonoma Mountain Village. Overall, the department's cost recovery program appears to adequately generate revenues that pay for services provided to development applicants. Staff believes that adequate cost recovery is achieved with the current fee schedule and that the fees are set appropriately, including the implementation of fee schedule changes approved in April 2015, which included administrative revisions as well as an automatic annual fee adjustment based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI). On July 2015, the first of the automatic annual CPI fee adjustments was made, increasing fees by 2.7% in the 12 -month period between December 2015 and 2016. Staff has seen no significant adverse effects from the CPI adjustment. The numbers and types of permit applications being received by the department for "maintenance -level" activities (i.e. baseline development activity that is seen year-to-year with little fluctuation, such as minor to moderate tenant improvements, residential maintenance such as re -roofs, water heaters, remodels, repairs, ITEM NO. 8 encroachment permits for utilities, planning applications for typical uses) are comparable to the prior year, before the fee schedule adjustments. For FY 2016-17, revenues are projected with an overall increase specifically in building plan check revenues and building permit and inspection revenues. Significant residential development will continue on the east side of Rohnert Park, with approximately 220 units projected for the University District and 20 units in Southeast Specific Plan. While infill development on Rohnert Park's westside appears to be ramping up, plan check and inspection revenues from anticipated projects are not expected to be realized until FY 2017-18. Fee Schedule Update Considerations With new subdivision development launched this spring, staff is providing new services not specifically defined in the fee schedule, for which a defined permit/application and fee/deposit would assist both staff and developers in tracking and charging costs. Staff will be developing proposed changes to the fee schedule in the upcoming months, which may include: • Cost recovery related to code enforcement • Addition of services such as review of Phased Occupancy Plans that are necessary to manage subdivision buildout by multiple builders • Refinement of new construction residential building fees to bring in line with Residential Code • Removing lot line adjustments and lot mergers from the planning fee schedule and including them in the engineering fee schedule • Additional minor administrative changes as identified by staff Staff recommends that the City Council consider directing staff to prepare an agenda item for a proposed fee schedule update at a future meeting. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The recommended action is consistent with Goal B: "Achieve and Maintain Financial Stability," and B-3 "Establish financial policies, procedures and systems that represent best practices." FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: There is no fiscal impact to the recommended action for the City Council to consider this cost recovery annual report and to file and accept the report. Department Head Approval Date: 06/13/16 City Attorney Approval Date: 06/14/16 Finance Manager Approval Date: 06/07/16 City Manager Approval Date: 06/20/16 Attachments: Attachment A: Building Fee Schedule and Cost Recovery Percentages Attachment B: Planning Fee Schedule and Cost Recovery Percentages Attachment C: Engineering Fee Schedule and Cost Recovery Percentages 2 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check Fees New Construction Occupancy Group R CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IV VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Project Size Threshold Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Percentage of Additional 100 SF service cost or fractional part recovered through thereof fee R-1 Residential - Hotels & Motels 5,000 $7,253 $16.55 $5,802 $13.24 100% 25,000 $10,563 $6.38 $8,450 $5.10 100% 50,000 $12,159 $12.87 $9,727 $10.30 100% 100,000 $18,598 $4.43 $14,878 $3.54 100% 250,000 $25,250 $3.26 $20,200 $2.60 100% 500,000 $33,405 $2.39 $26,724 $1.90 100% R-2 Apartments, Permanent 1,500 $5,721 $42.98 $4,577 $34.38 100% 7,500 $8,300 $17.01 $6,640 $13.61 100% 15,000 $9,576 $33.56 $7,661 $26.85 100% 30,000 $14,611 $11.67 $11,689 $9.33 100% 75,000 $19,863 $8.53 $15,890 $6.82 100% 150,000 $26,263 $6.23 $21,010 $4.98 100% R-3 Dwellings - Custom Homes, Models, First Master Plan (See Note 3 below) 1,000 $3,444 $34.46 $2,755 $27.60 100% 2,500 $3,961 $21.70 $3,169 $17.30 100% 3,500 $4,178 $40.53 $3,342 $32.46 100% 5,000 $4,786 $67.13 $3,829 $53.66 100% 6,500 $5,793 $36.66 $4,634 $29.33 100% 8,000 $6,343 $20.02 $5,074 $16.03 100% R-3 Dwellings - Plot Plan Check (Production Phase) (See Note 4 below) 1,000 $370 $0.00 $296 $0.00 100% 2,500 $370 $0.00 $296 $0.00 100% 3,500 $370 $0.00 $296 $0.00 100% 5,000 $370 $0.00 $296 $0.00 100% 6,500 $370 $0.00 $296 $0.00 100% 8,000 $370 $0.00 $296 $0.00 100% R-3 R-3 Additions 50 $290 $175.00 $232 $139.72 25% 250 $640 $161.20 $512 $128.92 35% 500 $1,043 $175.20 $834 $140.28 50% 1,000 $1,919 $90.60 $1,535 $72.44 60% 2,500 $3,278 $99.48 $2,622 $79.60 75% 5,000 $5,765 $109.23 $4,612 $87.46 100% NOTES: (1) Project size for plan check fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. (3) Refer to current Master Plan Policy and Procedures for application of fees. (4) Refer to Plot Plan Check and Production Phase Inspections Policy for application of fees. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Inspection Fees New Construction Occupancy Group R CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IV VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Project Base Cost Size @ Threshold Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof -Cost ase Cost @ Threshold Size for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Percentage of service cost recovered through fee R-1 Residential - Hotels & Motels 5,000 $11,484 25,000 $13,469 $9.92 $9,187 $7.94 $10,775 $15.46 100% 100% $19.32 50,000 $18,300 $11.48 $14,640 $9.18 100% 100,000 $24,043 $8.26 $19,234 $6.61 100% 250,000 $36,441 $7.92 $29,153 $6.34 100% 500,000 $56,256 $7.59 $45,005 $6.08 100% R-2 Apartments, Permanent 1,500 $4,540 7,500 $5,290 $12.50 $3,632 $10.00 100% $25.32 $4,232 $20.25 100% 15,000 $7,189 $15.33 $5,751 $12.26 100% 30,000 $9,489 $10.78 $7,591 $8.62 100% 75,000 $14,341 $10.41 $11,473 $8.33 100% 150,000 $22,153 $10.05 $17,722 $8.04 100% R-3 Dwellings - Custom Homes, Models, First Master Plan (See Note 2 below) 1,000 $3,313 $61.73 $2,650 $49.40 100% 2,500 $4,239 $9.50 $3,391 $7.60 100% 3,500 $4,334 $80.40 $3,467 $64.33 100% 5,000 $5,540 $59.60 $4,432 $47.66 100% 6,500 $6,434 $41.46 $5,147 $33.20 100% 8,000 $7,056 $28.84 $5,645 $23.12 100% R-3 Dwellings - Production Phase Permitting and Inspections (See Note 3 below) 1,000 $2,739 $51.66 $2,191 $41.33 100% 2,500 $3,514 $39.90 $2,811 $31.90 100% 3,500 $3,913 $45.33 $3,130 $36.26 100% 5,000 $4,593 $48.80 $3,674 $39.06 100% 6,500 $5,325 $35.20 $4,260 $28.13 100% 8,000 $5,853 $25.39 $4,682 $20.25 100% R-3 R-3 Additions 50 $310 $104.00 $248 $83.15 25% 250 $518 $192.40 $414 $153.98 35% 500 $999 $115.80 $799 $92.68 50% 1,000 $1,578 $94.26 $1,262 $75.39 60% 2,500 $2,992 $125.84 $2,393 $100.67 75% 5,000 $6,138 $168.00 $4,910 $134.42 100% NOTES: (1) Project size for inspection fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. (3) Refer to current Master Plan Policy and Procedures for application of fees. (4) Refer to Plot Plan Check and Production Phase Inspections Policy for application of fees. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check Fees New Construction Occupancy Groups A, B, & E CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IV I VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Project Size Threshold Base Cost @Cost Threshold Size for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Percentage of service cost recovered through fee A-1 All A Occupancy Types (Excluding restaurants, Assembly & TI's) 1,500 $6,678 1 $52.00 $5,342 $41.60 $17.36 1000 100% 7,500 $9,798 $21.69 $7,838 15,000 $11,425 $40.36 $9,140 $32.29 100% 30,000 $17,480 $13.93 $13,984 $11.14 100% 75,000 $23,751 $10.19 $19,001 $8.15 100% 150,000 $31,395 $7.45 $25,116 $5.96 100% A-2 Assembly - food and drink Restaurants, night clubs, bar 250 $1,578 $184.10 $1,262 $147.32 50% 1,250 $3,419 $147.52 $2,735 $117.98 75% 2,500 $5,263 $111.48 $4,210 $89.20 100% 5,000 $8,050 $38.33 $6,440 $30.66 100% 12,500 $10,925 $28.16 $8,740 $22.53 100% 25,000 $14,446 $20.68 $11,557 $16.55 100% A-3, A-4 Small assembly bldgs, indoor sport viewing arena, skating rink, tennis court 500 $2,945 $67.50 $2,356 $54.00 100% 2,500 $4,295 $24.60 $3,436 $19.68 100% 5,000 $4,910 $52.22 $3,928 $41.78 100% 10,000 $7,521 $17.99 $6,017 $14.39 100% 25,000 $10,220 $13.26 $8,176 $10.60 100% 50,000 $13,535 $9.77 $10,828 $7.80 100% A-5 Outdoor activities, amusement park, skating rink, tennis court 1,500 $7,315 $55.18 $5,852 $44.15 100% 7,500 $10,626 $21.29 $8,501 $17.02 100% 15,000 $12,223 $43.13 $9,778 $34.50 100% 30,000 $18,693 $14.85 $14,954 $11.88 100% 75,000 $25,376 $10.95 $20,301 $8.76 100% 150,000 $33,595 $8.07 $26,876 $6.45 100% B All B Occupancy Types (Buildings or spaces used for service type transactions, including storage of records and accounts; restaurants with less than 50 people. Not including office and Ti's) 500 $3,824 $86.20 $3,059 $68.95 100% 2,500 $5,548 $34.48 $4,438 $27.60 100% 5,000 $6,410 $235.52 $5,128 $188.42 100% 10,000 $18,186 $43.38 $14,549 $34.70 100% 25,000 $24,693 $31.80 $19,754 $25.44 100% 50,000 $32,645 $23.31 $26,116 $18.65 100% B Professional Office 500 $2,646 $63.85 $2,117 $51.05 100% 2,500 $3,923 $25.44 $3,138 $20.36 100% 5,000 $4,559 $51.24 $3,647 $41.00 100% 10,000 $7,121 $17.64 $5,697 $14.11 100% 25,000 $9,768 $12.11 $7,814 $9.69 100% 50,000 $12,796 $8.31 $10,237 $6.65 100% E All E Occupancy Types (Excluding TI's) 750 $5,020 $77.43 $4,016 $61.93 100% 3,750 $7,343 $28.96 $5,874 $23.17 100% 7,500 $8,429 $59.49 $6,743 $47.60 100% 15,000 $12,891 $20.63 $10,313 $16.50 100% 37,500 $17,534 $15.11 $14,027 $12.09 100% 75,000 $23,201 $11.06 $18,561 $8.85 100% NOTES: (1) Project size for plan check fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Inspection Fees New Construction Occupancy Groups A, B, & E CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IV VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Project Size Threshold Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Percentage of service cost recovered through fee A-1 All A Occupancy Types (Excluding restaurants, Assembly & TI's) 1,500 $5,845 $16.76 $4,676 $13.41 100% 7,500 $6,851 $33.06 $5,481 $26.45 100% 15,000 $9,331 $19.46 $7,465 $15.56 100% 30,000 $12,250 $13.96 $9,800 $11.17 100% 75,000 $18,534 $13.41 $14,827 $10.72 100% 150,000 $28,593 $12.88 $22,874 $10.28 100% A-2 Assembly - food and drink Restaurants, night clubs, bar 250 $1,218 $93.20 $974 $74.57 $112.82 50% 75% 1,250 $2,150 $141.04 $1,720 2,500 $3,913 $49.12 $3,130 $39.32 100% 5,000 $5,141 $34.92 $4,113 $27.93 100% 12,500 $7,760 $33.52 $6,208 $26.82 100% 25,000 $11,951 $32.17 $9,561 $25.75 100% A-3, A-4 Small assembly bldgs, indoor sport viewing arena, skating rink, tennis court 500 $2,355 $19.95 $1,884 $15.95 100% 2,500 $2,754 $38.04 $2,203 $30.44 100% 5,000 $3,705 $23.32 $2,964 $18.66 100% 10,000 $4,871 $16.92 $3,897 $13.54 100% 25,000 $7,410 $15.94 $5,928 $12.75 100% 50,000 $11,396 $15.01 $9,117 $12.00 100% A-5 Outdoor activities, amusement park, skating rink, tennis court 1,500 $6,119 $17.70 $4,895 $14.16 100% 7,500 $7,181 $34.12 $5,745 $27.29 100% 15,000 $9,740 $20.43 $7,792 $16.34 100% 30,000 $12,805 $14.76 $10,244 $11.81 100% 75,000 $19,451 $14.03 $15,561 $11.22 100% 150,000 $29,974 $13.33 $23,979 $10.65 100% B All B Occupancy Types (Buildings or spaces used for service type transactions, including storage of records and accounts; restaurants with less than 50 people. Not including office and TI's) 500 $1,700 $13.65 $1,360 $10.90 100% 2,500 $1,973 $29.08 $1,578 $23.28 100% 5,000 $2,700 $16.92 $2,160 $13.54 100% 10,000 $3,546 $12.14 $2,837 $9.71 100% 25,000 $5,368 $11.66 $4,294 $9.33 100% 50,000 $8,285 $11.19 $6,628 $8.96 100% B Professional Office 500 $1,749 $14.85 $1,399 $11.90 100% 2,500 $2,046 $28.12 $1,637 $22.48 100% 5,000 $2,749 $16.80 $2,199 $13.44 100% 10,000 $3,589 $12.33 $2,871 $9.86 100% 25,000 $5,439 $13.00 $4,351 $10.40 100% 50,000 $8,690 $13.70 $6,952 $10.96 100% E All E Occupancy Types (Excluding TI's) 750 $2,339 $13.30 $1,871 $10.63 100% 3,750 $2,738 $26.21 $2,190 $20.98 100% 7,500 $3,721 $15.52 $2,977 $12.41 100% 15,000 $4,885 $11.21 $3,908 $8.97 100% 37,500 $7,409 $10.75 $5,927 $8.60 100% 75,000 $11,441 $10.30 $9,153 $8.24 100% NOTES: (1) Project size for inspection fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA -1113 -IIIA -11113-1V by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check Fees New Construction Occupancy Groups F, H, M, S, U CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IV VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Base Cost Project @p Size Threshold Threshold Size Base Cost Cost for each @ Additional 100 SF or fractional Threshold part thereof Size Cost for each Percentage of Additional 100 SF service cost or fractional part recovered thereof through fee F-1 F-1 Woodworking 1,000 $4,543 $51.67 $3,634 $41.35 100% $15.82 100% 5,000 $6,610 $19.78 $5,288 10,000 $7,599 $40.16 $6,079 $32.13 100% 20,000 $11,615 $13.88 $9,292 $11.11 100% 50,000 $15,781 $10.25 $12,625 $8.20 1000 100,000 $20,908 $7.56 $16,726 $6.05 100% F-1 All F-1 Occupancy Types (excluding woodworking and industrial/manufacturing) 1,000 $2,708 $21.52 $2,166 $17.22 100% $49.38 100% 5,000 $3,569 $61.72 $2,855 10,000 $6,655 $2.89 $5,324 $2.31 100% 20,000 $6,944 $11.58 $5,555 $9.26 100% 50,000 $10,419 $6.88 $8,335 $5.50 100% $3.26 100% 100,000 $13,860 $4.08 $11,088 F-1, F-2 Industrial/Manufacturing and All F -2s 2,000 $5,019 $28.70 $4,015 $22.96 100% 10,000 $7,315 $10.94 $5,852 $8.75 100% 20,000 $8,409 $22.27 $6,727 $17.81 100% 40,000 $12,863 $7.68 $10,290 $6.14 100% 100,000 $17,474 $5.61 $13,979 $4.48 100% 200,000 $23,084 $4.09 $18,467 $3.26 100% H-2 H-4 High Hazard Group Pose health hazards 1,000 $4,158 $47.87 $3,326 $38.30 100% 5,000 $6,073 $18.04 $4,858 $14.44 100% 10,000 $6,975 $36.88 $5,580 $29.50 100% 20,000 $10,663 $12.71 $8,530 $10.17 100% 50,000 $14,478 $9.30 $11,582 $7.44 100% 100,000 $19,131 $6.80 $15,305 $5.44 100% H-3 High Hazard Readily support combustion 100 $2,188 $253.25 $1,750 $202.75 100% 500 $3,201 $99.00 $2,561 $79.20 100% 1,000 $3,696 $194.00 $2,957 $155.20 100% 2,000 $5,636 $67.60 $4,509 $54.06 100% 5,000 $7,664 $49.38 $6,131 $39.50 100% 10,000 $10,133 $36.07 $8,106 $28.86 100% H-5 High Hazard Semiconductor fabrication, R&D 1,500 $5,846 $44.70 $4,677 $35.75 100% 7,500 $8,528 $16.69 $6,822 $13.36 100% 15,000 $9,780 $34.56 $7,824 $27.65 100% 30,000 $14,965 $11.88 $11,972 $9.50 100% 75,000 $20,311 150,000 $26,878 $8.75 $16,249 $6.44 1 $21,502 $7.00 100% $5.15 100% M Mercantile - Market (retail or wholesale) 4,500 $4,813 $12.22 $3,850 $9.78 100% 22,500 $7,014 $4.68 $5,611 $3.74 100% 45,000 $8,068 $9.45 $6,454 $7.56 100% 90,000 $12,323 $3.28 $9,858 $2.62 100% 225,000 $16,760 $2.38 $13,408 $1.90 100% 450,000 1 $22,130 $1.72 1 $17,704 1 $1.37 1 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Plan Check Fees New Construction Occupancy Groups F, H, M, S, U ATTACHMENT A CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, 1116, IV I VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Base Cost Project @ Size Threshold Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Percentage of Additional 100 SF service cost or fractional part recovered thereof through fee S-1 S-2 Storage - Moderate and Low Hazard Storage - Low Hazard, Parking Garages Open or Enclosed 1,000 $3,201 $36.72 $2,561 $29.37 100% 5,000 $4,670 $14.22 $3,736 $11.38 100% 10,000 $5,381 $28.27 $4,305 $22.61 100% 20,000 $8,208 $9.74 $6,566 $7.79 100% 50,000 $11,130 $7.20 $8,904 $5.76 100% 100,000 $14,731 $5.32 $11,785 $4.25 100% S-1 Storage - Moderate Hazard, Repair Garage, Motor vehicles (not high hazard) 600 $2,309 3,000 $3,395 6,000 $3,883 $45.25 $1,847 $36.20 100% $16.26 $2,716 $13.00 100% $34.36 $3,106 $27.50 100% 12,000 $5,945 $11.80 $4,756 $9.43 100% 30,000 $8,069 $8.71 $6,455 $8,546 $6.97 100% $5.15 100% 60,000 $10,683 $6.42 S Motor Vehicles Fuel Dispensing 100 $1,899 500 $2,754 $213.75 $1,519 $171.00 100% $86.40 $2,203 $69.20 100% 1,000 $3,186 $165.30 $2,549 $132.20 100% 2,000 $4,839 $59.13 $3,871 $47.30 100% 5,000 $6,613 $41.66 $5,290 $33.34 100% 10,000 $8,696 $29.35 $6,957 $23.50 100% U Accessory- Agricultural building, Private garage/shed 100 $2,323 $268.00 $1,858 $214.50 100% 500 $3,395 $109.80 $2,716 $87.80 100% 1,000 $3,944 $205.50 $3,155 $164.40 100% 2,000 $5,999 $71.33 $4,799 $57.06 100% 5,000 $8,139 $52.04 $6,511 $41.64 100% 10,000 $10,741 1 $37.96 $8,593 $30.38 100% NnTFS (1) Project size for plan check fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Inspection Fees New Construction Occupancy Groups F, H, M, S, U CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, 1116, Iv I VA, v6 IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Base Cost Project @Cost Size Threshold Threshold Size Base Cost for each @ Additional 100 SF or fractional Threshold part thereof Size Cost for each Percentage of Additional 100 service cost SF or fractional recovered part thereof through fee F-1 F-1 Woodworking 1,000 $3,336 $14.75 $2,669 $11.80 100% 5,000 $3,926 $28.44 $3,141 $22.74 100% 10,000 $5,348 $16.45 $4,278 $13.16 100% 20,000 $6,993 $11.94 $5,594 $9.55 100% 50,000 $10,576 $11.51 $8,461 $9.20 100% 100,000 $16,331 $11.09 $13,065 $8.86 100% F-1 All F-1 Occupancy Types (excluding woodworking and industrial/manufacturing) 1,000 $2,005 $7.20 $1,604 $5.75 100% 5,000 $2,293 $17.56 $1,834 $14.06 100% 10,000 $3,171 $12.05 $2,537 $9.64 100% 20,000 $4,376 $10.46 $3,501 $8.37 100% 50,000 $7,515 $9.62 $6,012 $7.70 100% 100,000 $12,329 $8.84 $9,863 $7.08 100% F-1, F-2 Industrial/Manufacturing and All F -2s 2,000 $3,701 $7.78 $2,961 $6.22 100% 10,000 $4,324 $15.57 $3,459 $12.46 100% 20,000 $5,881 $9.17 $4,705 $7.34 100% 40,000 $7,716 $6.59 $6,173 $5.27 100% 100,000 $11,673 $6.34 $9,338 $5.07 100% 200,000 $18,018 $6.09 $14,414 $4.87 100% H-2 H-4 High Hazard Group Pose health hazards 1,000 $4,364 $18.75 $3,491 $15.00 100% 5,000 $5,114 $36.22 $4,091 $28.98 100% 10,000 $6,925 $21.85 $5,540 $17.48 100% 20,000 $9,110 $15.69 $7,288 $12.55 100% 50,000 $13,818 $15.03 $11,054 $12.02 100% 100,000 $21,335 $14.39 $17,068 $11.51 100% H-3 High Hazard Readily support combustion 100 $1,500 $68.25 $1,200 $54.50 100% 500 $1,773 $123.00 $1,418 $98.40 100% 1,000 $2,388 $73.50 $1,910 $58.80 100% 2,000 $3,123 $54.00 $2,498 $43.20 100% 5,000 $4,743 $51.44 $3,794 $41.16 100% 10,000 $7,315 $49.00 $5,852 1 $39.21 100% H-5 High Hazard Semiconductor fabrication, R&D 1,500 $4,899 $14.08 $3,919 $11.26 100% 7,500 $5,744 $27.45 $4,595 $21.96 100% 15,000 $7,803 $16.27 $6,242 $13.02 100% 30,000 $10,244 $11.79 $8,195 $9.43 100% 75,000 $15,550 $11.24 $12,440 $8.99 100% 150,000 $23,981 $10.71 $19,185 $8.57 100% M Mercantile - Market (retail or wholesale) 4,500 $3,510 $3.46 $2,808 $2.76 100% 22,500 $4,133 $6.63 $3,306 $5.31 100% 45,000 $5,626 $3.93 $4,501 $3.14 100% 90,000 $7,396 $2.79 $5,917 $2.23 100% 225,000 $11,163 $2.69 $8,930 $2.15 100% 450,000 1 $17,229 1 $2.591 $13,783 1 $2.07 1 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Inspection Fees New Construction Occupancy Groups F, H, M, S, U ATTACHMENT A CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IV VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Project Size Threshold Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Percentage of service cost recovered through fee S-1 S-2 Storage - Moderate and Low Hazard Storage - Low Hazard, Parking Garages Open or Enclosed 1,000 $2,066 $9.22 $1,653 $7.37 1007 5,000 $2,435 $17.26 $1,948 $13.80 100% 10,000 $3,298 $10.46 $2,638 $8.37 100% 20,000 $4,344 $7.39 $3,475 $5.91 100% 50,000 $6,563 $7.15 $5,250 $5.72 100% 100,000 $10,140 $6.91 $8,112 $5.53 100% S-1 Storage - Moderate Hazard, Repair Garage, Motor vehicles (not high hazard) 600 $2,004 $15.25 $1,603 $12.20 100% 3,000 $2,370 $27.96 $1,896 $22.36 100% 6,000 $3,209 $16.90 $2,567 $13.51 100% 12,000 $4,223 $12.15 $3,378 $9.72 100% 30,000 $6,410 $11.52 $5,128 $9.22 100% 60,000 $9,868 $10.92 $7,894 $8.74 100% S Motor Vehicles Fuel Dispensing 100 500 $1,556 $1,829 $68.25 $1,245 $54.50 100% $129.40 $1,463 $103.60 100% 1,000 $2,476 $79.00 $1,981 $63.20 100% 2,000 $3,266 $55.96 $2,613 $44.76 100% 5,000 $4,945 $53.80 $3,956 $43.04 100% 10,000 $7,635 $51.72 $6,108 $41.38 100% U Accessory- Agricultural building, Private garage/shed 100 $1,263 $60.00 $1,010 $48.00 100% 500 $1,503 $102.20 $1,202 $81.80 100% 1,000 $2,014 $63.20 $1,611 $50.60 100% 2,000 $2,646 $46.10 $2,117 $36.86 100% 5,000 $4,029 $43.82 $3,223 $35.06 100% 10,000 1 $6,220 1 $41.65 1 $4,976 1 $33.34 1 100% NnTFS- (1) Project size for inspection fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. (3) Adjusted Cost Recovery % is result of staff recommendation and/or Council direction. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check Fees New Construction Occupancy Groups I & L CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IV VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Project Size Threshold Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SForfractional part thereof Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Percentage of service cost recovered through fee 1-1 Institutional - Health Care Centers 500 2,500 $3,600 $81.45 $2,880 $65.15 100% $5,229 $31.96 $4,183 $25.56 100% 5,000 $6,028 $63.40 $4,822 $50.72 100% 10,000 $9,198 $21.93 $7,358 $17.54 100% 25,000 $12,488 $16.12 $9,990 $12.90 100% 50,000 $16,519 $11.84 $13,215 $9.48 100% 1-2 Institutional - Nursing Home/Assisted Living/Convalescent Hospital 1,000 $6,391 $72.42 $5,113 $7,430 $57.92 100% 5,000 $9,288 $28.06 $22.46 100% 10,000 $10,691 $56.42 $8,553 $45.13 100% 20,000 $16,333 $19.62 $13,066 $15.70 100% 50,000 $22,221 $14.33 $17,777 $11.46 100% 100,000 $29,388 $10.46 $23,510 $8.36 100% L Labs - California ONLY 1,000 $4,479 $51.65 $3,583 $41.32 100% 5,000 $6,545 $19.80 $5,236 $15.84 100% 10,000 $7,535 $39.53 $6,028 $31.62 100% 20,000 $11,488 $13.77 $9,190 $11.02 100% 50,000 $15,621 $10.06 $12,497 $8.05 100% 100,0001 $20,653 $7.341 $16,522 $5.88 100% NOTFS (1) Project size for plan check fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Inspection Fees New Construction Occupancy Groups I & L CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, 1116, IV I VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Base Cost Project @p Size Threshold Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Percentage of service cost recovered through fee 1-1 Institutional - Health Care Centers 500 $2,561 $23.20 $2,049 $18.55 100% 2,500 $3,025 $44.40 $2,420 $35.52 100% 5,000 $4,135 $25.88 $3,308 $20.70 100% 10,000 $5,429 $18.50 $4,343 $14.80 100% 25,000 $8,205 $17.66 $6,564 $14.13 100% 50,000 $12,621 $16.85 $10,097 $13.49 100% 1-2 Institutional - Nursing Home/Assisted Living/Convalescent Hospital 1,000 $5,433 $22.75 $4,346 $18.20 100% 5,000 $6,343 $45.62 $5,074 $36.50 100% 10,000 $8,624 $27.12 $6,899 $21.70 100% 20,000 $11,336 $19.47 $9,069 $15.57 100% 50,000 $17,178 100,000 $26,488 $18.62 $13,742 $14.89 100% $17.80 $21,190 $14.23 100% L Labs - California ONLY 1,000 $4,668 5,000 $5,450 $19.55 $3,734 $15.65 100% $39.22 $4,360 $31.38 100% 10,000 $7,411 $23.32 $5,929 $18.65 100% 20,000 $9,743 $16.80 $7,794 $13.44 100% 50,000 $14,785 $16.00 $11,828 $12.80 100% 100,000 $22,789 $15.231 $18,231 $12.19 100% nlnTFc- (1) Project size for inspection fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.S0. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check Fees New Construction All Shell Buildings CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, 116, IIIA, 1116, Iv I VA, VB NOTES: (1) Project size for plan check fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Base Cost Base Cost IBC Project Size @ Threshold Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional @ Threshold Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional Percentage of service cost recovered Class IBC Occupancy Type Threshold Size part thereof Size part thereof through fee All Shell Buildings 1,000 $3,824 $43.10 $3,059 $34.47 100% 5,000 $5,548 $16.62 $4,438 $13.30 100% 10,000 $6,379 $33.60 $5,103 $26.88 100% 20,000 $9,739 $11.71 $7,791 $9.37 100% 50,000 $13,253 $8.51 $10,602 $6.80 100% 100,000 1 $17,508 1 $6.18 1 $14,006 $4.93 1 100% NOTES: (1) Project size for plan check fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Inspection Fees New Construction All Shell Buildings CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, 1116, IV VA, VB NOTES: (1) Project size for inspection fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Base Cost IBC Project Size Base Cost @ Threshold Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part @ Threshold Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional Percentage of service cost recovered Class IBC Occupancy Type Threshold Size thereof Size part thereof through fee All Shell Buildings 1,000 $2,676 $14.42 $2,141 $11.52 100% 5,000 $2,602 $16.86 $3,253 $21.06 100% 10,000 $4,306 $14.80 $3,445 $11.84 100% 20,000 $5,786 $9.37 $4,629 $7.49 100% 50,000 $8,598 $8.70 $6,878 $6.96 100% 100,000 $12,949 $8.07 $10,359 $6.46 100% NOTES: (1) Project size for inspection fee calculation purposes is gross square footage as measured from the outside of exterior walls. (2) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA-IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check Fees Tenant Improvements Occupancy Groups A, B, E, F, H, I, M, S and "other" CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, 1116, IV I VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Project Size Threshold Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SForfractional partthereof Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Percentage of service cost recovered through fee A Assembly Occupancy Other than food and drink 500 $1,246 $73.40 $997 $58.71 50% 2,500 $2,714 $57.00 $2,171 $45.59 75% 5,000 $4,139 $43.78 $3,311 $35.02 100% 10,000 $6,328 $15.17 $5,062 $12.14 100% 25,000 $8,604 $11.08 $6,883 $8.87 100% 50,000 $11,376 $8.09 $9,101 1 $6.48 100% A-2 Assembly Occupancy Food and drink establishment (Restaurant, night club, bar) 500 $1,246 $73.40 $997 $58.71 50% 2,500 $2,714 $57.00 $2,171 $45.59 75% 5,000 $4,139 $43.78 $3,311 $35.02 100% 10,000 $6,328 $15.17 $5,062 $12.14 100% 25,000 $8,604 $11.08 $6,883 $8.87 100% 50,000 $11,376 $8.09 $9,101 $6.48 100% B Business Occupancy Services, except professional office, medical office, nail salon/hair salon, and restaurants with less than 50 occupants) 500 $1,102 $64.40 $882 $51.51 50% 2,500 $2,390 $51.36 $1,912 $41.09 75% 5,000 $3,674 $39.12 $2,939 $31.30 100% 10,000 $5,630 $13.30 $4,504 $10.64 100% 25,000 $7,626 $9.90 $6,101 $7.92 100% 50,000 $10,103 $7.36 $8,082 $5.89 100% B Business Occupancy 500 $978 $56.50 $783 $45.21 50% 2,500 $2,108 $45.40 $1,687 $36.29 75% 5,000 $3,243 $33.70 $2,594 $26.96 1000/a 10,000 $4,928 $11.81 $3,942 $9.45 100% 25,000 $6,700 $8.69 $5,360 $6.95 100% 50,000 $8,874 $6.39 $7,099 $5.11 100% B Business Occupancy Medical Office / Exam 500 $1,102 $64.40 $882 $51.51 50% 2,500 $2,390 $51.36 $1,912 $41.09 75% 5,000 $3,674 $38.50 $2,939 $30.80 100% 10,000 $5,599 $13.30 $4,479 $10.64 100% 25,000 $7,594 $9.90 $6,075 $7.92 100% 50,000 $10,070 $7.36 $8,056 $5.89 100% B Business Occupancy Nail / Hair Salon 250 $500 $36.90 $400 $29.52 500 1,250 $869 $46.08 $695 $36.86 75% 2,500 $1,445 $24.00 $1,156 $19.20 100% 5,000 $2,045 $5.32 $1,636 $4.25 100% 12,500 $2,444 $19.55 $1,955 $15.64 100% 250 $591 $43.80 $473 $35.10 50% B Business Occupancy Restaurants under 50 person occupancy 1,250 $1,029 $50.40 $824 $40.28 75% 2,500 $1,659 $15.44 $1,327 $12.36 100% 5,000 $2,045 $5.32 $1,636 $4.25 100% 12,500 $2,444 $19.55 $1,955 $15.64 100% E Educational Occupancy 500 $782 $47.10 $626 $37.68 50% 2,500 $1,724 $36.44 $1,379 $29.15 75% 5,000 $2,635 $27.66 $2,108 $22.12 100% 10,000 $4,018 $9.57 $3,214 $7.66 100% 25,000 $5,454 $6.99 $4,363 $5.59 100% 50,000 $7,203 $5.10 $5,762 $4.07 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A Plan Check Fees Tenant Improvements Occupancy Groups A, B, E, F, H, 1, M, S and "other" CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA. IIB, IIIA. 1116, IV I VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Base Cost Project @ Size Threshold Threshold Size Base Cost Cost for each @ Additional 100 SF or fractional Threshold part thereof Size Cost for each Percentage of Additional 100 service cost SF or fractional recovered part thereof through fee F, H F & H Occupancy Tenant Improvements Factory High Hazard 1,000 $1,808 $53.42 $1,447 $42.73 50% $33.40 75% 5,000 $3,945 $41.76 $3,156 10,000 $6,033 $31.85 $4,826 $25.48 100% 20,000 $9,218 $11.12 $7,374 $8.90 100% 50,000 $12,556 $8.04 $10,045 $6.43 100% 100,000 $16,578 1 $5.81 $13,262 $4.64 100% I I Occupancy Tenant Improvements Institutional 1,000 $2,239 $66.75 $1,792 $53.38 50% 5,000 $4,909 $52.52 $3,927 $42.02 75% 10,000 $7,535 $39.53 $6,028 $31.62 100% 20,000 $11,488 $13.77 $9,190 $11.02 100% 50,000 $15,621 $10.06 $12,497 $8.05 100% 100,000 $20,653 $7.34 $16,522 $5.88 100% M M Occupancy Tenant Improvements Mercantile 2,000 $1,664 $24.77 $1,332 $19.81 50% 10,000 $3,646 $19.58 $2,917 $15.66 75% 20,000 $5,604 $14.61 $4,483 $11.69 100% 40,000 $8,526 $5.08 $6,821 $4.06 100% 100,000 $11,576 $3.72 $9,261 $2.98 100% 200,000 $15,305 $2.72 $12,244 $2.18 100% S S Occupancy Tenant Improvements Storage 150 $949 $186.00 $760 $148.79 50% 750 $2,065 $149.46 $1,652 $119.56 75% 1,500 $3,186 $110.20 $2,549 $88.13 100% 3,000 $4,839 $38.68 $3,871 $30.95 100% 7,500 $6,580 $28.21 $5,264 $22.57 100% 15,000 $8,696 $20.57 $6,957 $16.45 100% Other Tenant Improvements 500 $1,513 $89.35 $1,211 $71.47 50% 2,500 $3,300 $70.84 $2,640 $56.68 75% 5,000 $5,071 $53.20 $4,057 $42.56 100% 10,000 $7,731 $18.53 $6,185 $14.82 100% 25,000 $10,511 $13.57 $8,409 $10.86 100% 50,000 $13,905 $9.93 $11,124 $7.95 100% NOTES: (1) Project size for Tenant Improvement plan check fee calculation purposes is total square footage from inside wall to wall measurements. (2) Plan check fee adjustments for Tenant Improvements (Tls): • TI with all systems (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and structural): 100% base cost fee • TI without plumbing / mechanical: 70% base cost fee + 70% incremental cost fee • TI without electrical: 70% base cost fee + 70% incremental cost fee • TI only adding walls: 70% base cost fee + 70% incremental cost fee (3) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA -IIB -IIIA -1116 -IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Inspection Fees Tenant Improvements Occupancy Groups A, B, E, F, H, 1, M, S and "other" CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IV I VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Project Size Threshold Base Cost @Cost Threshold Size for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Base Cost @ Threshold Size Cost for each Additional 100 SF or fractional part thereof Percentage of service cost recovered through fee A Assembly Occupancy (Other than food and drink) 500 $539 $32.25 $431 $25.81 50% 2,500 $1,184 $32.76 $947 $26.19 75% 5,000 $2,003 $15.70 $1,602 $12.56 100% 10,000 $2,788 $8.60 $2,230 $6.88 100% 25,000 $4,078 $7.64 $3,262 $6.11 100% 50,000 $5,989 $6.78 $4,791 $5.42 100% A-2 Assembly Occupancy Food and drink (Restaurant, night club, bar) 500 $739 $31.05 $592 $24.83 50% 2,500 $1,360 $51.16 $1,088 $40.91 75% 5,000 $2,639 $19.58 $2,111 $15.66 100% 10,000 $3,618 $11.56 $2,894 $9.25 100% 25,000 $5,353 $10.44 $4,282 $8.36 100% 50,000 $7,965 $9.42 $6,372 $7.55 100% B Business Occupancy Services, except professional office, medical office, nail salon/hair salon, and restaurants with less than 50 occupants) 500 $576 $24.95 $461 $19.98 50% 2,500 $1,075 $31.32 $860 $25.03 75% 5,000 $1,858 $14.24 $1,486 $11.40 100% 10,000 $2,570 $7.78 $2,056 $6.22 100% 25,000 $3,738 $7.35 $2,990 $5.88 100% 50,000 $5,576 $6.94 $4,461 $5.55 100% B Business Occupancy Professional Office 500 $539 $25.90 $431 $20.71 50% 2,500 $1,057 $30.08 $845 $24.07 75% 5,000 $1,809 $13.28 $1,447 $10.62 100% 10,000 $2,473 $7.78 $1,978 $6.22 100% 25,000 $3,640 $7.16 $2,912 $5.73 100% 50,000 $5,431 $6.58 $4,345 $5.27 100% B Business Occupancy Medical Office / Exam 500 $651 $29.50 $521 $23.62 50% 2,500 $1,241 $37.36 $993 $29.88 75% 5,000 $2,175 $16.18 $1,740 $12.94 100% 10,000 $2,984 $9.27 $2,387 $7.42 1000 25,000 $4,375 $8.76 $3,500 $7.00 100% 50,000 $6,565 $8.27 $5,252 $6.60 100% B Business Occupancy Nail / Hair Salon 250 $579 $43.40 $464 $34.65 50% 1,250 $1,013 $34.56 $810 $27.68 75% 2,500 $1,445 $17.60 $1,156 $14.08 100% 5,000 $1,885 $7.45 $1,508 $5.96 100% 12,500 $2,444 $19.55 $1,955 $15.64 100% B Business Occupancy Restaurants under 50 person occupancy 250 $651 $54.60 $521 $43.72 50% 1,250 $1,197 $39.52 $958 $31.62 75% 2,500 $1,691 $24.32 $1,353 $19.44 100% 5,000 $2,299 $9.14 $1,839 $7.32 100% 12,500 $2,985 $23.88 $2,388 $19.10 100% E Educational Occupancy 500 $539 $22.20 $431 $17.78 50% 2,500 $983 $29.08 $787 $23.25 75% 5,000 $1,710 $12.32 $1,368 $9.86 100% 10,000 $2,326 $7.46 $1,861 $5.97 100% 25,000 $3,446 $6.86 $2,757 $5.49 100% 50,000 $5,163 $6.30 $4,130 $5.04 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A Inspection Fees Tenant Improvements Occupancy Groups A, B, E, F, H, 1, M, S and "other" CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIA, IIB, IIIA, 1116, IV VA, VB IBC Class IBC Occupancy Type Base Cost Project @ Size Threshold Threshold Size Base Cost Cost for each @ Additional 100 SF or fractional part Threshold thereof Size Cost for each Percentage of Additional 100 SF service cost or fractional part recovered thereof through fee F, H F & H Occupancy Tenant Improvements Factory High Hazard 1,000 $1,123 5,000 $2,032 $22.72 $898 $18.18 50% $24.23 75% $30.28 $1,625 10,000 $3,546 $12.73 $2,837 $10.18 100% 20,000 $4,819 $7.83 $3,855 $6.26 100% 50,000 $7,168 100,000 $10,776 $7.21 $5,734 $5.77 100% $6.63 $8,621 $5.31 100% I I Occupancy Tenant Improvements Institutional 1,000 $2,080 5,000 $3,737 $41.42 $1,664 $33.13 50% $58.12 $2,990 $46.49 75% 10,000 $6,643 $22.62 $5,314 $18.10 100% 20,000 $8,905 $14.74 $7,124 $11.79 100% 50,000 $13,328 $13.75 $10,662 $11.00 100% 100,000 $20,205 $12.82 $16,164 $10.26 100% M M Occupancy Tenant Improvements Mercantile 2,000 $1,298 $13.50 $1,038 $10.80 50% 10,000 $2,378 $18.23 $1,903 $14.58 75% 20,000 $4,201 $7.12 $3,361 $5.70 100% 40,000 $5,626 $4.60 $4,501 $3.68 100% 100,000 $8,389 $4.27 $6,711 $3.41 1000 200,000 $12,660 $3.96 $10,128 $3.15 100% S S Occupancy Tenant Improvements Storage 150 $711 $98.33 $569 $78.75 50% 750 $1,301 $132.40 $1,041 $105.86 75% 1,500 $2,294 $52.73 $1,835 $42.20 100% 3,000 $3,085 $33.73 $2,468 $26.97 100% 7,500 $4,603 $30.80 $3,682 $24.64 100% 15,000 $6,913 $28.12 $5,530 $22.51 100% Other Tenant Improvements 500 $876 $37.55 $701 $30.03 50% 2,500 $1,627 $48.52 $1,301 $38.83 75% 5,000 $2,840 $20.68 $2,272 $16.54 100% 10,000 $3,874 $12.16 $3,099 $9.72 100% 25,000 $5,698 $11.02 $4,558 $8.82 100% 50,000 $8,454 $9.98 $6,763 $8.00 100% NOTES: (1) Project size for Tenant Improvement inspection fee calculation purposes is total square footage from inside wall to wall measurements. (2) Inspection fee adjustments for Tenant Improvements (Tls): • TI with all systems (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and structural): 100% base cost fee + 100% incremental cost fee • TI without plumbing / mechanical: 70% base cost fee + 70% incremental cost fee • TI without electrical: 85% base cost fee + 85% incremental cost fee • TI only adding/moving walls: 70% base cost fee + 70% incremental cost fee (3) To calculate Construction Type IA and IB base cost and cost for each additional 100 SF: Multiply value for Construction Type IIA- IIB-IIIA-IIIB-IV by 1.20 and Construction Type VA -VB by 1.50. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Permits IMECHANICAL PERMIT FEES Stand Alone Mechanical Plan Check (hourly rate) $ 102.00 Percentage of FEE TYPES FEE service cost UNIT FEES: recovered through fee IMECHANICAL PERMIT FEES Stand Alone Mechanical Plan Check (hourly rate) $ 102.00 100.00% UNIT FEES: A/C, Residential (each) Plan Check $ 72.00 100.00% A/C, Residential (each) Inspection $ 121.00 100.00% Furnace, less than 100,000 Btu, residential, including wall heaters, gas inserts, etc. Inspecton $ 89.00 65.00% Furnace, more than 100,000 Btu, residential, including wall heaters, gas inserts, etc. $ 128.00 70.00% Furnace, non -res, less than 100,000 Btu $ 137.00 100.00% Furnace, non -res, more than 100,000 Btu $ 152.00 100.00% Refrigeration Compressor $ 151.00 100.00% Boiler $ 261.00 100.00% Chiller $ 253.00 100.00% Heat Pump (Package Unit) $ 106.00 100.00% Air Handler $ 106.00 100.00% Duct Work (only) $ 106.00 100.00% Make-up Air System $ 152.00 100.00% Moisture Exhaust Duct, non-residential (Clothes Dryer) $ 90.00 100.00% Vent Fan, Single Duct (each) $ 99.00 100.00% Exhaust Hood and Duct (Residential) $ 120.00 100.00% Exhaust Hood, Type I (Commercial Grease Hood) $ 330.00 100.00% Exhaust Hood, Type II (Commercial Steam Hood) $ 237.00 100.00% Refrigerator Condenser Remote $ 175.00 100.00% Walk-in Box/Refrigerator Coil $ 167.00 100.00% Install/Relocate suspended heater, recessed wall heater, or floor -mounted unit heater (each) $ 106.00 100.00% Install/Relocate/Replace appliance vent installed and not included in an appliance permit (each) $ 114.00 100.00% Repair/Alter/Add heating appliance, refrigeration unit, cooling unit, absorption unit, or each heating, cooling, absorption, or evaporative cooling system, including installation of controls (each) Plan Check $ 111.00 100.00% Repair/Alter/Add heating appliance, refrigeration unit, cooling unit, absorption unit, or each heating, cooling, absorption, or evaporative cooling system, including installation of controls (each) Inspection $ 121.00 100.00% Install/Relocate boiler or compressor, up to and including 3HP, or absorption system up to and including 100,000 Btu/h (each) $ 129.00 100.00% Install/Relocate boiler or compressor, over 3HP and up to and including 15 HP, or absorption system over 100,000 Btu/h and up to and including 500,000 Btu/h (each) $ 179.00 100.00% Install/Relocate boiler or compressor, over 15 HP and up to and including 30 HP, or absorption system over 500,000 Btu/h and up to and including 1,000,000 Btu/h (each) Install/Relocate boiler or compressor, over 30 HP and up to and including 50 HP, or absorption system over 1,000,000 Btu/h and up to and including 1,750,000 Btu/h (each) $ 313.00 100.00% $ 341.00 100.00% Install/Relocate boiler or compressor, over 50 HP, or absorption system over 1,750,000 Btu/h (each) $ 494.00 100.00% Air -handling unit, including attached ducts. (Note: this fee shall not apply to an air -handling unit that is a portion of a factory -assembled appliance, cooling unit, evaporative cooler, or absorption unit for which a permit is required elsewhere) (each) $ 135.00 100.00% Air -handling unit over 10,000 CFM (each) $ 120.00 100.00% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Permits FEE TYPES FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Evaporative cooler other than portable type (each) $ 90.00 100.00% Ventilation fan connected to a single duct (each) $ 90.00 100.00% Ventilation system that is not a portion of any heating or air-conditioning system authorized by a permit (each) $ 99.00 100.00% Hood installation that is served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such hood (each) $ 106.00 100.00% Appliance or piece of equipment not classed in other appliance categories, or for which no other fee is listed (each) $ 166.00 100.00% 83.00 100.00% Gas System OTHER FEES: First Outlet $ 107.00 Other Mechanical Inspections (per hour) $ 102.00 100.00% 10.00 100.00% Building Sewer (PLUMBING/GAS PERMIT FEES Stand Alone Plumbing Plan Check (hourly rate) $ 102.00 100.00% UNIT FEES: Fixtures (each) $ 83.00 100.00% Gas System First Outlet $ 107.00 100.00% Each Additional Outlet $ 10.00 100.00% Building Sewer $ 106.00 100.00% Grease Trap (Inside Building, Each) $ 142.00 100.00% Backflow Preventer First 5 $ 84.00 100.00% Each after the First 5 $ 16.00 100.00% Roof Drain -Rainwater System $ 99.00 100.00% Shower Valves including associated plumbing $ 121.00 100.00% Water Heater $ 90.00 85.00% Water Pipe Repair/Replacement, residential $ 106.00 100.00% Water Pipe Repair/Replacement, non-residential $ 166.00 100.00% Water Service Supply Line, residential $ 106.00 100.00% Water Service Supply Line, non-residential $ 166.00 100.00% Drain -Vent Repair/Alterations, residential $ 99.00 100.00% Drain -Vent Repair/Alterations, non-residential $ 152.00 100.00% Drinking Fountain $ 99.00 100.00% Solar Water System Fixtures (solar panels, tanks, water treatment equipment) residential $ 373.00 100.00% Solar Water Heating, swimming pool, residential $ 350.00 100.00% Solar Water Heating, swimming pool, non-residential $ 385.00 100.00% Graywater Systems $ 354.00 100.00% Medical Gas System (Each Outlet) $ 155.00 100.00% Plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap, including water, drainage piping, and backflow protection (each) $ 99.00 100.00% Industrial waste pretreatment interceptor, including its trap and vent, excepting kitchen -type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps (each) $ 210.00 100.00% Install/Alter/Repair water piping and/or water treating equipment (each) $ 83.00 100.00% Repair/Alter drainage or vent piping (each fixture) $ 75.00 100.00% Lawn sprinkler system on any one meter, including backflow protection devices therefore (each) $ 106.00 100.00% Backflow devices not included in other fee services, e.g., building/trailer park sewer (each) $ 111.00 100.00% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Permits FEE TYPES FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Atmospheric -type vacuum breakers not included in other fee services, e.g., building/trailer park sewer (1-5 units) $ 106.00 100.00% Atmospheric -type vacuum breakers not included in other fee services, e.g., building/trailer park sewer (each unit over 5 units) $ 106.00 100.00% Canon Manor Sewer Lateral $ 557.00 100.00% Residential Sewer Lateral $ 235.00 100.00% Single -Family Dwelling (SFD) Residential Service, up to and including 400 amps $ OTHER FEES: 100.00% Single -Family Dwelling (SFD) Residential Service, greater than 400 amps $ 229.00 100.00% Other Plumbing and Gas Inspections (per hour) $ 102.00 100.00% Non -Residential (Multi -Family Dwelling (MFD) / Commercial / Industrial) service up to 200 amps $ ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES Stand Alone Electrical Plan Check (hourly rate) $ 102.00 100.00% SYSTEM FEES: Single -Family Dwelling (SFD) Residential Service, up to and including 400 amps $ 144.00 100.00% Single -Family Dwelling (SFD) Residential Service, greater than 400 amps $ 229.00 100.00% Non -Residential (Multi -Family Dwelling (MFD) / Commercial / Industrial) service up to 200 amps $ 84.00 100.00% Non -Residential (Multi -Family Dwelling (MFD) / Commercial / Industrial) service 225-400 amps $ 93.00 100.00% Non -Residential (Multi -Family Dwelling (MFD) / Commercial / Industrial) service 425-600 amps Non -Residential (Multi -Family Dwelling (MFD) / Commercial / Industrial) service 625-800 amps $ $ 118.00 152.00 100.00% 100.00% Non -Residential (Multi -Family Dwelling (MFD) / Commercial / Industrial) service over 800 amps $ 212.00 100.00% Subpanels Residential & multi -family dwelling subpanel <_ 100amps $ 86.27 93.00% Residential & multi -family dwelling subpanel > 100amps $ 113.23 96.00% Non-residential subpanel <_ 100amps $ 86.27 96.00% Non-residential subpanel > 100amps $ 113.23 96.00% Non -Residential Circuits 15 or 20 amp, first 10 circuits (each) $ 99.00 100.00% 15 or 20 amp, next 90 circuits (each) $ 129.00 100.00% 15 or 20 amp, over 100 circuits (each) $ 183.00 100.00% 30 or 40 amp circuits (each) $ 125.00 100.00% 50 to 175 amp circuits (each) $ 169.00 100.00% 200 amp and larger circuits (each) Plan Check $ 176.00 100.00% 200 amp and larger circuits (each) Inspection $ 145.00 100.00% Temporary Service (each) $ 200.00 100.00% Temporary Pole (each) $ 148.00 100.00% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Permits FEE TYPES FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Outdoor Events Carnivals, circuses, or other traveling shows or exhibitions utilizing transportable -type rides, booths, displays, and attractions $ 301.00 100.00% Electric generator and electrically -driven rides (each) $ 194.00 100.00% Mechanically -driven rides and walk-through attractions or displays having electric lighting (each) $ 194.00 100.00% System of area and booth lighting (each) $ 110.00 100.00% Temporary Power Service Temporary distribution system and temporary lighting and receptacle outlets for constructions sites, decorative light, Christmas tree sales lots, firework stands, etc. $ 261.00 100.00% Pre -Inspection (per hour) $ 243.00 100.00% Generator Installation (per kW) $ 114.00 100.00% UNIT FEES: Receptacle, Switch, Lighting Outlets, and Lighting Fixtures - RESIDENTIAL $0.06/SF 100.00% (Includes receptacles, switch, lighting, or other outlets at which current is used or controlled, except services, feeders, and meters; lighting fixtures, sockets or other lamp -holding devices) Residential Appliances Fixed residential appliances or receptacle outlets for same, including wall -mounted electric ovens; counter mounted cooking tops; electric ranges; self-contained room console or through -wall air conditioners; space heaters; food waste grinders; dishwashers; washing machines; water heaters; clothes dryers; or other motor - operated appliances (each) not exceeding one horsepower (HP) in rating (each) $ 90.00 100.00% (For other types of air conditioners and other motor -driven appliances having larger electrical ratings, see Power Apparatus) Nonresidential Appliances Nonresidential appliances and self-contained factory -wired, nonresidential appliances, including medical and dental devices; food, beverage, and ice cream cabinets; illuminated show cases; drinking fountains; vending machines; laundry machines; or other similar types of equipment (each) $ 152.00 100.00% Nonresidential appliances and self-contained factory -wired, nonresidential appliances not exceeding one horsepower (HP), kilowatt (kW), or kilovolt -ampere (kVA) in rating, including medical and dental devices; food, beverage, and ice cream cabinets; illuminated showcases; drinking fountains; vending machines; laundry machines; or other similar types of equipment (each) $ 152.00 100.00% (For other types of air conditioners and other motor -driven appliances having larger electrical ratings, see Power Apparatus) Power Apparatus Motors, generators, transformers, rectifiers, synchronous converters, capacitors, industrial heating, air conditioners and heat pumps, cooking or baking equipment, and other apparatus. Rating in horsepower (HP), kilowatts (kW), or kilovolt -amperes (kVA), or kilovolt -amperes -reactive (WAR) Up to and including 1 (each) Over 1 and not over 10 (each) $ 125.00 100.00% $ 143.00 100.00% Over 10 and not over 50 (each) $ 214.00 100.00% Over 50 and not over 100 (each) $ 242.00 100.00% Over 100 (each) $ 265.00 100.00% (For equipment or appliances having more than one motor, transformer, heater, etc., the sum of the combined ratings may be used. These fees include all switches, circuit breakers, contactors, thermostats, relays, and other directly related control equipment.) Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Permits FEE TYPES FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Bus ways Trolley and plug -in -type bus ways - each 100 feet or fraction thereof $ 156.00 100.00% (An additional fee will be required for lighting fixtures, motors, and other appliances that are connected to trolley and plug -in -type bus ways. No fee is required for portable tools.) Signs, Outline Lighting, and Marquees Signs, Outline Lighting, or Marquees $ 106.00 100.00% New electric branch circuit only for existing and future signs, outline lighting, and marquees and additional branch circuits within the same sign, outline lighting system, or marquee (each) $ 90.00 100.00% Miscellaneous Apparatus, Conduits, Bus ways, and Conductors Electrical apparatus, conduits, and conductors for which a permit is required, but for which no fee is herein set forth: Plan Check Electrical apparatus, conduits, and conductors for which a permit is required, but for which no fee is herein set forth: Inspection $ 94.00 100.00% $ 97.00 100.00% (This fee is not applicable when a fee is paid for one or more services, outlets, fixtures, appliances, power apparatus, bus ways, signs, or other equipment) OTHER FEES: Other Electrical Inspections (per hour) $ 102.00 100.00% OTHER INSPECTIONS AND FEES Inspections outside of normal business hours, 0-2 hours (minimum charge) Minimum charge - 2 hours, includes administrative and professional staff time $ 276.00 100.00% Each additional hour or portion thereof $ 174.00 100.00% Reinspections Minimum charge (See Reinspection Fee in MISCELLANEOUS FEES table) Each additional hour or portion thereof $ 174.00 100.00% Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated, per hour (See Supplemental Inspection Fee in MISCELLANEOUS FEES table) Additional Plan Review required by changes, additions, or revisions to approved plans, per hour (See Supplemental Plan Check Fee in MISCELLANEOUS FEES table) Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Miscellaneous Permits FEE TYPES Unit Note FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Antenna—Telecom Facility Cellular/Mobile Phone, free-standing new structure each $1,775 100% Cellular/Mobile Phone, attached to existing structure each each addt'I antenna $967 $205 100% 100% Each addt'I co -located antenna Application Meeting First Hour Each additional 1/2 hour Arbor/Trellis (R -3s only over 120ft, non R-3), Awning/Canopy (supported by building) R-3 Balcony addition (R-3) Balcony addition (R-3) over 200 SF Business License Inspections Carport (R-3) - Plan Check hourly rate $102 100% hourly rate $51 100% 50% 100% each $151 up to 200 SF each additional 50 SF or portion thereof $565 $135 100% each $77 100% each $231 100% Carport (R-3) - Inspection each $448 100% Change of Occupancy (over the counter) each $45 100% Change of Occupancy Chimney (factory -built, masonry), Chimney Repair Covered Porch (R3), Deck (wood) >30" above grade Covered Porch (R3), over 200 SF Demolition Commercial - Inspection Residential - Inspection Disabled Access Compliance Inspection minimum fee, actual costs thereafter (1) $141 100% each up to 200 SF each additional 100 SF or portion thereof $436 100% $151 50% $80 50% each $256 100% each $256 100% hourly rate $102 100% Door New door (non structural) each $154 100% New door (structural shear wall/masonry) each $724 100% Duplicate/Replacement Job Card each $148 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Miscellaneous Permits FEE TYPES Unit Note FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Exterior Renovation, Non -Residential Fence Masonry any height Non -masonry, over 6 feet in height; Non -masonry, over 6 feet in height; masonry any height, over 100 LF Final Inspection Permit (non-residential only) to reactivate an expired permit Fireplace per 100 SF or portion thereof $64 100% up to 100 LF $340 100% up to 100 LF $238 100% Each additional 100 LF or portion thereof $205 100% each (2) $334 100% each $219 100% New Pre-Fabricated/Metal Fireplace - Plan Check New Pre-Fabricated/Metal Fireplace - Inspection each $327 100% Fireplace Repairs / Demolition Plan Check each each $202 $189 50% 50% Inspection Flag pole (over 20 feet in height) Fire Repairs Residential, more than 30% damaged - Use Residential Addition Fee Residential, less than 30% damaged - Plan Check each $494 100% each each $436 $576 100% 100% Residential, less than 30% damaged - Inspection Commercial, use New Construction Tenant Improvement Foundation Only Residential W/O New Construction Permit each $922 100% W/ New Construction Permit each $417 100% Foundation Repair, R3 each $775 100% Foundation Repair, non -R3 each $929 100% Garage (detached) Wood frame up to 1,000 SF each $1,249 100% Wood frame over 1,000 SF and less than 2000 SF SF $237 100% Garage Conversion, Residential each $367 100% Generator each each $641 100% Insulation (batt, blown -in, injection) $129 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Miscellaneous Permits FEE TYPES Unit Note FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Master Plan - Revisions Deferred Submittal Processing_ Fee Minor (no change in structure or square footage) Major (USE RESIDENTIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION - MASTER PLAN) Master Plan - Duplicate Set Processing Fee Oven (Commercial) Partition—Commercial, Interior (up to 30 LF) (3) $374 $238 $187 100% each (3) (4) each (3) (4) 100% (3) each (3) (4) 100% each $755 100% up to 30 LF $520 100% Partition over 30 LF - Plan Check Partition over 30 LF - Inspection Partition—Residential, Interior (up to 30 LF) each additional 30 LF or portion thereof each additional 30 LF or portion thereof $148 100% $141 100% up to 30 LF $276 100% Partition over 30 LF Patio Cover (wood frame, metal frame, other) each additional 30 LF or portion thereof up to 300 SF each additional 300 SF or portion thereof up to 300 sf each additional 300 SF or portion thereof each additional 300 SF or portion thereof $174 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% $456 Patio, over 300 SF Enclosed (wood frame, metal frame, other) Enclosed patio over 300 SF - Plan Check Enclosed patio over 300 SF - Inspection Photovoltaic System - Residential Rooftop $321 $961 $276 $64 1 - 15 kilowatts - Plan Check each $154 100% 1 - 15 kilowatts - Inspection each $160 100% 16 - 31 kilowatts - Plan Check each $253 100% 16 - 31 kilowatts - Inspection each $262 100% 32 - 50 kilowatts - Plan Check each $321 100% 32 - 50 kilowatts - Inspection each $442 100% (For systems larger than 50 kW, use "Photovoltaic System - Commercial" fees below.) each Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Miscellaneous Permits FEE TYPES Unit Note FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Photovoltaic System - Commercial 1 - 15 kilowatts - Plan Check each $154 100% 1 - 15 kilowatts - Inspection each $160 100% 16 - 50 kilowatts - Plan Check each $321 100% 16 - 50 kilowatts - Inspection each $442 100% 51 - 70 kilowatts - Plan Check each $494 51 - 70 kilowatts - Inspection each $513 71 - 100 kilowatts- Plan Check each $544 100% 71 - 100 kilowatts- Inspection each $666 100% 101 - 130 kilowatts - Plan Check each $666 101 - 130 kilowatts - Inspection each $691 130 - 200 kilowatts - Plan Check each $768 100% 130 - 200 kilowatts - Inspection each $845 100% 201 - 250 kilowatts - Plan Check each $1,009 201 - 250 kilowatts - Inspection each $1,048 251 - 500 kilowatts - Plan Check each $1,180 251 - 500 kilowatts - Inspection each $1,225 501 kilowatts -1 megawatt- Plan Check each $1,793 501 kilowatts -1 megawatt- Inspection each $1,862 Plot Plan - Revision Product Review each (5) $141 100% minimum fee, actual costs thereafter (1) $121 100% Remodel—Residential Remodel up to 300 SF - Plan Check up to 300 SF $301 100% Remodel up to 300 SF - Inspection up to 300 SF $319 100% Remodel, over 300 SF - Plan Check Remodel, over 300 SF - Inspection Kitchen - Plan Check Kitchen - Inspection Bath - Plan Check each additional 100 SF or portion thereof each additional 100 SF or portion thereof each $70 100% $96 100% $276 100% each $364 100% each $180 100% Bath - Inspection each $243 100% Reinspection Fee / Final Inspection Fee (SFD) minimum fee, actual costs thereafter (1),(3) $141 100% Repairs Repairs, non-residential, non-structural - Plan Check each each $360 89% Repairs, non-residential, non-structural - Inspection $378 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Miscellaneous Permits FEE TYPES Unit Note FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Repairs, residential - Plan Check each $360 89% Repairs, residential - Inspection each $378 100% Re -roof Single Family Dwelling (SFD) Residential only (w/ new roof sheathing) - Inspection Single Family Dwelling (SFD) Residential only (w/o new roof sheathing) - Inspection each each each 5,000 SF or portion thereof each 5,000 SF or portion thereof each 5,000 SF or portion thereof $315 100% $219 100% Multi -Family Dwelling (Apartments/Condominiums) - Inspection Commercial - Plan Check Commercial - Inspection Revisions to approved plans Commercial New Tenant Improvement $454 100% $58 100% $415 100% Minimum fee (4) $121 100% Minimum fee (4) $121 100% Single Family Dwelling Minimum fee (4) $121 100% Addition Minimum fee (4) $121 100% Remodel Minimum fee (4) $121 100% Roof Structure Replacement - Plan Check up to 500 SF $219 100% Roof Structure Replacement - Inspection up to 500 SF each additional 100 SF or portion thereof $339 $45 100% 100% Roof structure replacement, over 500 SF Sauna—steam SCEIP projects for which permits not typically issued (use Minimum Processing Fee) Siding each $743 100% Stone and Brick Veneer (interior or exterior), up to 800 sf up to 800 SF $474 100% Other Siding up to 800 SF - Plan Check (for commercial only_)_ up to 800 SF $186 100% Other Siding up to 800 SF - Inspection up to 800 SF $237 100% Additional siding each additional 800 SF or portion thereof $174 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Miscellaneous Permits FEE TYPES Unit Note FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Signs, new (5 100 SF area) Roof / Projecting Signs Monument Pole (under 10') (6) each (6) $315 100% each (6) $289 100% each (6) $315 100% Wall/Awning Sign, Non -Electric each (6) $270 100% Wall, Electric each (6) $295 100% Other Sign - Plan Check each (6) $219 100% Other Sign - Inspection each (6) $135 100% Signs, new (>100 SF area) (6) Roof / Projecting Signs each (6) $513 100% Monument each (6) $360 100% Pole (over 10') each (6) $462 100% Wall/Awning Sign, Non -Electric each (6) $340 100% Wall, Electric each (6) $417 100% Other Sign - Plan Check each (6) $282 100% Other Sign - Inspection each (6) $301 100% Site Accessibility per hour $102 100% Skylight Less than 10 SF each $219 100% Greater than 10 SF or structural each $481 100% Solar Panels (Thermal), residential or equal each $347 100% Storage Racks Storage racks over 8' high, up to 100 LF Storage racks over 8' high, over 100 LF Structural Repairs (Non -Residential) - Plan Check first 100 LF $692 100% each additional 100 LF or portion thereof Each $244 100% $532 100% Structural Repairs (Non -Residential) - Inspection Each $952 100% Structural Repairs (Residential) - Plan Check Each $417 100% Structural Repairs (Residential) - Inspection Each $454 100% Stucco Applications up to 400 SF $468 100% Stucco Application, over 400 SF each additional 400 SF or portion thereof $288 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT A BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Plan Check and Inspection Fees Miscellaneous Permits FEE TYPES Unit Note FEE Percentage of service cost recovered through fee Supplemental Plan Check Fee (after 3rd review) First hour each (1) $141 100% Each Additional 1/2 hour or portion thereof per 1/2 hour or portion thereof (1) $70 100% Supplemental Inspection Fee First 1/2 hour each (1) $70 100% Each Additional 1/2 hour or portion thereof per 1/2 hour or portion thereof (1) $70 100% Swimming Pool/Spa Vinyl -lined (up to 800 so each $652 100% Fiberglass each $652 100% Gunite (up to 800 sf) each $652 100% Additional pool (over 800 sf or portion thereof) each $385 100% Commercial pool (up to 800 sf) each $1,125 100% Commercial pool (over 800 sf or portion thereof) each $1,303 100% Spa or Hot Tub (Pre -fabricated) Temporary Occupancy Approval Trash Enclosure Window or Sliding Glass Door New Window (change in opening size/location, non-structural) New window (structural shear wall/masonry) - Plan Check each minimum fee, actual costs thereafter each each each (4) $704 100% $38 100% $641 100% $115 50% $268 100% New window (structural shear wall/masonry) - Inspection each $166 100% Bay Window (structural) - Plan Check each $268 100% Bay Window (structural) - Inspection each $435 100% Minimum Processing Fee (Administrative - No Permit) each 1 (7) 1 $39 1 100% Notes: 1. Minimum fee includes professional and minimum adminstrative staff time for service 2. Inspection fee for reactivation of residential permits is included in "Reinspection Fee." 3. Refer to Master Plan Policy 4. Processing fee only. Staff time and materials cost, or actual consultant fee + City administrative fee may be in addition to processing fee. 5. Refer to Plot Plan and Production Phase Policy 6. "New" signs means the replacement of an existing sign with a new one, or installation of a new sign with an existing electrical source. 7. Use for SCEIP projects & other "non -permit' projects for intake and processing costs. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 ATTACHMENT B City of Rohnert Park — Development Services PLANNING SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 1 % Cost Recovery with Current Fee Actual cost of time & materials charged 1 Annexation against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% by staff. Residents: $289 plus the actual cost of 2,5 25% publishing / noticing 2 Appeals to City Council Non-residents: Actual cost of time & materials charged against an Initial 1, 2, 3 100% Deposit of $1,160 Residents: $401 plus the actual cost of 2,5 25% publishing/ noticing 3 Appeals to Planning Commission Non- residents: Actual cost of time & materials charged against an Initial 1, 2, 3 100% Deposit of $1,600 $90 - one address ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 _..... -----..........-----...... 50%_ .... .......... .................... .......... ................... $134 - 2 to 5 addresses 4 50% 4 Assignment of Address ....... ............ ............ ............................................................... ............ ............ ............................................................... ............ ..... _.......................... _...... ............................................ $224 - 6 to 20 addresses 4 50% $357 - 21 or more addresses 4 50% 5 Assignment of Temporary Power $67 4 50% Pole Address 6 Business License Research $87 4 100% 7 Certificate of Zoning Compliance $534 4 100% 8 Condition Modification/Waiver - $291 4 50% Administrative 9 Condition Modification/Waiver - Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 o 100/o Planning Commission against an Initial Deposit of $1,030. Development Agreement, Actual cost of time & materials charged 10 Processing & Amendment against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% by staff. 11 Development Area Plan Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% against an Initial Deposit of $9,240. $291 plus the actual cost of any outside 12 Filing & Notice of Categorical agency fees (such as County Filing Fee, 2,6 50% Exemption State Clearinghouse Fee and Office of Planning & Research) Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 1 ATTACHMENT B City of Rohnert Park — Development Services PLANNING SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 2 Actual cost of time & materials charged Environmental Impact Report against an Initial Deposit as determined 13 Review by staff. Applicant is also responsible for 1, 2, 3 ° 100% any other agency fees (e.g. State Fish & Game fees, etc.) Actual cost of time & materials charged 14 Final Development Plan against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% by staff. Actual cost of time & materials charged 15 Final Specific Plan against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% by staff. 16 General Plan Amendment Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% against an Initial Deposit of $5,140. 17 Home Occupation Permit $87 4 100% 18 Pre -Application Conference $255 4 50% 19 Pre -Application Conference - $1,017 4 100% Concept Plan Review Pre -Application Conference - 20 Single -Family Dwelling, Owner- $180 4 100% Occupied 21 Initial Study/Negative Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% Declaration against an Initial Deposit of $2,050. 22 Letter of Public $447 4 100% Necessity/Convenience $423 plus the actual cost of any outside 23 Notice of Determination agency fees (such as County Filing Fee, 2,6 50% State Clearinghouse Fee and Office of Planning & Research) Specific Plan/Planned Actual cost of time & materials charged 24 Development: Amendment/Revision of Related against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% Items - Standard by staff. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 2 ATTACHMENT B City of Rohnert Park — Development Services PLANNING SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES 25 Sign Review (Single Sign) $101 7 50% New - $534 7 50% SignProgram Review - ................................................................................................................................................................................................. ---- 26 New/Revised Revised - $357 7 50% Actual cost of time & materials charged 27 Preliminary Development Plan against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% by staff. 28 Rezoning Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% against an Initial Deposit of $6,620 Within existing footprint — Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% Site Plan & Architectural Review against an Initial Deposit of $1,520 29 Building Remodel (Commercial Expansion of footprint — & Industrial) Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% against an Initial Deposit as determined by staff. Site Plan & Architectural Actual cost of time & materials charged 30 Review: Building Remodel (>_ 2 against an Initial Deposit of $1,240 1, 2, 3 100% Residential Units) Site Plan & Architectural Review: Actual cost of time & materials charged 31 New Structure (Commercial & against an Initial Deposit of $1,230 1, 2, 3 100% Industrial) Site Plan & Architectural Review: Actual cost of time & materials charged 32 New Structure/Change-In-Use (>_ against an Initial Deposit of $1,230 1, 2, 3 ° 100/° 2 Residential Units) Actual cost of time & materials charged 33 Specific Plan - Preliminary Plan against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% by staff. Actual cost of time & materials charged 34 Specific Plan Amendment against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% by staff. Actual cost of time & materials charged 35 Specific Plan Preparation against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% by staff. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 3 ATTACHMENT B City of Rohnert Park — Development Services PLANNING SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES 36 Subdivision: Extension to Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 ° 100/° Approved Minor against an Initial Deposit of $715 37 Subdivision: Revision to Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% Approved Minor against an Initial Deposit of $1,230. Subdivision: Actual cost of time & materials charged 38 Extension /Revision to Approved against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% - Major by staff. Actual cost of time & materials charged 39 Tentative Map - Major (>_ 5 Lots) against an Initial Deposit as determined 1, 2, 3 100% by staff. 40 Tentative Map - Minor (<_ 4 Lots) Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% against an Initial Deposit of $4,110 41 Use Permit (Commercial/Industrial/ Mixed- Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% Use) against an Initial Deposit of $1,030 42 Use Permit - Residential >_ 2 Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 ° 100/° Units against an Initial Deposit of $1,030 43 Variance Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% against an Initial Deposit of $2,570 44 Zoning Confirmation Letter $87 4 100% 45 Zoning Ordinance Text Change Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% against an Initial Deposit of $5,140 Minor - $134 4 50% 46 Temporary Use Permit Major - Actual cost of time & materials charged against an Initial Deposit of 1, 2, 3 100% $1,030 47 Time Extension To Approved - Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% Minor against an Initial Deposit of $180 48 Time Extension To Approved - Actual cost of time & materials charged 1, 2, 3 100% Major against an Initial Deposit of $714 49 Administrative Permit $668 4 100% 50 Violation Correction $534 4 100% Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 4 ATTACHMENT B City of Rohnert Park — Development Services PLANNING SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Planning Fee Schedule Table Notes 1. Cost -recovery charges include all costs to provide services or process applications/projects. Costs that may be recovered include but are not limited to: City staff time at fully -burdened hourly rates, including those of City departments other than Development Services (e.g. Fire Services, Public Works, etc.); consultant costs; legal costs; administrative costs generated by application/project; public noticing and advertisement costs; and other public agency fees. 2. An Acknowledgement of Reimbursement Obligation for Payment of Full Cost Recovery Fees for Application Processing and Inspection Services form ("Reimbursement Obligation Form") or Reimbursement Agreement must be executed in conjunction with applications for these services and/or permits. 3. The method by which the City recovers its costs from the applicant or financially -responsible party is determined by the cost -recovery obligation form or agreement used. Typically, cost recovery is either: (a) a draw -down from a deposit, or (b) billing in arrears for costs incurred by the City to provide services. The cost recovery method and terms are stipulated in the Reimbursement Obligation Form, Reimbursement Agreement, or specific terms of a development agreement or other negotiated instrument approved by City. 4. Applicant will be charged a flat fee as indicated for the service, unless the service and/or entitlement is part of a more complex project with multiple/concurrent applications and entitlements in which costs for processing are recovered pursuant to an executed Reimbursement Obligation Form, Reimbursement Agreement, or specific terms of a development agreement or other negotiated instrument approved by City. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 5 % Cost Recovery with Current Fee 51 Planning review of building Actual cost of time and materials to be 1, 2, 3 100% permits collected at building permit issuance. 52 Tree Permit Clearance $206 4 100% (Exemption) 53 Approval for Tree Removal Actual cost of time and materials to be 1, 2, 3 o 100/o (Tree Removal Permit) billed against an initial deposit of $526 54 Lot Line Adjustments / Lot Actual cost of time and materials to be 1, 2, 3 o 100/o Mergers / Reversion to Acreage billed against an initial deposit of $863 Planning Fee Schedule Table Notes 1. Cost -recovery charges include all costs to provide services or process applications/projects. Costs that may be recovered include but are not limited to: City staff time at fully -burdened hourly rates, including those of City departments other than Development Services (e.g. Fire Services, Public Works, etc.); consultant costs; legal costs; administrative costs generated by application/project; public noticing and advertisement costs; and other public agency fees. 2. An Acknowledgement of Reimbursement Obligation for Payment of Full Cost Recovery Fees for Application Processing and Inspection Services form ("Reimbursement Obligation Form") or Reimbursement Agreement must be executed in conjunction with applications for these services and/or permits. 3. The method by which the City recovers its costs from the applicant or financially -responsible party is determined by the cost -recovery obligation form or agreement used. Typically, cost recovery is either: (a) a draw -down from a deposit, or (b) billing in arrears for costs incurred by the City to provide services. The cost recovery method and terms are stipulated in the Reimbursement Obligation Form, Reimbursement Agreement, or specific terms of a development agreement or other negotiated instrument approved by City. 4. Applicant will be charged a flat fee as indicated for the service, unless the service and/or entitlement is part of a more complex project with multiple/concurrent applications and entitlements in which costs for processing are recovered pursuant to an executed Reimbursement Obligation Form, Reimbursement Agreement, or specific terms of a development agreement or other negotiated instrument approved by City. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 5 ATTACHMENT B City of Rohnert Park — Development Services PLANNING SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES 5. Applicant or financially -responsible party will be charged a flat fee as indicated for the service, as well as additional costs for public noticing, mailing, and postage if incurred. Public noticing, mailing, and postage may be billed in arrears to the applicant or financially -responsible party. 6. Applicant or financially -responsible party will be charged a flat fee as indicated for the service, as well as outside agency fees (e.g. County Filing Fee, State Clearinghouse Fee and Office of Planning & Research, etc.). Outside agency fees may be billed in arrears to the applicant or financially -responsible party. 7. Applicant or financially -responsible party will be charged a flat fee as indicated for the service, as well as flat fee for engineering review if needed. Additional Notes about Fees and Charges Actual costs The actual cost of City staff time is the fully -burdened hourly rate of the staff providing service, which may include but is not limited to Development Services, Public Safety, Public Works, Administration (which includes City Attorney, City Manager's Office) providing review specifically for the project. Charges will be for increments of 0.25 hour. Consultant charges may apply In some cases, additional costs may be incurred by the City due to the necessity of using a consultant to assist Development Services with the review and processing of applications/projects. In such cases, the costs of the consultant's services will be passed through to the applicant, with an Administrative Fee in the amount of 7% of the consultant invoice cost, unless a different rate is stipulated for those services by a Reimbursement Agreement or Development Agreement. Concurrent / multiple applications When two or more applications are filed and processed concurrently, the required initial deposit will be the sum of the individual application fees and/or deposits. Annual Adjustment of Flat Fees Flat fees are adjusted annually based on the Consumer Price Index published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for All Urban Consumers, All Items, in the San Francisco -Oakland -San Jose Area, measured in the month of December in the calendar year that ends in the previous Fiscal Year. Annual Adjustment of Fully -Burdened Hourly Rate Fully -burdened hourly rates are adjusted annually based on the Consumer Price Index published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for All Urban Consumers, All Items, in the San Francisco -Oakland - Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 6 ATTACHMENT B City of Rohnert Park — Development Services PLANNING SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES San Jose Area, measured in the month of December in the calendar year that ends in the previous Fiscal Year. Services Not Listed on Planning Schedule of Fees and Charges When planning staff provide requested or necessary review, inspection or staff support services that are not included in this Planning Schedule of Fees and Charges, the Development Services Director may assess and collect such fees that are reasonably necessary to defray the cost of such services. Staff time shall be charged on a fully -burdened hourly rate basis or the actual cost of outside consultant, plus 7% administrative fee, or administrative fee rate as stipulated by applicable Reimbursement Agreement or Development Agreement. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 7 ATTACHMENT C City of Rohnert Park — Development Services ENGINEERING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 1 Engineering Services Fees/ Charges Initial Deposit Notes % Cost Recovery with current fee 1 Grading/Site Improvement Full cost -recovery $3,390 (plan check 1, 2, 100% Plan Check and Inspection charges apply. initial deposit), 1.5% of 3,4 Engineer's Estimated Cost of improvement (inspection initial deposit) 2 Public Improvement Plan Full cost -recovery $3,290 (plan check 1, 2, 100% Check and Inspection charges apply. initial deposit), 1.5% of 3,4 Engineer's Estimated Cost of improvement (inspection initial deposit) 3 Subdivision Plan Check and Full cost -recovery $2,460 (plan check 1, 2, 100% Inspection charges apply. initial deposit), 1.5% of 3,4 Engineer's Estimated Cost of improvement (inspection initial deposit) 4 Final Parcel Map Review Full cost -recovery $2,000 1, 2, 3 100% charges apply. 5 Final Subdivision Map Full cost -recovery $3,900 1, 2, 3 100% Review charges apply. 6 Final Map $575 per map N/A 5 100% Amendment/Revision Review (Minor) 7 Final Map Full cost -recovery $1,130 1, 2, 3 100% Amendment/Revision charges apply. Review (Major) 8 Time Extension $103 per application n/a 5 100% 9 Lot Line Adjustment Review Full cost -recovery $863 1, 2, 3 100% charges apply. 10 Street Vacation / Full cost -recovery $1,284 1, 2, 3 100% Abandonment Request charges apply. 11 Minor Encroachment $298 n/a 5 100% Permit/Inspection Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 1 ATTACHMENT C City of Rohnert Park — Development Services ENGINEERING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Engineering Fee Schedule Table Notes 1. Cost -recovery charges include all costs to provide services or process applications/projects. Costs that may be recovered include but are not limited to: City staff time at fully -burdened hourly rates, including those of City departments other than Development Services (e.g. Fire Services, Public Works, etc.), consultant costs, legal costs, administrative costs generated by application/project, public noticing and advertisement costs, and other public agency fees. 2. An Acknowledgement of Reimbursement Obligation for Payment of Full Cost Recovery Fees for Application Processing and Inspection Services form ("Reimbursement Obligation Form") or Reimbursement Agreement must be executed in conjunction with applications for these services and/or permits. 3. The method by which the City recovers its costs from the applicant or financially -responsible party is determined by the cost -recovery obligation form or agreement used. Typically, cost recovery is either: (a) a draw -down from a deposit, or (b) billing in arrears for costs incurred by the City to provide services. The cost recovery method and terms are stipulated in the Reimbursement Obligation Form, Reimbursement Agreement, or specific terms of a development agreement or other negotiated instrument approved by City. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 2 Engineering Services Fees/ Charges Initial Deposit Notes % Cost Recovery with current fee 12 Major Encroachment $1,232 n/a 5 100% Permit/Inspection 13 Major Encroachment Full cost -recovery $2,054 1, 2, 3 100% Permit/Inspection requiring charges apply. time and materials with initial deposit 14 Plumbing Permit issued by $298 n/a 5 100% Engineering / Inspection 15 Transportation Permit $16 for single trip n/a 6 N/A (Fee is set permit; $90 for annual by State) permit 16 Sign Review $113 per plan n/a 5,7 100% Engineering Fee Schedule Table Notes 1. Cost -recovery charges include all costs to provide services or process applications/projects. Costs that may be recovered include but are not limited to: City staff time at fully -burdened hourly rates, including those of City departments other than Development Services (e.g. Fire Services, Public Works, etc.), consultant costs, legal costs, administrative costs generated by application/project, public noticing and advertisement costs, and other public agency fees. 2. An Acknowledgement of Reimbursement Obligation for Payment of Full Cost Recovery Fees for Application Processing and Inspection Services form ("Reimbursement Obligation Form") or Reimbursement Agreement must be executed in conjunction with applications for these services and/or permits. 3. The method by which the City recovers its costs from the applicant or financially -responsible party is determined by the cost -recovery obligation form or agreement used. Typically, cost recovery is either: (a) a draw -down from a deposit, or (b) billing in arrears for costs incurred by the City to provide services. The cost recovery method and terms are stipulated in the Reimbursement Obligation Form, Reimbursement Agreement, or specific terms of a development agreement or other negotiated instrument approved by City. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 2 ATTACHMENT C City of Rohnert Park — Development Services ENGINEERING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES 4. Initial deposit due for these services will be determined by the City, based on the Engineer's Cost Estimate of improvement as provided by the applicant. The applicant -provided Engineer's Cost Estimate is subject to review and approval by the City. The initial deposit amount due may be adjusted by the City, based on recalculations of the Engineer's Cost Estimate approved by the City Engineer. 5. Applicant will be charged a flat fee as indicated for the service and/or permit, unless the service and/or permit is part of a more complex project with multiple/concurrent permits or entitlements in which costs for processing are recovered pursuant to an executed Reimbursement Obligation Form, Reimbursement Agreement, or specific terms of a development agreement or other negotiated instrument approved by City. 6. Transportation permit fees are determined by the State of California. 7. Added as additional flat fee to planning flat fee for this service. Additional Notes about Fees and Charges Actual costs The actual cost of City staff time is the fully -burdened hourly rate of the staff providing service, which may include but is not limited to Development Services, Public Safety, Public Works, and Administration providing review specifically for the project. Charges will be in increments of 0.25 hour. Consultant charges may apply In some cases, additional costs may be incurred by the City due to the necessity of using a consultant to assist Development Services with the review and processing of applications/projects. In such cases, the costs of the consultant's services will be passed through to the applicant, with an Administrative Fee in the amount of 7% of the consultant invoice cost, unless a different rate is stipulated for those services by a Reimbursement Agreement or Development Agreement. Concurrent / multiple applications When two or more applications are filed and processed concurrently, the required initial deposit will be the sum of the individual application fees and/or deposits. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 3 ATTACHMENT C City of Rohnert Park — Development Services ENGINEERING FEE SCHEDULE and COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGES Investigative fee for work started without a permit If work on an engineering project is found to have commenced without a permit, an investigation fee will be charged equal to the amount of permit fee that would apply to that project. If the project is full cost -recovery (i.e. not a flat fee project), the investigation fee will be the cost of time - and -materials required for inspection and administrative support to process the project, prior to the project coming into compliance. This investigation fee is in addition to the permit fees that will be required to bring the project into compliance. Annual Adjustment of Flat Fees Flat fees are automatically adjusted annually on July 1st, based on the Consumer Price Index published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for All Urban Consumers, All Items, in the San Francisco -Oakland -San Jose Area, measured in the month of December in the calendar year that ends in the previous fiscal year. Annual Adjustment of Fully -Burdened Hourly Rate Fully -burdened hourly rates are automatically adjusted annually on July 1st, based on the Consumer Price Index published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for All Urban Consumers, All Items, in the San Francisco -Oakland -San Jose Area, measured in the month of December in the calendar year that ends in the previous fiscal year. Services Not Listed on Engineering Schedule of Fees and Charges When engineering staff provide requested or necessary review, inspection or staff support services that are not included in this Engineering Schedule of Fees and Charges, the Development Services Director may assess and collect such fees that are reasonably necessary to defray the cost of such services. Staff time shall be charged on a fully -burdened hourly rate basis or the actual cost of outside consultant, plus 7% administrative fee, or administrative fee rate as stipulated by applicable Reimbursement Agreement or Development Agreement. Updated per Rohnert Park City Council Reso. No. 2015-094 Effective July 1, 2015 Page 4 �L,JJN r pAR,V .� Mission Statement � sz "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." �AtlF6 AK''P CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: June 28, 2016 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Mary Grace Pawson, Development Services Director/City Engineer Prepared By: Mary Grace Pawson, Development Services Director/City Engineer Agenda Title: Consideration of the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan ITEM NO. 9 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct a Public Hearing on the City's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan and Approve a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park Adopting the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan and Authorizing its Filing with the California Department of Water Resources BACKGROUND: The Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act) is codified in California Water Code Sections 10610 through 10656 and requires each urban water supplier with 3,000 or more connections, or which supplies at least 3,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) of water, to submit an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) every five years. The City has approximately 9,000 connections and meets the definition of an "urban water supplier". The UWMPs are foundational documents that outline an agency's long-term strategy for meeting anticipated water demands. The UWMPs are used to support Water Supply Assessments (WSAs) and Water Supply Verifications (WSVs) for new development. The UWMPs are exempt from review under CEQA. In 2009, the Water Conservation Act of 2009 added a requirement that every water supplier develop and adopt a "per capita" baseline water use and per capita water use targets for 2015 and 2020 with its 2010 UWMP. The purpose of the water use targets is to ensure that public water suppliers' reduce per capita water use by 20% by 2020, over the baseline. Water suppliers are required to report on their progress towards meeting their targets in the 2015 UWMP. The City prepared UWMPs in 2005 and 2010. Prior to that, it adopted regional UWMPs developed by the Sonoma County Water Agency. As part of adopting its 2010 UWMP the City adopted a 2015 individual water use target of 140 gallons per capita per day (gpcpd) and a 2020 individual water use target of 119 gpcpd. The City also elected to participate in the Sonoma Marin Water Saving Partnership's "regional alliance" which adopted a 2015 target of 142 gpcpd and a 2020 target of 129 gpcpd. Because it participates in the regional alliance, the City will need to meet its individual targets only if the region is unsuccessful. The proposed 2015 UWMP is an update of the 2010 document and is required to be submitted to the state in July, 2016. ANALYSIS: The 2015 UWMP arrives at the same primary conclusion as the City's 2004 WSA, 2005 UWMP and 2010 UWMP: the City has sufficient water supply to meet its planned ITEM NO. 9 demands, including the demands associated with new development, for at least the next 20 years. Highlights of the 2015 UWMP are presented below. Water Demands and Water Use T As part of the 2015 UWMP, the City reviewed and updated its water demands and its performance with respect to the adopted water use targets. The review included an update to the population figures used in the 2010 UWMP to ensure conformance with reported census data. The review highlighted that the City's population between 2005 and 2015 was less than projected in the 2010 UWMP and required re -calculation of the water use targets. The 2015 UWMP sets the following individual and regional targets. The City's actual computed water use for 2015 was slightly under 91 gpcpd which meets both the 2015 and 2020 targets. The Regional Alliance also met its targets. The 2015 performance does not reflect normal conditions — it includes the effects of the emergency drought regulations which were in place for most of 2014 and 2015. However, the City's water use is so far below even the 2020 target that no actions, beyond the City's non -emergency conservation program, are recommended. The City's long-term demand profile was established using Association of Bay Area Government projections that include buildout of the City's General Plan, including the newly adopted Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area. Potable water demand is expected to increase from approximately 5,000 acre feet per year (AFY) to 6,129 AFY by 2040. Total demands, including recycled water, are expected to grow from 6,057 AFY to 7,479 AFY by 2040. Water Supply The City utilizes Sonoma County Water (Agency) supply, local groundwater and recycled water in a "conjunctive" use strategy to meet demands. Agency water and recycled water are used first to meet demands. The City employs its groundwater resources as necessary to meet demands and respond to drought and emergency conditions. The City's total supply portfolio is estimate to be 10,299 AFY including: 1,350 AFY of recycled water; 2,577 AFY of groundwater and 6,372 AFY of Agency supply. The City's recycled water supply is supported by a contract with the Santa Rosa Subregional System. The City's groundwater supply is supported by its Water Policy Resolution and technical studies of the groundwater basin which have concluded that this volume of groundwater pumpage is sustainable. The volume of Agency supply included in the City's calculation is a discount from the City's contractual supply of 7,500 AFY. This discount reflects the fact that the City's contract with the Agency presumes that the Agency will increases its own water rights from 75,000 AFY to 101,000 AFY. The Agency has not accomplished this increase so the City is discounting its reliable supply. The UWMP includes an analysis of the City's supply under a range of hydrologic conditions. The single most severe condition is the Single Dry Water Year, when the Agency's analysis indicates and an additional 10% reduction in supply could be required. 2 Individual Target Regional Alliance Target 2015 143 gpcpd 143 gpcpd 2020 123 gpcpd 129 gpcpd The City's actual computed water use for 2015 was slightly under 91 gpcpd which meets both the 2015 and 2020 targets. The Regional Alliance also met its targets. The 2015 performance does not reflect normal conditions — it includes the effects of the emergency drought regulations which were in place for most of 2014 and 2015. However, the City's water use is so far below even the 2020 target that no actions, beyond the City's non -emergency conservation program, are recommended. The City's long-term demand profile was established using Association of Bay Area Government projections that include buildout of the City's General Plan, including the newly adopted Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area. Potable water demand is expected to increase from approximately 5,000 acre feet per year (AFY) to 6,129 AFY by 2040. Total demands, including recycled water, are expected to grow from 6,057 AFY to 7,479 AFY by 2040. Water Supply The City utilizes Sonoma County Water (Agency) supply, local groundwater and recycled water in a "conjunctive" use strategy to meet demands. Agency water and recycled water are used first to meet demands. The City employs its groundwater resources as necessary to meet demands and respond to drought and emergency conditions. The City's total supply portfolio is estimate to be 10,299 AFY including: 1,350 AFY of recycled water; 2,577 AFY of groundwater and 6,372 AFY of Agency supply. The City's recycled water supply is supported by a contract with the Santa Rosa Subregional System. The City's groundwater supply is supported by its Water Policy Resolution and technical studies of the groundwater basin which have concluded that this volume of groundwater pumpage is sustainable. The volume of Agency supply included in the City's calculation is a discount from the City's contractual supply of 7,500 AFY. This discount reflects the fact that the City's contract with the Agency presumes that the Agency will increases its own water rights from 75,000 AFY to 101,000 AFY. The Agency has not accomplished this increase so the City is discounting its reliable supply. The UWMP includes an analysis of the City's supply under a range of hydrologic conditions. The single most severe condition is the Single Dry Water Year, when the Agency's analysis indicates and an additional 10% reduction in supply could be required. 2 ITEM NO. 9 Supply and Demand Balance The 2015 UWMP concludes that the City has adequate supply to meet demand, even under dry year conditions. A summary of the City's estimated supply and demand balance under single dry year conditions is presented below. Water Use Contingency Plan Within its UWMP, the City must report on its Water Use Contingency Plan. Historically the City has relied upon the provisions included in Section 13.66 of its Municipal Code. However during the recent round of emergency state regulations, this plan did not provide the City with flexibility in responding to changing state requirements and the City needed to adopt several interim emergency ordinances (which have since expired). In order to provide a more flexible response, staff is proposing that the City Council consider a stand-alone Water Use Contingency Plan that could be implemented by Resolution, when and if required. This proposed stand-alone plan is included as Appendix 7 to the 2015 UWMP. The proposed Water Use Contingency Plan demonstrates that the City's supply is highly reliable. The City can tolerate up to a 30% reduction in supply without requiring demand reductions. To meet a supply reduction of 50%, the City would need to see demands reduced by 25%. However, because requirements for demand reductions can occur as a result of regulatory actions that do not take into account local supplies, staff has worked to develop a plan and "stages of action" that are appropriate for regulatory emergencies as well as actual water supply shortages. The proposed plan is summarized below. Stage 1 Voluntaa (10% Demand Reductions) - prohibits • The application of potable water to outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes runoff such that water flows onto adjacent property, non -irrigated areas, private and public walkways, roadways, parking lots, or structures; • The use of a hose that dispenses potable water to wash a motor vehicle, except where the hose is fitted with a shut-off nozzle or device attached to it that causes it to cease dispensing water immediately when not in use; • The application of potable water to driveways and sidewalks; • The use of potable water in a fountain or other decorative water feature, except where the water is part of a recirculating system; 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Supply Agency 5,735 5,735 5,735 5,735 5,735 Groundwater 2,577 2,577 2,577 2,577 2,577 Recycled Water 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 Total 9,662 9,662 9,662 9,662 9,662 Demand 6,755 6,929 7,068 7,261 7,479 Surplus (Deficit) 2,907 2,733 2,594 2,401 2,182 Water Use Contingency Plan Within its UWMP, the City must report on its Water Use Contingency Plan. Historically the City has relied upon the provisions included in Section 13.66 of its Municipal Code. However during the recent round of emergency state regulations, this plan did not provide the City with flexibility in responding to changing state requirements and the City needed to adopt several interim emergency ordinances (which have since expired). In order to provide a more flexible response, staff is proposing that the City Council consider a stand-alone Water Use Contingency Plan that could be implemented by Resolution, when and if required. This proposed stand-alone plan is included as Appendix 7 to the 2015 UWMP. The proposed Water Use Contingency Plan demonstrates that the City's supply is highly reliable. The City can tolerate up to a 30% reduction in supply without requiring demand reductions. To meet a supply reduction of 50%, the City would need to see demands reduced by 25%. However, because requirements for demand reductions can occur as a result of regulatory actions that do not take into account local supplies, staff has worked to develop a plan and "stages of action" that are appropriate for regulatory emergencies as well as actual water supply shortages. The proposed plan is summarized below. Stage 1 Voluntaa (10% Demand Reductions) - prohibits • The application of potable water to outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes runoff such that water flows onto adjacent property, non -irrigated areas, private and public walkways, roadways, parking lots, or structures; • The use of a hose that dispenses potable water to wash a motor vehicle, except where the hose is fitted with a shut-off nozzle or device attached to it that causes it to cease dispensing water immediately when not in use; • The application of potable water to driveways and sidewalks; • The use of potable water in a fountain or other decorative water feature, except where the water is part of a recirculating system; ITEM NO. 9 • The application of potable water to outdoor landscapes during and within 48 hours after measurable rainfall; • The serving of drinking water other than upon request in eating or drinking establishments; This stage will also require: • Compliance with the California Building Standards Commission and the Department of Housing and Community Development requirements for irrigation systems serving new homes; • The operators of hotels and motels to provide guests with the option of choosing not to have towels and linens laundered daily. Stage 1 Mandatory (up to 20% demand reductions) - would implement all actions established in previous stage plus: • Irrigation limited to the hours of 8:00 pm to 6:00 am • Nonpotable water used for construction purposes wherever feasible. Stage 2 Mandatory (up to 25% demand reductions) — would implement all actions established in previous stage plus: • Filling new swimming pools is prohibited • Filling or topping -off of existing swimming pools is prohibited • No water -using landscape installation in new construction Stage 3 Mandatory (more than 25% demand reduction) — would implement all actions established in previous stage plus: • New construction must offset new demand by conserving the equivalent of half the demand within the community If Council is supportive of this approach, staff will bring the conforming code modifications to Council in July. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: Adoption of the 2015 UWMP is consistent with Goal C - Ensure the effective delivery of public services and Goal D: Continue to develop a vibrant community. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: None. Adopting a 2015 Urban Water Management is a requirement of state law. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: Adopting the 2015 UWMP has no direct fiscal impacts. Failure to adopt the UWMP could jeopardize the City's ability to access state loan and grant funds. Implementation of the ongoing water conservation program described in the UWMP is included the City's budget for its Water Enterprise Fund. 2 ITEM NO. 9 Department Head Approval Date: 06/05/2016 Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: 06/10/2016 City Manager Approval Date: 06/13/2016 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): Resolution of the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park Adopting the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan and Authorizing its Filing with the California Department of Water Resources 2 Draft City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-72 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ADOPTING THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 2015 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN AND AUTHORIZING ITS FILING WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES WHEREAS, the Urban Water Management Planning Act (the Act, California Water Code Section 10610 et. seq.) requires that every urban water supplier that supplies water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers prepare an Urban Water Management Plan (Plan) every five years, the primary objectives of which are to plan for the efficient management and use of the water supply; WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park (City) is an urban water supplier within the meaning of the Act; and WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park staff and its consultants, in consultation with the Sonoma County Water Agency and other local water agencies, have prepared the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan to meet the requirements of the Act, as supplemented by the Water Conservation Act of 2009 (2009 Act), in accordance with the guidelines published by the California Department of Water Resources; and WHEREAS, the preparers of the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan have the training, experience and expertise necessary to prepare a Plan meeting the requirements of the Act and the 2009 Act; and WHEREAS, the 2009 Act requires that the State of California reduce daily per capita water use by twenty percent by the year 2020, and that urban water suppliers report on the progress they have made towards the community water use targets established with the suppliers' 2010 Urban Water Manager Management Plans; and WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan documents that both the City of Rohnert Park and its Regional Alliance have exceeded both the 2015 interim water use target and the 2020 water use target, which were adopted in 2010; and WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan has been available for public review since June 15, 2016 in compliance with the requirements of the Act; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on June 28, 2016, in compliance with the Act and the 2009 Act to receive oral and written comments upon the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, including compliance with the community water use targets, having published notice on June 15, June 17 and June 24, 2016; and 2016-72 WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, City staff reports and presentations and the oral and written comments received; and WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan was prepared in accordance with and meets the requirements of the Act and the 2009 Act, and the facts, assumptions and analyses in the City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan are reasonable and supported by substantial evidence; and WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15282(v), the preparation and adoption of an Urban Water Management Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 10652 of the Water Code is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby find, determine and declare as follows: All of the above recitals are true and correct and material to the adoption of this Resolution. 2. The City Council hereby elects to continue to use the method described in Water Code Section 10608.20(b)(1), (eighty percent of baseline use) in calculating its individual water use target for 2020. 3. The City elects to continue to use the regional water use target established by the region for determining compliance with the 2009 Act. 4. The City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, is adopted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to make the appropriate filings with the California Department of Water Resources in accordance with the requirements of the Act and to take all actions reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Resolution. 2016-72 DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 28th day of June, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk Attachment: City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT: ( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) 3 2016-72 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan 2015 Draft June 2016 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 1 CONTENTS June 2016 1. Introduction & Overview......................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background and Purpose..........................................................................................................1 1.2 Urban Water Management Planning and the California Water Code......................................1 1.3 Urban Water Management Plans in Relation to Other Planning Efforts .................................. 2 1.3.1 Relationship to the City's General Plan..................................................................................... 2 1.3.2 Relationship to the North Coast Integrated Regional Water Management Plan ..................... 2 1.3.3 Relationship to the Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Management Plan .................................... 2 1.3.4 Relationship to the Groundwater Sustainability Act of 2014 .................................................... 2 1.4 UWMP Organization..................................................................................................................3 2 Plan Preparation ...................................................................................................................................4 2.1 Basis for Preparing a Plan..........................................................................................................4 2.2 Regional Planning......................................................................................................................4 2.3 Individual or Regional Planning and Compliance......................................................................5 2.4 Fiscal or Calendar Year and Unit of Measure............................................................................5 2.5 Coordination and Outreach.......................................................................................................6 3 System Description............................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 General Description...................................................................................................................7 3.1.1 Political Characteristics and Governance..................................................................................9 3.2 Service Area.............................................................................................................................10 3.3 Service Area Climate................................................................................................................13 3.3.1 Climate Change........................................................................................................................13 3.4 Service Area Population and Demographics...........................................................................14 4 System Water Use..............................................................................................................................16 4.1 Recycled versus Potable and Raw Water Demand.................................................................16 4.2 Water Uses by Sector..............................................................................................................16 4.3 Distribution System Water Losses...........................................................................................18 4.4 Estimating Future Water Savings............................................................................................19 4.5 Water Use for Lower Income Households..............................................................................19 5 Baselines and Targets.........................................................................................................................21 5.1 Updating Calculations from the 2010 UWMP.........................................................................21 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 June 2016 5.2 Baseline Periods......................................................................................................................21 5.3 Service Area Population..........................................................................................................21 5.4 Gross Water Use......................................................................................................................21 5.5 2015 and 2020 Targets............................................................................................................22 5.6 2015 Compliance Daily Per Capita Water Use........................................................................23 5.7 Regional Alliance.....................................................................................................................23 6 System Supplies.................................................................................................................................. 24 6.1 Sonoma County Water Agency Supply (Purchased Water)....................................................24 6.1.1 Agency's Water Rights.............................................................................................................24 6.1.2 The Restructured Agreement for Water Supply..................................................................... 25 6.1.3 Drought Considerations..........................................................................................................25 6.2 Groundwater...........................................................................................................................25 6.2.1 Basin Description.....................................................................................................................26 6.2.2 Groundwater Quality...............................................................................................................27 6.2.3 Adjudicated Basins..................................................................................................................27 6.2.4 Sufficiency of Groundwater.....................................................................................................27 6.2.5 Groundwater Management....................................................................................................28 6.2.6 Limitations to Groundwater Pumping and Overdraft Conditions...........................................28 6.2.7 Historical Groundwater Pumping (2010-2015).......................................................................28 6.3 Surface Water..........................................................................................................................29 6.4 Stormwater..............................................................................................................................29 6.5 Wastewater and Recycled Water............................................................................................29 6.5.1 Recycled Water Coordination.................................................................................................29 6.5.2 Wastewater Collection, Treatment, and Disposal................................................................... 30 6.5.3 Recycled Water System...........................................................................................................31 6.5.4 Recycled Water Beneficial Uses.............................................................................................. 32 6.5.5 Actions to Encourage and Optimize Future Recycled Water Use...........................................33 6.6 Desalinated Water Opportunities...........................................................................................34 6.7 Exchanges or Transfers............................................................................................................34 6.8 Future Water Projects.............................................................................................................34 6.9 Summary of Existing and Planned Sources of Water..............................................................35 6.10 Climate Change Impacts to Supply..........................................................................................36 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 7 Water System Reliability.....................................................................................................................37 7.1 Constraints on Water Sources.................................................................................................37 7.1.1 Water Quality Constraints.......................................................................................................37 7.2 Constraints on the Agency Supply...........................................................................................37 7.2.1 Hydrologic Constraints............................................................................................................37 7.2.2 Legal & Environmental Constraints.........................................................................................39 7.3 Constraints on Groundwater Supply.......................................................................................39 7.4 Recycled Water Supply............................................................................................................40 7.5 Supply and Demand Assessment............................................................................................41 8 Water Shortage Contingency Plan......................................................................................................43 8.1 Stages of Action.......................................................................................................................43 8.2 Prohibition on End Uses..........................................................................................................44 8.3 Penalties, Charges, Other Enforcement of Prohibitions.........................................................45 8.4 Consumption Reduction Methods..........................................................................................45 8.5 Determining Water Shortage Reductions...............................................................................45 8.6 Revenue and Expenditure Impacts..........................................................................................46 8.7 Resolution or Ordinance..........................................................................................................46 8.8 Catastrophic Supply Interruption............................................................................................46 8.9 Minimum Supply Next Three Years.........................................................................................47 9 Demand Management Measures.......................................................................................................48 10 Plan Adoption Submittal and Implementation...................................................................................49 11 References.......................................................................................................................................... 51 List of Tables Table1-1 Plan Organization..........................................................................................................................3 Table 2-1 Public Water System Information.................................................................................................4 Table2-2 Plan Identification......................................................................................................................... 5 Table 2-3 Agency Identification....................................................................................................................6 Table 2-4 Water Supplier Information Exchange..........................................................................................6 Table 3-1 Summary of Planned Development..............................................................................................8 Table3-2 Climate Data................................................................................................................................13 Table 3-3 Population Projections from the 2010 UWMP...........................................................................14 Table 3-4 Population PROJECTIONS - Current and Projected.....................................................................15 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 Table 4-1- Retail Demands for Potable and Raw Water — Actual...............................................................17 Table 4-2 Demands for Potable and Raw Water — Projected.....................................................................18 Table 4-3 Total Water Demands.................................................................................................................18 Table 4-4 12 Month Audit Loss Reporting..................................................................................................19 Table 4-5 Inclusion in Water Use Projection...............................................................................................19 Table 5-1 Baselines and Targets Summary.................................................................................................22 Table5-2 2015 Compliance.........................................................................................................................23 Table 6-1 Groundwater Volume Pumped...................................................................................................29 Table 6-2 Wastewater Collected within the Service Area in 2015.............................................................30 Table 6-3 Wastewater Treatment and Discharge within the Service Area 2015 ........................................31 Table 6-4 Current and Projected Recycled Water Direct Beneficial Uses Within Service Area..................32 Table 6-5 2010 UWMP Recycled Water Use Projections Compared to 2015 Actual.................................33 Table 6-6 Methods to Expand Recycled Water Use.................................................................................... 33 Table 6-7 Expected Future Water Supply Projects or Programs.................................................................34 Table6-8 Water Supplied- Actual...............................................................................................................35 Table 6-9 Water Supplies- Projected..........................................................................................................36 Table 7-1 (Agency) Basis of Water Year Data............................................................................................. 38 Table 7-2 Normal Year Water Supply and Demand Comparison................................................................41 Table 7-3 Sngle Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison.......................................................................41 Table 7-4 Multiple Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison...................................................................42 Table 8-1 Stages of Water Shortage Contingency Plan..............................................................................43 Table 8-2 Restrictions and Prohibitions on End Uses.................................................................................44 Table 8-3 Stages of Water Shortage Contingency Plan — Consumption Reduction Methods ....................45 Table 8-4 Minimum Supply Next Three Years............................................................................................47 Table 10-1 Notification to Cities and Counties...........................................................................................49 List of Figures Figure 3-1 Water Service Area Map......... Figure 3-2 Potable Water System Map.... Figure 3-3 Recycled Water System Map.. Appendices iv ...............................................................................................10 ...............................................................................................11 ...............................................................................................12 1. Climate Vulnerability Assessment 2. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Demand Analysis and Conservation Measures Update 3. AWWA Water Audit Model Output 4. City SB X7-7 Compliance Tables 5. Regional Alliance SB X7-7 Compliance Tables City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 6. Water Policy Resolution 7. Water Shortage Contingency Plan S. California Urban Water Conservation Council Reports 9. Public Notices, Adoption Resolution 10. DWR Checklist v June 2016 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 1. INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW June 2016 The City of Rohnert Park (City) is located in central Sonoma County, approximately 50 miles north of San Francisco. The City provides water service to approximately 9,000 service connections in the North Coast Hydrologic Region and meets the definition of an "urban water supplier" as outlined in California Water Code Section 10610 et. seq.. The City receives its wholesale potable water from the Sonoma County Water Agency (Agency), its wholesale recycled water from the Santa Rosa Subregional System (Subregional System) and also uses groundwater from the Santa Rosa Plain Sub -basin of the Santa Rosa Valley Groundwater Basin as part of its potable supply. This 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) was prepared by the City in order to comply with the requirements of the California Water Code. In addition to meeting the requirements of state law, the City will use this UWMP to support the preparation of Water Supply Assessments and Water Supply Verifications for new development. 1.1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The purpose of the UWMP is to demonstrate that a water supplier can meet the water demands of its water customers over a 25 -year planning horizon and under a range of hydrologic conditions. This UWMP analyzes current and projected water supply and demand for normal, single -dry and multiple -dry water year conditions. This UWMP also provides an update on the City's progress towards meeting the water use targets it adopted in 2010 as required by the Water Conservation Act of 2009. Specifically this UWMP describes, reports, and evaluates the City's: Water deliveries and uses; Water supply sources; Water use efficiency practices; Demand Management Measures; and Water Shortage Contingency Plan. The evaluations and projections in this document are based on the City's current water supply contracts with the Agency and the Subregional System and planned water supply projects. This document is a "living" document and will be updated every five years or as changes to the City's water supply and demand pattern require. 1.2 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND THE CALIFORNIA WATER CODE The Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act) is codified in California Water Code Sections 10610 through 10656 and requires each urban water supplier with 3,000 or more connections, or which supplies at least 3,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) of water, to submit a UWMP to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) every five years. The City has approximately 9,000 connections and meets the definition of an "urban water supplier". The Act specifies the required content of each UWMP and allows for the level of detail provided in each UWMP to reflect the size and complexity of the water supplier. The Act requires projections in five-year increments for a minimum of 20 years. This UWMP considers a 25 -year planning horizon through year 2040. The Act does not require that a UMWP contain the level of system -specific detail that would be included in a water system master plan. The Act specifically exempts UWMPs from review under the California 1 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)1. Additionally, Water Supply Assessments (Water Code Section 10631) and Water Supply Verifications (Water Code Section 66473.7) may rely on the UWMP as a foundational document for findings required in these documents. In this 2015 UWMP, the City is also revisiting and reporting on its progress towards achieving the water supply targets it adopted in 2010 in accordance with the Water Conservation Act (SB X7-7). At this point the City's actual 2015 per capital water use is lower than its adopted targets for both 2015 and 2020. The regional alliance, in which the City participates, is also reporting actual 2015 per capita water use that is lower than the regional alliance's adopted targets. More detail on the water conservation targets is provided Chapter 5. 1.3 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS IN RELATION TO OTHER PLANNING EFFORTS 1.3.1 RELATIONSHIP TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN The City is currently working under its General Plan 2020, originally adopted in July 2000 and updated as recently as March 2016 to approve the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area. This UWMP considers all land uses described in the General Plan for areas within the City's corporate limits and its adopted Sphere of Influence. The City anticipates significant new growth in its defined Specific Plan Areas and Priority and Planned Development Areas. This growth had been stalled as a result of economic conditions. 1.3.2 RELATIONSHIP TO THE NORTH COAST INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN The City is signatory to the Memorandum of Mutual Understanding that governs the North Coast Resource Partnership (Resource Partnership). The Resource Partnership prepares and updates the North Coast Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP). While a strong focus of the North Coast IRWMP is the recovery of salmonid species, through the IRWMP, the City has secured grant funding for water conservation and for the planning and design of a multi-purpose detention and groundwater recharge basin on Copeland Creek, just east of the City limits. 1.3.3 RELATIONSHIP TO THE SANTA ROSA PLAIN GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN In October 2014, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors adopted the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed Groundwater Management Plan (Groundwater Management Plan). This voluntary groundwater management plan was developed in accordance with the requirements of Water Code 10750 et. seq. (the Groundwater Management Act) and includes a series of implementation strategies to better monitor, model and manage groundwater in the Santa Rosa Plain. The City funds and participates in the Santa Rosa Plain Basin Advisory Panel, which is implementing the Groundwater Management Plan. While the Groundwater Management Plan concludes that there is a possibility that future groundwater demands could exceed the budget for the basin, recent monitoring efforts demonstrate generally stable or rising groundwater levels throughout the basin. 1.3.4 RELATIONSHIP TO THE GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY ACT OF 2014 As a result of the requirements of the Groundwater Sustainability Act of 2014, the City is working with County of Sonoma, the Sonoma County Water Agency and other cities and districts that are eligible to form 1 Water Code Section 10652 2 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 June 2016 a Groundwater Sustainability Agency to develop a single Groundwater Sustainability Agency for the Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Basin. This work will be completed by June 2017 and builds on the solid foundation of the adopted Groundwater Management Plan. 1.4 UWMP ORGANIZATION The outline of this UWMP generally follows the 2015 Urban Water Management Plans Guidebook for Urban Water Suppliers. This document is organized into the 10 chapters outlined on Table 1-1. The table also includes a description of the key elements in the sections. TABLE 1-1 PLAN ORGANIZATION Table 1-1: Plan Organization Alah Chapter Title Key Elements Water Code Requirements forthe Plan and Description 1 Introduction &Overview of Regional Water Management Efforts Basis for Preparing the Plan, Regional Planning and 2 Plan Preparation Compliance, CalendarYearand Acre -Foot Basis, Coordination and Outreach General Description, Boundaries, Maps, Climate and 3 System Description Demographics Potable and Recycled Water Demands, Water Use by 4 System Water Use Sector, Losses, Estimated Future Savings, Lower Income Households, Climate Change Updated Calculations, Baselines, Targets, Compliance, 5 SBx7-7 Baseline and Targets Regional Alliance Imported Water, Groundwater, Recycled Water, Future 6 System Supplies Water Projects, Summary of Supplies, Climate Change Impact to Supply Constraints, Reliability by Type of Year, Supply and 7 Water Supply Reliability Assessment Demand Assessment, Regional Reliability Stages, Prohibitions, Enforcement, Consumption 8 Water Shortage Contingency Planning Reduction Methods, Determining Reductions, Revenue and Expenditure Impacts, Authority, Catastrophic Interruption, Minimum Supply for Next Three Years 9 Demand Management Measures Planned Implementation to Achieve Targets, California Urban Water Conservation Council Reports 10 Plan Adoption, Submittal and Implementation Summary of Adoption Process 3 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 2 PLAN PREPARATION 2.1 BASIS FOR PREPARING A PLAN June 2016 As described in Chapter 1, the City is a municipal water supplier providing service to approximately 9,000 water connections including single and multi -family residences, commercial, industrial and institutional customers and irrigation connections. Under normal hydrologic conditions, the City's potable water deliveries vary between 4,500 and 6,000 acre feet annually (AFA). The City meets the definition of an "urban water supplier" under the California Water Code and prepared Urban Water Management Plans in 2005 and 2010. Prior to that time, the City adopted the regional Urban Water Management Plans prepared by the Agency. Table 2-1 below provides the City's Public Water System information. TABLE 2-1 PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM INFORMATION 2.2 REGIONAL PLANNING The cities of Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Sonoma, Cotati, and Petaluma, the Town of Windsor, North Marin and Valley of the Moon Water Districts, California -American Water Company and the Agency formed the Sonoma -Marin Saving Water Partnership (Partnership) in 2010. The purpose of the Partnership is to establish financial obligations for conservation activities, to identify and recommend implementation of water conservation projects and to maximize implementation of cost-effective projects for the Partnership members. The Partnership coordinates all water use efficiency focused media buys in the region and provides support to members that need additional assistance with implementing local programs and/or meeting conservation targets. The Partnership also serves as a "regional alliance" for the purpose of reporting baseline and targets under the Water Conservation Act of 2009. 4 Table 2-1 Retail Only: Public Public Water System Number Public Water System Name Number of Municipal Connections 2015 Volume of Water Supplied 2015 4910014 City of Rohnert Park 9,060 4,277 TOTAL 9,060 4,277 NOTES: 2.2 REGIONAL PLANNING The cities of Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Sonoma, Cotati, and Petaluma, the Town of Windsor, North Marin and Valley of the Moon Water Districts, California -American Water Company and the Agency formed the Sonoma -Marin Saving Water Partnership (Partnership) in 2010. The purpose of the Partnership is to establish financial obligations for conservation activities, to identify and recommend implementation of water conservation projects and to maximize implementation of cost-effective projects for the Partnership members. The Partnership coordinates all water use efficiency focused media buys in the region and provides support to members that need additional assistance with implementing local programs and/or meeting conservation targets. The Partnership also serves as a "regional alliance" for the purpose of reporting baseline and targets under the Water Conservation Act of 2009. 4 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 June 2016 The Partnership has received notable recognition for effective collaboration and program implementation including: EPA Water Sense Partner of the Year 2015 EPA Water Sense Partner of the Year 2014 EPA Water Sense Excellence Award 2013 2.3 INDIVIDUAL OR REGIONAL PLANNING AND COMPLIANCE While the City participates in regional water planning efforts and is part of regional alliance for reporting under the Water Conservation Act of 2009, the City is preparing an individual UWMP in order to better support its land use goals and the review of development proposals within its sphere of influence. Table 2- 2 summarizes the City's approach to regional planning and compliance. TABLE 2-2 PLAN IDENTIFICATION 2.4 FISCAL OR CALENDAR YEAR AND UNIT OF MEASURE In this 2015 UWMP, the City is reporting water use by calendar year and in acre feet (AF). Table 2-3 summarizes this reporting standard. 5 Plan Identification Table 2-2: Select Only One Type of Plan Name of RUWMP or Regional Alliance if applicable drop down list 0 Individual UWMP ❑ Water Supplier is also a memberof a RUWMP 0 Water Supplier is also a memberof a Regional Alliance North Marin -Sonoma Alliance ❑ Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP) NOTES: 2.4 FISCAL OR CALENDAR YEAR AND UNIT OF MEASURE In this 2015 UWMP, the City is reporting water use by calendar year and in acre feet (AF). Table 2-3 summarizes this reporting standard. 5 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 TABLE 2-3 AGENCY IDENTIFICATION ,•le 2-3: Agency Identification •- • • - • •• ❑ Agency is a wholesaler 0 Agency is a retailer 0 UWMP Tables Are in Calendar Years ❑ UWMP Tables Are in Fiscal Years If Using Fiscal Years Provide Month and Date that the Fiscal Year Begins (mm/dd) Units of Measure Used in UWMP (select from Drop down) Unit AF NOTES: 2.5 COORDINATION AND OUTREACH June 2016 In accordance with California Water Code Section 10631(j), the City has provided water use projections to both its wholesale potable water supplier, the Agency, and its wholesale recycled water supplier, the Subregional System. Table 2-4 summarizes this coordination. TABLE 2-4 WATER SUPPLIER INFORMATION EXCHANGE The City meets at least monthly with its water wholesaler, the Agency, and with other water contractors who purchase water from the Agency. This monthly coordination has been instrumental in coordinating water supply and demand analyses for the preparation of this document. The City and the other water contractors have worked together to prepare a regional water demand and conservation analysis (see Chapter 4) as well as the regional alliance work around water use targets (see Chapter 5). Chapter 10 provides more description of the public notification and outreach efforts that took place during the development and adoption of this 2015 UWMP. 0 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 3 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION The water service area under consideration in this 2015 UWMP is bounded by the City's Sphere of Influence as outlined in its General Plan 2020. The City's General Plan identified six major Specific Plan Areas (SPAs): Northeast SPA Canon Manor SPA University District SPA Wilfred Dowdell SPA Southeast SPA Northwest SPA The City's General Plan anticipated annexation and development of all of the SPAS except Canon Manor. To date the University District, Southeast and Wilfred Dowdell and Northwest SPAS have been approved and annexed. The Northeast SPA currently has no active development proposal. The Canon Manor Specific Plan Area has contracted with the Penngrove Water Company for water supply, so its demands are not considered demands on the City supply. Additionally, the City's Sphere of Influence includes Sonoma State University, which has its own water system and is not served by the City. This UWMP also takes into account three major infill planned development (PD or PDA) projects: the Stadium Lands PD, the Sonoma Mountain Village PD and the Central Rohnert Park PDA. The City has approved Master Plans and Environmental Documents for each of these planned developments. The City does not have outside service area connections. Figure 3-1 (included in Section 3.2) illustrates the City's water service area which is the current City Limit and also illustrates the Specific and Planned Development Areas. Table 3-1 provides a summary of the planned growth within each of the SPAS and PDs. This 2015 UWMP includes build out of these areas and will be used to support Water Supply Assessments (WSAs) and Water Supply Verifications (WSVs) for this planned growth. 7 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 TABLE 3-1 SUMMARY OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT June 2016 Table 3-1: Summary of Development Northeast Northwest Southeast University District Wilfred Dowdell Stadium Area Sonoma Mountain Village Central Rohnert Park Total Acres 215.7 90.0 80.0 297.0 24.8 30.0 175.0 330.0 Residential Units Single Family 890 394 1,277 338 700 835 High Density 200 218 994 Mixed Use 398 81 150 Second Units 198 Total 1,090 398 475 1,645 338 1,892 835 Total Affordable 163 72 218 - 13 248 125 Commercial Sq Ft 458,700 10,000 100,000 302,114 140,000 290,000 429,936 Office Sq Ft 234,000 268,039 Industrial Sq Ft 218,200 129,315 Mixed Use Sq Ft 58,400 Status no active planning annexed 2015 annexed 2011 -107 lots under construction annexed 2007-399 lots under construction annexed 2009 approved 2008- 338 residences completing construction approved 2010 approved 2016 The City's water service area is approximately 6.4 square miles and serves residential, commercial, industrial, institutional and irrigation needs. The City is at elevation 106 feet above mean sea level. The distribution system consists of approximately 115 miles of water distribution system mains and two pressure zones. Most of the distribution system mains are 6- to 8 -inch diameter pipes with a small number in the 10- to 16 -inch diameter range. The City's water system includes seven water storage tanks ranging in size from 300,000 gallons to 1.3 million gallons. The total storage available to the City's system is 4.2 million gallons. Figure 3-2 (included in Section 3.2) illustrates the potable water distribution system The City also delivers tertiary treated recycled water to customers. The recycled water is produced by the Subregional System and delivered through a low-pressure and a high-pressure distribution system operated and maintained by the City. The low-pressure system includes an 18 -inch diameter pipeline that runs along Wilfred Avenue and Golf Course Drive and ends at Foxtail Golf Course near the northern city limits. This low-pressure system delivers approximately 500 acre-feet per year (AFY) to 5 customers. The high-pressure system begins at the Rohnert Park Pump Station, located at the intersection of Stony Point Road and Rohnert Park Expressway. The high-pressure system delivers 500 AFY to 27 customers. Figure 3-3 (included in Section 3.2) illustrates the recycled water system. 0 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 3.1.1 POLITICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND GOVERNANCE The City's retail water systems, including the potable and recycled water system, are governed by a 5 - member City Council which includes a mayor. The water and recycled water systems, including the City's groundwater wells, are managed and operated by the Public Works Department. The Agency system is governed by a Board of Directors, which is composed of the members of the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. The Agency and its Board of Directors are also the lead agency for the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed Groundwater Management Plan. The relationship between the Agency and its water contractors, including the City, is outlined in the Restructured Agreement for Water Supply (Restructured Agreement). The agreement provides for a Water Advisory Committee (WAC) to advise the Agency's Board of Directors on policy issues. The WAC representatives for the City are one Council member and one alternate Council member selected by the Council. The WAC is limited to an advisory role. The Subregional System, which is the City's wholesale supplier of recycled water, is managed and operated by the City of Santa Rosa. The Subregional System treats, recycles and disposes of wastewater generated in by the cities of Santa Rosa, Cotati, Rohnert Park and Sebastopol and the South Park County Sanitation District. The relationship between the City of Santa Rosa and the other Subregional partners is defined by the Agreement between the City of Santa Rosa and the City of Rohnert Park, City of Sebastopol, City of Cotati and South Park County Sanitation District for the Use of Santa Rosa Subregional Sewage System dated April 3, 1975 and subsequently amended on September 1, 1987, October 20, 1987, December 1, 1994, July 1, 2002 and November 19, 2008. The Subregional System governance includes a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to the Subregional System. The City Engineer participates in the TAC. 0 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan - 2015 3.2 SERVICE AREA FIGURE 3-1 WATER SERVICE AREA MAP — Z Specific Plan Casino Lands Stadium Lands Planned Development N W+ + E S 10 June 2016 -- — -- a NF1 inns � Wilfred-Dowdell -7� Specific Plan!'" Golf Course Drr Northeast :.................., -7- - Specific Plan „ 717I -1n RohnPrt University District is - Pprk I: Specific Plan is Central �� �' __ I: Rohnert Park 2110E ., r- i Sonoma State' 1ru4rrsin E CotaV Ave? 101 b Sonoma Mountain ------- Southeast � Village Planned - Specific Plan - Development City of Rohnert Park 2015 UWMP Water Service area Figure 3-1 Date: 611 512 01 6 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 FIGURE 3-2 POTABLE WATER SYSTEM MAP GOLF COURSE BLVD W W-15 o BUSINESS BARK DR:! O 61I51tJ E55 RA RK DR 0 W-41 • o 5 June 2016 N PN r _Pry i T-4 � a W-20• W-31 i --------------- 5 W-0. GOLF COURSE BLVD •_-..-.! !;W-29 -- Zone 1 if W-14 of ,..........,......-.......... T-5 W-27 „= W-30+----------- ------------------ -----f � � r Z PN P PNf W-16 , 6 V�-11 ,..,; - ♦ W-21 y W-2• W-10 + r W-39• r y cin c-vra zone r � ---. Zone 2 • Well '4 Z0N W-22+ W_1 • - ROHNERT PARK EXPWY �. - - - Zones ST -3 12" SCWA line i = T-2 - W-9 s W-2• e W-39• r Legendl' + 1011THWESTDLVD W-13 E. COTATI AVE a `.,;� • Well '4 I, !• .'� �y W-33 0 Tanks "• T-1,�i"�'' "" + �. - - - Zones pN Bio•, 12" SCWA line PRV - pressurePN reducing valve 1N18A E° W-34 0 a--,---..�.--� W86 •W35 171 SCWAturnout _..1 City Limits Streams i; Parcels s Ft a c.N F� City of Rohnert Park 2015 UWMP Figure 3-2 Water System 2,700 1,350 0 2,700 Feet 11 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 FIGURE 3-3 RECYCLED WATER SYSTEM MAP _ i I --- i i GOLF COURSE BLVD W , i' I• BUSINESS PARK June 2016 o N -- I �� 1 I! GOLF COURSE BLVD ! i. O � \ J � s � w Z) o HE®u fiE _ --- CUV CE FR �� b zy i I ROHNERTFAR,, i FX�Wy ENTERPRISE r 1 q I 9y �3 I OUTHWEST BLVD 20 , Legend •: - . % _ `: i._. City limit r ;. 'i, �► Recycled Water Service Area �� w •�i Pipes _ v� Sites r'�_ _ ; City ' t Private City Of Rohnert Park 2015 UWMP :r No I� i . 4 Figure 3-3 Recycled Water System 2.T00 1.350 0 2.70011 12 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan - 2015 3.3 SERVICE AREA CLIMATE June 2016 The City is located in the Russian River watershed. The climate and hydrology of the Russian River watershed directly affect the City because its wholesale supply from the Sonoma County Water Agency is drawn from the Russian River. The climate of the Russian River watershed is tempered by its proximity to the Pacific Ocean and is characterized by seasonal rainfall patterns. Over 90 percent of the total annual precipitation falls between October and April, with a large percentage of the rainfall typically occurring during three or four major winter storms. The regional averages for rainfall, temperature and the rate of evapotranspiration of common turf grass (ETo) are summarized in Table 3-2. TABLE 3-2 CLIMATE DATA Table 3-2: Climate Data Average Average Eto, in Rainfall, in Average Temp, F January 1.2 6.25 47.0 February 1.7 5.32 50.5 March 2.8 4.09 52.8 April 3.71 2.06 55.8 May 5.0 0.97 59.8 June 6.0 0.26 64.6 July 6.1 0.03 66.5 August 5.9 0.08 66.6 September 4.5 0.38 65.9 October 2.9 1.60 61.2 November 1.5 3.64 53.4 December 0.7 5.50 47.6 Totals 42.01 30.181 1 Notes: data from Western Regional Climate Center wrcc@dri.edu for Santa Rosa Station 1902-2010 3.3.1 CLIMATE CHANGE Through its cooperative work with the Agency, particularly the recently adopted Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Management Plan, the City benefits from ongoing work to understand and mitigate the impacts of climate change on the water supply. Specifically the Groundwater Management Plan notes: "The San Francisco Bay Area climates have warmed over the 20th century, as monthly maximum temperatures increased approximately 1 °C between 1900 and 2000 (Flint and Flint, 2012). A long-term variability in precipitation is demonstrated by droughts in the 1920s, the 1970s, and the late 1990s. The USGS conducted a regional study of how climate change affects water resources and habitats in the San Francisco Bay area. The study relied on historical climate data and future climate projections, which were downscaled to fine spatial scales for application to a regional water -balance model (Flint and Flint, 2012). Changes in climate, potential evapotranspiration, recharge, runoff, and climatic water deficit modeled for the San Francisco Bay area included detailed studies in the Russian River Valley. 13 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 Results indicated large spatial variability in climate change and the hydrologic response across the region. Although the model results indicate warming under all projections, the potential precipitation changes by the end of the 21st century differed depending on the model details. Hydrologic models predicted reduced amounts of early and late wet season runoff at the end of the century under both wetter and drier future climate projections, suggesting extended dry seasons. Summers are projected to be longer and drier in the future than in the past regardless of precipitation trends. The greater variations in precipitation could directly affect water supplies and result in reduced reliability. The study also found that water demands are likely to steadily increase because of increased evapotranspiration rates and climatic water deficit during the extended summers. The study concluded that extended dry season conditions and greater potential for drought, combined with increases in precipitation over shorter periods of time, could serve as additional stressors on water quality and habitat. ' The City has completed the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment included as Appendix I to DWR's guidebook. The completed checklist is included as Appendix 1. Of the forty questions posed, the City answered eight affirmatively. The City's reliance on rainfall -based water supplies that are not connected to the Sacramento Bay Delta supply or Colorado River supply gives it some insulation from large scale climate risks to its water supply. One of the largest areas of vulnerability to the region is habitat and ecosystem impacts on the Russian River system which hosts several endangered salmonid species. The Agency has been working actively with resources agencies for over a decade to mitigate the impacts of water supply activities on the ecosystem and is actively implementing a number of habitat improvement projects. 3.4 SERVICE AREA POPULATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS In its 2010 UWMP, the City elected to use population and employment projections based on the 2009 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) data. ABAG published the projections report in 2009, which included population and employment estimates for each city in the Bay Area. Table 3-3 illustrates the population projections used in the 2010 UWMP, which included the anticipated development in the SPAS and PDs described above. TABLE 3-3 POPULATION PROJECTIONS FROM THE 2010 UWMP As part of preparing this 2015 UWMP, the City developed its population and employment projections based on ABAG's 2013 population report which anticipates the development of the Central Rohnert Park PDA. Table 3-4 illustrates these population projections. The 2013 ABAG projections take into account the slow growth experienced during the recession period. The projections indicate that the City will recover from this slow growth trend by approximately 2030. 2 Santa Rosa Plain Watershed Groundwater Management Plan, page 2-5 14 • • 2010 UWMP Population• Population 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Served 43,398 46,440 47,900 49,300 51,000 53,000 NOTES: source is 2009 Association of Bay Area Governments As part of preparing this 2015 UWMP, the City developed its population and employment projections based on ABAG's 2013 population report which anticipates the development of the Central Rohnert Park PDA. Table 3-4 illustrates these population projections. The 2013 ABAG projections take into account the slow growth experienced during the recession period. The projections indicate that the City will recover from this slow growth trend by approximately 2030. 2 Santa Rosa Plain Watershed Groundwater Management Plan, page 2-5 14 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 TABLE 3-4 POPULATION PROJECTIONS - CURRENT AND PROJECTED June 2016 In general the City's development pattern is suburban in nature, with relatively low densities. However, approximately 40 percent of the City's housing stock consists of multi -family units (condominiums and apartments). This land use pattern contributes to the City's relatively low per capita water use. 15 •le 3-4 (DWR 3-1 Retail): Population - Current an• Projected Population Served 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040(opt) 45,465 47,232 49,045 51,060 53,232 55,524 NOTES: source is 2013 Association of Bay Area Governments -Subregional June 2016 In general the City's development pattern is suburban in nature, with relatively low densities. However, approximately 40 percent of the City's housing stock consists of multi -family units (condominiums and apartments). This land use pattern contributes to the City's relatively low per capita water use. 15 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 4 SYSTEM WATER USE June 2016 This section provides an overview of the City's projected water demands, including the demands associated with the Central Rohnert Park PDA. The City has recently completed its 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand and Water Conservation Measures Update (2015 Demand Update), which is included as Appendix 2. The 2015 Demand Update is based on the Association of Bay Area Governments population and job projections and includes the recently adopted Central Rohnert Park PDA. The 2015 Demand Update projects that the City's potable water demands through 2040 will range between 5,600 and 6,100 AFY, depending on the level of water conservation undertaken by the City. The 2015 Demand Update indicates that the City has the potential to secure approximately 500 AFY of water supply (the difference between 5,600 and 6,100 AFY) by undertaking more aggressive water conservation activities. 4.1 RECYCLED VERSUS POTABLE AND RAW WATER DEMAND Chapter 6 provides detail on the City's water supplies which include two potable water sources (Sonoma County Water Agency and local groundwater) and recycled water. The City does not have a raw water supply. The City's tertiary -treated recycled water supply is produced by the Subregional System. The City and the Subregional System have recently entered into a Producer Distributor Agreement that provides the City with access to 1,350 AFY of recycled water. The City uses recycled water primarily for irrigation purposes and recycled water demand has varied between 800 and 1,100 AFY over the past 10 years. Recycled water demand is accounted for separately from irrigation demands served by potable water. Recycled water serves approximately 70% of the irrigation demand served through dedicated irrigation meters. 4.2 WATER USES BY SECTOR To prepare for the submission of its 2015 UWMP, the City contracted with Maddaus Water Management, Inc. (MWM) to prepare the 2015 Demand Update in order to: 1. Update its potable water demand forecast for the years 2015 to 2040; and 2. Update the range of potable water conservation savings that could be achieved and the costs of those savings under three water conservation programs that could be implemented between the years 2015 to 2040. The 2015 Demand Update focuses specifically on potable water demand and conservation projections. Table 4-1 presents the City's current water use pattern and Table 4-2 presents the projected growth in potable water demand based on full implementation of CalGreen building and plumbing requirements. Table 4-3 presents the City's total water demand, including recycled water demands. As discussed in more detail in Chapter 5, the projected demand pattern will allow the City to continue to meet its adopted water use targets. 16 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 TABLE 4-1- RETAIL DEMANDS FOR POTABLE AND RAW WATER —ACTUAL June 2016 TableDemands forPotable Use Type M ger eer e e e e -•ee Drop down list Mayselect each use multiple times Level of Treatment These are the only Use Types that will be Additional Description When Delivered Volume recognized by the WUEdato online Drop down list submittal tool Single Family Drinking Water 1,852 Multi -Family Drinking Water 1,676 Commercial Drinking Water 428 Industrial Includes Institutional/Governmental Drinking Water 3 Landscape Drinking Water 397 Groundwater recharge 0 Saline water intrusion barrier 0 Agricultural irrigation 0 Wetlands or wildlife habitat 0 Sales/Transfers/Exchanges to 0 other agencies Losses Drinking Water 601 Other Drinking Water TOTAL 4,957 NOTES: "Water Losses" included unmetered water that the City delivers to parks, schools and landscape areas. To comply with the requirements of Proposition 218 (California Constitution Articles XIII C and D) the City estimates the water used by these customers and pays for it. The City's Public Works Department is currently undertaking a project to install meters on these unmetered connections and reduce the volume of "unaccounted-for" water in the system. 17 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan - 2015 TABLE 4-2 DEMANDS FOR POTABLE AND RAW WATER - PROJECTED June 2016 TableDemands forPotable an• Projected Demands� Use •'(Add additional rowsas "••• Report T• the Extent thatRecords areAvailable Drop down list Additional Description (as needed) 0 May select each use multiple times 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 -opt These are the only Use Types that will be recognized by the WUEdata online submittal tool Single Family 1,903 1,958 1,990 2,039 2,097 Multi -Family 1,711 1,731 1,745 1,779 11822 Commercial 458 467 477 492 507 Industrial Includes Institutional/Governmental 501 528 547 574 606 Landscape 432 445 459 477 497 Losses 600 600 600 600 600 TOTALI 5,605 1 5,729 5,818 5,961 6,129 NOTES: Totals include projected conservation savings associated with implementation of the plumbing and building codes. The 2015 Demand and Conservation Update, included as Appendix 2, provides significant additional detail on the calculation of these savings. The City has adjusted "losses" projected in the 2015 Demand & Conservation Update to reflect unmetered but billed water sold to parks and schools. This volume counted as "losses" in Appendix 3 is included as Institutional/Governmental use in this report. TABLE 4-3 TOTAL WATER DEMANDS . •le 4-3 Retail: Total Water Demands� 1 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 (opt) Potable and Raw Water 4,957 5,605 5,729 5,818 5,961 6,129 From Tables 4-1 and 4-2 Recycled Water Demand* 1,100 1,150 1,200 1,250 1,300 1,350 From Table 6-4 TOTAL WATER DEMAND 6,057 6,755 6,929 7,068 7,261 7,479 *Recycled water demandfields will be blank until Table �-4 is comp'lete. NOTES: 4.3 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM WATER LOSSES As required by DWR's guidelines, the City has reviewed its water use profile using the American Water Works Association's (AWWA's) Water Audit Model version 5. This audit model indicated that City's water losses are approximately 600 AFA or approximately 12% of its production, which is slightly above industry average. The areas for improvements noted by the model are improving the accuracy of data from the City's production records on its well field and improving on billed but unmetered water used at City parks IN City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 and by the school district. The City is undertaking projects both to improve its SCADA system and the data secured from City wells and to install meters at unmetered public sites. Table 4-4 below presents the results of the AWWA model run. The complete model is included as Appendix 3. TABLE 4-4 12 MONTH AUDIT LOSS REPORTING Reporting Period Start Date Volume of Water Loss* (mm/YYYY) 01/2014 1 600.618 NOTES: 4.4 ESTIMATING FUTURE WATER SAVINGS The 2015 Demand Update also modeled additional conservation activities that the City could undertake which would further reduce demands by 384 to 556 AFY. As demonstrated in Chapter 5, the City does not need these additional savings to meets its water use targets. As demonstrated in Chapter 7, the City's supplies are adequate to meet projected demands without these additional conservation savings. However, because the City has identified additional, feasible conservation savings, it has the flexibility to use increased water conservation activity as a strategy for managing planned growth. Appendix 2 provides the detail on this additional modeling effort. Table 4-5 summarizes this in tabular format. TABLE 4-5 INCLUSION IN WATER USE PROJECTION 4.5 WATER USE FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS The 2015 Demand Update is based on Association of Bay Area Government's (ABAG's) projection of General Plan build out in Rohnert Park. General Plan build out will be consistent with the City's inclusionary housing ordinance which requires a set aside of 15% of new, for -sale units to serve the needs of low and 19 IAre Future Water Savings Included in Projections? . (Refer to Appendix K of UWMP Guidebook) Drop down list (y/n) Yes If "Yes" to above, state the section or page number, in the cell to the right, where Chapter 3 Of Appendix 2 citations ofthe codes, ordinances, etc... utilized in demand projections are found. Are Lower Income Residential Demands Included In Projections? Yes Drop down list (y/n) NOTES: 4.5 WATER USE FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS The 2015 Demand Update is based on Association of Bay Area Government's (ABAG's) projection of General Plan build out in Rohnert Park. General Plan build out will be consistent with the City's inclusionary housing ordinance which requires a set aside of 15% of new, for -sale units to serve the needs of low and 19 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 June 2016 very low income residents. Because water projections are based on the City's land use projections and the City's land use projections, by definition, take into account the City's inclusionary housing requirements, the water use projects in this 2015 UWMP include water use by low income households. Table 4-5 (presented above) summarizes this in tabular format. 20 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 5 BASELINES AND TARGETS June 2016 The Water Conservation Act of 2009 required that all urban water suppliers calculate and adopt 2015 and 2020 water use targets as part of their 2010 Urban Water Management Plans. In 2010, the City calculated and adopted a local 2015 target of 140 gallons per capita per day (gpcpd) and a local 2020 target of 119 gpcpd. The City also participated in a "regional alliance" which has adopted a 2015 water use target of 142 gpcpd and a 2020 target of 129 gpcpd. Under the requirements of the Water Conservation Act of 2009, if all members of the regional alliance meet the regional target, the group is in compliance; otherwise the City will need to meet its locally adopted targets. 5.1 UPDATING CALCULATIONS FROM THE 2010 UWMP As part of this 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, the City updated its calculations using the 2010 census data and participated in the update of the targets for its regional alliance. This section summarizes the update effort. The City's detailed updated calculations are included in Appendix 4. 5.2 BASELINE PERIODS As discussed in Chapter 4, there is extensive use of recycled water in the City's service area. In its 2010 UWMP, the City documented that recycled water use exceeded 10% of its total water use in 2008 and used 13 -year baseline period. On SB X7-7 Table 1, included in Appendix 4, the City repeated this calculation and again verified its ability to use a longer baseline period. For the purposes of both the 2010 UWMP and this 2015 UWMP, the City is using a baseline period that begins in 1992 and ends in 2004. It is using a 5 -year, target confirmation baseline period that begins in 2003 and ends 2007. 5.3 SERVICE AREA POPULATION The City's water service area is conterminous with its City limits allowing it to use Department of Finance (DOF) data to establish its service area population. This data is presented on SB X7-7 Table 3, included in Appendix 4. It is important to note that the conformed DOF census used in this 2015 UWMP presents lower population numbers from the year 2000 forward than were used in the 2010 calculations. The City used these lower population numbers to perform the baseline and target calculations in 2015. 5.4 GROSS WATER USE The City has used the gross potable water entering its system to establish its gross water use. Recycled water entering its separate, purple -pipe system has not been included in the calculation. The City does not place water into long term storage or serve other water suppliers or agricultural users so these exclusions have not been applied. SBX7-7 Table 4 and 4A, included in Appendix 4 present the detail of this water use from the City's Sonoma County Water Agency and local groundwater supplies. 21 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 In 2010, the City reported is gross water use in million gallons per day (mgd) based on average water use over the course of the year. In this 2015 UWMP, the City is reporting gross water use in acre feet per year, based on actual monthly deliveries from its Agency and groundwater sources. The 2015 reporting standard is more accurate and better conforms to the standard used by its regional alliance partners. In 2010, the City reported a baseline water use of 162 gpcpd and a 5 -year target compliance check of 125 gpcpd. For this 2015 UWMP, the City recalculated both of these baselines using the 2010 DOF population data and its conformed gross water use data. With these refinements, in 2015, the City is reporting a baseline water use of 161 gpcpd and a 5 year target compliance check of 129 gpcpd. The change in the 5 -year target compliance check is a result of the fact that the DOF population data used in this reporting cycle showed lower population totals, beginning in 2000, than the City had estimated in 2010. Because the reported gross water use has not changed but reported population has declined, the per capita water use has increased. SB X7-7 Table 5, included in Appendix 4, contains the detailed calculations that support these baseline water use numbers. Table 5-1 below summarizes these calculations. 5.5 2015 AND 2020 TARGETS In 2010, the City used Method 1 (80% of baseline use) to establish its 2015 and 2020 targets. At that time, the City adopted a 2020 Water Use Target of 119 gpcpd and a 2015 Interim Target of 140 gpcpd. In 2015, the City is again electing to use Method 1 but has revised its targets to reflect, primarily, the decreased population reflected in the DOF data. As was the case in 2010, the City's 2020 target is actually established by its 5 -year compliance check value of 129 gpcpd. The target is calculated as 95% of 129 gpcpd or 123 gpcpd, slightly higher than when adopted in 2010. The 2015 target is calculated as the midpoint between the baseline of 161 gpcpd and the 2020 target or 142 gpcpd. This is also slightly higher than the interim target adopted in 2010 and this difference is, again, a result of the updated population data. TABLE 5-1 BASELINES AND TARGETS SUMMARY Tableand Targets Summary Retail Agency or Regional Alliance Only Average Baseline 2015 1 nterim Confirmed Start Year End Year Baseline Period Target * 2020 Target* GPCD* 10-15 1992 2004 161.11 142 123 year 5 Year 2003 2007 129.48 *All values are in Gallons per Capita per Day (GPCD) NOTES: Reported 5 -year baseline GPCD has been affected by the change in population included in DOF data 22 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 5.6 2015 COMPLIANCE DAILY PER CAPITA WATER USE June 2016 The Water Code allows the City increase its 2015 Interim Target because of certain extraordinary factors. The City will not be taking advantage of this option. The City has been diligent in reducing its 2015 water use by 16% from 2013 levels, in accordance with the Emergency Drought Regulations adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board. The City's 2015 per capita water use is just over 90 gpcpd, well below its interim target. Appendix 4 provides additional detail on these calculations, which are summarized in Table 5-2 below. The table illustrates that the City has meet its local 2015 interim target. In fact, the City's actual 2015 per capita water use is lower than the adopted 2020 target. TABLE 5-2 2015 COMPLIANCE 5.7 REGIONAL ALLIANCE The Water Conservation Act provides that urban water retail suppliers may plan, comply and report on the 2020 water use target on a regional basis, an individual basis, or both. The City is one of nine water contractors to the Agency for purchase of Russian River water supply. The water contractors are eligible to form a regional alliance, under the provisions of the Water Conservation Act because the water contractors are recipients of water from a common wholesale water supplier. The City Council approved becoming a member of the regional alliance and using regional targets on April 12, 2011. The region reports under the name of the Sonoma -Marin Saving Water Partnership and includes the cities of Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sonoma, Cotati and Petaluma, the Town of Windsor, Valley of the Moon Water District, North Marin Water District and Marin Municipal Water District. In 2010, the regional alliance, selected Option 1 for establishing the regional alliance target. Option 1 consists of each member of the regional alliance calculating their individual targets and then weighting the individual targets by each member's population. In 2010, the Alliance established a 2020 Water Use Target of 129 gpcpd and a 2015 Interim Water Use Target of 142 gpcpd. The Alliance updated its calculations for 2015 and again calculated a 2020 target of 129 gpcpd. Its calculated 2015 Interim Target is 143 gpcpd, with the slightly higher number reflecting the adjustments made to population to conform to the 2010 census. Together the Alliance members achieved at 2015 weighted water use of 100 GPCD, exceeding the established target. Appendix 5 includes the detailed calculation tables for the Regional Alliance. 23 �'•i i i Optional Adjustments to 2015GPCD Did Supplier 2015 From Methodology8 2015 GPCD Achieve Actual Interim (Adjusted if Targeted 2015 GPCD* Target Extraordinary Economic Weather TOTAL Adjusted applicable) Reduction for GPCD* Events* Adjustment* Normalization* Adjustments* 2015GPCD* 2015?Y/N 91 142 0 0 0 0 90.5778112 190.57781124 1 Yes *All values are in Gallons per Capita per Day (GPCD) NOTES: 5.7 REGIONAL ALLIANCE The Water Conservation Act provides that urban water retail suppliers may plan, comply and report on the 2020 water use target on a regional basis, an individual basis, or both. The City is one of nine water contractors to the Agency for purchase of Russian River water supply. The water contractors are eligible to form a regional alliance, under the provisions of the Water Conservation Act because the water contractors are recipients of water from a common wholesale water supplier. The City Council approved becoming a member of the regional alliance and using regional targets on April 12, 2011. The region reports under the name of the Sonoma -Marin Saving Water Partnership and includes the cities of Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sonoma, Cotati and Petaluma, the Town of Windsor, Valley of the Moon Water District, North Marin Water District and Marin Municipal Water District. In 2010, the regional alliance, selected Option 1 for establishing the regional alliance target. Option 1 consists of each member of the regional alliance calculating their individual targets and then weighting the individual targets by each member's population. In 2010, the Alliance established a 2020 Water Use Target of 129 gpcpd and a 2015 Interim Water Use Target of 142 gpcpd. The Alliance updated its calculations for 2015 and again calculated a 2020 target of 129 gpcpd. Its calculated 2015 Interim Target is 143 gpcpd, with the slightly higher number reflecting the adjustments made to population to conform to the 2010 census. Together the Alliance members achieved at 2015 weighted water use of 100 GPCD, exceeding the established target. Appendix 5 includes the detailed calculation tables for the Regional Alliance. 23 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 6 SYSTEM SUPPLIES June 2016 The City of Rohnert Park has three sources of water: Sonoma County Water Agency supply, local groundwater and recycled water. The City manages these supplies using a "conjunctive use" strategy, drawing on the Agency and recycled water supplies first and utilizing its local groundwater to manage peak demands and in times of water shortages. The total reliable supply available to the City through these three sources is 10,299 AFY, including 8,949 AFY of potable water and 1,350 AFY of recycled water. As discussed in this section, there is some minor hydrologic variability to this supply profile. 6.1 SONOMA COUNTY WATER AGENCY SUPPLY (PURCHASED WATER) This section describes the Agency supply, its hydrologic availability and the various contracts that affect this supply. This information is brought forward from the City's previous WSAs and its 2005 and 2010 UWMPs and is used to project the Agency supply that is reasonably available to the City under all hydrologic conditions. The City expects it will receive up to 6,372 AFY under normal hydrologic conditions from the Agency supply. The City's contract for water supply with Sonoma County Water Agency is the Restructured Agreement for Water Supply. Under this contract the City has access to as much as 7,500 AFY. The City's water supply allocation in the Restructured Agreement, presumes the Agency is able to secure modifications to its water rights permits that will allow it to increase its diversions from 75,000 AFY to 101,000 AFY. (See Sections 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 for additional discussion of the Agency's water rights and contracts). The Agency can also pump 2,300 AFY of groundwater to meet demand. Over the past 10 years, the City has used between 2,500 and 5,000 AFY of Agency supply, which is significantly less than its maximum allocation. The water supply available to the City from the Agency is measured in two ways, hydrologic availability, and legal availability. Hydrologic availability is a measure of how much water is available because of rainfall, runoff, and storage in the Russian River watershed. Normal Year, Single Dry Year and Multiple Dry Year are ways to describe the hydrologic availability of water supply under a variety of rainfall conditions. The Agency's hydrologic models, (Sonoma County Water Agency 2015 Urban Water Management Plan) indicate that its water supply is most constrained under the Single Dry Year condition when approximately 60,000 AFY is available. Legal availability is a measure of how much water the Agency is allowed to divert under the water rights permits it receives from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The Agency currently has permits to divert and re -divert 75,000 AFY. The Agency has a pending water rights application to increase its diversion and re -diversion rights to 101,000 AFY but this application has not been acted upon. At the present time, legal availability is a large constraint on the Agency supply because it cannot currently diver the full volume of water allocated under the Restructured Agreement. 6.1.1 AGENCY'S WATER RIGHTS The Agency currently diverts and re -diverts water from the Russian River System under four permits issued by the SWRCB. These permits (Numbers 12947A, 12949, 12950 and 16596) provide the Agency with the rights to divert and re -divert up to 75,000 AFY, and to store water in Lake Mendocino and Lake Sonoma. 24 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 These permits also set minimum in -stream flow requirements to protect fish and wildlife and maintain recreation in the Russian River. The SWRCB's Decision 1610 provides for varying minimum in -stream flow requirements under different hydrologic cycles (i.e., in -stream flow requirements are lower in dry water years than in normal water years). The Agency works with the SWRCB on a regular basis to implement the various in -stream flow requirements of its permits based on hydrologic conditions at the time. 6.1.2 THE RESTRUCTURED AGREEMENT FOR WATER SUPPLY The Restructured Agreement for Water Supply (the Restructured Agreement) is the contractual document that outlines how the Agency's proposed 101,000 AFY water right is allocated among the Agency's Contractors and other customers. The Restructured Agreement was executed on June 20, 2006 and has a term of at least forty years. The Restructured Agreement allocates 7,500 AFY to the City, with an average day maximum month pumping rate of 15.0 million gallons per day (mgd) under Normal Year conditions. Section 3.5 of the Restructured Agreement (the Water Shortage Provisions) defines how the water supply and transmission system capacity would be allocated in case of shortage. On April 18, 2006, the Agency's Board of Directors adopted a Water Shortage Allocation Methodology that provides a mathematical quantification of the Water Shortage Provisions. This allows the Contractors to calculate their reasonably expected Agency allocation under a range of supply scenarios. Based on the Water Shortage Allocation Methodology, the City expects it can receive up to 6,372 AFY as long as the Agency's water rights are limited to 75,000 AFY. 6.1.3 DROUGHT CONSIDERATIONS The State of California has been experiencing a serious drought with rainfall and especially snowpack being recorded as the lowest on record in 120 years. On January 17, 2014, Governor Brown declared a statewide drought emergency, which has been followed up with several subsequent Executive Orders and two rounds of emergency drought regulations issued by the State Water Resources Control Board. The City has responded to these requirements with its own emergency drought ordinances and is currently exceeding its required conservation savings of 16% over 2013 demands. While the State Water Project, administered by the Department of Water Resources, is extremely stressed by the lack of snowpack, the Sonoma County Water Agency's rainfall based water system is experiencing significantly less stress. Currently the Agency's primary storage reservoir, Lake Sonoma, is at 97.3% of capacity (www.scwa.ca.gov/currentwatesupplylevels ) The Agency and its contractors are currently finalizing self -verification calculations under the State's emergency drought regulations. These calculations illustrate that a minimum of 3 years of supply is currently available. 6.2 Groundwater This section describes the City's groundwater supply, its hydrologic availability and the policies that affect its use. This 2015 UWMP projects that 2,577 AFY of groundwater will be available to the City. The City's local groundwater supply is from the Santa Rosa Plain (SRP) Subbasin of the Santa Rosa Valley (SRV) Groundwater Basin. The City has developed 42 groundwater wells, 29 of which are currently active. The active wells have a total rated production capacity of 6.3 mgd. The City's 2010 Urban Water 25 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 Management Plan, which is incorporated by reference, provides additional detail on the individual wells and their production capability. The City manages its groundwater supply in accordance with its 2004 Water Policy Resolution which limits groundwater pumping to 2,577 AFY. A Water Supply Assessment developed by the City in 2004 (the 2004 WSA) provided the technical support for this maximum pumping rate, which can be sustained over all hydrologic conditions. The 2004 WSA is incorporated by reference in this 2015 UWMP. Over the past 10 years the City has used between 350 and 1,600 AFY of groundwater, which is significantly less than the technical and policy limitations on groundwater use. 6.2.1 BASIN DESCRIPTION The City is located in the southern portion of the Santa Rosa Valley (SRV) Groundwater Basin, which drains to the northwest, toward the Russian River and then to the Pacific Ocean. All of the City's water supply wells are located in the SRV Groundwater Basin and no City wells are planned to be constructed outside the SRV Basin. Figure 3-2 included in Section 3.2 illustrates the City's well locations. This section contains a summary of the geology and hydrogeologic conditions in the SRV Groundwater Basin (DWR, 2004). Santa Rosa Vallev Groundwater Basin The SRV Groundwater Basin encompasses an area of 158 square miles. There are three subbasins within this basin: the SRP Subbasin, the Healdsburg Area Subbasin, and the Rincon Valley Subbasin (DWR, 2004). The City pumps groundwater from the SRP Subbasin, which has an area of 125 square miles; this is the largest of the three subbasins. The Healdsburg Area Subbasin has an area of 24 square miles, and the Rincon Valley Subbasin contains 9 square miles. The Russian River valley forms the boundary between the Healdsburg Area Subbasin and the SRP Subbasin. The Rincon Valley Subbasin is separated from the SRP Subbasin by a narrow constriction in the bedrock of the Sonoma Volcanics east of Santa Rosa. The southern boundary of the basin is formed by a groundwater divide located just south of the cities of Rohnert Park and Cotati. This divide separates the basin from the Petaluma Valley Groundwater Basin to the south. Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin The SRP Subbasin extends from the City, going north to the Russian River, and to just south of Healdsburg, in the northwest. The subbasin is approximately 22 miles long and up to nine miles wide. It is drained by the Laguna de Santa Rosa, which flows north to the Russian River. The subbasin contains three primary water -bearing units: the Wilson Grove Formation, Quaternary alluvial fan deposits, and Quaternary alluvium. Groundwater quality in these formations is generally good (DWR, 2004). DWR (1982) described groundwater levels in the SRP Subbasin as "about in balance, with increased ground water levels in the northeast contrasting with decreased ground water levels in the south." During the period from 1990 to 2003, groundwater levels in the northern part of the subbasin continued to increase, and groundwater levels in the south showed marked increases between 2004-2007, primarily in response to decreased pumping in the subbasin. During the last ten years, the water levels have continued to increase. Even with the drought conditions, monitoring conducted as part of the implementation of the Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Management Plan demonstrated generally stable groundwater levels. Hydrographs in the SRV Groundwater Basin from the DWR Water data library were reviewed to update the 26 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 groundwater conditions reported by DWR in 1982, and these show no indication of overdraft conditions near Rohnert Park. Storage capacity for the SRP Subbasin was estimated at 948,000 AF based on an average specific yield of 7.8 percent at depths of 10 to 200 feet (DWR, 2004; Cardwell, 1958). Average annual natural recharge from 1960 to 1975 for the entire subbasin was estimated to be 29,300 AF and average annual pumping during the same time was estimated at 29,700 AF (DWR, 1982a). 6.2.2 GROUNDWATER QUALITY Groundwater produced by the City is tested for a total of 139 constituents, including bacteria, pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, organic chemicals, inorganic chemicals, nitrates, radioactivity, corrosivity, trihalomethanes, iron, and manganese. Groundwater produced from the City's wells meets primary state drinking water standards. Overall mineral content for all zones in 2009, as indicated by specific conductance (electrical conductance; EC), ranges from 280 to 610 µmhos/cm. EC values are below the recommended secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 900 µmhos/cm. Other water quality concerns in the Rohnert Park area include elevated nitrate, arsenic, iron, and manganese concentrations in some wells. Nitrate concentrations in City wells perforated in the intermediate zone or in multiple zones range from non -detect to 35 mg/L, which is less than the primary MCL of 45 mg/L. Samples collected from five wells in 1997 exceeded secondary MCLS for iron and manganese, which do not pose health hazards but are considered nuisance pollutants. However, treatment can be used to reduce iron and manganese to levels that meet the secondary MCLS (Dyett & Bhatia, 2000). Arsenic is naturally occurring in the area, and concentrations in City wells range from 2 to 12 µg/L. Arsenic concentrations at the upper end of the range of detected concentrations occur in City wells completed in the northwestern area in the deep and lower zones (well depths greater than 600 feet). Arsenic concentrations in these deeper wells are at levels near or above the federal MCL of 10 µg/L. Organic chemicals introduced through known point sources could influence groundwater quality conditions in the future. No serious or widespread issues that affect community water supplies due to organic chemical sources are known to be present in the City. 6.2.3 ADJUDICATED BASINS Neither the SRV Basin nor the SRP Subbasin has been adjudicated. 6.2.4 SUFFICIENCY OF GROUNDWATER A full analysis of the water level hydrographs and their relationship to pumpage and sufficiency was evaluated in the 2004 WSA for a time period between 1977 and 2003, where there were several periods of wet, normal, single dry and multiple -dry years. Groundwater recharge was estimated to be about 8,300 acre-feet per year and showed a positive change in groundwater storage through 2003. The observed groundwater level trends indicate stable to continued increasing levels during 2012-2013 and a slight lowering in groundwater levels during the drought period of 2014 and 2015. The City's groundwater supply has not historically been subject to hydrologic variability. Reliability and Vulnerability of the Groundwater Supply 27 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 While the City has imposed policy restraints on its groundwater pumping, there are no physical constraints to groundwater pumping. The City has more than adequate capacity from its well field to pump what it anticipates utilizing. Maintaining sustainable groundwater supplies is one of the primary goals of groundwater management. Groundwater level trends within the basin indicate that pumpage over the last five years has been sustainable. The 2004 WSA included an analysis of the historical groundwater level and pumpage data and presented an estimated range of pumpage within which the City and other pumpers in the southern portion of the SRP Subbasin could operate without causing persistent groundwater level declines. On the whole, groundwater levels within the SRP Subbasin have remained in balance and significantly increased in the southern portion of the SRP Subbasin since DWR's 1982 study (DWR, 1982a). As described in earlier sections, the City's pumpage for the 25 -year horizon falls within a range that is historically demonstrated to be sustainable. Thus, groundwater supplies from the basin are sufficient to meet the City's projected groundwater demands. 6.2.5 GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT The City supported the development the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed Groundwater Management Plan, which was adopted in the fall of 2014, and participates actively in the implementation of this Plan. Modeling and monitoring data collected by the City and others indicate that groundwater levels are generally rising around the City's well field, an indication of stable supply (Hydrologic and Geochemical characteristic of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed). Under the auspices of the Groundwater Management Plan, groundwater levels in selected wells are regularly monitored and reported upon. The California Department of Water Resources defines the Santa Rosa Valley Groundwater Basin as a "medium priority basin". As a result, and in accordance with the requirements of the Groundwater Sustainability Act of 2014, the City is working with the County of Sonoma, the Sonoma County Water Agency, the cities of Cotati, Santa Rosa and Sebastopol and the Town of Windsor to form a Groundwater Sustainability Agency and develop a Groundwater Sustainability Plan. These agencies all expect that the Groundwater Sustainability Plan will build upon the adopted Groundwater Management Plan and continue to provide a strong framework for managing the groundwater supply. 6.2.6 LIMITATIONS TO GROUNDWATER PUMPING AND OVERDRAFT CONDITIONS The City has adopted local policies related to groundwater management. Resolution No. 2004-95 (the Water Policy Resolution, see Appendix 6), was adopted on April 27, 2004, and specifies that new development outside of the current City limits will not be approved if it would contribute to the City exceeding an average annual pumping rate of approximately 2,577 AFY. The Water Policy Resolution is the only local policy determination related to groundwater management in Sonoma County. The City also has a policy of not allowing private wells within the City Limits. The City has operated under the framework of the Water Policy Resolution since 2004 and groundwater pumpage is consistently below 2,577 AFY. 6.2.7 HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER PUMPING (2010-2015) Table 6-1 illustrates the City's groundwater use for the five-year period from 2011-2015. The City pumped as little as 766 AF in 2012. The City's pumpage increased in 2014 and 2015, to as much as 1,583 AF in 2014. This increase reflects the City's conjunctive use management strategy, which involves maximizing the use City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 of Agency water during normal years and relying more on groundwater in drought conditions. The amount pumped in 2014 is still well below the 2,577 AFY threshold specified in the City's 2004 Water Policy Resolution. The groundwater pumped was sufficient to meet the City's needs and the City did not encounter any major challenges with regards to obtaining groundwater. TABLE 6-1 GROUNDWATER VOLUME PUMPED •AICI ire]• Groundwater Type Drop Down List Location or Basin Name 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 May use each category multiple times Add additional rows as needed Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin of Alluvial Basin the Santa Rosa Valley 821 766 1343 1583 1455 Groundwater Basin TOTAL 821 766 1,343 1,583 1,455 N OTES: 6.3 SURFACE WATER The City does not utilize an independent surface water supply. 6.4 STORMWATER The City does not utilize an independent storm water supply. 6.5 WASTEWATER AND RECYCLED WATER The City's tertiary -treated recycled water supply is produced by the Subregional System. In July of 2015, the City and the Subregional System entered into a Producer Distributor Agreement that made the City the retail recycled water purveyor within its limits and to Sonoma State University and provided the City with access to 1,350 AFY of recycled water. The City and Sonoma State University use recycled water primarily for irrigation purposes and recycled water demand has varied between 800 and 1,100 AFY over the past 10 years. This section provides additional information on the wastewater collection, treatment and recycled water systems. 6.5.1 RECYCLED WATER COORDINATION As described above the Subregional System is the City's wholesale supplier of recycled water. This UWMP has been coordinated with the Subregional System. 29 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 6.5.2 WASTEWATER COLLECTION, TREATMENT, AND DISPOSAL The City owns and operates the collection system within its corporate limits and also collects and transports wastewater generated by Sonoma State University and within the Canon Manor SPA. The City's collection system consists of 77 miles of gravity sewers, 7.5 miles of force mains, 16 inverted siphons, and three pump stations that convey sewage to the treatment facility. Most facilities were installed between 1956 and 1980 and the average age is estimated to be 30 years. Wastewater is transported to the Subregional System's Laguna Treatment Plant through the City's terminal pump station. Table 6-2 presents the volume of wastewater generated within the City's sewer service are in 2015. TABLE 6-2 WASTEWATER COLLECTED WITHIN THE SERVICE AREA IN 2015 Wastewater treatment and disposal is provided by the Subregional System, which also serves the cities of Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, and Cotati. Wastewater from the Subregional System is treated at the Laguna Water Reclamation Plant, located about 2 miles northwest of Rohnert Park. The City owns capacity rights to 3.43 million gallons per day (MGD) at the Laguna Water Reclamation Plant and has an agreement with the City of Santa Rosa to use up to 4.46 MGD of capacity rights. Under the Subregional System's approved Incremental Recycled Water Program, Rohnert Park can acquire up to 5.15 MGD of capacity. Rohnert Park's current capacity needs are approximately 3.0 MGD. The Subregional System treats wastewater to Title 22 tertiary recycled water standards as discussed in Section 6.5.2. While a great deal of the Subregional System's recycled water is used for urban, agricultural or industrial purposes, the Subregional System maintains a permitted discharge to the Russian River. The Subregional System is committed to supplying recycled water users first and its permitted discharge is used primarily to manage variations in hydrologic conditions (for example, in a cool wet year when rainfall is 30 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 high and irrigation demand is low, the Subregional System will discharge more water than in a warm dry year when irrigation demand is high). Although the City is part of the Subregional System no wastewater is treated or disposed of within city limits. While the Laguna Treatment Plant is not the City's service area, the City has coordinated with the Subregional System and completed Table 6-3 in order to provide a clear picture of the recycled water used in its service area. TABLE 6-3 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISCHARGE WITHIN THE SERVICE AREA 2015 6.5.3 RECYCLED WATER SYSTEM As described earlier in this report, the City owns and operates a purple -pipe recycled water system. The City's wholesale supplier of recycled water is the Subregional System. The recycled water system is illustrated in Figure 3-3 (Section 3.2). The City's recycled water system was installed in the 1990s and recycled water is used for irrigation of large landscapes in the City including parks and school grounds, various commercial and industrial sites, and the Foxtail Golf Course. Recycled water use offsets historic demands on the City's potable water system and demands on irrigation wells. Recycled water use averages between 800 and 1,100 AFY. The use is relatively constant, however because recycled water is used almost exclusively for irrigation purposes the demand can fluctuate with local rainfall patterns and attendant irrigation demands. The Subregional System has prepared and adopted its Incremental Recycled Water Master Plan (IRWP Master Plan located at http://ci.santa-rosa.ca.us/departments/utilities/irwp/Pages/default.aspx. The IRWP Master Plan outlines the long term strategy for expansions to the recycled water system. 31 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 6.5.4 RECYCLED WATER BENEFICIAL USES June 2016 Recycled water is currently used to irrigate 450 acres of land within the City. This includes two City -owned 18 -hole golf courses, Roberts Lake Park, Roberts Lake Road and the Park 'n Ride lot landscaped area, City parks, school grounds, and many sites with significant lawn and landscaped areas. Consistent with IRWP Master Plan, its General Plan and the environmental documents for proposed new development, the City is working with the Subregional System to incrementally expand the recycled water system within its service area in order to provide recycled water for irrigation and other non -potable uses. This expansion will provide up to 1,350 AFY of additional supply. All environmental clearances are complete for this expansion. The City will be constructing recycled water main extensions with developers over the next 10 years. The actually timing of the expansion is dependent on the timing of new development. The projected recycled water directs beneficial uses within the service area is shown in Table 6-4 below. Table 6-5 compares actual use in 2015 to the estimates made in the City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. TABLE 6-4 CURRENT AND PROJECTED RECYCLED WATER DIRECT BENEFICIAL USES WITHIN SERVICE AREA ProjectedTable 6-4 Retail: Current and Recycled Water Direct Beneficial Uses Within Service Area Recycled water is not used and The supplier will not complete is not planned for use within the service the tablebelow. area of the supplier. ad Name of Agency ' City of Santa Rosa Subregional System : City of Rohnert Park Beneficial Use Type General Description of 2015 Uses Level of Treatment 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 (opt) Drop down list Agricultural irrigation Landscape irrigation (excludes golf courses) Commercial landscapes and SSU Tertiary 462 Golf course irrigation FoxTail Golf Course Tertiary 336 Commercial use Industrial use Geothermal and other energy production Seawater intrusion barrier Recreational impoundment Wetlands orwildlife habitat Groundwater recharge (IPR)* Surface water augmentation (IPR)* Direct potable reuse Other (Provide General Description) Total; 1 798 1,150 1,200 1,250 1,300 1 1,350 N CITES: 32 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 TABLE 6-5 2010 UWMP RECYCLED WATER USE PROJECTIONS COMPARED TO 2015 ACTUAL June 2016 Use Type 2010 Projection for 2015 2015 Actual Use Agricultural irrigation Landscape irrigation (excludes golf courses) 1,300 462 Golf course irrigation 336 Commercial use Provide page in UWMP - Industrial use Geothermal and other energy production Seawater intrusion barrier Expected Increase in Recreational impoundment Description Wetlands or wildlife habitat Groundwater recharge (IPR) Surface water augmentation (IPR) Recycled Water Use Direct potable reuse 0 Other Type of Use Total 1,300 798 NOTES: City's 2010 projections did not differentiate Golf Course Use from other Landscape Use 6.5.5 ACTIONS TO ENCOURAGE AND OPTIMIZE FUTURE RECYCLED WATER USE The City has an adopted recycled water use ordinance (Section 13.62.040 of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code). The City uses its regulatory to authority under this ordinance to require extension of recycled water mains and connection of new landscapes to recycled water, when feasible. Since the adoption of its 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, the City has connected one new commercial customer, and one new multi -family residential customer and has extended approximately one-half mile of recycled water main to serve a planned new park. The City estimates that, over time, its recycled water use will grow by 300 AFY as its General Plan build out continues and new customers are added. Table 6-6 summarizes this information. TABLE 6-6 METHODS TO EXPAND RECYCLED WATER USE Table 6-6 Retail: Methods to Expand Future Recycled Water Use oSupplier does not plan to expand recycled complete the table below but will provide water use in the future. narrative explanation. Supplierwill Provide page in UWMP - Planned Expected Increase in Name of Action Description Implementation Recycled Water Use Year Add additional rows as needed Mandatory Use Ordinance and Extend recycled water mains as System Expansion to Serve necessary to provide supply to new Varies 300 Development development Total 300 NOTES: 33 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 6.6 DESALINATED WATER OPPORTUNITIES June 2016 The City does not have any current or future desalination water supply plans due to the City's locations in relation to sea water, as well as the water quality of the Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin. 6.7 EXCHANGES OR TRANSFERS Water transfers are authorized between the Agency's water contractors under the Restructured Agreement. The City does not anticipate any transfers or exchanges. 6.8 FUTURE WATER PROJECTS The City's water supply is not dependent on future expansions to meet projected demand. The City is planning two future capital improvement projects to extend the life of its groundwater well system and to reduce its "unaccounted for" water by installing meters at school and park properties. These are described below. Groundwater Wells Replacement/Upgrade. The City is evaluating its well system and will be assessing the yield and condition of its wells. The project will include replacing and/or supplementing its local groundwater supply well system. Water Meter Installation Prosect. The City is currently paying for irrigating some school properties since one meter is shared between school and park irrigation. The project would separate these shared connections by installing meters on un -metered City properties in order to accurately account for water consumed and reduce apparent water losses. Because the City is not relying on expansion projects to meet its existing or future water demand, it has not entered data in Table 6-7. TABLE 6-7 EXPECTED FUTURE WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS OR PROGRAMS 34 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 6.9 SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND PLANNED SOURCES OF WATER June 2016 The water supply for the City consists of three components: purchased water from the Agency, pumped groundwater from City owned wells, and recycled water produced by the Subregional System. Table 6-8 presents the City's utilization of each supply source in 2015, Table 6-9 presents the City's projected supply from each source for the planning period from 2015 through 2040. TABLE 6-8 WATER SUPPLIED- ACTUAL SuppliesTable 6-8 Retail: Water WaterSupplyI Additional Detail on Drop down list Total Right May use each category multiple times. Water Supply Water or Safe These are the only waters upply categories Actual Volume Quality that will be recognized by the WUEdota Drop Down List Yield online submittal tool (optional) Add additional rows as needed Sonoma County Water Drinking Purchased or Imported Water 2,774 6,372 A Agency Y Water Drinking Groundwater City Owned Wells 1,455 2,577 Water Santa Rosa Subregional Recycled Recycled Water 798 1,350 System Wate r Total 5,026 10,299 NOTES: Agency Supply volume is the City's estimated safe yield. The Restructured Agreement provides the City with contractual rights to 7,500 AFY 35 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 TABLE 6-9 WATER SUPPLIES- PROJECTED June 2016 6.10 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS TO SUPPLY Impacts to the City's water supplies due to climate change are as follows: Agency Supply: At this time climate change impacts to the Water Agency's water supply is unknown, although the Agency is working with the US Geological Survey to analyze potential long- term impacts. However, because the Water Agency's water supply is rainfall -driven climate change is expected to affect supply in that timing of runoff is expected to shit to earlier in the year. This will affect reservoir storage, especially in spring and summer months. Annual precipitation is expected to vary with vulnerability to droughts and dry periods. Groundwater: Climate change can affect the availability and yield from groundwater aquifers. Groundwater levels in the area fluctuate depending on precipitation, aquifer recharge, and pumping. As is the case with the Agency supply, long-term studies and adopted management plan are focused on minimizing this impact. Recycled Water: Recycled water is relatively resistant to climate change. However, long-term conservation efforts, which reduce discharge to the Laguna Treatment Plant, may ultimately impact the City's recycled water supply. As discussed earlier in this UWMP, the City has completed the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and its rainfall -based supply system is less vulnerable to the impacts of climate change than other types of supply. The City is among the nine cities and County of Sonoma's collaborative effort to develop a Community Climate Action Plan to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and respond to the impacts of climate change. 36 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 7 WATER SYSTEM RELIABILITY 7.1 CONSTRAINTS ON WATER SOURCES The City has three sources of water supply: Agency supply, groundwater, and recycled water. The City's supply projections indicate that its long term water supply portfolio is composed of the following: Sixty-two percent Agency water; Twenty-five percent local groundwater; Thirteen percent recycled water. The City balances these supplies using a conjunctive use strategy. The City's current Agency supply, groundwater supply and recycled water supply are all reasonably stable and supported by contracts, policy and a court judgment. The Agency's proposed supply increase is not predictable, particularly with respect to the schedule upon which it can be delivered. The City's supply planning strategy is to rely only upon the Agency's currently permitted supply, its own sustainable groundwater production and a modest increase in recycled water deliveries. The anticipated increase in recycled water deliveries is highly predictable because major distribution infrastructure already exists; the Subregional System has completed the planning and environmental studies; and the City has adopted development impact fee programs to fund the construction of the expanded system. Since 2010, the recycled water system has been extended to serve the Stadium Lands PDA and the University District SPA. An extension to serve the Southeast SPA is currently entering the construction phase. 7.1.1 WATER QUALITY CONSTRAINTS The quality of the City's water deliveries is regulated by the California Department of Health Services (DHS), which requires regular collection and testing of water samples to ensure that the quality meets regulatory standards and does not exceed MCLs. The City, the SCWA and the Subregional System perform water quality testing, which has consistently yielded results within the acceptable regulatory. The quality of existing surface water, groundwater, and recycled water supply sources over the next 25 years is expected to be adequate. Surface and groundwater water will continue to be treated to drinking water standards, and no surface water, groundwater, or recycled water quality deficiencies are foreseen to occur in the next 25 years. 7.2 CONSTRAINTS ON THE AGENCY SUPPLY 7.2.1 HYDROLOGIC CONSTRAINTS The Agency has developed a model of its water system, including storage available in Lake Mendocino and Lake Sonoma, in order to project hydrologic reliability. This model, which is described in detail in the Agency's Urban Water Management Plan, is based on the water year types presented in Table 7-1, below. 37 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 The Agency's model indicates that its system is not impaired by hydrology in normal and multiple dry years. However, in single dry years the system's reliability is reduced slightly. Based on the Agency's analysis for the single -dry year, it can deliver the following percentages of its supply to its customers (see Agency 2010 UWMP Tables 6-2 and 6-3): 2020: 100 percent 2025: 90 percent 2030: 92 percent 2035: 94 percent Section 3.5 of the Restructured Agreement for Water Supply includes an allocation methodology that is used in the case of water supply shortages. This allocation methodology takes into account each water contractors' basic health and safety needs and current conservation practices. As a result of this, shortages are not uniformly shared by all contractors (i.e. if 80 percent of the Agency's water supply is available, all contractors will not automatically experience a 20 percent cutback). Contractors with lower baseline demands, reflecting more mature water conservation programs, receive somewhat smaller water shortage reductions than contractors with higher baseline demands and less mature conservation programs. The Agency and its contractors developed a spreadsheet -based allocation model that reflected the commitments of Section 3.5 of the Restructured Agreement. The City has reviewed the Water Shortage Allocation Model and it indicates that the City could generally expect to receive more water than a straight-line percentage reduction would predict. However, in an effort to be conservative in estimating potential single -dry year reductions, the City has used a straight-line percentage allocation to arrive at an estimated single -dry year supply. This assumption is reflected in Table 7-1 (Agency), below. While the City is utilizing conservative assumptions to estimate its supply in dry years, should a dry year even occur, the City will work with the Agency and other contractors to appropriately implement the provisions of Section 3.5 of the Restructured Agreement. TABLE 7-1(AGENCY) BASIS OF WATER YEAR DATA City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 7.2.2 LEGAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS There are also legal and environmental factors that have the potential to constrain the Agency water supply. As described in Section 6, while the City's contract with the Agency is premised on Agency supply rights of 101,000 AFY, four State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) permits currently govern the Agency's system and limit diversions to 75,000 AFY. In addition, a final Biological Opinion (BO) from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) constrains the Agency's Russian River operations in order to protect state and federal endangered species (steelhead trout, and coho and Chinook salmon). The BO calls for the elimination or reduction of impacts to salmonids due to water supply and flood control activities in the Russian River watershed through measures deemed "reasonable and prudent alternatives," including: Extensive monitoring of both habitat and fish in Dry Creek, the Russian River and its estuary; Eliminating impediments to fish migration and improving habitat on several streams; Restoring up to six miles of habitat in Dry Creek and studying a bypass project; Requesting the State Water Resources control Board to reduce summertime flows in the Russian River; Creating a freshwater lagoon in the estuary at the mouth of the Russian River during the summer months. The Agency is currently completing an environmental impact report that documents both operational modifications and habitat restoration project that it will undertake to comply with the BO. These activities are expected to mitigate impacts to salmonids from the current water supply operations and minimize legal and environmental constraints on the Agency's currently permitted supply. 7.3 CONSTRAINTS ON GROUNDWATER SUPPLY 39 Base Year if not using a Quantification of available supplies is not calendaryear, type in the lost 0 compatible with this table and is provided yearofthe elsewhere in the UWMP. Year Type fiscal, water Location year, arrange of years, for Quantification of available supplies is example, water year 1999- I �F i=� provided in this table as either volume 2000, use2000 only, percent only, or both. Volume Available % of Average Supply Average Year 1962 6,372 100% Single -Dry Year 1977 5,735 90% Multiple -Dry Years 1st Year 1988 6,372 100% Multiple -Dry Years 2nd Year 1989 6,372 100% Multiple -Dry Years 3rd Year 1990 1 6,372 100% Multiple -Dry Years 4th Year Optional 1991 1 6,372 100% NOTES: Because the City's supplies are all from the same Russian River watershed and subject to the same hydrologic events, the base year used is the same for all supplies. 7.2.2 LEGAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS There are also legal and environmental factors that have the potential to constrain the Agency water supply. As described in Section 6, while the City's contract with the Agency is premised on Agency supply rights of 101,000 AFY, four State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) permits currently govern the Agency's system and limit diversions to 75,000 AFY. In addition, a final Biological Opinion (BO) from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) constrains the Agency's Russian River operations in order to protect state and federal endangered species (steelhead trout, and coho and Chinook salmon). The BO calls for the elimination or reduction of impacts to salmonids due to water supply and flood control activities in the Russian River watershed through measures deemed "reasonable and prudent alternatives," including: Extensive monitoring of both habitat and fish in Dry Creek, the Russian River and its estuary; Eliminating impediments to fish migration and improving habitat on several streams; Restoring up to six miles of habitat in Dry Creek and studying a bypass project; Requesting the State Water Resources control Board to reduce summertime flows in the Russian River; Creating a freshwater lagoon in the estuary at the mouth of the Russian River during the summer months. The Agency is currently completing an environmental impact report that documents both operational modifications and habitat restoration project that it will undertake to comply with the BO. These activities are expected to mitigate impacts to salmonids from the current water supply operations and minimize legal and environmental constraints on the Agency's currently permitted supply. 7.3 CONSTRAINTS ON GROUNDWATER SUPPLY 39 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 June 2016 As described in Section 6 and its 2004 WSA, the City analyzed groundwater trends in order to develop a groundwater pumping rate of 2,577 AFY that is sustainable under all hydrologic conditions. While the City meets all water quality standards with its groundwater supply. It has taken some of its wells off line because of arsenic levels that exceed standards. 7.4 RECYCLED WATER SUPPLY The City has a contract for a recycled water supply of 1,350 AFA. This supply is reliable under all hydrologic conditions. While the City's recycled water supply meets all water quality standards for unrestricted nonpotable use, it cannot be used to meet potable demands. 40 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 7.5 SUPPLY AND DEMAND ASSESSMENT June 2016 In accordance with the California Water Code, the following tables compare the water supply available to the City under normal, single dry and multiple dry year conditions in five year increments from 2020 to 2040. TABLE 7-2 NORMAL YEAR WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND COMPARISON TABLE 7-3 SNGLE DRY YEAR SUPPLY AND DEMAND COMPARISON Table 7-2 Retail: Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison Dry Year 2020 Supply 2025 and Demand 2030 1 ja 2040 Supply totals 2020 2025 2030 2035 9,662 9,662 Demand totals 6,755 6,929 (Opt) Supply totals 7,479 Difference 2,907 2,733 2,594 auto ill from Table 6-9 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 Demand totals (auto ill rom Table 4-3) 6,755 6,929 7,068 7,261 7,479 Difference 3,544 3,370 1 3,231 1 3,038 1 2,820 NOTES: TABLE 7-3 SNGLE DRY YEAR SUPPLY AND DEMAND COMPARISON 41 Table 7-3 Retail: Single Dry Year 2020 Supply 2025 and Demand 2030 Comparison 2035 2040 ( O pt) Supply totals 9,662 9,662 9,662 9,662 9,662 Demand totals 6,755 6,929 7,068 7,261 7,479 Difference 2,907 2,733 2,594 2,401 2,183 NOTES: 41 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan - 2015 TABLE 7-4 MULTIPLE DRY YEAR SUPPLY AND DEMAND COMPARISON 42 June 2016 7 2020 2025 2030 2040 2035 (Opt) First year Supply totals 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 Demand totals 6,755 6,929 7,068 7,261 7,479 Difference 3,544 3,370 3,231 3,038 2,820 Supply totals 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 Second year Demand totals 6,755 6,929 7,068 7,261 7,479 Difference 3,544 3,370 3,231 3,038 2,820 Supply totals 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 Third year Demand totals 6,755 6,929 7,068 7,261 7,479 Difference 31544 3,370 3,231 3,038 2,820 Supply totals 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 10,299 Fourth year (optional) Demand totals 61755 6,929 7,068 7,261 7,479 Difference 3,544 3,370 3,231 3,038 2,820 NOTES: 42 June 2016 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 8 WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN June 2016 This section provides information required by Water Code Section 10632. The City's complete Water Shortage Contingency Plan, as updated for this 2015 UWMP, is included in Appendix 7. 8.1 STAGES OF ACTION The City's Water Shortage Contingency Plan includes an analysis of the demand reductions required to meet certain levels of supply reductions. Because the City's water supply is robust and reliable, it can expect to manage supply reductions of as much as 30%, without needing to require demand reductions. However, while the City's supply is highly reliable, there have been instances, such as the most recent Statewide Emergency Regulations, where the City was required to achieve certain demand reduction targets, even with water supply available. As such in the Water Contingency Plan, the City has developed rationing stages that allow it to respond to both true supply emergencies and regulatory mandates with a program of increasingly voluntary and mandatory actions. Table 8-1 summarizes the City's stages of action. TABLE 8-1 STAGES OF WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN Table 8-1 Retail Stages of Water Shortage Contingency Plan AN • • - - Both Percent Supply Stage Reduction) Water Supply Condition Numerical value as (Narrative description) a percent Add additional rows as needed Under this voluntary stage, the City will requesting up to 10% reduction in demand up to 15% which is suffient to meet a 15% reduction in 1- Voluntary supply Under this first mandatory stage, the City will 1 -Mandatory 15% to 30% require up to 20% reduction in demand which is sufficient to meet a 30% reduction in supply Under this second mandatory stage, the City will require up to a 25% reduction in demand 2- Mandatory 30% to 45% which is sufficient to meet nearly a 50% reduction in supply Under this final mandatory stage, the City 3 - Mandatory 50% will require a partial offset of new development demands. I One stage in the Water Shortage Contingency Plan must address a water shortage of 50%. NOTES: The City may also use stages of its water shortage contingency plan to respond to regulatory requirements for reduction in demand even in the absense of a locally declared supply shortage 43 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 8.2 PROHIBITION ON END USES June 2016 Since 2013, the City has worked through a series of interim urgency ordinances in order to respond to the State's emergency regulations and required prohibitions on end uses. As part of this 2015 UWMP cycle the City is working to update its Municipal Code to better conform to the most recently promulgated state regulations. Table 8-2 includes the prohibitions that are part of the City's Water Shortage Contingency Plan. TABLE 8-2 RESTRICTIONS AND PROHIBITIONS ON END USES Only:Table 8-2 Retail Restrictions and Prohibitions on End Users Additional Explanation Penalty, Charge, Stage Drop down list or Reference or Other These are the only categories that will be accepted by the (optional) Enforcement? WUEdato online submittal tool Drop Down List Add additional rows as needed Landscape - Restrict or prohibit runoff from 1 -Voluntary Yes landscape irrigation Other- Require automatic shut of hoses Yes Other- Prohibit use of potable waterforwashing Yes hard surfaces Water Features - Restrict water use for decorative water features, such as fountains Yes Prohibtion of watering Landscape - Other landscape restriction or within 48 hours of Yes prohibition measurable rainfall Compliance with code Landscape - Other landscape restriction or requirements for new Yes prohibition landscapes CII - Lodging establishment must offer opt out of Yes linen service CII - Restaurants may only serve water upon Yes request Landscape - Limit landscape irrigation to specific Landscape irrigation 1 -Mandatory Yes times between 8 pm and 6 am Require nonpotable water use for Other Yes construction where feasible Prohibitfillingof new 2 -Mandatory Other water feature or swimming pool restriction pools and topping off Yes existing pools Prohibit installation of Landscape - Other landscape restriction or landscaping in new Yes prohibition construction N CITES: 44 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 8.3 PENALTIES, CHARGES, OTHER ENFORCEMENT OF PROHIBITIONS June 2016 Section 13.66.070 of the Municipal Code outlines the City's enforcement process when its water waste prohibitions or stages of actions are violated. These actions include Personal contact with the customer Delivery of written notice Installation of a flow -restricting device. The City also has the authority to abate water waste under the nuisance provisions of its Municipal Code. These provisions include the authority to impose fines ranging from $100 to $500 per occurrence. 8.4 CONSUMPTION REDUCTION METHODS In addition to prohibitions and restrictions, the City initiates actions to help with consumption reduction efforts. The City's actions are generally accomplished as part of the Sonoma Marin Water Saving Partnership, with a goal of having a well -coordinated and consistent regional conservation message at all times. Table 8-3 summarizes the City's actions. TABLE 8-3 STAGES OF WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN - CONSUMPTION REDUCTION METHODS TableOnly: Stages of Water Shortage Contingency Plan - Consumption Reduction Methods Consumption Reduction Methods by Water Supplier Additional Explanation or Reference Stage Drop down list (optional) These are the only categories that will be accepted by the WUEdato online submittal tool Add additional rows as needed Provide Rebates on Plumbing Fixtures 1 -Voluntary and Devices Offer Water Use Surveys 1- Mandatory Expand Public Information Campaign Increase Water Waste Patrols New development required to offset 50% of 3 - Mandatory Other its demands NOTES: 8.5 DETERMINING WATER SHORTAGE REDUCTIONS The City's wells and SCWA supply turnouts are all equipped with water meters. Additionally, each potable and recycled water customer is metered. Non-residential landscape irrigation is metered separately from indoor use at most non-residential sites. The City reads meters on a monthly basis and is able to document 45 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 both demand reductions and atypically high water use. The City contacts individual customers to resolve issues related to atypically high water use. 8.6 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE IMPACTS The Water Code requires the City to analyze the impacts on revenue from a 50% reduction in supplies. As outlined above, a 50% reduction in water supply will require a 25% reduction in water use. Therefore, the City' analysis is based on a 25% reduction in demand and the revenue associated with that demand. This reduced revenue would be balanced by some reduction in costs, since the City would be purchasing less water from the Sonoma County Water Agency. In addition the City would have the option of deferring planned capital expenditures and utilizing its utility system reserves. The City manages its Water Enterprise Fund to maintain cash reserves, and these operating reserves are currently approximately 50% of its annual operating costs, or approximately $3.9 million. Appendix 7 includes a detailed analysis of the City's costs, rates and reserve balances in order to assess the impacts of water shortages. This analysis concluded that the City would need to use approximately $400,000 of its reserves to cover revenue shortfalls associated with a 15% reduction in supply. This draw on reserves would increase to nearly $1 million to cover 50% reduction in supply. The City has adequate reserves to manage these impacts 8.7 RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE The City has the authority to declare a water shortage emergency by resolution. A draft of this resolution is included in the Water Shortage Contingency Plan (Appendix 7). 8.8 CATASTROPHIC SUPPLY INTERRUPTION In accordance with the Emergency Services Act, the City has developed an Emergency Operation Plan (EOP). This EOP guides response to unpredicted catastrophic events that might impact water delivery including regional power outages, earthquakes or other disasters. The EOP outlines standard operating procedures for all levels of emergency, from minor accidents to major disasters. The EOP has been coordinated with the Agency and neighboring water purveyors. The catastrophic events and planned actions included in the City's EOP are listed below and will be used to manage interruptions to the Agency supply, the groundwater supply or both. Earthquake o Use shutoff valves and spare piping to manage ruptured mains o Storage available to provide emergency supply o Implement procedures for assessing quality, notifying the public and flushing and disinfecting the system if necessary because of flood water contamination o Use portable and emergency generators Flooding o Storage available to provide emergency supply o Implement procedures for assessing quality, notifying the public and flushing and disinfecting the system if necessary because of flood water contamination o Use portable and emergency generators Toxic Spills (effects Agency Supply) o Use local groundwater 46 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 June 2016 o Implement procedures for assessing quality, notifying the public and flushing and disinfecting the system Fire o Storage available to provide fire Flows o Implement Mutual Aid Plans o Use portable and emergency generators Power Outage or Grid Failure o Use portable and emergency generators Severe Winter Storms o Use portable and emergency generators Hot Weather o Use portable and emergency generators 8.9 MINIMUM SUPPLY NEXT THREE YEARS As discussed in Chapters 6 and 7, the City has three water supply sources that it used conjunctively in order to achieve a robust and reliable supply strategy. Table 8-4 provides the City's estimated water supply available for the next three years based on the driest three-year historic sequence for the Agency's water supply. No water shortages are anticipated. TABLE 8-4 MINIMUM SUPPLY NEXT THREE YEARS Table• • 2016 2017 2018 Available Water Supply 10,299 10,299 10,299 NOTES: As outlined in the Agency's UWMP, its supply is not reduced under a multiple dry year scenario While the City's supply is reliable, the City has been required to implement its water contingency plans as a result of regulatory requirements imposed upon the Agency, the City or both. 47 City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 9 DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEASURES June 2016 The City is a member of the California Urban Water Conservation Council and is submitting its annual reports, found in Appendix 8, as documentation of implementation of demand management measures. City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 10 PLAN ADOPTION SUBMITTAL AND IMPLEMENTATION June 2016 This section describes City's process for adopting this 2015 UWMP including the various agencies and stakeholders with which the City communicated in order to obtain input and information. Table 10-1 identifies the various agencies that the City is coordinating with during the UWMP preparation process. The City's 60 -day notice is included as Appendix 9. TABLE 10-1 NOTIFICATION TO CITIES AND COUNTIES .• Table1-1 Retail: Notification to Cities and Counties City Name 60 Day Notice Notice of Public Hearing Add additional rows as needed City of Cotati 0 0 City of Petaluma 0 0 City of Santa Rosa 0 ❑,1 City of Sonoma ❑ R City of Sebastopol ❑ Fill Town of Windsor 0 0 Interested Entity 60 Day Notice Notice of Public Hearing North Marin Water District 0 R Valley of the Moon Water District 0 0 Penngrove Water Company 0 Sonoma State University 0 0 County Name Drop Down List 60 Day Notice Notice of Public Hearing Add additional rows as needed Sonoma County 0 0 ❑�r Fill .• City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 June 2016 The findings of the Draft UWMP were presented to the City Council's Water Issues Subcommittee and at a Public Hearing before the City Council on June 28, 2016. The public hearing was publicly noticed and the public given the opportunity to offer comments to the UWMP and to ask questions regarding the findings. A copy of the hearing notices and City Council resolution of adoption is also included in Appendix 9. The UWMP was adopted by the City Council on June 28, 2016. The Final UWMP incorporates comments made by the City Council and the public. The Final UWMP is available for public viewing at the following website link: http://www.rpcitV.orp/ and at the City's main office during normal business hours. A copy of the Final UWMP will be submitted to DWR, the California State Library, the Sonoma County Water Agency and Sonoma County no later than 30 days after adoption by the City Council. Comments to the Final UWMP made by DWR and the City's responses to the comments will be added to the website for the public's information. Implementation of the 2015 Final UWMP will be the responsibility of the City Engineer and Director of Public Works. 50 City of Rohnert Park June 2016 Urban Water Management Plan — 2015 11 REFERENCES Brelje & Race, 2004, Water Model Study Summary Report — City of Rohnert Park Brown & Caldwell, 2005, 2005 Urban Water Management Plan Sonoma County Water Agency Brown & Caldwell, 2011, 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, Sonoma County Water Agency. Dyett & Bhatia, 2000, Our Place .... Rohnert Park 2020 General Plan, 7th Edition. Maddaus Water Management, 2015, 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand Analysis and Water Conservation Measures Update Nishikawa, Tracy, ed., 2013, Hydrologic and Geochemical Characterization of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed, Sonoma County California; U. S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2013-5118. Santa Rosa Plain Basin Advisory Panel, 2014, Santa Rosa Plain Watershed Groundwater Management Plan Winzler & Kelly, 2004, Final Water Supply Assessment - City of Rohnert Park Winzler & Kelly, 2005, 2005 Urban Water Management Plan — City of Rohnert Park Winzler & Kelly, 2011, Urban Water Management Plan 2010 — City of Rohnert Park APPENDICES THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CLIMATE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Appendix I Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Final Draft The Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment is taken from the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning, USEPA and DWR, 2011. The vulnerability assessment highlights those water -related resources that are important to a region and are sensitive to climate change. I. Water Demand ❑ Are there major industries that require cooling/process water in your planning region? As average temperatures increase, cooling water needs may also increase. Identify major industrial water users in your region and assess their current and projected needs for cooling and process water. 0 Does water use vary by more than 50% seasonally in parts of your region? Seasonal water use, which is primarily outdoor water use, is expected to increase as average temperatures increase and droughts become more frequent. Where water use records are available, look at total monthly water uses averaged over the last five years (if available). If maximum and minimum monthly water uses vary by more than 25%, then the answer to this question is "yes" Where no water use records exist, is crop irrigation responsible for a significant (say >50%) percentage of water demand in parts of your region? cIr /JcAy., j! �C.4 C:Cr Ci ACL i; - , 7 >� J J l r El Are crops grown in your region climate -sensitive? Would shifts in daily heat IV patterns, such as how long heat lingers before night-time cooling, be prohibitive for some crops? - Fruit and nut crops are climate -sensitive and may require additional water as the climate warms. ❑ Do groundwater supplies in your region lack resiliency after drought events? Droughts are expected to become more frequent and more severe in the future. Areas with a more hardened demand may be particularly vulnerable to droughts and may become more dependent on groundwater pumping. �lC�/k'c / At, a oc�. I`da_ �'j4- a Are water use curtailment measures effective in your region? - Droughts are expected to become more frequent and more severe in the future. Areas with a more hardened demand may be particularly vulnerable to droughts. M) Appendix I Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Final Draft ❑ Are some instream flow requirements in your region either currently insufficient to support aquatic life, or occasionally unmet? Changes in snowmelt patterns in the future may make it difficult to balance water demands. Vulnerabilities for ecosystems and municipal/agricultural water needs may be exacerbated by instream flow requirements that are: 1. not quantified, 2. not accurate for ecosystem needs under multiple environmental conditions including droughts, and 3. not met by regional water managers. 11. Water Supply ❑ Does a portion of the water supply in your region come from snowmelt? Snowmelt is expected to decrease as the climate warms. Water systems supplied by snowmelt are therefore potentially vulnerable to climate change. Where watershed planning documents are available, refer to these in identifying parts of your region that rely on surface water for supplies; if your region contains surface water supplies originating in watersheds where snowpack accumulates, the answer to this question is "Yes." Where planning documents are not available, identify major rivers in your region with large users. Identify whether the river's headwaters are fed by snowpack. ❑ Does part of your region rely on water diverted from the Delta, imported from the Colorado River, or imported from other climate -sensitive systems outside your region? - Some imported or transferred water supplies are sources from climate -sensitive watersheds, such as water imported from the Delta and the Colorado River. ❑ Does part of your region rely on coastal aquifers? Has salt intrusion been a problem in the past? - Coastal aquifers are susceptible to salt intrusion as sea levels rise, and many have already observed salt intrusion due to over -extraction, such as the West Coast Basin in southern California. ❑ Would your region have difficulty in storing carryover supply surpluses from year to year? - Droughts are expected to become more severe in the future. Systems that can store more water may be more resilient to droughts. ❑ Has your region faced a drought in the past during which it failed to meet local water demands? I-3 Appendix I Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Final Draft - Droughts are expected to become more severe in the future. Systems that have already come close to their supply thresholds may be especially vulnerable to droughts in the future. In Does your region have invasive species management issues at your facilities, along conveyance structures, or in habitat areas? - As invasive species are expected to become more prevalent with climate change, existing invasive species issues may indicate an ecological vulnerability to climate change. S�%Jlc� <cx i lG'bcLvl t�/ .h �l L1 1l <..C'c "C -J G`aCC'�1r""r Ill. Wat r.Quality L -'Are increased wildfires a threat in your region? If so, does your region include reservoirs with fire -susceptible vegetation nearby which could pose a water quality concern from increased erosion? Some areas are expected to become more vulnerable to wildfires over time. To identify whether this is the case for parts of your region, the California Public Interest Energy Research (PIER)Program has posted wildfire susceptibility projections as a Google Earth application at: http.//cal-adapt.org/fire% These projections are only the results of a single study and are not intended for analysis, but can aid in qualitatively answering this question. Read the application's disclaimers carefully to be aware of its limitations. ❑ Does part of your region rely on surface water bodies with current or recurrent water quality issues related to eutrophication, such as low dissolved oxygen or algal blooms? Are there other water quality constituents potentially exacerbated by climate change? - Warming temperatures will result in lower dissolved oxygen levels in water bodies, which are exacerbated by algal blooms and in turn enhance eutrophication. Changes in streamflows may alter pollutant concentrations in water bodies. ❑ Are seasonal low flows decreasing for some waterbodies in your region? If so, are the reduced low flows limiting the waterbodies' assimilative capacity? - In the future, low flow conditions are expected to be more extreme and last longer. This may result in higher pollutant concentrations where loadings increase or remain constant. ❑ Are there beneficial uses designated for some water bodies in your region that cannot always be met due to water quality issues? I-4 Appendix I Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Final Draft - In the future, low flows are expected decrease, and to last longer. This may result in higher pollutant concentrations where loadings increase or remain constant. ❑ Does part of your region currently observe water quality shifts during rain events that impact treatment facility operation? - While it is unclear how average precipitation will change with temperature, it is generally agreed that storm severity will probably increase. More intense, severe storms may lead to increased erosion, which will increase turbidity in surface waters. Areas that already observe water quality responses to rainstorm intensity may be especially vulnerable. IV. Sea Level Rise ❑ Has coastal erosion already been observed in your region? - Coastal erosion is expected to occur over the next century as sea levels rise. ❑ Are there coastal structures, such as levees or breakwaters, in your region? - Coastal structures designed for a specific mean sea level may be impacted by sea level rise. ❑ Is there significant coastal infrastructure, such as residences, recreation, water and wastewater treatment, tourism, and transportation) at less than six feet above mean sea level in your region? Coastal flooding will become more common, and will impact a greater extent of property, as sea levels rise. Critical infrastructure in the coastal floodplain may be at risk. Digital elevation maps should be compared with locations of coastal infrastructure. ❑ Are there climate -sensitive low-lying coastal habitats in your region? - Low-lying coastal habitats that are particularly vulnerable to climate change include estuaries and coastal wetlands that rely on a delicate balance of freshwater and salt water. ❑ Are there areas in your region that currently flood during extreme high tides or storm surges? I_Mi Appendix I Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Final Draft - Areas that are already experiencing flooding during storm surges and very high tides, are more likely to experience increased flooding as sea levels rise. ❑ Is there land subsidence in the coastal areas of your region? - Land subsidence may compound the impacts of sea level rise. ❑ Do tidal gauges along the coastal parts of your region show an increase over the past several decades? Local sea level rise may be higher or lower than state, national, or continental projections. - Planners can find information on local tidal gauges at http.//tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends states.shtml?region=ca V. Flooding ❑ Does critical infrastructure in your region lie within the 200 -year floodplain? DWR's best available floodplain maps are available at: http.//www.water. ca. gov/floodmgmt/Irafmo/fmb/fes/best available maps/ While it is unclear how average precipitation will change with temperature, it is generally agreed that storm severity will probably increase. More intense, severe storms may lead to higher peak flows and more severe floods. Refer to FEMA floodplain maps and any recent FEMA, US Army Corps of Engineers, or DWR studies that might help identify specific local vulnerabilities for your region. Other follow-up questions that might help answer this question: 1. What public safety issues could be affected by increased flooding events or intensity? For example, evacuation routes, emergency personnel access, hospitals, water treatment and wastewater treatment plants, power generation plants and fire stations should be considered. 2. Could key regional or economic functions be impacted from more frequent and/or intense flooding? ❑ Does part of your region lie within the Sacramento -San Joaquin Drainage District? - The SSJDD contains lands that are susceptible to overflows from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, and are a key focus of the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan. (http.//www.water. ca.gov/cvfmp/program.cfm). ❑ Does aging critical flood protection infrastructure exist in your region? IQ11 Appendix I Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Final Draft Levees and other flood protection facilities across the state of California are aging and in need of repair. Due to their overall lowered resiliency, these facilities may be particularly vulnerable to climate change impacts. DWR is evaluating more than 300 miles of levees in the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers Valleys and the Delta (http://www. water. ca.pov/leveesl). ❑ Have flood control facilities (such as impoundment structures) been insufficient in the past? - Reservoirs and other facilities with impoundment capacity may be insufficient for severe storms in the future. Facilities that have been insufficient in the past may be particularly vulnerable. ❑ Are wildfires a concern in parts of your region? Wildfires alter the landscape and soil conditions, increasing the risk of flooding within the burn and downstream areas. Some areas are expected to become more vulnerable to wildfires over time. To identify whether this is the case for parts of your region, the California Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER) has posted wildfire susceptibility projections as a Google Earth application at: http.//cal-adapt.org/fire% These projections are the results of only a single study and are not intended for analysis, but can aid in qualitatively answering this question. Read the application's disclaimers carefully to be aware of its limitations. VI. Ecosystem and Habitat Vulnerability ❑ Does your region include inland or coastal aquatic habitats vulnerable to erosion and sedimentation issues? - Erosion is expected to increase with climate change, and sedimentation is expected to shift. Habitats sensitive to these events may be particularly vulnerable to climate change. ❑ Does your region include estuarine habitats which rely on seasonal freshwater flow patterns? Seasonal high and low flows, especially those originating from snowmelt, are Iready shifting in many locations. L1 Do climate -sensitive fauna or flora populations live in your region? Some specific species are more sensitive to climate variations than others. ve (= �� MA Appendix I Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Final Draft Do endangered or threatened species exist in your region? Are changes in species distribution already being observed in parts of your region? Species that are already threatened or endangered 4y have a lowered capacity��� . adapt to climate change. Eq//Does the region rely on aquatic or water -dependent habitats for recreation or other economic activities? - Economic values associated with natural habitat can influence prioritization. ❑ Are there rivers in your region with quantified environmental flow requirements or known water quality/quantity stressors to aquatic life? - Constrained water quality and quantity requirements may be difficult to meet in the future. ❑ Do estuaries, coastal dunes, wetlands, marshes, or exposed beaches exist in your region? If so, are coastal storms possible/frequent in your region? - Storm surges are expected to result in greater damage in the future due to sea level rise. This makes fragile coastal ecosystems vulnerable. ❑ Does your region include one or more of the habitats described in the Endangered Species Coalition's Top 10 habitats vulnerable to climate change http://www.endangered.orp/its-getting-hot-out-there/? - These ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to climate change. ❑ Are there areas of fragmented estuarine, aquatic, or wetland wildlife habitat within your region? Are there movement corridors for species to naturally migrate? Are there infrastructure projects planned that might preclude species movement? - These ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to climate change. VIII. Hydropower Ey,Is hydropower a source of electricity in your region? - As seasonal river flows shift, hydropower is expected to become less reliable in the future. W. Appendix I Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Final Draft ❑ Are energy needs in your region expected to increase in the future? If so, are there future plans for hydropower generation facilities or conditions for hydropower generation in your region? Energy needs are expected to increase in many locations as the climate warms. This increase in electricity demand may compound decreases in hydropower production, increasing its priority for a region. Mi APPENDIX 2 2015 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN DEMAND ANALYSIS AND CONSERVATION MEASURES UPDATE THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand Analysis and Water Conservation Measures Update 4 Qualified Water Efficient Landscaper FINAL July 10, 2015 SAVING WATER 11�'r►v E�� MADDA US WATER MANAGEMENT INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS LISTOF FIGURES................................................................................................................................................................4 LISTOF TABLES.................................................................................................................................................................. 4 LISTOF ACRONYMS.......................................................................................................................................................... 5 EXECUTIVESUMMARY............................................................................................................................................................. 6 Introduction........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Long -Term Demand and Conservation Program Analysis Results................................................................. 6 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Goals and Objectives........................................................................................................................................... 13 1.2 Approach and Methodology............................................................................................................................... 13 1.3 Collaboration between SMSWP, Water Contractors and SCWA........................................................... 13 1.4 Content of Report.................................................................................................................................................. 14 2. DATA COLLECTION AND VERIFICATION PROCESS........................................................................................................ 15 2.1 Data Collection Process...................................................................................................................................... 15 2.2 Types of Data Collected...................................................................................................................................... 16 3. DEMAND PROJECTIONS..................................................................................................................................................... 18 3.1 Demand Methodology Overview...................................................................................................................... 18 3.2 Future Population and Employment Projections.........................................................................................20 3.3 Water Use Data Analysis and Key Inputs to the DSS Model.................................................................. 21 3.4 Water Use Targets................................................................................................................................................ 24 3.5 Water Demand Projections With and Without the Plumbing Code ....................................................... 24 3.6 Water Demand Projections - 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) Format .................. 25 4. COMPARISON OF INDIVIDUAL CONSERVATION MEASURES........................................................................................ 29 4.1 Selecting Conservation Measures to be Evaluated (Conservation Measure Screening) ............... 29 4.2 Conservation Measures Evaluated.................................................................................................................. 29 4.3 Water Reduction Methodology.......................................................................................................................... 33 4.4 Perspectives on Benefits and Costs............................................................................................................... 33 4.5 Present Value Parameters................................................................................................................................. 33 4.6 Measure Assumptions including Unit Costs and Water Savings........................................................... 34 4.7 Assumptions about Avoided Costs.................................................................................................................. 34 4.8 Comparison of Individual Measures................................................................................................................ 36 5. RESULTS OF CONSERVATION PROGRAM EVALUATION............................................................................................... 40 5.1 Selection of Measures for Programs............................................................................................................... 40 5.2 Results of Program Evaluation......................................................................................................................... 41 6. CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................................................................................... 46 APPENDIX A - ASSUMPTIONS FOR THE DSS MODEL......................................................................................................... 47 A.1 Plumbing Codes and Legislation....................................................................................................................... 47 A.2 Present Value Parameters.................................................................................................................................. 57 A.3 Assumptions about Measure Costs................................................................................................................. 57 A.4 Assumptions about Measure Savings............................................................................................................. 58 APPENDIX B - WATER USE GRAPHS FOR PRODUCTION AND CUSTOMER CATEGORIES ............................................. 59 APPENDIX C - MEASURE SCREENING PROCESS AND RESULTS..................................................................................... 65 APPENDIX D - ASSUMPTIONS FOR WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES EVALUATED IN THE DSS MODEL .............. 69 APPENDIX E - LIST OF CONTACTS........................................................................................................................................ 94 APPENDIX F - REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................................. 96 3 LIST OF FIGURES Figure ES -1. Conservation Measure Program Scenarios.............................................................................................................8 Figure ES -2. Long Term Demands with Conservation Programs*...............................................................................................9 Figure ES -3. Water Conservation Program Savings Projections - SB X7-7 Target, GPCD.......................................................11 Figure3-1. DSS Model Flow Diagram........................................................................................................................................19 Figure 3-2. Historical and Projected Population and Employment..............................................................................................20 Figure 3-3. Potable Water Use Projections for City of Rohnert Park(AFY)................................................................................25 Figure 5-1. Conservation Measures Selected for Programs.......................................................................................................41 Figure 5-2. Long Term Demands with Conservation Programs..................................................................................................42 Figure 5-3. Present Value of Utility Costs versus Cumulative Water Saved...............................................................................43 Figure 5-4. Water Conservation Program Savings Projections - SB X7-7 Target, GPCD.........................................................45 Figure A-1. DSS Model Overview Used to Make Potable Water Demand Projections...............................................................51 Figure A-2. Example Toilet Replacement Percentages by Type of Toilet..................................................................................52 Figure A-3. Example Residential Toilet Initial Proportions from Fixture Analysis used for DSS Fixture Model ..........................53 Figure A-4. Example Residential Toilet Fixture Screenshot from DSS Model............................................................................54 Figure A-5. Example Future Replacement Rates of Fixtures from DSS Model..........................................................................55 Figure A-6. End Use Breakdown Example Screenshot..............................................................................................................56 Figure A-7. Single Family End Use Breakdown and Fixture Use Frequency Example Screenshot............................................56 Figure C-1. Water Contractor -Only Measures Screening Ranking.............................................................................................66 Figure C-2. Regional Measures Screening Ranking...................................................................................................................67 LIST OF TABLES Table ES -1 Conservation Measures Evaluated............................................................................................................................7 Table ES -2. Potable Water Use Projections (Acre-Feet/Year)*....................................................................................................8 Table ES -3. Water Demand Program Savings Projections..........................................................................................................9 Table ES -4. Adopted Water Conservation Target Compared to Projected Program Savings (in GPCD)...................................11 Table ES -5. Economic Analysis of Alternative Programs...........................................................................................................12 Table 2-1. Data Collected for Water Contractors........................................................................................................................17 Table 3-1. Historical and Projected Population and Employment...............................................................................................21 Table 3-2. Water Use Data Analysis and DSS Model Key Assumptions....................................................................................22 Table 3-3. Potable Water Use Projections (Acre- Feet/Yea r)*.....................................................................................................25 Table 3-4. (DWR Table 2-2) Population - Current and Projected..............................................................................................26 Table 3-5. Demands and Accounts by Customer Category*......................................................................................................27 Table 3-6. (DWR Table 3-1) Retail Uses of Potable and Raw Water - Actual and Projected (Acre-Feet/Year) .........................27 Table 3-7. (DWR Table 3-4) Losses from Potable Water System (Acre-Feet/Year)...................................................................27 Table 3-8. (DWR Table 3-6) Total Potable Water Use (Acre-Feet/Year)*..................................................................................28 Table 3-9. (DWR Table 3-8) Passive Savings (Acre-Feet/Year)*...............................................................................................28 Table 4-1. Water Use Efficiency Measure Descriptions..............................................................................................................30 Table 4-2. Water Contractor Avoided Costs of Water.................................................................................................................35 Table 4-3. Conservation Measure Cost and Savings.................................................................................................................38 Table 5-1. Potable Water Use Projections (Acre-Feet/Yea r)*.....................................................................................................42 Table 5-2. Long Term Conservation Program Savings...............................................................................................................43 Table 5-3. Comparison of Long -Term Conservation Programs - Utility Costs and Savings......................................................44 Table 5-4. Adopted Water Conservation Target Compared to Projected Program Savings (in GPCD).....................................44 Table 6-1. Potable Water Use Projections (Acre- Feet/Yea r)*.....................................................................................................46 Table A-1. CALGreen Building Code Summary Table................................................................................................................48 Table A-2. New Development Ordinances.................................................................................................................................49 4 LIST OF ACRONYMS AB Assembly Bill ILI Infrastructure Leakage Index ABAG Association of Bay Area IRR Irrigation Governments MF Multi -family ACS American Community Survey MG Million gallons AF acre-foot/acre-feet MMDD Master measure design AFY acre-foot/acre-feet per year database AMI Automated Meter MMWD Marin Municipal Water Infrastructure District AWWA American Water Works MWM Maddaus Water Management, Association Inc. AWWARF American Water Works ND New Development Association Research NMWD North Marin Water District Foundation NRW Non -revenue water BMP Best Management Practice PV Present value CCR California Code of Regulations PWSS Public Water System Statistics CII Commercial, Industrial, and SB Senate Bill Institutional SCWA Sonoma County Water Agency CPI Consumer Price Index SF Single Family CUWCC California Urban Water SMSWP Sonoma -Marin Conservation Council Saving Water Partnership DWR Department of Water UHET Ultra High Efficiency Toilet Resources ULFT Ultra Low Flow Toilet DSS Decision Support System UWMP Urban Water Management FY Fiscal Year Plan GPCD Gallons per capita per day WF Water factor gpf Gallons per flush WSA Water Supply Assessment HE High Efficiency HEU High Efficiency Urinal 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction To prepare for the submission of the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, a demand and conservation technical analysis was conducted by Maddaus Water Management, Inc. (MWM) for all of the water suppliers in Sonoma and Marin Counties (Water Contractors) that receive water from the Sonoma County Water Agency (Agency). The purpose of this analysis was to: 1. Calculate a potable water demand forecast for the years 2015 to 2040. 2. Calculate the range of potable water conservation savings that could be achieved and the costs of those savings under three water conservation programs that could be implemented between the years 2015 to 2040. This effort included: • Evaluating twenty-five existing and new conservation programs that can reduce future water demand; • Estimating the costs and water savings of these measures in each water supplier's service area; and • Combining the measures into increasingly more aggressive programs and evaluating the costs and water savings of these programs. The analysis focuses specifically on potable water demand and conservation projections. The impacts of existing local recycled water programs are "implicit" in this analysis in that the base water demands used for the analysis take into account the potable water offset provided by recycled water. The impacts of planned recycled water programs or program expansions will need to be analyzed by the individual Water Contractors. This report presents the results for the City of Rohnert Park, generally referred to throughout as the "Water Contractor" or the "City". Long -Term Demand and Conservation Program Analysis Results The project for the Water Contractors included two parts: (1) create a demand and conservation analysis for 2015 to 2040, and (2) evaluate conservation savings potential for the years 2015 to 2040 with a variety of different measures and conservation programs. The first step in the analysis was to review and analyze historical water use production and billing data. Building on MWM's previous year 2010 demand and conservation technical analysis effort, for most Water Contractors, billing data was provided for the years 2010 to 2014. The data was graphically analyzed and discussed with the individual Water Contractors. The historical water use, the selected population and employment projections, the plumbing code information, and discussions with the Water Contractors were used to create a demand forecast for the years 2015 to 2040, as further described in Section 3. Once the demand forecasts were completed, a conservation analysis was developed based on combinations of the 25 conservations measures presented in Table ES -1. The conservation analysis included all the measures selected by the Water Contractors via electronic survey. The following important assumptions about the conservation measures were included in this analysis: 1. The measures reviewed for each Water Contractor are listed in Table ES -1 and described in Section 4. 2. The impacts of new development on water demands were updated to reflect changes to local ordinances, changes to the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, and the requirements of the CALGreen building code (as of May 1, 2015). Detailed information on the assumptions regarding codes can be found in Appendix A. The following tables and figures present the water demands and conservation savings for the City of Rohnert Park's analysis. Projected growth in population and/or jobs will cause water demand to increase. The requirements of the Plumbing Code, together with local conservation programs, will serve to save water. The savings projected from Executive Summary City of Rohnert Park Plumbing Code implementation include the requirements of new California State Law, specifically Assembly Bill 715, which requires installation of High Efficiency Toilets and High Efficiency Urinals as of 2014, and SB 407, which requires: (1) Any toilet manufactured to use more than 1.6 gallons of water per flush. (2) Any urinal manufactured to use more than one gallon of water per flush. (3) Any showerhead manufactured to have a flow capacity of more than 2.5 gallons of water per minute. (4) Any interior faucet that emits more than 2.2 gallons of water per minute for all new construction and replacements as of 2017 for single family and 2019 for multi -family and commercial properties. For each Water Contractor the three conservation program scenarios were developed: • Program A "Existing Program": includes the measures that the Water Contractor currently offers. These measures are not necessarily designed the way they are currently implemented, having, in some cases, more aggressive annual account targets planned for the future. • Program B "Optimized Program": includes measures that the Water Contractor currently implements or is interested in implementing. Current measures are not necessarily designed the way they are currently implemented, having, in some cases, more aggressive annual account targets. • Program C "All Measures Analyzed": presents a scenario where all 25 measures are implemented. Table ES -1 presents the conservation measures modeled in this analysis. The table is organized to illustrate measures targeted at the water utility, the Commercial/Industrial/Institutional (CII) sector, the landscape sector, and the residential sector. This organization is intended to assist Water Contractors in selecting the combination of measures best suited to the service area demographics. Water Loss I Pricing Public Info & School Education through Sonoma Marin Saving Water Partnership (SMSWP) Public Info & School Education - Water Contractor Prohibit Water Waste Table ES -1 Conservation Measures Evaluated Indoor and Outdoor Surveys - CII Replace CII Inefficient Equipment Efficient Toilet Replacement Program - CII Urinal Rebates — CII Plumber Initiated UHET & HEU Retrofit Program Require <0.25 gal/flush Urinals in New Development HE Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway — CII Outdoor Large Landscape Audits & Water Budgeting/Monitoring Landscape Rebates and Incentives for Equipment Upgrade Turf Removal - MF, CII Turf Removal - SF Water Conserving Landscape and Irrigation Codes Require Smart Irrigation Controllers and Rain Sensors in New Development HE Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway - SF, MF Indoor and Outdoor Surveys - SF, MF Efficient Toilet Replacement Program — SF Direct Install UHET, Showerheads, and Faucet Aerators - SF, MF HE Clothes Washer Rebate - SF, MF Submeters Incentive Executive Summary City of Rohnert Park Sonoma Marin Saving Water Partnership (SMSWP) program includes all Sonoma and Marin County Water Contractors receiving water from Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA). The conservation programs implemented in 2015 do vary among the individual Water Contractors. Figure ES -1 presents the collective Water Contractors' conservation measure program scenarios, indicating which measures have been selected by the City of Rohnert Park for implementation within each program. Figure ES -1. Conservation Measure Program Scenarios Program Measures Program A Program B Program C. Water Loss J . AMI J Pricing J J Public Info & School Education - SMWSP J J Program Public Info & School Education - Water Contractor J J Scenarios Prohibit Water Waste NO J I ndoor and Outdoor Surveys - CII r F V Replace CII Inefficient Equipment F- — EfficientToilet Replacement Program- CII W 4 Urinal Rebates—CII F — r Plumber Initiated UHET & HEU Retrofit Program F 5,426 Require X0.125 gal/flush Urinals in New Development NO 5,591 HE Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway—CII r f HE Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway- SF, MF 0 V Indoor and Outdoor Surveys - SF, MF F-0 Efficient Toilet Replacement Program—SF V J Direct Install UHET, Showerheads, and Faucet Aerators - SF, MF - J HE Clothes Washer Rebate - SF, MF Submeters Incentive J J Outdoor Large Landscape Audits & Water Budgeting/Monitoring 5,459 Landscape Rebates and Incentives for Equipment Upgrade Code and Turf Removal - MF, CII r i Turf Removal - SF Water Conserving Landscape and Irrigation Codes r ,� Demand 5,356 Require Smart Irrigation Controllers and Rain Sensors in New Development P V V Table ES -2 presents the City of Rohnert Park's potable water use projections without Plumbing Code savings, with only Plumbing Code savings and no active conservation activity, and with Plumbing Code savings and Program A, Program B, and Program C active conservation program implementation savings. Table ES -2. Potable Water Use Projections (Acre-Feet/Year)* Plumbing ..• . 5,415 5,675 5,887 6,111 6,372 6,644 Demand with Plumbing 5,415 5,605 5,729 5,817 5,960 6,129 ..• , Demand with Plumbing 5,365 5,348 5,426 5,461 5,591 5,745 .. .. Demand with Plumbing 5,361 5,309 5,310 5,337 5,459 5,605 Code and Demand 5,356 5,277 5,268 5,304 5,427 5,573 Code and *Data is not weather normalized. Total water use is potable only. Does not include recycled water use. 8 Executive Summary City of Rohnert Park Figure ES -2 illustrates the same data in graphical form. Both the Table and Figure illustrate that the majority of the projected demand reduction occurs as a result of the Plumbing Code requirements and the City's existing conservation program. Figure ES -2. Long Term Demands with Conservation Programs* M 1.0 r\ M M O r -I N M -:I- M ID r\ 00 M O r -I N M -,I- M W r\ 00 M O r -I r -I r -I r -I ri N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Year Note: All line types shown in the legend are presented in the graph. Table ES -3 illustrates projected water savings for Plumbing Code implementation and Plumbing Code implementation with each water conservation program scenario in five-year increments. The benefit to cost ratio for each conservation program from the perspective of the Water Contractor (water utility) and the perspective of the Water Contractors and customers (community) is also presented. The table illustrates that while all proposed programs are technically "cost effective" (the benefit cost ratio exceeds 1.0), the City of Rohnert Park's existing program incorporates the most cost effective combination of conservation measures. Table ES -3. Water Demand Program Savings Projections 69 157 293 412 515 51 326 460 650 781 899 54 365 577 773 913 1,039 60 397 619 807 945 1,071 N/A N/A 2.89 1.79 2.20 1.15 1.91 1.10 Table ES -4 presents the gallons per capita per day (GPCD) targets that the City of Rohnert Park adopted in 2011 as required by the Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB X7-7), as well as projected GPCD demand estimates for the City with Plumbing Code implementation alone and with Plumbing Code implementation plus each of the conservation programs. 9 6,800 (Demand Projection without Plumbing Code 6,600 --X—Demand Projection with Plumbing Code -I-Program A with Plumbing Code 6,400 --*—Program B with Plumbing Code — Program C with Plumbing Code +, 6,200 v a, 6,000 L u a 5,800 5,600 5,400 5,200 M 1.0 r\ M M O r -I N M -:I- M ID r\ 00 M O r -I N M -,I- M W r\ 00 M O r -I r -I r -I r -I ri N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Year Note: All line types shown in the legend are presented in the graph. Table ES -3 illustrates projected water savings for Plumbing Code implementation and Plumbing Code implementation with each water conservation program scenario in five-year increments. The benefit to cost ratio for each conservation program from the perspective of the Water Contractor (water utility) and the perspective of the Water Contractors and customers (community) is also presented. The table illustrates that while all proposed programs are technically "cost effective" (the benefit cost ratio exceeds 1.0), the City of Rohnert Park's existing program incorporates the most cost effective combination of conservation measures. Table ES -3. Water Demand Program Savings Projections 69 157 293 412 515 51 326 460 650 781 899 54 365 577 773 913 1,039 60 397 619 807 945 1,071 N/A N/A 2.89 1.79 2.20 1.15 1.91 1.10 Table ES -4 presents the gallons per capita per day (GPCD) targets that the City of Rohnert Park adopted in 2011 as required by the Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB X7-7), as well as projected GPCD demand estimates for the City with Plumbing Code implementation alone and with Plumbing Code implementation plus each of the conservation programs. 9 Executive Summary City of Rohnert Park The Table illustrates that the City is projected to meet its conservation target under all modeled programs. The relationship of projected water demands to the adopted 2020 GPCD target is illustrated in Figure ES -3. 10 Executive Summary City of Rohnert Park Table ES -4. Adopted Water Conservation Target Compared to Projected Program Savings (in GPCD) Note: 2015 Actual per capita use will be provided by the Water Contractor at the time the 2015 UWMP is prepared. Figure ES -3. Water Conservation Program Savings Projections — SB X7-7 Target, GPCD 154 144 134 124 a C7 114 104 94 - A 84 2000 2005 2010 2015 +Historical Demand (Demand Projection without Plumbing Code Demand Projection with Plumbing Code --o—Program A with Plumbing Code —W—Program B with Plumbing Code Program C with Plumbing Code Year 2020 SBX7-7 GPCD Tareet 2020 Year 2025 2030 2035 2040 Notes: 1. All line types shown in the legend are presented in the graph. The following demand scenarios, Program B and Program C, are close in value and may be indistinguishable in the figure. 2. Note the decline in water use in the 2014 dry year and 2008-2011 economic recession. Table ES -5 shows the year 2040 indoor and outdoor water savings for the three conservation programs modeled; the present value of water savings and the present value of costs to the utility and community are also displayed. The cost of utility savings per unit volume of water is shown in the far -right column. The assumptions and methodology used in the economic analysis are described in Sections 4.4 through 4.7 and in Appendix A Sections A.3 through A.4. is Executive Summary Table ES -5. Economic Analysis of Alternative Programs City of Rohnert Park iL INTRODUCTION This section provides an overview of the goals and objectives for the water demand and conservation analysis, the methodology and approach used to collect and analyze data, and an overview of the content of the report. In this report, demand management and water conservation are used interchangeably. 1.1 Goals and Objectives The purpose of this report is to present an overview of the demand and conservation evaluation process which has been completed specifically for the City of Rohnert Park through a cooperative and collaborative process undertaken by the cities of Cotati, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa and Sonoma, the Marin Municipal, North Marin and Valley of the Moon Water Districts and the Town of Windsor, collectively known as the Water Contractors. The goal was to develop forecasts of demand and conservation savings for the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan that can be used by each of the Water Contractors and by the Sonoma County Water Agency. The goal of this Project was to develop transparent, defensible, and uniform demand and conservation projections for the nine Water Contractors using a common methodology that can be used to support regional planning efforts as well as individual Water Contractor work. Pursuant to this goal, the specific objectives of the Project were as follows: (1) Quantify the total average -year water demand for each Water Contractor to the year 2040; (2) Quantify the passive and active conservation water savings potential for each individual Water Contractor through 2040; (3) Identify conservation programs that could be considered for implementation by the Water Contractors either individually or through their regional partnership, the Sonoma Marin Saving Water Partnership (SMSWP); and (4) Provide each Water Contractor with a user-friendly model that can be used to support ongoing demand and conservation planning efforts. 1.2 Approach and Methodology To accomplish the above goal and objectives, each Water Contractor's water demands and conservation savings were forecasted through 2040 using the Demand Side Management Least Cost Planning Decision Support System (DSS Model). The DSS Model prepares long-range, detailed water demand and conservation savings projections to enable a more accurate assessment of the impact of water use efficiency programs on demand. The DSS Model can use either a statistical approach to forecast demands (e.g., an econometric model), or it can use forecasted increases in population and employment to evaluate future demands. Furthermore, the DSS Model evaluates conservation measures using benefit cost analysis with the present value of the cost of water saved and benefit -to -cost ratio as economic indicators. The analysis is performed from various perspectives including the utility and community. The DSS Model was used to forecast demands for the Water Contractors in prior planning efforts in 2005 and 2009 (except the City of Petaluma in 2009) and as a result contains a significant, robust data set on demographics and water use for each Water Contractor. 1.3 Collaboration between SMSWP, Water Contractors and SCWA This report was completed as a collaborative effort between the Water Contractors, the Sonoma County Water Agency (including Agency staff that are part of the SMSWP), and the consulting team from Maddaus Water Management, Inc. Over the course of this report's development, input was solicited from the aforementioned groups (Project Team) through multiple forums, including workshops, one-on-one meetings, and web -based meetings. 13 1: Introduction City of Rohnert Park 1.4 Content of Report This report provides a detailed description of the methodology, assumptions, and results for the demand forecast and conservation analysis. The following information is included in this report and is discussed in individual sections below: • Section 2 - Data Collection and Verification Process • Section 3 - Demand Projections • Section 4 - Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures • Section 5 - Results of Conservation Program Evaluation • Section 6 - Conclusions • Appendix A - Assumptions for the DSS Model • Appendix B - Water Use Graphs for Production and Customer Categories • Appendix C - Measure Screening Process and Results • Appendix D - Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model • Appendix E — List of Contacts • Appendix F — References 14 2. DATA COLLECTION AND VERIFICATION PROCESS This section presents an overview of the long term demand and conservation evaluation process including the initial data collection steps. 2.1 Data Collection Process The initial phase of this effort included a data collection process using a Data Collection and Verification File (Data File). The quantitative Data File was developed in Microsoft Excel to collect, organize, and verify the necessary input data for the DSS Model. The data required for the demand and conservation projections was organized into the Data Files (one per Water Contractor). This task was streamlined by populating the Data Files using a variety of existing data sources based on previous project collaborations and readily available information. The Data Files were then distributed to the individual Water Contractors for review, verification, and updates. Key sources for existing data were: • the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC) database — each Water Contractor is a CUWCC member and reports to CUWCC on water demands and conservation efforts; • the Sonoma -Marin Saving Water Partnership Conservation Reports, which again reflect data that the Water Contractors report annually; • Sonoma County Water Agency Water Deliveries Annual Reports and Temporary Urgency Change Order (TUCO) reporting, which include significant information on Agency and local water supply production; • the Water Contractor's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan; • Department of Water Resources Public Water System Statistics (DWR PWSS) Reports; • 2013 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Projections (population and employment forecasts); and • Local General Plan information. The Data File was completed and verified by the member Water Contractors through the following steps: (1) Distribution of Files to Individual Water Contractors: The files were distributed to the individual Water Contractors in January 2015 via the Project's ftp site. (2) Instructional Meetings: A kick off meeting with the Water Contractors was held on January 21, 2015 to disseminate information related to the data collection process. During the meeting, the Project Team reviewed the Data File contents with the Water Contractors and provided instructions for completing the files. (3) Data File Completion by Water Contractors: Each Water Contractor reviewed and completed its individual Data File, which required: o Verification of the data that was pre -populated in the file by the Project Team o Data entry of missing information into the Data File as needed (4) Data File Submission by Water Contractors: Water Contractors submitted the files via the Project ftp site between the end of February and early March 2015 after completing Step 3. (5) Data File Review and Refinement: The Project Team reviewed the individual data files in the order submitted. If further data and refinement were required, the Project Team contacted the individual Water Contractor to obtain the necessary information. (6) Data Signature Forms: Once the data was submitted by each Water Contractor and deemed to be complete, the Water Contractor signed a data verification form to acknowledge the data was ready for the demand analysis portion of the project. 15 2: Data Collection and Verification Process 2.2 Types of Data Collected City of Rohnert Park The data needs of the DSS Model drove the data collection effort. The individual data elements within each category are documented in Table 2-1. Specific data for the Water Contractor is provided in Section 3. Data including water use and total employment (jobs) were collected to evaluate the historical growth and future growth in the service area. The service area data was used for both of the demand forecasting tools in the DSS Model and for the conservation analysis. Service area demographic data such as the number of dwelling units were collected from the 2010 U.S. Census data and 2011-2013 American Community Survey (ACS) 3 -Year Estimates. Population sources include the 2010 UWMPs, the 2013 ABAG Projections (population and employment forecasts), SMSWP conservation reports, prior DSS Models, and Water Contractor provided projections. Again, Water Contractor specific data is included in Section 3. The service area demographics were used for future demand forecasting. Historical conservation data from the SMSWP and CUWCC conservation activity databases was incorporated into the Project for a review of future conservation program levels of saturation and as a benchmark of reasonable levels of implementation for future conservation programs. The analysis focuses specifically on potable water demand and conservation projections. Data on recycled water use was not collected or analyzed. The impacts of existing local recycled water programs are "implicit" in this analysis in that the base water demands used for this analysis take into account the potable water offset provided by existing recycled water programs. The impacts of planned recycled water programs or program expansions will need to be analyzed by the individual Water Contractors. 16 2: Data Collection and Verification Process City of Rohnert Park Table 2-1. Data Collected for Water Contractors Model Input Parameter Time Period Units Source(s) Service Area Data Agency Info Current NA Water Contractor Provided Contact Info Current Name, number, email Water Contractor Provided Planning Documents Varies NA 2010 UWMP Water Contractor Provided Abnormal Years Varies Years Water Contractor Provided Customer Classes Varies NA Water Contractor Provided System Input Volume 1997-2014 or Previous DSS Models longer if Volume (Water Production) SMSWP & CUWCC Conservation provided Database Consumption and 1997-2014 or 2010 UWMPs longer if Volume Accounts DWR PWSS Reports provided Cost of Water Varies $ / Volume Water Contractor provided Maximum Day Demand Varies Date & Volume Water Contractor provided Water Contractor Provided 2010 to 2014 American Water Works Water System Audits NA if available Association (AWWA) Methodology Historical Service Area Population Projected Population DP -1 General Profile and Housing Characteristics DP04 Selected Housing Characteristics B25033 Population in Housing Units Historical Service Area Employment Projected Jobs Historical Conservation Conservation Targets Service Area Demographics 2000-2014 People 2015-2040 2010 2010 2010 2000-2014 2015-2040 Program Inception to 2014 2015, 2018, 2020 or other People Various units Various units Dwelling units Economy Water Contractor Provided ABAG 2013 2010 UWMP Prior DSS Models Water Contractor Provided 2010 US Census 2013 ACS 3 -yr 2010 US Census 2013 ACS 3 -yr 2010 US Census 2013 ACS 3 -yr ABAG 2013 Jobs 2010 UWMP Prior DSS Models Water Contractor Provided ABAG 2013 Jobs DSS Models Water Contractor Provided Conservation SMSWP and CUWCC Database Various units Prior DSS Models Water Contractor Provided GPCD SMSWP and CUWCC Database Water Contractor Provided 17 3. DEMAND PROJECTIONS The purpose of Section 3 is to document the demand projections developed for the Water Contractor. This section presents: • Demand methodology overview, • Population and employment projections, • Water use data analysis inputs and key assumptions for the DSS Model, • Water use targets • Water demand projections with and without the Plumbing Code savings through 2040 (this is the demand before incorporating planned water savings from future active conservation efforts), and • Water demand projections in the 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) format in preparation for the 2015 U W M P 3.1 Demand Methodology Overview Each Water Contractor's water demand (i.e., average year demand before additional active conservation savings were incorporated) was forecasted through 2040 using the DSS Model. The demand analysis process included forecasting future water demand (2015-2040) by customer category based upon forecasted increases in population and employment. Average water use per customer category account was based on an analysis of historical data between 2005 and 2014 (which reflects the data set available for the City). The City's dataset reflects the fact that residential water meters were installed in the early 2000s. To forecast water demands, the DSS Model relies on demographic and employment projections, combined with the effects of natural fixture replacement due to the implementation of plumbing codes to forecast future demands. Natural fixture replacement due to the implementation of plumbing codes is part of passive conservation savings. Passive conservation refers to water savings resulting from actions and activities that do not depend on direct financial assistance or educational programs from Water Contractors. These savings result primarily from (1) the natural replacement of existing plumbing fixtures with water -efficient models required under current plumbing code standards and (2) the installation of water -efficient fixtures and equipment in new buildings and retrofits as required under CALGreen Building Code Standards. The DSS Model evaluated water savings associated with these codes and standards to project passive conservation savings. Section 3 of this report presents the DSS Model's demand estimates taking into account savings only from passive conservation. 3.1.1 DSS Model Methodology For the demand projections (2015 through 2040), the DSS Model was used to forecast water demand for each Water Contractor. The DSS Model also includes a conservation component that quantifies savings from passive conservation (e.g. plumbing codes) and active conservation programs. The DSS Model's conservation component covers the entire forecast period, 2015-2040. Quantification of water savings potential from active conservation programs is presented in Sections 4 and 5. The DSS Model prepares long-range, water demand and conservation water savings projections. The DSS Model is an end-use model that breaks down total water production (i.e., water demand in the service area) into specific water end uses, such as toilets, faucets, irrigation, etc. This "bottom-up" approach allows for detailed criteria to be considered when estimating future demands, such as the effects of natural fixture replacement, plumbing codes, and conservation efforts. The purpose of using end use data is to enable a more accurate assessment of the impact of water efficiency programs on demand and to provide a rigorous and defensible modeling approach necessary for projects subject to regulatory or environmental review. 18 3: Demand Projections City of Rohnert Park Figure 3-1. DSS Model Flow Diagram Dnp ■ Single Family Residential Population 1 Continuing Employment Conservation Growth programs ■ ■ ■ � Projections Forecasts Multi -Family by ProjectedCustomer DemandCategory Commercial Base 2015 Water 2020 Forecasts j Ilse 2025 � 2030 by Industrial 2035Indoor " & 2040 • ••• Institutional New Planned Conservation Dedicated 11133:2Model Forecast 2015 to 2040 The first step for forecasting water demands using the DSS Model was to gather customer category billing data from each Water Contractor. The next step was to check the model by comparing water use data with available demographic data to characterize water usage for each customer category (single family, multi -family, commercial, industrial, and institutional) in terms of number of users per account and per capita water use. During the model calibration process data were further analyzed to approximate the indoor/outdoor split by customer category. The indoor/outdoor water usage was also further divided into typical end uses for each customer category. Published data on average per -capita indoor water use and average per -capita end use were combined with the number of water users to verify that the volume of water allocated to specific end uses in each customer category is consistent with social norms from end use studies on water use behavior (e.g., for flushes per person per day). 3.1.2 Water Contractor Input and Review As part of the Project's collaborative approach, an instructional webinar conference call was held in April 2015 to facilitate the participating Water Contractors understanding of and involvement in the development of the demand projections. During the webinar, the Project Team reviewed the methodology using a real example with preliminary results from one of the Water Contractors. The goals of the webinar were: (1) to review the demand modeling approach and results and (2) to answer Water Contractor questions. The Water Contractors had the opportunity to review the demand modeling results and to provide questions and comments at the one-on-one calls and emails with MWM. In addition, individual in-person meetings were held between MWM modeling staff and Water Contractor representatives to review the draft demand projections in May 2015. 19 3: Demand Projections 3.2 Future Population and Employment Projections City of Rohnert Park Each Water Contractor's future population and employment projections were incorporated into each DSS Model to project future demand. Population and employment projections through 2040 were provided or confirmed by each Water Contractor through the data collection process described in Section 2. These growth projections were used to develop a projected demand through the year 2040. Population projections were obtained from one of the following sources: • Local General Plan (population and employment) — Typically these plans, depending upon when they were published, have a population and jobs forecast for 2040 and build out. • Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) (population and employment) — ABAG recently published a new projections report in 2013 that includes population and employment estimates for each city in the San Francisco Bay Area. The ABAG projections report provides population and employment estimates for 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, and 2040. ABAG now publishes its projections report every four years consistent with the Sustainable Community Strategies time line. The previous DSS Model projections and ABAG Projections for 2013 were reviewed to determine the most appropriate data set to use in this DSS Model update. At the City's request, the population and employment projections were based on 2013 ABAG Subregional estimates, to be consistent with the planning projections in prior reports prepared by MWM. Population and Employment projections are shown in Figure 3-2 and Table 3-1. Figure 3-2. Historical and Projected Population and Employment 20 City of Rohnert Park Population & Employment 60,000 25,000 50,000 20,000 40,000 o 15,000 v E 30,000 0 0 10,000 a ;_ 20,000 Historical Population "' Projected Population 10,000 Historical Employment 5,000 Projected Employment 0 0 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Year 20 3: Demand Projections Table 3-1. Historical and Projected Population and Employment 2005 43,828 16,185 2010 43,730 14,429 2015 45,465 15,735 2020 47,232 17,129 2025 49,054 17,640 2030 51,016 18,171 2035 53,232 18,910 2040 55,524 19,684 1. Source: Association of Bay Area Governments. Draft Preferred Scenario of the Sustainable Communities Strategy (Jobs -Housing Connection Strategy), file name: ABAG Preferred Scenario v20_May 24 2013_Output.xls, worksheet name: SSA Totals, row 121, columns G -L, (ABAG, 2013). 2. Source: Association of Bay Area Governments. Draft Preferred Scenario of the Sustainable Communities Strategy (Jobs -Housing Connection Strategy), file name: ABAG Preferred Scenario v20_May 24 2013_Output.xls, worksheet name: SSA Totals, row 121, columns BU -BZ, (ABAG, 2013). 3.3 Water Use Data Analysis and Key Inputs to the DSS Model City of Rohnert Park The demand analysis process includes using baseline average water use per customer to forecast water demands by customer category based upon forecasted increases in population and employment to predict customer category account growth. Average water use per customer category account was based on a water use data analysis investigating historical and current water use data and demographic data. This analysis includes the following elements: • Model Start Year—This is the starting year for the analysis. For this project, the start year for the model is 2015. The DSS Model includes 25 years of data projecting information until the year 2040. • Base Year for Future Water Factors — Based on an analysis of historical water billing data, each Water Contractor selected a year or average of multiple years that is representative of current water use and used as a base year demand factor for developing future water use projections. The City chose to average water use over the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012 and 2013. The data set for 2011 had significant anomalies, making the data suspect. Also, the City had drought restrictions in place in 2014, which resulted in an abnormal reduction in demand. The City chose to average demands over these years to help normalize weather related impacts on demand. Appendix B presents historical customer category water use graphs. Historical water use was provided by the City of Rohnert Park, taken from DWR's annual PWSS reports, or taken from previous modeling efforts conducted by MWM. The data was reviewed and confirmed by the City. Units shown are average gallons of water per account per day. These graphs were reviewed to better identify outlier data points and years so that a representative baseline water use value (of average account water use by category) could be determined. The effects of drought, economic recessions, service line failures, and meter inaccuracies are typically evident in these figures. • Average gal/day/acct—This is the amount of water in gallons that is used per day, per account. Indoor/outdoor Water Use — This is the amount of water per account split into the percent that is used indoors and outdoors. • Non -Revenue Water (NRW) —This is the sum of all water input to the system that is not billed (metered and unmetered) water consumption, including apparent (metering accuracy) and real losses. The values were calculated by taking the difference between the amount of water produced and the amount of water that was sold. Data provided by the Water Contractor was used, if provided, unless another more accurate value from the AWWA M36 Water Loss reports was provided. 21 3: Demand Projections City of Rohnert Park • Census Data—The 2010 Census data or 2013 American Community Survey 3 -year data was used as a general reference when determining population, housing units and household sizes for each individual city (and/or unincorporated area) serviced by the Water Contractors. Housing units and household sizes were used to estimate water use per person in the service area as well as individual residential customer categories. • Current Service Area Population — The 2015 total population for the Water Contractors was taken directly from the selected population projection source shown in Table 3-1. • Employment data — The employment figures were obtained from the selected source as discussed earlier in this report. The following Table 3-2 shows the key inputs and assumptions used in the model. The assumptions having the most dramatic effect on future demands are the natural replacement rate of fixtures, how residential or commercial future use is projected, and finally the percent of estimated non -revenue water. More details on these assumptions, including screenshots of where they are incorporated into the DSS Model, can be found in Appendix A. Table 3-2. Water Use Data Analysis and DSS Model Key Assumptions Residential End Uses Model Input Values are found in the "End Uses" section of their DSS Model on the "Breakdown" worksheet. Key References: CA DWR Report "California Single Family Water Use Efficiency Study," 2011 Page 28 Figure 3: Comparison of household end -uses, AWWARF Report "Residential End Uses of Water' (DeOreo, 1999 Page 108 Table 5.9 "Percentage of average indoor gallons per capita per day usage, (Update of this AWWARF Residential End Use Study report is pending in 2015). 22 Model Model Start Year 2015 J Water Demand Factor Year(s) 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013. [Base Year(s)] 2011 was not used because it was an abnormal year. 2014 was not used since it was a drought year. 19.9% Non -Revenue Water in Start This value can be found in the green NRW section of each Water Contractor's Year DSS Model. Population Projection Source Employment Projection 2013 ABAG Subregional estimates. Source $1,368.55/AF ($4,200/MG). This value reflects the cost of purchasing water Avoided Cost of Water from the Sonoma County Water Agency. Base Year Water Use Profile (average of years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013) Residential Total Water Demand Start Year Indoor Customer Categories Use Factors Indoor Use % Accounts Distribution (gal/day/acct) Water Use 43% 216 (gpcd) Single Family 7,647 69% 55 Multi -family 535 38% 2,794 74% 45 Commercial 479 10% 797 75% N/A Institutional/Industrial 2 0.1% 1,410 4% N/A Irrigation 331 9% 1,070 0% N/A Total 8,994 100% N/A N/A N/A Parameter Model Input Values and Key References Residential End Uses Model Input Values are found in the "End Uses" section of their DSS Model on the "Breakdown" worksheet. Key References: CA DWR Report "California Single Family Water Use Efficiency Study," 2011 Page 28 Figure 3: Comparison of household end -uses, AWWARF Report "Residential End Uses of Water' (DeOreo, 1999 Page 108 Table 5.9 "Percentage of average indoor gallons per capita per day usage, (Update of this AWWARF Residential End Use Study report is pending in 2015). 22 3: Demand Projections City of Rohnert Park ModelParameter r Model Input Values are found in the "End Uses" section of their DSS Model on the "Breakdown" worksheet. Non -Residential End Uses, % Key Reference: AWWARF Report "Commercial and Institutional End Uses of Water" Appendix D: Details of Commercial and Industrial Assumptions, by End Use (Dziegielewski, 2000). category. Non -Residential Frequency of Key References: Estimated based using AWWARF Report "Commercial and Use Data, Toilets and Urinals, Institutional End Uses of Water" Appendix D: Details of Commercial and Uses/user/day Industrial Assumptions, by End Use (Dziegielewski, 2000). Based on three studies of office buildings in which the numbers varied from 2.0 to 3.45 toilet flushes per employee per day (Darell Rogers cited in Schultz Communications (1999); Konen cited in A and N Technical Services, Inc. (1994); and Eva Opitz cited in PMCL (1996)). 23 Model Input Values are found in the "Codes and Standards" green section of Non -Residential Fixture each Water Contractor's DSS Model by customer category fixtures. Efficiency Current Installation U.S. Census, Housing age by type of dwelling plus natural replacement plus Efficiency Residential Fixture rebate program (if any). Current Installation Rates Key Reference: California Urban Water Conservation Council Potential Best Management Practice Report (PBMP) "High Efficiency Plumbing Fixtures - Toilets and Urinals" : Residential toilet installation rates in California Page 42 Residential Frequency of Use Table 8 and 9 Table (Koeller & Company, 2005). Data, Toilets, Showers, Key Reference: Consortium for Efficient Energy (www.ceel.org) Washers, Uses/user/day Model Input Values are found in the "Codes and Standards" green section on the "Fixtures" worksheet of each Water Contractor's DSS Model. Key Reference: AWWARF Report "Residential End Uses of Water" 1999, Page Water Savings for Fixtures, 99 Table 5.5 Toilet flush volume, per capita use, and utilization, 12 study sites, gal/capita/day Page 102 Table 5.6 Shower per capita use, volume, duration, and flow rate, 12 study sites, CA DWR Report "California Single Family Water Use Efficiency Study", 2011, Water Contractor supplied data on costs and savings, professional judgment where no published data available. category. Non -Residential Frequency of Key References: Estimated based using AWWARF Report "Commercial and Use Data, Toilets and Urinals, Institutional End Uses of Water" Appendix D: Details of Commercial and Uses/user/day Industrial Assumptions, by End Use (Dziegielewski, 2000). Based on three studies of office buildings in which the numbers varied from 2.0 to 3.45 toilet flushes per employee per day (Darell Rogers cited in Schultz Communications (1999); Konen cited in A and N Technical Services, Inc. (1994); and Eva Opitz cited in PMCL (1996)). 23 I Model Input Values are found in the "Codes and Standards" green section of Non -Residential Fixture each Water Contractor's DSS Model by customer category fixtures. Efficiency Current Installation Key Reference: 2010 U.S. Census, Housing age by type of dwelling plus natural Rates replacement plus rebate program (if any). Assume commercial establishments built at same rate as housing, plus natural replacement. Model Input Values are found in the "Codes and Standards" green section on the "Fixtures" worksheet of each Water Contractor's DSS Model, and Residential Frequency of Use confirmed in each "Service Area Calibration End Use" worksheet by customer Data, Toilets, Showers, category. Washers, Uses/user/day Key Reference: Falls within ranges in AWWARF Report "Residential End Uses of Water 1999. Page 99 Table 5.5 Toilet flush volume, per capita use, and utilization, 12 study sites, Page 102 Table 5.6 Shower per capita use, volume, I duration, and flow rate, 12 study sites, Model Input Values are found in the "Codes and Standards" green section on the "Fixtures" worksheet of each Water Contractor's DSS Model, and confirmed in each "Service Area Calibration End Use" worksheet by customer category. Non -Residential Frequency of Key References: Estimated based using AWWARF Report "Commercial and Use Data, Toilets and Urinals, Institutional End Uses of Water" Appendix D: Details of Commercial and Uses/user/day Industrial Assumptions, by End Use (Dziegielewski, 2000). Based on three studies of office buildings in which the numbers varied from 2.0 to 3.45 toilet flushes per employee per day (Darell Rogers cited in Schultz Communications (1999); Konen cited in A and N Technical Services, Inc. (1994); and Eva Opitz cited in PMCL (1996)). 23 3: Demand Projections City of Rohnert Park 3.4 Water Use Targets "The Water Conservation Act of 2009" (SB X7-7) required urban water agencies, within their 2010 Urban Water Management Plans, to adopt 2015 and 2020 water use targets that would result in 15% and 20% reductions from a "baseline" year by 2015 and 2020 respectively. The targets are set in gallons per capita per day, which in its simplest form reflects total water use divided by service area population. (However, there are provisions for adjusting water use if a service includes non -urban uses.) The law provided urban water suppliers with several methods for computing baselines and targets. The law also provided water suppliers with the option of establishing regional targets and working together to reduce water use. Because each service area is different and because there are various methods that could be employed, each Water Contractor has a different per capita consumption baseline value and year 2020 water use target. The Water Contractors also adopted a regional target and continue to work towards that target. The City of Rohnert Park's 2020 target is 119 GPCD1 and the Regional Alliance target is 129 GPCD. The City has also elected to track their year 2018 CUWCC GPCD target of 123.5. The City's GPCD use, based on 2014 data, is approximately 92 gpcd (note 2014 was a drought year so water use was influenced by state mandated restrictions. 3.5 Water Demand Projections With and Without the Plumbing Code Water demand projections were developed to the year 2040 using the DSS Model. Table 3-3 shows projected demands in 5 -year increments with and without plumbing codes. The demand projections reflect average water use assuming average weather conditions and do not reflect drier and hotter drought conditions. Likewise, climate change (which might alter weather patterns), increased or decreased rainfall, and possibly increased irrigation demand in the spring and fall due to a warmer climate have NOT been addressed in this analysis. 1 Source: City of Rohnert Park 2010 Urban Water Management Plan page 3-3 and 3-4. 24 ModelParameter Model Input Value Residential Toilets 2%/year (1.28 gpf and 1.6 gpf toilets), 2.5% (3.5 gpf and higher toilets) Model Input Value Commercial Toilets 2% (1.28 gpf and 1.6 gpf toilets), 2.5% (3.5 gpf and higher toilets) Model Input Value: Residential Showers 4% Model Input Value: Residential Clothes washers 10% Model Input Value: 4% replacement rate corresponds to 25 year life of a new Natural Replacement Rate of fixture. Fixtures Model Input Value: 10% replacement rate corresponds to 10 year washer life based on 2014 Key References: AWWARF Report "Residential End Uses of Water" and "Bern Clothes Washer Study," Final Report, Energy Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, for U.S. Department of Energy, March 1998. Online: www.energystar. oy Model Input Value is found the "Codes and Standards" green section on the "Fixtures" worksheet of each Water Contractor's DSS Model. Future Residential Water Use Increases Based on Population Growth and Demographic Forecast Future Non -Residential Water Use Increases Based on Employment Growth and Demographic Forecast 3.4 Water Use Targets "The Water Conservation Act of 2009" (SB X7-7) required urban water agencies, within their 2010 Urban Water Management Plans, to adopt 2015 and 2020 water use targets that would result in 15% and 20% reductions from a "baseline" year by 2015 and 2020 respectively. The targets are set in gallons per capita per day, which in its simplest form reflects total water use divided by service area population. (However, there are provisions for adjusting water use if a service includes non -urban uses.) The law provided urban water suppliers with several methods for computing baselines and targets. The law also provided water suppliers with the option of establishing regional targets and working together to reduce water use. Because each service area is different and because there are various methods that could be employed, each Water Contractor has a different per capita consumption baseline value and year 2020 water use target. The Water Contractors also adopted a regional target and continue to work towards that target. The City of Rohnert Park's 2020 target is 119 GPCD1 and the Regional Alliance target is 129 GPCD. The City has also elected to track their year 2018 CUWCC GPCD target of 123.5. The City's GPCD use, based on 2014 data, is approximately 92 gpcd (note 2014 was a drought year so water use was influenced by state mandated restrictions. 3.5 Water Demand Projections With and Without the Plumbing Code Water demand projections were developed to the year 2040 using the DSS Model. Table 3-3 shows projected demands in 5 -year increments with and without plumbing codes. The demand projections reflect average water use assuming average weather conditions and do not reflect drier and hotter drought conditions. Likewise, climate change (which might alter weather patterns), increased or decreased rainfall, and possibly increased irrigation demand in the spring and fall due to a warmer climate have NOT been addressed in this analysis. 1 Source: City of Rohnert Park 2010 Urban Water Management Plan page 3-3 and 3-4. 24 3: Demand Projections City of Rohnert Park Table 3-3. Potable Water Use Projections (Acre-Feet/Year)* 5,415 5,605 5,729 5,817 5,960 6,129 *Data is not weather normalized. Total water use is potable only. Does not include recycled water use. Values include NRW. Figure 3-3 shows the potable water demand projections with and without the plumbing code through 2040. 7,000 6,000 5,000 v 4,000 W v L a 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Figure 3-3. Potable Water Use Projections for City of Rohnert Park (AFY) ----------------- - Ln lO r` 00 M O r -i N M � Ln lO n 00 Ol O r -I N M :I- Ln l0 r` 00 M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Year 3.6 Water Demand Projections — 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) Format The draft 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Guidance Document from the California Department of Water Resources (CA DWR) was released in April 2015 and the final guidance document is not planned to be released until after July 1, 2015. Without the final guidance document, the exact formatting of the tables for the 2015 UWMP are not known. Therefore, it was elected to place the demand data into the draft 2015 UWMP format. The 2015 draft Urban Water Management Plan Guidance Document from the California Department of Water Resources requests that future demand information be in a specific format. The following tables are the 2015 draft UWMP tables relating to population and demand that are requested. The demand projection shown is the "with Plumbing Code" demands and is otherwise the same as Table 3-3 and Figure 3-3. Table 3-4 below provides population projections for the service area. 25 3: Demand Projections City of Rohnert Park Table 3-4. (DWR Table 2-2) Population — Current and Projected 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 040 ' • • 45,465 47,232 49,054 51,016 53,232 55,524 The current and projected number of connections and deliveries to the Water Contractor's water distribution system, by sector, are identified in the following Table 3-5 and Table 3-6. Deliveries include plumbing code savings but do not include non -revenue water (NRW). 26 3: Demand Projections Table 3-5. Demands and Accounts by Customer Category* City of Rohnert Park Single Multi- FC-. Institutional/ Total Family family ommercia, Industrial Irrigation (no NRW) # of 7,647 535 accounts ��Mm Deliveries 1,852 1,676 ■ 428 3 397 4,356 AFY # of 7,944 556 521 2 360 9,384 accounts Deliveries 1,903 1,711 458 3 432 4,508 AFY # of 8,251 577 537 2 371 9,738 accounts Deliveries 1,958 1,731 467 3 445 4,604 AFY # of 8,581 600 553 2 382 10,119 accounts Deliveries 1,990 1,745 477 4 459 4,674 AFY # of 8,953 626 576 2 398 10,556 accounts ® Deliveries 2,039 1,779 492 4 477 4,790 AFY # of 9,339 653 599 2 414 11,008 accounts Deliveries 2,097 1,822 507 4 497 4,927 AFY *Based on Demand WITH Plumbing Code, excluding NRW. Table 3-6. (DWR Table 3-1) Retail Uses of Potable and Raw Water - Actual and Projected (Acre-Feet/Year) Single Family - 1,852 1,903'VW1,958 1,990 2,039 2,097 1,676 1,711 1,731 1,745 1,779 1,822 Commercial428 458 467 477 492 507 Institutional/industrial3 3 3 4 4 4 Irrigation397 432 445 459 477 497 1 . 4,356 4,508 4,604 4,674 4,790 4,927 For this project, losses or non -revenue water (NRW) is defined as the difference between total water produced and water sold to customers. Non -revenue water use normally includes unmetered water use, such as for fire protection and training, system and street flushing, sewer cleaning, construction, system leaks, meter inaccuracy, and unauthorized connections. Non -revenue water can also result from meter inaccuracies. The total current and future water losses for the system are shown in Table 3-7. Table 3-7. (DWR Table 3-4) Losses from Potable Water System (Acre-Feet/Year) 1,060 1,098 1,125 1,143 1,170 1,202 The total current and future water use for the system is shown in the table below. 27 3: Demand Projections Table 3-8. (DWR Table 3-6) Total Potable Water Use (Acre-Feet/Year)* City of Rohnert Park Retail Usesf 4,356 4,508 4,604 4,674 4,790 4,927 • 1,060 1,098 1,125 1,143 1,170 1,202 • 5,415 5,605 5,729 5,817 5,960 6,129 *Total water use is potable only. Does not include recycled water use. Recycled water use and projection are in another section of the UWMP. Passive savings due to plumbing codes and standards are presented in Table 3-9. These savings include the effects of any historical investments the Water Contractor has made in water efficient toilets, urinals, showerheads, and clothes washers that currently exist in the service area. Table 3-9 does not include the impacts of continuing retrofit and incentive programs in the future. Table 3-9. (DWR Table 3-8) Passive Savings (Acre-Feet/Year)* • - 69 157 293 412 515 *Passive savings are accounted for in the water use projections in DWR Table 3-1. 28 4. COMPARISON OF INDIVIDUAL CONSERVATION MEASURES This section presents the conservation measure screening process, a description of the measures selected to be analyzed in the Water Contractor's DSS Model, measure design assumptions and modeling methodology, and a comparison of the individual conservation measure costs and savings. 4.1 Selecting Conservation Measures to be Evaluated (Conservation Measure Screening) An important step in updating the water conservation program is the review and screening of new water conservation measures. New measures were designed with an implementation schedule reflecting dates sometime in the future when the Water Contractor might begin such programs. The first step in the conservation analysis was to review historical water conservation activity and savings. The purpose of this review was to look at historically successful programs, past penetration rates (activity levels) for individual measures, and the types of programs that were implemented (and for which customers — single family, multi -family, commercial, etc.) by each of the Water Contractors since the 2010 UWMP. The participation rates were incorporated into the design of each of the 25 conservation measure activity levels in the DSS Model analysis. Following the review of the historical conservation efforts, a list of over 50 potential conservation measures was provided to each Water Contractor to be considered for further evaluation in the DSS Model. This list of measures was then screened by the Water Contractors to: (1) identify those measures with the highest level of interest and potential for implementation within the region and (2) identify which entity (SMSWP or individual Water Contractors) would be best suited to implement each measure. Through this process, a total of 25 measures were selected for analysis in the individual Water Contractor DSS models. The screening process and results are described in Appendix C. Once the 25 measures were selected for analysis, a master measure design database (MMDD) was created to streamline the individual measure design process. The MMDD served as a consistent starting point for all the Water Contractor's measures so that measure design parameters such as target end uses, customer classes, unit costs, and savings would initially align. 4.2 Conservation Measures Evaluated Table 4-1 includes the 25 water use efficiency measures that were included in the DSS Model analysis. The table includes measures, devices and programs (e.g., direct install high efficiency toilets) that can be used to achieve water use efficiency, methods through which the device or program will be implemented and what distribution method, or mechanism, can be used to activate the device or program. The list of potential measures was drawn from MWM and Water Contractor general experience and review of local Water Contractor's water use efficiency programs. The measure descriptions apply generally to each Water Contractor. Water Contractor -specific measure descriptions can be found in Appendix D where screen shots of every conservation measure's inputs from each Water Contractor's DSS Model are presented. Water use efficiency savings due to plumbing codes such as CALGreen (California Statewide New Development Building Code), SB 407 (Plumbing Fixture Retrofit on Resale or Remodel), and any new development ordinances specific to each individual Water Contractor are included in the DSS Model and presented in Appendix A. 29 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures City of Rohnert Park 30 Table 4-1. Water Use Efficiency Measure Descriptions Measure Dewipfion. Water Loss WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Maintain a thorough annual accounting of water production, sales by customer class and quantity of water produced and billed consumption (to define non -revenue water). In conjunction with system accounting, include water system audits that identify and quantify known legitimate uses of non - revenue water in order to determine remaining potential for reducing real (physical) water losses. Goal would be to lower the Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) and real water losses water every year by a pre -determined amount based on cost- effectiveness. These programs typically pay for themselves based on savings in operational costs (and saved rate revenue can be directed more to system repairs/replacement and other costs) and recovered revenue through addressing apparent losses. Specific goals and methods to be developed by Utility. May include accelerated main and service line replacement. Enhanced real loss reduction may include more ambitious main replacement and active leak detection and/or capture water from water main flushing and hydrant flow testing for reuse. AMI WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Retrofit system with AMI meters and associated network capable of providing continuous consumption data to Utility offices. Improved identification of system and customer leaks is a major conservation benefit. Some costs of these systems are offset by operational efficiencies and reduced staffing, as regular meter reading and opening and closing accounts are accomplished without the need for a site visit. Also enables enhanced billing options and ability to monitor unauthorized usage, such as use/tampering with closed accounts or irrigation when time of day or days per week are regulated. Customer service is improved as staff can quickly access continuous usage records to address customer inquiries. Optional features include online customer access to their usage, which has been shown to improve accountability and reduce water use. A five-year change -out would be a reasonable objective and may take longer if coupled with a full meter replacement program (on the order of 10 years). Require that new, larger or irrigation customers install such AMI meters as described above and possibly purchase means of viewing daily consumption inside their home, business, or by their landscape/property managers, either through the Internet (if available) or separate device. The AMI system would, on demand, indicate to the customer and Utility where and how their water is used, facilitating water use reduction and prompt leak identification. This would require Utility to install an AMI system. Pricing WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Assumes average annual price increase of 5% for the next 25 years unless otherwise specified by the Water Contractors. Measure converts price increases to real price increases net of inflation; Annual increase must be above user set threshold (such as assuming a 2% inflation) to trigger a demand reduction. Public Info & School REGIONAL MEASURE: Continue with regional public information and school education Education - SMSWP campaign. School education includes: school assembly program, classroom presentations, and other options for school education. Public Info & School WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Public information dissemination and school Education - Water education initiatives beyond those conducted by SMSWP. Contractor Prohibit Water WATER CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: Adopt or modify ordinance that Waste prohibits the waste of water defined as gutter flooding, restrictions on watering days and failure to repair leaks in a timely manner. Indoor and Outdoor WATER CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: Top water customers from each CII 30 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures City of Rohnert Park nlwm'� r, Measure Descriptilo�� Surveys - CII category would be offered a professional water survey that would evaluate ways for the business to save water and money. The surveys would be for targeted to large users (accounts that use more than 5,000 gallons of water per day) such as hotels, restaurants, large stores and schools. Emphasis will be on supporting the top users in customer leaks be repaired, with either part of the repair subsidized and/or the cost paid with revolving funds paid back with water bills over time. May also include an option to replace inefficient plumbing fixtures at low-income residences. May include adjustments to irrigation schedules on automatic irrigation controllers. Provide incentive to install pressure regulating valve on existing properties with pressure exceeding 80 psi. 31 each customer category. Replace CII WATER CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: Provide a rebate or voucher for Inefficient certain CII equipment. Program to provide rebates for a standard list of water Equipment efficient equipment. Included would be x-ray machines, icemakers, air-cooled ice machines, steamers, washers, spray valves, efficient dishwashers, replacing once through cooling, and adding conductivity controller on cooling towers. After a free water use survey, analyze options to replace inefficient equipment including available incentives. Provide customer with findings report and incentive upon completing work. Measure assumes a 50/50 cost share with an average cost per customer of $3,000 of utility funding. Efficient Toilet WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Efficient Toilet Replacement Program - CII. Provide Replacement a rebate or voucher for the installation of a high efficiency flushometer toilet - toilets Program - CII flushing 1.28 gpf or less. Rebate amounts reflect the incremental purchase cost. Urinal Rebates — CII WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Provide a rebate or voucher for the installation of a high efficiency urinals. WaterSense standard is 0.5 gpf or less, though models flushing as low as 0.125 gpf (1 pint) are available and function well, so could be specified. Rebate amounts would reflect the incremental purchase cost. Plumber Initiated WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Plumber Initiated Ultra High Efficiency Toilet (UHET) UHET & HEU and/or Urinal Retrofit Program. The Water Contractor could subsidize the installation Retrofit Program cost of a new UHET or High Efficiency Urinal (HEU) purchased by the Water Contractor Licensed plumbers, pre -qualified by the Water Contractor would solicit customers directly. Require <0.125 WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Require that new buildings be fitted with .125 gpf (1 gal/flush Urinals in pint) or less urinals rather than the current standard of 0.5 gal/flush models. New Development HE Faucet Aerator/ WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: High Efficiency Faucet Aerator / Showerhead Showerhead Giveaway — CII. Utility would buy showerheads and faucet aerators in bulk and give Giveaway — CII them away at Utility office or community events. HE Faucet Aerator/ WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: High Efficiency Faucet Aerator / Showerhead Showerhead Giveaway - SF, MF. Utility would buy showerheads and faucet aerators in bulk and Giveaway - SF, MF give them away at Utility office or community events. Need to coordinate this program with the School Education measure on retrofit kit giveaways to the same customer categories. Indoor and Outdoor REGIONAL OR WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Indoor and outdoor water surveys for Surveys - SF, MF existing residential customers. Target those with high water use and provide a customized report to owner. May include give-away of efficient shower heads, aerators, and toilet devices. Customer leaks can go uncorrected at properties where owners are least able to pay costs of repair. These programs may require that customer leaks be repaired, with either part of the repair subsidized and/or the cost paid with revolving funds paid back with water bills over time. May also include an option to replace inefficient plumbing fixtures at low-income residences. May include adjustments to irrigation schedules on automatic irrigation controllers. Provide incentive to install pressure regulating valve on existing properties with pressure exceeding 80 psi. 31 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures City of Rohnert Park No. Measure Name 0 Measure Description M Efficient Toilet WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Provide a rebate or voucher for the installation of an Replacement ultra-high efficiency toilet (UHET). UHET toilets flush 1.28 gpf or less and include dual Program — SF flush technology. Rebate amounts would reflect the incremental purchase cost. Replacement program can be either a direct install or rebate program. Includes replacement of 1.6 gpf that are not well functioning. Direct Install UHET, WATER CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: Direct Install High Efficiency Toilets, Showerheads, and Showerheads, and Faucet Aerators in Residential Buildings. Utility would subsidize Faucet Aerators - SF, installation cost of a new UHET purchased by the utility. Licensed plumbers, pre - MF qualified by the Utility would solicit customers directly. Customers would get a new UHET and showerheads and faucet aerators installed at a discounted price. HE Clothes Washer WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Provide a rebate for efficient washing machines to Rebate - SF, MF residential customers. It is assumed that the rebates would remain consistent with Turf Removal - SF WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Provide a per square foot incentive to remove turf and replace with low water use plants or permeable hardscape. Rebate based on dollars per square foot removed and capped at an upper limit for single family residences. Water Conserving WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Develop and enforce Water Efficient Landscape Landscape and Design Standards. Standards specify that development projects subject to design Irrigation Codes review be landscaped according to climate appropriate principals, with appropriate turf ratios, plant selection, efficient irrigation systems and smart irrigation controllers. The ordinance could require certification of landscape professionals. Require Smart WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Require Weather Adjusting Smart Irrigation Irrigation Controllers per CALGreen on New Development. It is optional to require Rain Sensors Controllers and Rain in CALGreen for New Development. Require developers for all properties (100%) of Sensors in New greater than four residential units and all commercial development to install the Development weather based irrigation controllers. May require landscaper training. 32 relevant state and federal regulations (Department of Energy, Energy Star) and only offer the best available technology. Submeters Incentive WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Require or provide a partial cost rebate to meter facilities that are currently master metered (e.g., multifamily dwelling units, mobile home parks, commercial centers) but not separately metered. Outdoor Large WATER CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: Outdoor water audits offered for Landscape Audits & existing large landscape customers. Normally those with high water use are targeted Water and provided a customized report on how to save water. All large multi -family Budgeting/Monitori residential, CII, and public irrigators of large landscapes would be eligible for free ng landscape water audits upon request. Website will provide feedback on irrigation water use (budget vs. actual). May include the cost for dedicated meter conversion. Landscape Rebates WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: For SF, MF, CII, and IRR customers with landscape, and Incentives for provide a Smart Landscape Rebate Program with rebates for substantive landscape Equipment Upgrade retrofits or installation of water efficient upgrades; Rebates contribute towards the purchase and installation of water -wise plants, compost, mulch and selected types of irrigation equipment upgrades including: Large Rainwater Catchment Systems, Rain Barrels, Rain Sensors, Rotating Sprinkler Nozzles, Drip Irrigation Equipment, Weather Based Irrigation Controllers and Gray Water Systems. Turf Removal - MF, WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Provide a per square foot incentive to remove turf CII and replace with low water use plants or hardscape. Rebate is based on price per square foot removed, and capped at an upper limit for multi -family or commercial residence. Turf Removal - SF WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Provide a per square foot incentive to remove turf and replace with low water use plants or permeable hardscape. Rebate based on dollars per square foot removed and capped at an upper limit for single family residences. Water Conserving WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Develop and enforce Water Efficient Landscape Landscape and Design Standards. Standards specify that development projects subject to design Irrigation Codes review be landscaped according to climate appropriate principals, with appropriate turf ratios, plant selection, efficient irrigation systems and smart irrigation controllers. The ordinance could require certification of landscape professionals. Require Smart WATER CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Require Weather Adjusting Smart Irrigation Irrigation Controllers per CALGreen on New Development. It is optional to require Rain Sensors Controllers and Rain in CALGreen for New Development. Require developers for all properties (100%) of Sensors in New greater than four residential units and all commercial development to install the Development weather based irrigation controllers. May require landscaper training. 32 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures 4.3 Water Reduction Methodology City of Rohnert Park Each conservation measure targets a particular water use such as indoor single family water use. Targeted water uses are categorized by water user group and by end use. Targeted water user groups include single family residential, multi- family residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional (CII), etc. Measures may apply to more than one water user group. Targeted end uses include indoor and outdoor use. The targeted water use is important to identify because the water savings are generated from reductions in water use for the targeted end use. For example, a residential retrofit conservation measure targets single family and multi -family residential indoor use, and in some cases specifically shower use. When considering the water savings potential generated by a residential retrofit one considers the water saved by installing low -flow showerheads in single family and multi -family homes. The market penetration goal for a measure is the extent to which the product or service related to the conservation measure occupies the potential market. In essence, the market penetration goal identifies how many fixtures, rebates, surveys, etc. the wholesale customer would have to offer or conduct over a period of time to reach its water savings goal for that conservation measure. This is often expressed in terms of the number of fixtures, rebates, surveys, etc. offered or conducted per year. The potential for errors in market penetration goal estimates for each measure can be significant because they are based on previous experience, chosen implementation methods, projected utility effort, and funds allocated to implement the measure. The potential error can be corrected through re-evaluation of the measure as the implementation of the measure progresses. For example, if the market penetration required to achieve specific water savings turns out to be more or less than predicted, adjustments to the implementation efforts can be made. Larger rebates or additional promotions are often used to increase the market penetration. The process is iterative to reflect actual conditions and helps to ensure that market penetration and needed savings are achieved regardless of future variances between estimates and actual conditions. In contrast, market penetration for mandatory ordinances can be more predictable with the greatest potential for error occurring in implementing the ordinance change. For example, requiring dedicated irrigation meters for new accounts through an ordinance can assure an almost 100 percent market penetration for affected properties. Water contractors are constantly looking at when a measure reaches saturation. Baseline surveys are the best approach to having the most accurate information on market saturation. This was taken into account when analyzing individual conservation measures where best estimates were made. MWM was not provided with any baseline surveys for this analysis, but discussions were held with the individual Water Contractors on what their best estimates were for saturation for their service area. 4.4 Description of Benefits and Costs The determination of the economic feasibility of water conservation programs involves comparing the costs of the programs to the benefits provided. This analysis was performed using the DSS Model developed by MWM. The DSS Model has received the endorsement of the California Urban Water Conservation Council and calculates cost effectiveness of conservation measure savings at the end-use level; for example, the model determines the amount of water a toilet rebate program saves in daily toilet use for each single family account. Additional detail on the DSS Model and assumptions can be found in Appendix A. 4.5 Present Value Parameters The time value of money is explicitly considered. The value of all future costs and benefits is discounted to 2015 (the model start year) at the real interest rate of 3.01%. The DSS Model calculates this real interest rate, adjusting the current nominal interest rate (assumed to be approximately 6.1%) by the assumed rate of inflation (3.0%). The formula to calculate the real interest rate is: (nominal interest rate — assumed rate of inflation)/ (1 + assumed rate of inflation). Cash flows discounted in this manner are subsequently referred to as "Present Value" sums. If the interest rates were 33 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures City of Rohnert Park lowered it would decrease the discounting of the cash flows or costs of the conservation measures. Additional information on Present Value referenced in Appendix A. 4.6 Measure Assumptions including Unit Costs and Water Savings Appendix D presents the assumptions and inputs used in the Water Contractor's DSS Model to evaluate each water conservation measure. Assumptions regarding the following variables were made for each measure: • Targeted Water User Group End Use — Water user group (e.g., single family residential) and end use (e.g., indoor or outdoor water use). • Utility Unit Cost — Cost of rebates, incentives, and contractors hired (by Water Contractor or SMSWP) to implement measures. The assumed dollar values for the measure unit costs were closely reviewed by staff and are found to be adequate for each individual measure. The values in the majority of cases are in the range of what is currently offered by other water utilities in the region. • Retail Customer Unit Cost — Cost for implementing measures that is paid by retail customers (i.e., the remainder of a measure's cost that is not covered by a utility rebate or incentive). • Utility Administration and Marketing Cost — The cost to the utility for administering the measure, including consultant contract administration, marketing, and participant tracking. The mark-up is sufficient (in total) to cover conservation staff time and general expenses and overhead. Costs are determined for each of the measures based on industry knowledge, past experience and data provided by the Water Contractor. Costs may include incentive costs, usually determined on a per -participant basis; fixed costs, such as marketing; variable costs, such as the costs to staff the measures and to obtain and maintain equipment; and a one-time set-up cost. The set-up cost is for measure design by staff or consultants, any required pilot testing, and preparation of materials that are used in marketing the measure. Measure costs are estimated each year between 2015 and 2040. Costs are spread over the time period depending on the length of the implementation period for the measure and estimated voluntary customer participation levels. Lost revenue due to reduced water sales is not included as a cost because the conservation measures evaluated herein generally take effect over a span of time that is sufficient to enable timely rate adjustments as necessary to meet fixed cost obligations. Data necessary to forecast water savings of measures include specific data on water use, demographics, market penetration, and unit water savings. Savings normally develop at a measured and predetermined pace, reaching full maturity after full market penetration is achieved. This may occur three to ten years after the start of implementation, depending upon the implementation schedule. The unit costs vary according to the type of customer account and implementation method being addressed. For example, a measure might cost a different amount for a residential single family account, than a residential multi -family account, and for a rebate versus an ordinance requirement or a direct installation implementation method. Typically water utilities have found there are increased costs associated with achieving higher market saturation, such as more surveys per year. The DSS Model calculates the annual costs based on the number of participants each year. The general formula for calculating annual utility costs is: • Annual Utility Cost = Annual market penetration rate x total accounts in category x unit cost per account x (1+administration and marketing markup percentage) • Annual Customer Cost = Annual number of participants x unit customer cost • Annual Community Cost = Annual utility cost + annual customer cost 4.7 Assumptions about Avoided Costs The most expensive source of water for almost all of the Water Contractors, and in some cases the only source of water, is the SCWA Russian River Supply. The price of the water to the Water Contractors is set by SCWA every year and varies by Water Contractor location, depending upon which aqueduct they draw from. Since 1990, the annual price of water 34 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures City of Rohnert Park has increased significantly. The annual rate of increase from 1989/90 to 2013/14 has varied from 4.0 to 5.1% per year, depending upon the aqueduct. Since 1990, the annual rate of inflation has been 2.64% per year in the San Francisco Bay Area, as measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Based on this data the price of SCWA water has increased faster than the CPI. Therefore, in evaluating the benefit -cost ratio of conservation measures and programs it is appropriate to consider the net increase in benefits (i.e., the net increase in the avoided cost of water). Other costs, such as the cost of conservation, will increase presumably at the CPI rate. Also, the cost of conservation programs will be paid for with inflated dollars. For this evaluation, the avoided costs are escalated from the 2014 value to a projected 2030 value (16 years). The total avoided cost of water escalated is the 2014 current SCWA price of water plus the chemical/treatment and pumping and distribution costs. The chemical/treatment and pumping and distribution costs were provided by the Water Contractors in their data collection workbooks. The net increase and the water production avoided costs used in this evaluation are provided in the following table. The 2014 SCWA cost of water is escalated to a 2030 projected value using a 4% per year rate increase. The cost of treatment distribution and pumping is escalated at 2% per year. Table 4-2. Water Contractor Avoided Costs of Water Santa Rosa Aqueduct $ 730.68 $ 1,368.55 $0.002 M17 $0.00 * $1,368.55 $ 730.68 $ 1,368.55 $0.23 $0.32 $1,368.87 Petaluma Aqueduct $ 730.68 $ 1,368.55 $0.002 $0.00 $1,368.55 • Valley the $ 730.68 $ 1,368.55 $0.002 $0.00 $1,368.55 of 1 Moon Water $ 793.24 $ 1,485.72 $0.002 $0.00 $1,485.72 District Sonoma City of Sonoma Aqueduct $ 793.24 $ 1,485.72 $0.002 $0.00 $1,485.72 Town of I Individual $ 876.81 $ 1,368.553 $0.002 $0.00 $1,368.55 Windsor Rate NorthIndividual $ 741.78 $ 1,389.34 $29.09 $39.93 $1,429.27 Water D Rate Individual Marin —J Rate for first Municipal4,300 acre- $ 786.91 $ 1,473.87 $65.65 $90.12 $1,563.99 Water District i feet from SCWA 1 This value is used in each Water Contractor's DSS Model. 35 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures City of Rohnert Park Z Water Contractors did not provide specific energy/cost quantities, or else the Water Contractor's cost is zero for SCWA-supplied water. Therefore, the distribution cost is shown at zero, which as an avoided cost will produce a more conservative estimate for the value of conserved water. 3 Town of Windsor water rates in 2022 will change to Santa Rosa Aqueduct rates. Therefore, the Santa Rosa Aqueduct rate will be in effect in 2030. For those Water Contractors with wastewater operation costs including chemical, treatment, energy, and transport costs, a 2% per year escalation was used to a projected 2030 value. These values can be found in each Water Contractor's data collection workbook and DSS Model. This avoided cost determination process has the effect of raising the benefit -cost ratios in our evaluation by the amount that is roughly the percentage difference in the future versus the current price of SCWA water. In our opinion, this escalation represents a more realistic comparison of benefits and costs of conservation. 4.8 Comparison of Individual Measures Table 4-3 presents how much water the measures will save through 2040, how much they will cost, and what the cost of saved water will be per unit volume if the measures are implemented on a stand-alone basis (i.e. without interaction or overlap from other measures that might address the same end use(s)). Thus, savings from measures which address the same end use(s) are not additive. The model uses impact factors to avoid double counting in estimating the water savings from programs of measures. For example, if two measures are planned to address the same end use and both save 10% of the prior water use then the net effect is not the simple sum (20%). Rather it is the cumulative impact of the first measure reducing the use to 90% of what it was without the first measure in place and then reducing the use another 10% to result in the use being 81% of what it was originally. In this example the net savings is 19%, not 20%. Using impact factors, the model computes the reduction as follows, 0.9 x 0.9 = 0.81 or 19% water savings. Since interaction between measures has not been accounted for in Table 4-3, it is not appropriate to include totals at the bottom of the table. However, the table is useful to give a close approximation of the cost effectiveness of each individual measure. Cost categories are defined below: • Utility Costs - those costs that the Water Contractor as a water utility will incur to operate the measure including administrative costs. • Utility Benefits - the avoided cost of producing water. • Customer Costs - those costs customers will incur to implement a measure in the Water Contractor's service area and maintain its effectiveness over the life of the measure. • Customer Benefits - the savings other than from reduced water/sewer utility bills, such as energy savings resulting from reduced use of hot water. Conservation program participants will see lower water and sewer bills but overall there will be no net customer benefit. • Community Costs and Benefits - Community Costs and Benefits include Utility Costs plus Customer Costs, and Utility Benefits plus Customer Benefits, respectively. The column headings in Table 4-3 are defined as follows: • Present Value (PV) of Utility and Community Costs and Benefits ($) = the present value of the 25 -year time stream of annual costs or benefits, discounted to the base year. • Utility Benefit -Cost ratio = PV of Utility Costs divided by PV of Utility Benefits over 25 years. 36 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures City of Rohnert Park • Community Benefit -Cost ratio = (PV of Utility Benefits plus PV of customer energy savings) divided by (sum of PV of Utility Costs plus PV of Customer Costs), over 25 years. • Five Years Total Cost to Utility ($) = the sum of the annual Utility Costs for years 2015 through 2019. Only those measures that are run between 2015 and 2020 will have a cost. The measures start in the years as specified for each measure shown in Appendix D. • Water Savings in 2020 (AFY) = water saved in acre-feet per year. The year 2020 is provided as this information is helpful as relates to the Water Contractor's adopted target under the Water Conservation Act of 2009. • Utility Cost of Water Saved per Unit Volume ($/AF) = PV of Utility Costs over 25 years divided by the 25 -Year Water Savings. This value is compared to the utility's avoided cost of water as one indicator of the cost effectiveness of conservation efforts. It should be noted that the value somewhat undervalues the cost of savings because program costs are discounted to present value and the water benefit is not. 37 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures Table 4-3. Conservation Measure Cost and Savings City of Rohnert Park $3,785,674 $3,785,674 $1,037,622 $1,037,622 3.65 3.65 $375,000 159 $254 $1,637,256 $1,637,256 $1,080,947 $1,080,947 1.51 1.51 $0 20 $571 $192,235 $192,235 $319,813 $319,813 0.60 0.60 $50,000 49 $129 $276,479 $458,917 $264,484 $264,484 1.05 1.74 $66,981 11 $911 $138,240 $229,458 $132,242 $132,242 1.05 1.74 $33,490 5.5 $911 $24,943 $24,943 $148,485 $247,476 0.17 0.10 $31,747 1.1 $5,438 $164,399 $336,238 $372,550 $620,917 0.44 0.54 $93,376 7.0 $2,107 $23,920 $60,313 $43,747 $77,399 0.55 0.78 $19,920 1.4 $1,897 $83,568 $83,568 $158,613 $229,003 0.53 0.36 $168,326 3.8 $1,793 $10,758 $10,758 $65,158 $76,741 0.17 0.14 $56,504 0.6 $5,698 $51,970 $51,970 $92,968 $114,972 0.56 0.45 $21,759 1.3 $1,585 $30,106 $30,106 $27,467 $127,349 1.10 0.24 $21,046 1.5 $847 $9,982 $26,365 $17,598 $46,927 0.57 0.56 $18,675 1.3 $2,144 $56,761 $124,355 $28,112 $74,967 2.02 1.66 $29,817 7.5 $603 $167,107 $246,030 $198,683 $239,696 0.84 1.03 $50,317 7.1 $1,107 $10,180 $10,180 $12,081 $21,746 0.84 0.47 $12,814 0.5 $1,122 911 4: Comparison of Individual Conservation Measures City of Rohnert Park • $447,214 $794,662 $155,226 $193,435 2.88 4.11 $36,514 1 10 1 $306 •SF, MF■ ■ Clothes Washer Rebate - $365,103 MF $921,332 $73,444 $390,724 4.97 2.36 $77,899 18 $193 • $213,737 $347,432 $206,385 $275,180 1.04 1.26 $44,177 3.9 $812 tdoor Large Landscape • $19,429 $19,429 $27,249 $31,286 0.71 0.62 $28,918 2.6 $1,706 Rebatesidscape entives for $139,208 $139,208 $171,921 $289,652 0.81 0.48 $182,377 12 $1,399 Removalerade $257,066 $257,066 $202,343 $1,447,531 1.27 0.18 $112,454 7.8 $712 Removal$179,066 $179,066 $225,539 $1,613,473 0.79 0.11 $126,196 5.5 $1,140 $463,232 Codes -ter Conserving Landscape 'k Irrigation $463,232 $30,879 $277,914 15.00 1.67 $11,580 12 $58 ruire Smart Irrigation • Rain $438,861 $438,861 $174,351 $1,363,108 2.52 0.32 $49,010 8.9 $337 .. 1Some measures have no Water Utility Costs from 2015 to 2020, indicated by a dash (-) in the table. This means that there are no costs for these five years only, from 2015, inclusive, up to 2020, exclusive. It is not indicative of any activity before 2015 or during and/or after 2020. This column is meant to be helpful for budgeting purposes only. 39 5. RESULTS OF CONSERVATION PROGRAM EVALUATION This section describes the process of selecting conservation measures for developing alternative conservation program scenarios and various cost, savings, and target results. 5.1 Selection of Measures for Programs The 25 conservation measures were incorporated into each Water Contractor's DSS Model for cost -benefit analysis and selection of a conservation program to meet the Water Contractor's goals. Included in each Water Contractor's DSS Model was a list of measures in each of three alternative conservation programs (Programs A, B, and C), which were designed to illustrate a range of various measure combinations and resulting water savings. Four key items were taken into consideration during measure selection for Programs A, B, and C: • Existing Water Contractor water use efficiency measures; • Programs run by SMSWP; • Measures focused on Programmatic BMP defined by the CUWCC's Memorandum of Understanding if the individual Water Contractor had reported on a measure; and • New and innovative measures. These programs are not intended to be rigid frameworks but rather to demonstrate the range in savings that could be generated if selected measures were run together. For each Water Contractor the three program scenarios are organized as follows: • Program A: "Existing Program" option includes the measures that the Water Contractor currently offers. These measures are not necessarily designed the way they are currently implemented having, in some cases, more aggressive annual account targets. Again, though Program A represents the conservation measures each Water Contractor is currently implementing, it is important to note that these measures are designed in each Water Contractor's DSS Model to represent how the measure will be implemented in the future and not necessarily how it has historically been implemented. • Program B: "Optimized Program" includes measures that the Water Contractor currently implements or is interested in implementing. Current measures are not necessarily designed the way they are currently implemented having, in some cases, more aggressive annual account targets. Measures are typically cost- effective and save significant amounts of water. Key benchmarks for the proposed strategies include: (1) cost- effectiveness, (2) compliance with CUWCC's BMPs, (3) ability to help achieve water use reduction targets by 2020 (SB X7-7) if applicable for the individual Water Contractor, (4) reflects reasonable predicted annual water contract budget allocations for water conservation activities. • Program C: "All Measures Analyzed" presents a scenario where all 25 measures are implemented. Though it is unlikely that the Water Contractor would elect to implement all the measures, this program offers the opportunity to explore what the water savings (and costs) would potentially be should the Water Contractor implement such an extensive conservation program. The Water Contractor's DSS Model presents estimated average per capita per day savings with the plumbing codes only, and each of the alternative programs (Program A, B, and Q. Plumbing code includes current state and federal standards (including CALGreen, Senate Bill 407 and Assembly Bill 715) for items such as toilets, showerheads, faucets, pre -rinse spray valves. SB 407 and AB 715 require the replacement of non -water conserving plumbing fixtures with water - conserving fixtures. The Water Contractor was provided a copy of the DSS Model to review the conservation program options, tailor the programs to meet its needs, and select the program that fit its individual water savings goals and budgets. The reasons 40 5: Results of Conservation Program Evaluation City of Rohnert Park that each member Water Contractor selected a particular suite of measures varied and included the following consideration: • Measure cost-effectiveness to Water Contractor • Applicability to service area • Amount of water savings generated • Cost to Water Contractor • Ease of implementation for Water Contractor and staffing required • Whether the measure was being run by SCWA or SMSWP • Local preferences Table 5-1 displays which measures are in each program. Figure 5-1. Conservation Measures Selected for Programs 5.2 Results of Program Evaluation The following table and Figure 5-2 shows annual water demand with no conservation (plumbing code only) and the three conservation programs. The table and figure illustrate that savings associated with plumbing code implementation and Program A are the most significant savings predicted by the model. Implementation of Programs B and C result in marginal additional savings. Cf :::,o, gram Scenarios Measures Program A Program B Program C Water Loss d AMI Pricing r Program Public Info &School Education -SMWSP as Public Info & School Education - Water Contractor i r Scenarios Prohibit Water Waste r� r Indoor and Outdoor Surveys - CII - r Replace CII Inefficient Equipment r � Efficient Toilet Replacement Program - CII IV fV Urinal Rebates - CII r - r Plumber Initiated UH ET & HEU Retrofit Program r 7J Require X6.125 gal/flush Urinals in New Development 110 r HE Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway -CII 14 r 4 HE Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway -SF,MF t4 r rr Indoor and Outdoor Surveys - SF, MF r Iv ry Efficient Toilet Replacement Program -SF r r t~ Direct Install UHET, Showerheads, and Faucet Aerators - SF, MF r r W HE Clothes Washer Rebate - SF, MF rr rV rV Submeters Incentive r r r Outdoor Large Landscape Audits & Water Budgeting/Monitoring r r Y Landscape Rebates and Incentives for Equipment Upgrade r r V Turf Removal - MF, CII r r W Turf Removal - SF r W iV Water Conserving Landscape and Irrigation Codes r r r Require Smart Irrigation Controllers and Rain Sensors in New Development f,-, 1 r,-, r 5.2 Results of Program Evaluation The following table and Figure 5-2 shows annual water demand with no conservation (plumbing code only) and the three conservation programs. The table and figure illustrate that savings associated with plumbing code implementation and Program A are the most significant savings predicted by the model. Implementation of Programs B and C result in marginal additional savings. Cf 5: Results of Conservation Program Evaluation City of Rohnert Park Table 5-1. Potable Water Use Projections (Acre- Feet/Yea r) * 51415 Plumbing .. 5,675 5,887 6,111 6,372 6,644 Demand with Plumbing 5,415 .. 5,605 5,729 5,817 5,960 6,129 Demand with Plumbing- 5,365 5,348 5,426 5,461 5,591 5,745 .. .. Demand with Plumbing 5,361 5,309 5,310 5,337 5,459 5,605 Code and PlumbingDemand with 5,356 5,277 5,268 5,304 5,427 5,573 Code and Program C 7 *Data is not weather normalized. Total water use is potable only. Does not include recycled water use. 6,800 6,600 6,400 6,200 v 6,000 U a 5,800 5,600 5,400 5,200 Figure 5-2. Long Term Demands with Conservation Programs -*--Demand Projection without Plumbing Code -r-Demand Projection with Plumbing Code -#-Program A with Plumbing Code -Program B with Plumbing Code --r Program C with Plumbing Code Ln l0 r\ W M O r -I N M � Ln l0 r\ W M 0 r -I N m ct Ln l0 r\ w m o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Year Note: All line types shown in the legend are presented in the graph. Table 5-1 shows the savings in 5 -year increments for all three conservation programs; these are from the conservation programs alone and include the plumbing code savings. The separate starting points for the demand with and without the plumbing code versus the conservation programs is directly correlated to the variation in individual measures selected for each individual Program A, B, and C. Table 5-2 illustrates that all the programs modeled are at least marginally cost effective although the overall cost benefit ratio for the conservation program is reduced as more measures are implemented. E, V, 5: Results of Conservation Program Evaluation Table 5-2. Long Term Conservation Program Savings City of Rohnert Park - 69 157 293 412 515 N/A N/A 51 326 460 650 781 899 2.89 1.79 54 365 577 773 913 1,039 2.20 1.15 60 397 619 807 945 1,071 1.91 1.10 Figure 5-3 shows how marginal returns change as more money is spent to achieve savings. The slope of the line on the graph illustrates cost-effectiveness: the steeper the slope of the line, the more cost effective the program is to implement. Figure 5-3. Present Value of Utility Costs versus Cumulative Water Saved 1,200 1,000 U. a 800 a, L 600 a� M c 400 0 N 200 0 Program A $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 Present Value of Costs ($1,000) Table 5-3 presents key evaluation statistics compiled from the DSS Model. Assuming each program's measures are successfully implemented, projected indoor, outdoor and total water savings for 2040 in AFY are shown; these savings do include plumbing code savings. Savings and costs in the following table are a result of each program's conservation measures and any plumbing codes. Total present value costs and savings are estimated over the 25 year analysis period using an interest rate of 3%. The cost of water saved is presented for the utility. These cost parameters are derived from the annual time stream of utility, customer, and community costs. 43 5: Results of Conservation Program Evaluation City of Rohnert Park Table 5-3. Comparison of Long -Term Conservation Programs — Utility Costs and Savings 538 361 ' 899 $7,107,384 $2,460,754 $4,362,913 $315 MMMMII 583 456 1,039 $9,271,830 $4,206,847 $9,057,957 $409 with Plumbing 612 459 1,071 $10,045,098 $5,267,908 $10,594,602 $474 Code I The following table presents the year 2020 GPCD target and Program A, B, and C GPCD estimates for the Water Contractor. Table 5-4. Adopted Water Conservation Target Compared to Projected Program Savings (in GPCD) Note: 2015 Actual per capita use will be provided by the Water Contractor at the time the 2015 UWMP is prepared. 44 5: Results of Conservation Program Evaluation City of Rohnert Park The following figure presents the year 2020 GPCD target and historical and projected GPCD estimates with plumbing codes and Program A, B, and C savings. Figure 5-4. Water Conservation Program Savings Projections — SB X7-7 Target, GPCD 154 Historical Demand (Demand Projection without Plumbing Code 144 Demand Projection with Plumbing Code —0—Program A with Plumbing Code —OI -Program B with Plumbing Code 134 Program C with Plumbing Code Year 2020 SBX7-7 GPCD Target 0 124 a L� } 114 104 94 84 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Year Notes All line types shown in the legend are presented in the graph. The following demand scenarios, Program B and Program C, are close in value and therefore indistinguishable in the figure. Note the decline in water use in the 2014 dry year and 2008-2011 economic recession. 45 6. CONCLUSIONS This section presents a discussion of the relative savings and cost-effectiveness of the Water Contractor's alternative conservation programs. The City of Rohnert Park's service area has a relatively high portion of residential water use and a significant amount of outdoor water use. Consequently, residential and irrigation conservation programs produce the most savings. The City's service area is not a heavy manufacturing sector, so the conservation potential in the commercial sector is relatively low. Based on the assumed avoided cost of water, water conservation programs are cost-effective, although the most aggressive program provides relatively little additional savings at a relatively high cost. Overall conclusions are as follows: • The change in water demands from years 2015 to 2040 are projected to increase. The following projected demand scenarios have been analyzed for the 25 -year study period: • Significant water savings will occur from the implementation of the Plumbing Codes in the Water Contractor's service area. • Water savings from implementation of Program A, Program B, and Program C conservation programs would reduce water needs in 2040 by approximately 6.3%, 8.5% and 9.1% respectively when compared to 2040 potable water demand with the plumbing code. • For Program A, B, and C measures, approximately 88% of the active conservation water savings potential in 2040 (or 42% of the water savings total if the plumbing code is included) is in reducing outdoor use; the rest is indoor use reduction potential. • The average cost of water saved over 30 years is lower than the current price of SCWA water. Thus, measures that are cost-effective at today's water rates will be more so if SCWA rates rise in the future. • Water savings contributed by Program A measures alone are 384 acre-feet in 2040 (active program savings). • Water savings contributed by the Program B measures alone are 524 acre-feet in 2040 (active program savings). • Benefit -cost ratios of Program A, Program B, and Program C conservation alternatives are 2.9, 2.2, and 1.9 respectively, indicating that all program combinations are cost-effective from the utility standpoint. Table 6-1. Potable Water Use Projections (Acre- Feet/Yea r) * e e 5,415 5,675 5,887 6,111 6,372 6,644 5,415 5,605 5,729 5,817 5,960 6,129 5,365 5,348 5,426 5,461 5,591 5,745 5,361 5,309 5,310 5,337 5,459 5,605 5,356 5,277 5,268 5,304 5,427 5,573 *Data is not weather normalized. Base year water demand is based on 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, and 2013 years. 2014 was not used since it was a drought year. Total water use is potable only. Does not include recycled water use. 46 APPENDIX A - ASSUMPTIONS FOR THE DSS MODEL The following section presents the key assumptions used in the DSS Model. The assumptions having the most dramatic effect on future demands are the natural replacement rate of fixtures, how residential or commercial future use is projected, and finally the percent of estimated real water losses. This section presents DSS Model assumptions regarding plumbing code water savings, present value parameters, and active conservation measure costs and savings. A.1 Plumbing Codes and Legislation The DSS Model incorporates the following three items as a "code" meaning that the savings are assumed to occur and are therefore "passive" savings. 1. National Plumbing Code 2. CALGreen 3. AB 715 4. AB 407 Each of the three items is described below. In the sections following the descriptions is information on how the DSS Model handles these items and what information is needed for input. National Plumbing Code The Federal Energy Policy Act of 1992, as amended in 2005 requires only fixtures meeting the following standards can be installed in new buildings: • Toilet —1.6 gal/flush maximum • Urinals —1.0 gal/flush maximum • Showerhead - 2.5 gal/min at 80 psi • Residential Faucets — 2.2 gal/min at 60 psi • Public Restroom Faucets - 0.5 gal/min at 60 psi • Dishwashing pre -rinse spray valves —1.6 gal/min at 60 psi Replacement of fixtures in existing buildings is also governed by the Federal Energy Policy Act that requires only devices with the specified level of efficiency (shown above) can be sold today (since 2006). The net result of the plumbing code is that new buildings will have more efficient fixtures and old inefficient fixtures will slowly be replaced with new more efficient models. The national plumbing code is an important piece of legislation and must be carefully taken into consideration when analyzing the overall water efficiency of a service area. In addition to the plumbing code the US Department of Energy regulates appliances such as residential clothes washers. Regulations to make these appliances more energy efficient has driven manufactures to dramatically reduce the amount of water these efficient machines use. Generally, front loading washing machines use 30 to 50% less water than conventional models (which are still available). In a typical analysis the DSS Model forecasts a gradual transition to high efficiency clothes washers (using 12 gallons or less) so that by the year 2025 this will be the only type of machines purchased. In addition to the industry becoming more efficient, rebate programs for washers have been successful in encouraging customers to buy more water efficient models. Given that machines last about 10 years, eventually all machines will be of this type. In 2012, the United States Environmental Protection Agency estimated the Energy Star clothes washer market share in the US in 2011 to be over 60%. Energy Star washing machines have a water factor (WF) of 6.0 or less. A WF of 6.0 is the equivalent of using 3.1 cubic feet or 23.2 gallons of water per load. 47 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model State Building Code —CALGreen City of Rohnert Park The CALGreen requirements effect all new development in the State of California after January 1, 2011. The new development requirements under CALGreen are listed in the following figure. MWM added the CALGreen requirements that effect all new development in the State of California after January 1, 2011. MWM modeled water savings from the CALGreen building code by adding Multi -family and Commercial customer categories as appropriate to applicable conservation measures. Table A-1. CALGreen Building Code Summary Table Toilets, Showers, Achieve 20% Indoor 1/1/2011 Lavatory & Kitchen savings overall Faucets, Urinals below baseline Outdoor 1/1/2011 Only if building Indoor 1/1/2011 Submeter leased >50,000 sq. ft. & if spaces leased space use >100 gpd Toilets, Showers, Lavatory & Kitchen o Faucets, Wash Achieve 20% savings overall Fountains, below baseline Metering Faucets, Urinals Outdoor 1/1/2011 Yes Provide weather adjusting Yes controllers Yes Yes Provide water > 1,000 sq ft. budget landscaped area Separate meter As per Local or DWR ordinance Prescriptive > 1,000 sq ft. landscaping landscaped area requirements Weather adjusting Yes irrigation controller * Effective date is 7/1/2011 for toilets. New Development Ordinances —Water Contractor -Specific The new development ordinances for each Water Contractor are listed in the following Table A-2 below. 48 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model Table A-2. New Development Ordinances All 10 All All All Allj All All -9gAll 2010 (SF>4 lots) & 2010, l 2005 No No 2010 sq No SF>5,000 2000 >2,500 ft/lot sq ft 2010 (SF>4 lots) & 2010, l 2005 Yes 2010 2010 > otssq No SF>5,000L2011 ft/lot sq ft mv� 2005 Yes 2009 2011 2011 No No 2011 —Illlpm� fl N 2009 No No No No 2012 2000 No 2009 No No No No 2011 01 No No No No No No No 2006 Yes 2009 2011 2011 No No 2011 SF since 2010 for 2010 2010 for 2010 (State 2007. All landscapes (adopted All except 2004 ordinance) 2010 other > 2,500 sq ordinance SF<5,000 1994 40 since 1993 ft (applies planned to sq. ft. and 49 City of Rohnert Park Yes No Yes Yes �—Alk EEEE=Mq Yes Yes Yes No MEMEdM Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model City of Rohnert Park 1City of Rohnert Park has extensive green building ordinance requiring developers to select from a set of green building measures including some of the listed measures. 2City of Cotati ND -3 confirmed to start in 2009 based on July 27, 2010 with City of Cotati at the request of Damien O'Bid. Build It Green Checklist mandatory, beginning in the year 2004. The year 2009 was selected as a start date for 100% deployment of measures, as the measures can be selectively deployed providing the overall point minimum is achieved. 50 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model City of Rohnert Park State Plumbing Code —AB 715 The Plumbing Code includes the new CCR Title 20 California State Law (AB 715) requiring High Efficiency Toilets and High Efficiency Urinals be exclusively sold in the state by 2014. The following figure conceptually describes how the National plumbing code, CALGreen and AB 715 are incorporated into the flow of information in the DSS Model. Figure A-1. DSS Model Overview Used to Make Potable Water Demand Projections USERS PER ACCOUNT California State Law —SB 407 INDOOR/OUTDOOR WATER USAGE WATER USAGE BY END USE FIXTURE ------ MODELS ACCOUNT GROWTH PROJECTIONS CALIBRATION J LEGEND - Input Data ® Model Process O Output/Results O Calibration Base -Year Conditions T Demand Forecasting 1 FINAL DEMAND PROJECTIONS SB 407 (Plumbing Fixture Retrofit on Resale or Remodel): The DSS Model carefully takes into account the overlap with SB 407, the plumbing code (natural replacement), CALGreen, AB 715 and rebate programs (such as toilet rebates). SB 407 begins from the year 2017 in residential and 2019 in commercial properties. SB 407 program length is variable and continues until all the older high flush toilets have been replaced the service area. The number of accounts with high flow fixtures is tracked to make sure that the situation of replacing more high flow fixtures than actually exist does not occur. DSS Model Fixture Replacement The DSS Model is capable of modeling multiple types of fixtures, including fixtures with slightly different design standards. For example currently toilets can be purchased that can flush at a rate of 0.8 gallons per flush, 1.0 gallon per flush or 1.28 gallons per flush. The 1.6 gpf and higher gallons per flush toilets still exist but no longer can be purchased in California and cannot therefore be used for a replacement or new installation. So the DSS Model utilizes a fixture replacement table to decide what type of fixture is installed when a fixture is replaced or a new fixture is installed. The replacement of the fixtures is listed as a percentage as shown in the following figure. For example, a value of 100% would represent that all the toilets sold would be of one particular flush volume. A value of 75% means that three out of every four toilets installed would be of that particular flush volume type. The DSS Model contains a pair of replacement tables for each fixture type and customer category combination. For example, the DSS Model will contain a 51 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model City of Rohnert Park pair of replacement tables for Residential Single Family toilets, Residential Multi -family toilets, Commercial toilets, Residential clothes washing machines, Commercial washing machines, etc. Figure A-2. Example Toilet Replacement Percentages by Type of Toilet In the previous example, the DSS Model combines the effects of the following for the toilet fixture type: • Federal Policy Act o Determines the "saturation" of 1.6 gpf toilets as it was in effect from 1992-2014 for toilet replacements. • CALGreen o Determines that all "new appliance market share" toilets in "new" development will be 1.28 gpf o The year 2012 was selected as the beginning of the toilet portion of the code did not go into effect until July 1, 2011 and it also takes a while to get a permit, build the facility or residence, and have the toilets functioning with the building occupied, such that the savings would not actually occur until the year 2012 rather than the year 2011. • AB 715 o Determines that the "replacement appliance market" and "new appliance market" toilets will all be 1.28 gpf toilets or lower. DSS Model Initial Fixture Proportions The DSS Model also needs a place to start when it comes to fixture replacement. It needs to know what the initial proportions (or percentages) of each type of fixture that are currently installed (also known as fixture saturation rate) in the modeled service area for each customer class. Figure A-3 presents an example of the initial proportions determined for residential toilets in the year 2010. In the following example the model started in 2010, therefore it is assumed the initial proportions of the 1.28 gallon per flush type toilets is 0% as they were not readily available at that time. Then using the 2010 DP -04 census data, which shows the age of houses in the service area, it is calculated that 39.3% of the total current homes were built since 1992 when 1.6 gallon per flush toilets where required to be installed in new homes. Then an average natural replacement rate (rate of broken or remodeled toilet) of 2.5% per year for higher flush volume toilets is assumed. Then, in this example, a 3.96% replacement rate is calculated due to a rebate program that was raising the replacement rate of toilets. This gives the initial proportion of 1.6 gallon per flush (gpf) toilets to be 90.0%, and 1.28 gpf toilets 3.3%. In this case the initial proportion of high flush toilets is assumed to be the remainder of 6.7%. This figure shows an example of a toilet fixture model and how it incorporates the changes from each of these legislative items. There are similar fixture models for showers, clothes washers, and urinals. There is one fixture model for each of the following categories: • Single family toilets • Multi -family toilets 52 Replacement Appliance Market Shares Year 1.28 gpf HET 1.6 gpf ULFT High Use Toilet Total 2012 75% 25% 0% 100% 2014 100% 0% 0% 100% 2020 100% 0% 0% 100% 2030 100% 0% 0% 100% 2050 100% 0% 0% r 100% New Appliance Market Shares Year 1.28 gpf HET 1.6 gpf ULFT High Use Toilet Total 2012 100% 0% 0% 100% 2014 100% 0% 0% 100% 2020 100% 0% 0% 100% 2030 100% 0% 0% 100% 2050 100% 0% 0% r 100% In the previous example, the DSS Model combines the effects of the following for the toilet fixture type: • Federal Policy Act o Determines the "saturation" of 1.6 gpf toilets as it was in effect from 1992-2014 for toilet replacements. • CALGreen o Determines that all "new appliance market share" toilets in "new" development will be 1.28 gpf o The year 2012 was selected as the beginning of the toilet portion of the code did not go into effect until July 1, 2011 and it also takes a while to get a permit, build the facility or residence, and have the toilets functioning with the building occupied, such that the savings would not actually occur until the year 2012 rather than the year 2011. • AB 715 o Determines that the "replacement appliance market" and "new appliance market" toilets will all be 1.28 gpf toilets or lower. DSS Model Initial Fixture Proportions The DSS Model also needs a place to start when it comes to fixture replacement. It needs to know what the initial proportions (or percentages) of each type of fixture that are currently installed (also known as fixture saturation rate) in the modeled service area for each customer class. Figure A-3 presents an example of the initial proportions determined for residential toilets in the year 2010. In the following example the model started in 2010, therefore it is assumed the initial proportions of the 1.28 gallon per flush type toilets is 0% as they were not readily available at that time. Then using the 2010 DP -04 census data, which shows the age of houses in the service area, it is calculated that 39.3% of the total current homes were built since 1992 when 1.6 gallon per flush toilets where required to be installed in new homes. Then an average natural replacement rate (rate of broken or remodeled toilet) of 2.5% per year for higher flush volume toilets is assumed. Then, in this example, a 3.96% replacement rate is calculated due to a rebate program that was raising the replacement rate of toilets. This gives the initial proportion of 1.6 gallon per flush (gpf) toilets to be 90.0%, and 1.28 gpf toilets 3.3%. In this case the initial proportion of high flush toilets is assumed to be the remainder of 6.7%. This figure shows an example of a toilet fixture model and how it incorporates the changes from each of these legislative items. There are similar fixture models for showers, clothes washers, and urinals. There is one fixture model for each of the following categories: • Single family toilets • Multi -family toilets 52 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model • Commercial toilets • Commercial urinals • Single family showers • Multi -family showers • Single Family clothes washers • Multi -family clothes washers City of Rohnert Park Figure A-3. Example Residential Toilet Initial Proportions from Fixture Analysis used for DSS Fixture Model Fixture Model: Residential Toilets Appliance Data Comments Replacement Data Volume per Proportion of Net Change Net Change Initial Percent Annual Fixture Type Use Homes by due to Natural due to RebateFixture Proportion S4 Type Replacements (Gallons)' Age Replacement Program' 1.28 gal/flush High Efficiency 3.4% as these toilets were not 1.28 gal/flush High Efficiency Toilets HET 1.3 0.0% 0.0% 3.30% 3.3% very prelevant in the start year. Toilets HET 2.0% 39.3% new homes since 1990 + 1.6 gal/flush Ultra Low Flow 50% natural replacement +15% 1.6 gal/flush Ultra Low Flow Toilets (ULFT) 1.8 39.3% 50.0% 0.66% 90.0% retrofit program Toilets (ULFT) 2.0% High Flush and 3.5 gal/flush 4.0 60.7% -50.00% -3.96% 6.7% Remainder High Flush and 3.5 gal/flush 2.5% NOTES: 1a. Volumes -per -use are based on average flush volumes for age of toilet. New toilets when out of adjustment flush at an average of 1.8 gpf instead of 1.6 gpf. 1b. Initial proportions of fixtures installed in homes are based on the age of homes as provided in the 2010 Census. 2. Assume homes constructed after 1992 installed ULFTs. 3. Net change due to rebate program is based on historical active conservation activity. 4. The initial proportions are fundamentally calculated by taking the initial proportions of homes by age (corresponding to efficiency levels) and adding the net change due to natural replacement and adding change due to rebate program minus the "free rider effect." No fixture % can exceed 90%. 5a. Assume a 2.5% replacement rate for older toilets to the ULFTs over the 17 years since they where required. 5b. Assume a future annual replacement rate of 2.0% for high efficiency fixtures, 2.0% for medium efficiency fixtures and 2.5% for low efficiency fixtures. 2.0% corresponds Ito a 50 year fixture life. 2.5% corresponds with a 40 year fixture life. These initial proportions determine in the fixture model and found in each Water Contractor's Water Use Data Analysis workbook, are then entered into the DSS Model for each fixture's "Codes and Standards" worksheet. A screenshot of the single family toilets codes and standards worksheet is shown in the following figure. Most DSS Models include fixture models for SF and MF toilets, showers, and clothes washers; and commercial toilets and urinals. 53 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model Figure A-4. Example Residential Toilet Fixture Screenshot from DSS Model City of Rohnert Park DSS Model Fixture Replacement Rates An additional input to the DSS Model is the natural replacement rate of fixtures due to breakage, remodeling or other reason for replacement over time. To do this the DSS Model uses an percentage value for each fixture type that becomes the assumed natural replacement rate for that fixture. For example, high flush toilets have a replacement rate value of 2.5%. Each year the number of remaining accounts with old toilets is calculated as 0.975 times the prior year's value. This value can be modified by the user for any fixture as shown in Figure A-5 below. 54 General Measure Category Udault Plumbing code Start Year 2012 The DSS Model is capable of modeling multiple types of fixtures, including fixtures with slightly different design standards. For example currently toilets can be purchased that can flush at L29 gallons per flush or lb gallons perflush. The higher Single Family flush toilets (3.-'gpf) still exist but no longercan be purchased in California and cannot therefore be used fora replacement Toilets or new installation. The DSS Model utilizes a fixture replacement table to decide what type of toilet is installed when a fixture is replaced ora new fixture is installed. The replacement of the fixtures is listed as a percentage. For example, a value of 10076 would represent that all the toilets sold would be of one particular flush volume. A value of 7576 means that three out of every four toilets installed would be of that particular flush volume type. The DSS Model combines the effects of the following for the toilet fixture type: • Federal Policy Act: Detern ines the 'saturation' of lb gpf toilets as it was in effect from 1992-2014 for toilet replacements. • Cal Green: Determines that all anew appliance market share' toilets in `new" development will be 1.28 gpf. The year 2012 was selected for the model input as the toilet portion of the code did not go into effect until July 1, 2011 and it also takes a while to get a permit, build the facility or residence, and have the toilets functioningwith the buildingoccupied, such that the savings would not actual w occu r until the year 2012 rather than the year 2011. • AB 715: Determines that the `replacement appliance market' and "new appliance market' toilets will all be 1.28 gpf toilets. An additional input to the DSS Model is the natural replacement rate of fixtures due to breakage, remodeling or other reason for replacement overtime. To do this the DSS Model uses a percentage value for each fixture type that becomes the assumed natural replacement rate for that fixture. For example, anaturaIre placement rate of2.5%isused for older toilets. This value can be modified by the user as shown on the previous worksheet. Each year the number of remaining accounts Descrlpton with old toilets is calculated as 0.975 times the prior year's value. L Volumes -per -use are based on average flush volumes forage of toilet. New toilets when out of adjustment flush at an average of LS gpf instead of lb gpf. 2. Initial proportions of fixtures installed in homes are based on the age of homes as provided in the 2010 Census. 3. Assume homes constructed after 1992 installed ULFTs. 4. Net change due to rebate program is based on historical active conservation activity. a The initial proportions are fundamentally calculated by taking the initial proportions of homes by age (corresponding to efficiency levels) and adding the net change due to natural replacement and adding change due to rebate program minus the "free rider effect." No fixture % can exceed 90%. 6. Assume a 2.5% replacement rate for older toilets to the ULFTs overthe 17 years since they where required. 7. Assume a future annual replacement rate of 2076 for high efficiency fixtures, 2.076 for medium efficiency fixtures and Comments 2576 for low efficiency fixtures. 2.0% corresponds to a 50 year fixture life. 25% corresponds with a 40 year fixture life. Customer Category Single Family — End Use Toilets Effected Fixtures 1.28 gpf HET r 1.6 gpf ULFT r* High Use Toilet 'v Initial Fixture Proportions 1.28 gpf HET 2.7% 1.6 gpf ULFT 90.0% High Use Toilet 7.3% Total 100.0 DSS Model Fixture Replacement Rates An additional input to the DSS Model is the natural replacement rate of fixtures due to breakage, remodeling or other reason for replacement over time. To do this the DSS Model uses an percentage value for each fixture type that becomes the assumed natural replacement rate for that fixture. For example, high flush toilets have a replacement rate value of 2.5%. Each year the number of remaining accounts with old toilets is calculated as 0.975 times the prior year's value. This value can be modified by the user for any fixture as shown in Figure A-5 below. 54 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model City of Rohnert Park Also included in the following figure are example fixture efficiencies, which can be adjusted to any desired level based on service area characteristics. MWM can update data on efficiency levels found in the field and the 2011 California Single Family Water Use Efficiency Study (DeOreo) or other recent information related to fixture saturation rates. Figure A-5. Example Future Replacement Rates of Fixtures from DSS Model DSS Model End Uses Indoor and outdoor residential and non-residential end use breakdowns can be found in the "End Uses" section of each Water Contractor's DSS Model on the "Breakdown" worksheet. As screenshot example of this worksheet is shown in Figure A-6. The source of these values is the California DWR Report "California Single Family Water Use Efficiency Study", 2011, AWWARF's Report "Residential End Uses of Water" 2015 (pending), and Water Contractor supplied data on costs and savings. AWWARF's 2000 "Commercial and Institutional End Uses of Water" is also used. 55 Fixture Name End Use Fixtures Average Water Use Units Fixture Life (yrs) Replacement Rate 1.28 gpf HET Toilets 1.30 gpf 50 2.0% 1.6 gpf ULFT Toilets 1.80 gpf 50 2.0% High Use Toilet Toilets 3.50 gpf 40 2.5% 1gpf UrinaI urinals 1.00 gpf 50 2.0% 0.5gpfUrinal urinals - 0.50 gpf 50 2.0% Waterless Urinal urinals 0.00 gpf 50 2.0% High Use Urinals Urinals 3.00 gpf 40 2.5% quart Urinals Urinals 0.25 gpf 50 2.0% High Efficiency 2 gpm showers 13.92 gal per use 25 4.0% Law Flaw 2.5 gpm showers 18.27 gal per use 25 4.0% High Flow> 3 gpm showers 23.49 gal per use 25 4.0% Efficient Clothes washers 12.00 gal per use 10 10.05/C Medium Efficiency Clothes washers 19.20 gal per use 10 10.0% Top Loader Clothes washers 34.20 gal per use 10 10.0% DSS Model End Uses Indoor and outdoor residential and non-residential end use breakdowns can be found in the "End Uses" section of each Water Contractor's DSS Model on the "Breakdown" worksheet. As screenshot example of this worksheet is shown in Figure A-6. The source of these values is the California DWR Report "California Single Family Water Use Efficiency Study", 2011, AWWARF's Report "Residential End Uses of Water" 2015 (pending), and Water Contractor supplied data on costs and savings. AWWARF's 2000 "Commercial and Institutional End Uses of Water" is also used. 55 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model Figure A-6. End Use Breakdown Example Screenshot City of Rohnert Park End use breakdown values will differ slightly between Water Contractors due to differing demographics of their service area population. Residential frequency of use information for toilets, showers, and washers, and non-residential frequency of use of toilets and urinals is included in the "Codes and Standards" green section on the "Fixtures" worksheet of each Water Contractor's DSS Model, and then confirmed in each "Service Area Calibration End Use. Calculated frequencies of use in uses/user/day for customer end uses are presented in each customer category's "Service Area Calibration End Use" worksheet and compared to an industry -accepted use range based on AWWARF's residential, commercial and institutional end use reports mentioned previously. An example of this calibration sheet is shown in the screenshot in Figure A-7 below. Figure A-7. Single Family End Use Breakdown and Fixture Use Frequency Example Screenshot Indoor End Use Name Breakdoum Lower Upper State Fixture Model SF MF COM IND INST IRR OTH Calibrated W'0ii' Toilets 16.0% 18.096 16.5% 12.096 18.0% Showers 24.0% 0.73 0.6 Urinals Calibrated Eck 4.0% 3.096 5.0% Clothes Washers 13.0% 0.32 Faucets 21.0% 12.096 13.0% 14.096 14.0% Showers 24.0% 28.096 8.0% 8.096 8.0% Breakdown Dishwashers 2.0% 5.096 6.0% 6.096 6.0% Clothes Washers 13.0% 16.5% 15.0% 15.096 15.0% Process 23.0% 27.096 Kitchen Spray Rinse 5.0% 5.096 5.0% Internal Leakage 7.0% 5.096 9.5% 10.096 10.0% Baths 2.5% 1.5% Other 14.5% 141096 0.0% 0.096 19.0% Total 100.09'0 100.0% 100.090 100.0% 100.0% 0.09/0 0.040' Outdoor End Use Name SF MF COM IND I NST IRR OTH Irrigation 80.0% 83.096 95.0% 95.096 95.0% 95.096 Pools 1.0% 2.096 Wash Down 7.0% 4.096 Car Washing 7.0% 4.096 External Leakage 5.0% 7.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Outdoor95.0% Total 100.0% 100.090 100.0% 1DD.D9lo 100.0% 100.D°lo 100.0% End use breakdown values will differ slightly between Water Contractors due to differing demographics of their service area population. Residential frequency of use information for toilets, showers, and washers, and non-residential frequency of use of toilets and urinals is included in the "Codes and Standards" green section on the "Fixtures" worksheet of each Water Contractor's DSS Model, and then confirmed in each "Service Area Calibration End Use. Calculated frequencies of use in uses/user/day for customer end uses are presented in each customer category's "Service Area Calibration End Use" worksheet and compared to an industry -accepted use range based on AWWARF's residential, commercial and institutional end use reports mentioned previously. An example of this calibration sheet is shown in the screenshot in Figure A-7 below. Figure A-7. Single Family End Use Breakdown and Fixture Use Frequency Example Screenshot 56 End Use Use Percentage UseslUserlDay Lower Upper State Fixture Model Toilets 16.0% 4.76 4.5 5.6 Calibrated W'0ii' Faucets 21.0% Showers 24.0% 0.73 0.6 0.9 Calibrated Eck Dishwashers 2.0% Clothes Washers 13.0% 0.32 0.3 0.42 Calibrated _ Single Family Internal Leakage 7.0% Baths 2.5% Other 14.5% Total 100.0% 56 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model A.2 Present Value Parameters City of Rohnert Park Present value analysis using constant FY 2014 dollars and a real discount rate of 3% is used to discount costs and benefits to the base year. From this analysis, benefit -cost ratios of each measure are computed. When measures are put together in programs, the model is set up to avoid double counting savings from multiple measures that act on the same end use of water. For example, multiple measures in a program may target toilet replacements. The model includes assumptions to apportion water savings between the multiple measures. Economic analysis can be performed from several different perspectives, based on which party is affected. For planning water use efficiency programs for utilities, the perspectives most commonly used for benefit -cost analyses are the "utility" perspective and the "community" perspective. The "utility' benefit -cost analysis is based on the benefits and costs to the water provider. The "community' benefit -cost analysis includes the utility benefit and costs together with account owner/customer benefits and costs. These include customer energy and other capital or operating cost benefits plus costs of implementing the measure, beyond what the utility pays. The utility perspective offers two advantages. First, it considers only the program costs that will be directly borne by the utility. This enables the utility to fairly compare potential investments for saving versus supplying increased quantities of water. Second, revenue shifts are treated as transfer payments, which means program participants will have lower water bills and non -participants will have slightly higher water bills so that the utility's revenue needs continue to be met. Therefore, the analysis is not complicated with uncertainties associated with long-term rate projections and retail rate design assumptions. It should be noted that there is a significant difference between the utility's savings from the avoided cost of procurement and delivery of water and the reduction in retail revenue that results from reduced water sales due to water use efficiency. This budget impact occurs slowly, and can be accounted for in water rate planning. Because it is the water provider's role in developing a water use efficiency plan that is vital in this study, the utility perspective was primarily used to evaluate elements of this report. The community perspective is defined to include the utility and the customer costs and benefits. Costs incurred by customers striving to save water while participating in water use efficiency programs are considered, as well as the benefits received in terms of reduced energy bills (from water heating costs) and wastewater savings, among others. Water bill savings are not a customer benefit in the aggregate for reasons described above. Other factors external to the utility, such as environmental effects, are often difficult to quantify or are not necessarily under the control of the utility. They are therefore frequently excluded from economic analyses, including this one. The time value of money is explicitly considered. Typically the costs to save water occur early in the planning period whereas the benefits usually extend to the end of the planning period. A long planning period of 30-40 years is typically used because costs and benefits that occur beyond 2050 years have very little influence on the total present value of the costs and benefits. The value of all future costs and benefits is discounted to the first year in the DSS Model (the base year, which in this case is 2015), at the real interest rate of 3.01%. The DSS Model calculates this real interest rate, adjusting the current nominal interest rate (assumed to be approximately 6.1%) by the assumed rate of inflation (3.0%). The formula to calculate the real interest rate is: (nominal interest rate — assumed rate of inflation)/ (1 + assumed rate of inflation). Cash flows discounted in this manner are herein referred to as "Present Value" sums. A.3 Assumptions about Measure Costs Costs were determined for each of the measures based on industry knowledge, past experience and data provided by the individual Water Contractors. Costs may include incentive costs, usually determined on a per -participant basis; fixed costs, such as marketing; variable costs, such as the costs to staff the measures and to obtain and maintain equipment; and a one-time set-up cost. The set-up cost is for measure design by staff or consultants, any required pilot testing, and preparation of materials that will be used in marketing the measure. The model was run for 36 years (each year between FY 2014 and FY 2050). Costs were spread over the time period depending on the length of the implementation period for the measure and estimated voluntary customer participation levels. 57 Appendix A: Assumptions for the DSS Model City of Rohnert Park Lost revenue due to reduced water sales is not included as a cost because the water use efficiency measures evaluated herein generally take effect over a long span of time that is sufficient to enable timely rate adjustments, if necessary, to meet fixed cost obligations and savings on variable costs such as energy and chemicals. A.4 Assumptions about Measure Savings Data necessary to forecast water savings of measures include specific data on water use, demographics, market penetration, and unit water savings. Savings normally develop at a measured and predetermined pace, reaching full maturity after full market penetration is achieved. This may occur three to seven years after the start of implementation, depending upon the implementation schedule. For every water use efficiency activity or replacement with more efficient devices, there is a useful life. The useful life is called the "Measure Life" and is defined to be how long water use efficiency measures stay in place and continue to save water. It is assumed that measures implemented because of codes, standards or ordinances, like toilets for example, would be "permanent" and not revert to an old inefficient level of water use if the device needed to be replaced. However, some measures that are primarily behavioral based, such as residential surveys, are assumed to need to be repeated on an ongoing basis to retain the water savings (e.g., homeowners move away and new homeowners may have less efficient water using practices around the home). Surveys typically have a measure life on the order of five years. 58 APPENDIX B - WATER USE GRAPHS FOR PRODUCTION AND CUSTOMER CATEGORIES As initially presented in Section 3 of this report, this appendix presents historical customer category water use graphs. Units shown are average gallons of water per account per day. These graphs were reviewed to better identify outlier data points and years so that a representative baseline water use value (of average account water use by category) could be determined. The effects of drought, economic recessions, service line failures, and meter inaccuracies are typically evident in these figures. 59 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Customer CategorySingle Family Residential CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Customer Category Multifamily Residential AN ANIT A �� 1. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Customer Category Commercial v IM IN ICE, ,■ C CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Customer Category: Industrial CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Customer Category: Irrigation ,IASLMW APPENDIX C - MEASURE SCREENING PROCESS AND RESULTS In order to start the cost effectiveness analysis and build a water use efficiency model for each Water Contractor, the SMSWP Water Contractors decided on the list of conservation measures to be analyzed that, once modeled, would serve as the menu to build conservation program scenarios. To this end, two web -based webinars were conducted in February and March 2015 to review and select conservation measures together with staff representatives from each Water Contractor. The library of conservation measure opportunities had more than 50 measures and various implementation strategies (having different unit costs, participation levels and/or unit water savings which must be modeled individually). In order to maximize efficiency and productivity at the workshop, each Water Contractor developed two "top 10" lists of active conservation measures that they wanted to evaluate in order to eventually decide if their Water Contractor would include the measure in their DSS Model: Regional "Top 10" list — a suite of measures each Water Contractor wanted to bean a lyzed for the SMSWP to implement. Water Contractor "Top 10" list — a suite of measures that each Water Contractor representative selected for their own Water Contractor to possibly implement individually without SMSWP support. Furthermore, to help facilitate input and combine results most easily, each Water Contractor completed an online survey to help identify their ideal "top 10" potential conservation measures for both the regional and Water Contractor programs. Water Contractors collaborated internally with others in their Water Contractor as necessary. The results of the survey were treated as the input from each Water Contractor's perspective. Based on this initial Water Contractor input, subsequent workshop calls were structured to focus on a discussion of measures that received mixed interest from the group, rather than those measures that the group already had consensus on. This approach led to a decision on which measures should initially be included in the DSS Models. Additionally, each Water Contractor also had the ability to add unique measures for their individual DSS Model. Once finalized, the selected measures on both the SMSWP-led and Water Contractor -led lists were inserted into each Water Contractor's DSS Model, along with the standard utility operations (e.g., water loss control programs) and education measures in order to have a complete standard menu of 25 measures in each Water Contractor's DSS Model. Next, the Project Team worked with each Water Contractor to more specifically analyze measures (participation rates, Water Contractor unit costs and unit water savings, etc.), and build conservation program scenarios. The number of measures, twenty-five, comes from the consultant's past experience on having enough measures to choose from to (a) build program scenarios that are able to meet SB X7-7 water use targets, and (b) still be feasible to be successfully implemented between SMSWP and Water Contractor combined efforts. The following figures present the regional and Water Contractor measure rankings resulting from this screening process. Measures with the highest priority for being included in the cost effectiveness analysis were ranked with number 1 representing the most important. Note that selections for the top 1-5 measures likely "passed" the screening; measures showing ranking 5-10 received the most debate at the workshop. 65 Appendix C: Measure Screening Process and Results City of Rohnert Park Figure C-1. Water Contractor -Only Measures Screening Ranking PRE-SCREEN POTENTIAL INDIVIDUAL WATER CONTRACTOR CONSERVATION MEASURES Ranked 1 thru 54 in Order of Interest 9A - Single Family Water Surveys, Target: SF indoor 9B - Multi -Family Water Surveys. Target: MF Indoor 3A - Real Water Loss Reduction - Leak Repair_ Target: System 50 - Targeted AMI to Irrigation or Large User Accounts. Target: ALL 513 - Install AMI New Development. Target: ALL 5A- Install AML Target: ALL 2B - Apparent Loss Reduction - Meter Testing. Target: System 813 - MF Submeter Incentive. Target: Existing Mr Indoor 30 - Real Water Loss Reduction. Target: System 10A - High Efficiency Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway_ Target: SF MF 2A -Apparent Loss Reduction - Billing System. Target: System 6A - Rate Structure Evaluation_ Target ALL 1 - Conduct Annual System Water Use Audit. Target: System 8D - Require Multifamily Submetering for New Developments. Target: New... 8C - MF Submeter Incentive_ Target: New MF Indoor 9C - Real Customer Water Loss Reduction - Leak Repair and Plumbing... 3B - Real Water Lass Reduction - Reduce Background Lasses with Main... 10B - High Efficsency Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway. Target: CII 8A- Mobile Home Park Submetering. Target: MF Indoor 4 - Distribution System Pressure Regulation. Target: System 76 - Water Budget Based Billing. Target: Selected Categories Outdoor Use.,. 6C - Establish Separate Pricing Structure for irrigation Accounts . Target: AII_.. 20B - Provide a Rebate for Hot Water on Demand Pump Systems. Target:... 613 - Modification to or Implementation of Tiered Rate Conservation Pricing.. - 7A - Water Budget Based Billing. Target: ALL 16 - Toilet Retrofit At Time of Sale. Target: ALL 29 - Require Weather Adjusting Smart Irrigation Controllers and / or Rain... 17 - Require a0.25 gal/flush urinals in new development. Target: CII (New... 32 -Water Conserving Landscape and Irrigation Codes. Target: ALL 23A - Efficient Dishwasher Rebates. Target: SF Indoor 9D - Pressure Reduction. Target: ALL 14B - Install High Efficiency Fixtures in Government Buildings. Target: CII... 22 - Require High Efficiency Clothes Washers in New Development. Target:... 14C - Install High Efficiency Fixtures in Low Income Housing, Target:... 39 - Prohibit Water Waste and Practices. Target: All Outdoor 18 - Require Fixture Replacement by a Deadline. Target: ALL 34 - Landscape irrigation restricted to designated days and times. Target:... 23B - Require Efficient Dishwashers in New Development. Target: SF Indoor 19 - Garbage Disposal. Target: SF Indoor 20A - Require Hot Water on Demand / Structured Plumbing in Now. 37A - Gray water Retrofit SF. Target: SF Outdoor 36C - Require Rain Barrel. Target: SFR Outdoor 27C -Artificial Turf Sports Fields_ Target: IRR Outdoor 35B/ 90 - Pressure Regulation. Target: ALL 38 - Require or Rebate Swimming Pool Covers. Target: ALL Outdoor 37D - Rebate Lavatory Sink Water Recycle System For Toilet Flushing._. 40 - Top Water Users Program (Top customers from each customer... 41A - Customized Top Users Incentive Program_ Target: CII indoor / Outdoor 53 - Low Impact New and Remodeled Development. Target: ALL 37B - Require Plumbing for Gray Water In New SF Development. Target: SF_.. 37C - Rebate for Gray Water Systems In New CII Development. Target; Cil... 42 - Require Plan Review for new CII. Target: CII Indoor / Outdoor 40C - Cooling Tower Regulations. Target: CI I Indoor 54 - Prohibit Once through Cooling, Non -Recycling Fountains, Water... 0 10 20 30 40 50 Average Rarkino 66 Appendix C: Measure Screening Process and Results City of Rohnert Park Figure C-2. Regional Measures Screening Ranking PRE-SCREEN POTENTIAL REGIONAL CONSERVATION MEASURES Ranked 1 thru 39 in Order of Interest 26 - Financial Incentives for Irrigation and Landscape Upgrades_ Target: ALL 27A - Landscape Conversion or Turf Removal. Target: SF 50 Public Education - Irrigation Focus - Outdoor Residential focused Public.. 27B - Landscape Conversion or Turf Removal. Target MF CII 11A - High Efficiency Toilet (HET) Rebates. Target: SF MF 25A - Outdoor Water Audit. Target: Large Irrigation Customers - Outdoor Only 25B - Water BudgetinglMonitoring. Target Large Landscape 48 Public Education -Conservation Print Media, Electronic Conservation. 12A - High Efficiency Urinal Rebates. Target: CII 14A - Install High Efficiency Toilets. Showerheads, and Faucet Aerators in... 11B - High Efficiency Toilet (HET) Rebates. Target: CII 41B - CI I Rebates to Replace Inefficient Equipment. Target: Existing Customers... 24 - Outdoor Water Surveys. Target: SF MF 12B - High Efficiency Toilet and I or Urinal Bulk Purchase Program. Target: ALL 21A - Residential Washer Rebate. Target: SF, MF Indoor 13- Plumber Initiated High Efficiency Toilet and 1 or Urinal Retrofit Program.... 28 - Weather -Based Irrigation Controller Rebates. Target. ALL 15 - Install High Efficiency Toilets, Urinals, and Showerheads in Commercial.. 35A - Drip Irrigation. Target: SF 41C - Water Savings Performance Program_ Target CII Indoor 21B - High Efficiency Washer Rebate Target CII Indoor 31 - Rotating Sprinkler Nozzle Rebates. Target: ALL Outdoor 30A - Rebate or Free Rain Sensors. Target: Outdoor ALL or Selected 52 - Schools Education Programs, Target: ALL 306 - Require Rain Sensors- Target: Outdoor ALL or Selected 43 - Promote Restaurant Spray Nozzles . Target: Cl I Indoor 36A - Provide Rain Barrel Incentive. Target: SFR Outdoor 44 - School Building Retrofit. Target: CII Indoor f Outdoor 36B - Provide Incentive for Large Rainwater Catchment Systems. Target: MFR.. 33 - Require Irrigation Designers I Installers be Certiried (possibly by Irrigation... 45A - Focused Water Audits for Hotels/Motels. Target: CII Indoor 1 Outdoor 27D - Shade Tree Program. Target: ALL 456 - Hotels/Motels Retrofit wlFinancial Assistance. Target: CII Indoor 45C - Hotels/Motels Retrofit. Target: Cl I Indoor 49 Public Education - Recognition Programs for Water Savings by Residences.. 46B - Rebates for Conductivity Controllers on Cooling Towers. Target: CII Indoor 46A - Rebates for Sub meters on Cooling Towers. Target: Cl I I ndoor 51 - Promote Green Buildings. Target: ALL 47 - Dry Vacuum Pump. Target CII Indoor The general discussion screening criteria included: 0 10 20 30 40 Average Ranking • Technology/Market Maturity — Refers to whether the technology needed to implement the water use efficiency measure, such as an irrigation control device, is commercially available and supported by the local service industry. A measure was more likely to be included if the technology was widely available in the service area and less likely to be included if the technology was not commercially available or not supported by the local service industry. • Service Area Match — Refers to whether the measure or related technology is appropriate for the area's climate, building stock, and lifestyle. For example, promoting native and/or water efficient landscaping may not be appropriate where water use analysis indicates little outdoor irrigation. Thus, a measure was not included if it 67 Appendix C: Measure Screening Process and Results City of Rohnert Park was not well suited for the area's characteristics and could not save water; and was more highly considered to be included if it was well suited for the area and could save water. Customer Acceptance/Equity — Refers to whether retail customers within the service area would be willing to implement and accept the water use efficiency measures. For example, would retail customers attend homeowner irrigation classes and implement lessons learned from these classes? If not, then the water savings associated with this measure would not be achieved and a measure with this characteristic would score low for this criterion. This criterion also considers retail customer equity where one category of retail customers receives benefit while another pays the costs without receiving benefits. Retail customer acceptance may be based on convenience, economics, perceived fairness, and/or aesthetics. Based on the survey results and previously listed criteria, MWM and Water Contractor staff decided if a measure was a "Yes" or "No". Measures with a "No" were eliminated from further consideration, while those with a "Yes" passed into the next evaluation phase: cost-effectiveness analysis using the DSS Model. Below was the schedule of measure screening tasks: • January 2015 - Survey Monkey survey #1 distributed • February 2015 — Screening web -based workshop with Water Contractors and SMSWP and SCWA representatives • February 2015 - Survey Monkey survey #2 distributed • March 2015 — Screening web -based workshop call with Water Contractors and SMSWP and SCWA representatives • March 2015 — Measure list finalized 68 APPENDIX D - ASSUMPTIONS FOR WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES EVALUATED IN THE DSS MODEL This appendix presents various parameter inputs as well as cost and savings results for the conservation measures evaluated in the Water Contractor's DSS Model. Annual utility costs, targets, and water savings were provided for each individual measure for the first 5 years to the year 2020. The actual DSS Model runs measures to the year 2040. Overview Name Water Loss Afihr 1 Category + Measure Type water Loss Measure + Water Loss Time Period First Year 2015 Backlog Costs Total Backlog Work Costs $375,000 Years to Complete Backlog 5 Maintenance Costs Annual lviaintonance Costs $50000 Target Total GPCD Reductionj 3.0 Oescrip i4go CONTRACTOR MFASI F: Maintain a thorough annual accounting of water production, sales by customer class and quantity of water produced and billed consumption (to define norrrevenue water). In conjunction with system accounting, include water system audits that identify and quantity known legitimate uses of non -revenue water in order to determine remaining potential for reducing real (physcial) water losses. Goal would be to lower the Infrastructure Leakage Index {ILI}and real water losses water every year by a pre -determined amount based on cost- effectiveness. These programstypiralltrpayfor themselves based on saving: in operation I costs (and saved rate revenue can be directed more to system repairs/replacement and other ousts) and recovered revenue through addressing apparent losses. Specific ®oak and methods to be developed by Utility. May include accelerated main and service rine replacement. Enhanced real loss reduction may include more ambitious main replacement a rd active leak detection. Ca pture water from water main flushing and hydra ntflow testing for reuse. Results Average Water Savings (mgd 0.140077 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility F $3,755,674 Lifetime Casts - Present Value ($) Utility Targets $1,037,622 Community $1,037,622 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 3.65 Community 3.65 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume ($Img) Utility $780 Comments Savings is calculated over the rife of the program which is tied to the Contractor's current Non Revenue Water percentage which can be found in the GREEN "Non Revenue Water" portion of the DSS Model. All programs are advised to have 'Annual Maintenance Costs' inputted to allow for budget estimates for complete program. Additional water savings of `Nort-Revenue Water' real water kisses may be available when technically feasible. Typicaltargetismirimum system losses based on percent of water system input volume down to approximately 676 (as defined as the difference between production and consumption or a kemathvely as a percent of System Input Volume using AWWA Water System Auditdefinitions). For NRW below 6%(which can be found in the GREEN "Non Revenue Water" portion of the DSS Model), input "OV for new real water savings and "$W in the Backlog Cost section. For NRW above 6%, a GPCD savings input volume can be computed {an estimate of annual savings volume divided bytotal population}. For example a 4.0 GPCD is equivalent to a 2% reduction for the system with a 150 GPCD water use. Additional Water Loss Control Program budget to achieve these water savings is inputted into the `Backlog Cost' section a long with t he duration of the years to accomplish the estimated reduction. In other words, $250000 over 5 years would add $50,000 per year to assist with meeting N RW reduction goa Is. 69 Costs Targets water Saui Utility Projected NRW Percent Total Savings 2015 $75,000 2015 19.0% 2015 0.027279 2016 $75,000 2016 18.4% 2016 0.054982 2017 $75,000 2017 17.9% 2017 0.083109 2018 $75,000 2018 17.3% 2018 0.111660 2019 $75,000 2019 16.7% 2019 0.140636 2020 $50,000 2020 16.7% 2020 0.141696 69 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 AN Cat Measure Type Standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2020 Permanent-� Last Yzr 2024 Measure Len 5 Fixture Costs tlli Gty I Customer I FIVAcct SF $160.00 $0.00 1 MF $160.00 $0.00 2 COM $160.00 $0.00 3 RR $160.00 $0.00 3 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 40% De scri ption CONTRACTOR MFASURF: Retrofit cyst—wfth AMI nates and associated network capable of prowdng continuous cananrption data to 11tOly offiuxs. Improved idertrTaation of systan and choreas leaks is a najrr con—ation benefit. Sone rents of it— systars are offset by operational efficiencies and reduced staffing, as regular meterreading and opening and closing accords are a®rQlisted without the nand for a site visit_ Also enables enhanced billing options and ability to morrTor unauthorized usage, such as u s0tanupering with closed accounts or irrigation when tine of clay or chys prswedt are regulated Cushtncer service 6 ir¢oved as staff ran qucky acc-s continuous; usage records to address cuaturner inqurks Optimal feahres include online customer accessto their usage, which has hien shunrn to n¢nve accountability Ily and redcewateruse. Afrve-yearchagg-outwouldhea reasonable ohjecttae and nay take lager it coupled wlh a fl I meter rmpdaeinerd progiam (onthe order of 10 years} Reciaiethat rew, Iargeror irrgation customers install such AMI meters as described above and possiby, purchase main of viewing daily hamaription inside harhorre, busie�,er byther landscape/property managers, ether through the Internet (d ave table) er seeaate d vk� The AMI systern would, on dimaa indicate to the uashmher and Wil ly where and fowtheirwahm isused, facl Hating watause reduclm and prompt leak identification, lints would requre LitOlyto install an AMI system. I Monty I Customer I Total I City of Rohnert Park z Average Water Savings (mgc Lifetime Savin s - Present ValuE utility $1,637,256 End uses Communilyl $1,637,255 z Lifetime Costs- Present Value m o �_ �_ utility $1,080,947 Communityl $1,080,947 Toilets r r r Ilnnals r r Benefit to Cost Ratio util 1.51 Peucers r r r r ahrw.ers r r r r communityl 1.51 Di.h—h— r I r r Cost of Savings per unit volume Cloth -Wash -11 r r utility $1,751 Intimal v.vmm enss Basis forthe startig value cost estinate is $16o perAM I um #)ata provided by Sada Rosa $90 per nate $70 erdpowit) where assures (a) does not include any partial % cent share forthe `UtOtty' of estinated AMI (autorretic nate in hastnhdhre) fornrfer repl—wirl, wlh other water utility deparhnerds—Wo stile for the Capita I Improvement Plan (CI p) such as engineering and/or operations; and (b) Cost esthnate ones not include service leak repair (assume inciaded in Water Loss Cuhbol pmgnam} Progamand CosNnduteprovrsnnrtoactm 'continuous float reading that indicate presence cot potential leak including contacting customer, plunber, referaL etc 70 Target Method oercemage % of Accts Targeted lyrl 10.0009. Only Effects New Accts r Tod Savings ( 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000900 0.000000 0.017545 End use Savings Per Replacement %Savings perAccount SF I ntem al Leakage 20.09E SF Inrlgat on S.o9G SF Exlernal Leakage 20.0% MF I eternal Leafage 20.0% MF Irrigation i0% MF Exlerlal Leakage 20.09E COM Inlernal Leakage 20.0% COM Irrigation 5.09E COM Exlemal Leakage 20.09E I RR l nternal Leakage 20.0% RRlrrigation 5.096 RR Eternal. Leakaoe 20.0% Target Method oercemage % of Accts Targeted lyrl 10.0009. Only Effects New Accts r Tod Savings ( 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000900 0.000000 0.017545 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Overview NamePricing Abbr 3 Category W Measure Type Pricing Measure Pricing Custom e Class Customer Class Single Famil; Time Period First Year 1 2015 Description 1 CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Assumes average annual price increase of 5% for the next 25 years. Measure converts price increases to real price increases net of inflation; Annual increase must be above user set threshold (such as assuming a 2% inflation) to trigger a demand reduction. Comments A conservative industry estimate for 5 -year rate studies and price elasticities are assumed. The pricing measure only addresses SF customers. City of Rohnert Park Planned Rate Increases Costs Results Cummulative Index Increase 2015 Utility Customer Total (Community) 2015 $10,000 $0 $10,000 2016 $10,000 $0 $10,000 2017 $10,000 $0 $10,000 2018 $10,000 $0 $10,000 2019 $10,000 $0 $10,000 2020 $10,000 $0 $10,000 City of Rohnert Park Planned Rate Increases Water Savings Results Cummulative Index Increase 2015 Average Water Savings (mgd) Price Incr Change Price Incr Adjusting for Year N, Inflation 2016 0.084999 2% Lifetime Savings - Present Value {$) 104.0 Utility 1 $192,235 2015 5.096 3.0% Delete 106.1 Communityl $192,235 2016 5.0% 3.0% Delete 108.2 Lifetime Costs - Present Value {$) 2017 5.0% 3.0% Delete 110.4 Utility $319,813 2018 5.096 3.0% Delete Comrrunityl $319,813 2019 5.096 3.0% DekL- Benefit to Cost Ratio 2020 5.096 3.0% Delete Utility 1 0.60 2021 5.096 3.0% Delete ComrTunityl 0.60 2022 5.0% 3.0% Delete Cost of Savings per Unit Volume ($/mg) 2023 5.0% 3.0% Delete Utility $396 2024 5.0% 3.0% Delete 2025 5.0% 3.0% Delete Price Elasticity 2026 5.096 3.0% Delete Overall Indoor Outdoor 2027 5.0% 3.0% Delete -0.12 -0.05 -0.26 2028 5.0% 3.0% Delete 2029 5.0% 3.0% Delete Utility Costs 2030 5.0% 3.0% Delete Rate Study Cost $50.000 Rate Study Frequency (every # yrs) 5 First Year of Rate Study 2021 Projected Price Index Water Savings Price Index Cummulative Index Increase 2015 100.0 09/0 2016 102.0 2% 2017 104.0 4% 2018 106.1 6% 2019 108.2 8% 2020 110.4 10% 71 Annual Maintenance Costl $10,000 Consumer Price Index First Year Inclexi 100.0 Annuallncrease 2% Water Savings Total Savings (nmgd) 2015 0.007196 2016 0.014443 2017 0.021742 2018 0.029090 2019 0.036489 2020 0.043936 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 Public Info 3 School Education - SIMNSP Overview Name Public Info & School Education - S Abbr 4 Categ ory Measure Tvi l standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 Permanent Last Year 2040 Years 2 Measure Length 26 Repeat Fixture Costs Costs Surromar y utility I Customer I FtxlAccl SF $3.00 $0.00 1 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 15% Description REGIONAL MEASURE: Continue with regional public information and school education campaign. School education includes: school assembly program, classroom presentations, other options for school education. Customer Classes I End Uses Costs Surromar y Savings per Account 0 z 0 o r 0.5% utility Customer 0.5% Total 2015 $13,191 $0 $13,191 2016 $13,294 $0 $13,294 2017 $13,396 $0 $13,396 2018 $13,499 $0 $13,499 2019 $13,.601 $0 $13,601 2020 $13,704 $0 $13,704 Customer Classes I End Uses t;ouMg SF 3,824 3,853 3,883 3,913 3,942 3,972 Savings per Account 0 z 0 o r 0.5% Toilets 0.5% SF Showers Urinals SF Dishwashers 0.5% Faucets 1✓ 0.5% SF Baths Showers SF Internal Leakage 0.5% Dishwashers 0.5% SF Pools Clothes Washers fO Process SF Wash Down 0.5% Kitchen Spray Rinse 0.5% SF External Leakage Internal Leakage Fv Baths Fv aver � longation Pools V Wash Down 51 Car Washing External Leakage W Outdoor Cooling Comments Cost assumes Sr category but impacts all customer classes. SMWSP public into budget of $160000 annually for all water contractors is spent on QWEL, Water Wase Gardening Online, Garden Sense, and the Eco-FriendlyGarden Tour. Based on 153,770 single familyaccounts for water contractors in 2014, the expenditures per SF account is approximately$1.00. SMWSP school education is $300000 per year for all the water contractors which equates to $2.00 per account. The education annual budget is for 20p= students and 24,000 ciriculum materials distributed. In summary, the total cost of $3.00 per SF account includes $1.00 for public information a nd $2.00 per SF account for school education. City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (ml 0.009960 Lifetime Savings - Present Value ($) utilityl $276,419 Communityl $458,917 Lifetime Costs - Present Value ($) utility $264,484 Community $264,484 Benefit to Cost Ratio utilityl 1.05 Communityl 1.74 Cost of Samnas per unit Volume ($/ma) End Use Savings Per Replacement t;ouMg SF 3,824 3,853 3,883 3,913 3,942 3,972 Savings per Account SF Toilets 0.5% SF Faucets 0.5% SF Showers 0.5% SF Dishwashers 0.5% SF Clothes Washers 0.5% SF Baths 0.5% SF Internal Leakage 0.5% SF Irrigation 0.5% SF Pools 0.5% SF Wash Down 0.5% SF Car Washing 0.5% SF External Leakage 0.5% Target Method Percentage °J° of Accts Targeted f yr� 50.00076 0i Effects New Aci I' 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 t;ouMg SF 3,824 3,853 3,883 3,913 3,942 3,972 Targets Total 3,824 3,853 3,883 3,913 3,942 3,9721 Water Sav Total Savings 2015 0.004757 2016 0:009532 2017 0.009586 2018 0.009641 2019 0.009697 2020 0.009752 72 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 Public Info 3 School Education - Watter Co nhacil or Overview Name Public Info & School Education Abbr 5 Categ ory Measure TVReI Standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 Permanent il Last Year 2040 Years 1 2 Measure Length 26 Repeall r Fixture Costs Total utility I Customer I FIxi'i SF $3.001 $0.00 1 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 15% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Public informafion dissemination and school education initiatives beyond those conducted bySMWSP. Customer Classes End Uses Total m � z o z z X X_ .-:cccsnls SF 1,912 1,927 1,941 1,956 1,971 1,986 Toilets P Water Sav Urinals Total Savings 2015 Faucets ''I 2015 0.002379 Showers V $6,647 $0 $6,647 2016 Dishwashers P 2017 $6,698 $0 $6,698 Clothes Washers r Process 0.004793 2018 Kitchen Spray Rinse 2018 0.004821 Internal Leakage $6,801 $0 $6,801 2019 Baths P 2020 $6,8521 $0 $6,852 Other r @004876 Irrigation P Pools rV Wash Down P Car Washing Fv External Leakage Dutdaor Geelong --] City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mgd 0.0©4980 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $138,240 Communityl $229,458 Lifetime Costs - Present Value t Utility $132,242 Community $132,242 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 1 1.05 Communityl 1.74 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume i utilitvl $2,796 End Use Savings Per %S SF Toilets SF Faucets SF Showers SF Dishwashers SF Clothes Washers SF Baths SF Internal Leakage SF Irrigation SF Pools SF Wash Dawn Comments SF Car Washing Cast assumes SFcategorybutimpactsall FSF External Leakage customer classes. Public info budget of $2 per SF account is assumed. Targets School education Assumes Average cost per Target Method student is $1 per SF account. % of Accts Targeted 1 yr Only Effects New Accts Costs ,•, Te� Summar; Utility Customer Total 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 .-:cccsnls SF 1,912 1,927 1,941 1,956 1,971 1,986 Targets Total 1,912 1,927 1,941 1,956 1,971 1,9961 Water Sav Total Savings 2015 $6,596 $0 $6,596 2015 0.002379 2016 $6,647 $0 $6,647 2016 0.004766 2017 $6,698 $0 $6,698 2017 0.004793 2018 $6,149 $0 $6,749 2018 0.004821 2019 $6,801 $0 $6,801 2019 0.004848 2020 $6,8521 $0 $6,852 2020 @004876 73 s per Account 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 25.00076 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Overview Customer Classes Name Prohibit Water Waste z © o r Abbr 6 N v z Category Measure Type standard Measure Prohibit Water End Uses waste Time Period Measure Life p o First Year 2016 Permanent Last Year 2040 Years 5 Toilets r r r r r Measure Longthl 25 Repeat r Urinals r r r Faucets r r r r r Fixture Costs showers utility Customer FwAcct 10% Dishwashers SF $50.00 $50.00 1 Clothes Washers MF $100.00 $100.00 1 Process COM $100.00 $100.00 1 Kitchen Spray Rinse INDINST $10000 $10000 1 Internal Leakage IRR $10000 $10000 1 Baths Other Irrigation Pods Wash Dawn car washing DINST Internal Leakag 10% Administration Costs Markup Percentage 50% Description 10% CONTRACTORORREGIONAL MEASURE: Adaptor moddyordinance that prohibits the waste of water defined as gutter flooding, restrictions ark watering days and fa ilureto repair lea ks in a timely manner. 10% External Leakage Wd°°r Cooling 10% 2015 2016 2017 2015 2019 2020 Costs Customer Total $0 $0 Comments Utiliy costs hazed on 1 tour of staff time for residential contact and 2 hours for MF and CII enforcement. Assume $50 customer cost to fix irrigatio n water waste/leak - most visible water waste is irrigation. Savings assumes 6% of accounts have a leak of 33 gallons per day. Assumed 1% water savings per account to he an nservative. Adminisrafioa cost is to cover staff to help find aad investiage the water waste calk / leaks. City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mgd: 0.000937 Lifetime Savinas- Present Value Lifetime Costs - Present Value [$) Utility 1 $148,485 Community $24),476 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 1 0.17 CGmmunityl 0.10 Cast of Savinqs per Unit Volume ($!mq) End Use Savings Per Replacement SF °Ja Savings per Account SF Intemal Leakage 10% SF Irrigation 10% SF External Leakage 10% MF Internal Leakage 10% MF Irrigation 10% MF External Leakage 10% COM Internal Leakage 10% COM Irrigation 10% COM External Leakage 10% DINST Internal Leakag 10% INDINST Irrigation 10% DINST External Leaka 10% IRR Internal Leakage 10% IRR Irrigation 10% IRR External Leakaqe 10% Target Method Percentage °/a at Accts Targeted / yr 1.000% Only Effects New Accts F Water 74 SF MF COM I INDINST IRR I Total ITGtal Savings 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0.000000 2016 77 5 5 0 3 91 2016 0.000193 2017 78 5 5 0 3 91 2017 0.000388 2018 78 5 5 0 3 92 2018 0.000585 2019 79 6 5 0 4 93 2019 0.000784 2020 79 6 5 0 4 94 2020 0.000985 74 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Overview Customer Classes Name Indoor and Outdoor Surveys - CVI z A 7 rLLn © o Category Measure Type standard Measure • Indoor and Ou6door Surveys - CE Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 Permanent Last Year 2040 Years 1 5 Measure Length 26 Repeat r - Fixture Costs Utility I Customer I FixFAect GOM $3,000.00 $200.00 1 INDINST $3,000.00 $2-;W.001 1 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 25% CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: Tap water custo mens from each CII category would be offered a professional water survey that would evaluate ways for the business to save water and money. The surveys would be far targeted to targe users (accounts that use more than 5000 gallons of water per day) such as hotels, res taurants,stores and schools. Emphasiswillbe an supporting the top users in each customer After the free water use survey has been Completed at site, Sill will analyze the recommendations an the provided findings report and determine it the site q ua rrfies to r a financial End Uses � z p o r COM Toilets Toilets r r Urinals Faucets r r r r Showers F rV Dishwashers Fv Fv Clothes Washers r Fv Process tr W K,tc hen Spray Rinse F r Interval Leakage r r Baths GOM Other Other Irrigation P I✓ r r Pools COM Irrigation Wash Down COM External Leakage Car Washing INDINST Toilets External Leakage Fo N outdoor INDINST Faucets Coo ling r Utility costs represent staff site survey time and reporting. customer Costs estimate any casts to implement survey recommendations. Overall average savings for the targeted targe customers are per end use since torture and appliance recommendations will vary. It is recommended target this program to start with the top users in the service area. (an helps to explain why the target percentage is only 1% since targeting the largest users). City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.006067 Lifetime Savings - Present Value ($) Utility $164,399 Community $336,238 Lifetime Grits -Present Value( Utility $372,550 Communityl $620,917 Benefit to Gost Ratio 777 Uiility 0.44 Community 1 0.54 Gast of Savings Der Unit Volume (S/mu) End Use Savings Per Replacement Savings per Account COM Toilets 25.0% COM Urinals 25.0% GOM Faucets 25.0% COM Showers 25.0% COM Dishwashers 25.0% COM Clothes Washers 25.0% COM Process 25.0% OM Kitchen Spray Rins 25.0% COM Internal Leakage 25.0% GOM Other 25.0% COM Guohng 25.0% COM Irrigation 25.0% COM External Leakage 25.0% INDINST Toilets 25.0% INDINST Urinals 25.0% INDINST Faucets 25.0% INDINST Showers 25.0% INDINST Dishwashers 25.0% DINST Clothes Washei 25.0% INDINST Process 25.0% INST Kitchen Spray Nit 25.0% DINST Internal Leakag 25.0% INDINST Other 25.0% INDINST Gooring 25.0% INDINST Irrigation 25.0% INDINST Pools 25.0% DINST External Leaka 25.0% Target Method Percentage % of Accts Targeted / yr 1.000% Only Effects New Accts r- ets Water Savincls (mqd) Utility Customer Total GOM INDINST Total Total Savings 2015 $18,038 $12,025 $30,063 2015 5 0 5 2015 0.001195 2016 $18,356 $12,238 $30,594 2016 5 0 5 2016 0.002405 2017 $18,675 $12,450 $31,125 2017 5 0 5 2017 0.003629 2018 $18,994 $12,663 $31,657 2018 5 0 5 2018 0.004869 2019 $19,313 $12,875 $32,188 2019 5 0 5 2019 0.006123 2020 $19,632 $13,0881 $32,720 2020 5 01 5 2020 0.006212 75 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 Replace CE Inefficient Equipment Overview Name Replace CII Inefficient Abbr 8 Category Measure TvDL Standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2018 Permanent t- Last Year 2D22 Years 1 10 Measure Length 5 Repeat I r - Fixture Costs m Utility Customer Fil't COM $3,000.00 $3f000.00 1 INDINST $3,000.00 $3,000.0 1 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 3076 uescnpnon CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: After undergoing a free water use survey, SMW SP will analyze the recommendations on the provided findings report and determine if the site qualities Fora financial incentive. Financial incentives will be provided after analyzing the cost benefit ratio of each proposed project. Incentives are tailored to each indvidual site as each site has va rying water savings potentia Is. I ncentves will he granted at the sole discretion of SMWSP while funding lasts. Program to provide rebates for a standard fist of water efficient equipment. Included would be x- ray machines, icemakers, air-cooled ice machines, stew mers, washers, spray va hies, efficient dishwashers, replacing once through coo ring, and adding conductivity controller on cooling towers. Customer Classes End Uses m m � z 0 z X � v z rr sumrna utility Customer Toilets 1✓ r Urinals 1✓ r Faucets r T Showers r r Dishwashers iv I✓ Clothes Washers I+ r Process R IS Kitchen Spray Rinse P P Internal Leakage r F Baths Chher 1 F Irrigation F- r— Pools I NDINST Dishwashers Wash Down DINSTClothes Washe Gar Washing INDINST Process External Leakage F F Dutdo or ceelmg r- r Comments Estimated Utility/Customer -W50 cost sha ring. Ice machines and food steamers are new and just gettingstarted. Limited on any water-cooled ice machines. This measure can be acrAmed to incorporate any CII techology that is deemed appropriate by the program participants to allow flexibrity to adapt to new technology advancements. Costs Targets INDINST Total % Savings per Account sumrna utility Customer Total 2015 $0 $0 $o COM Faucets 2015 2016 $D $0 $0 COM Dishwashers 2016 2017 $0 $0 $0 COM Process 2017 2018 $9,877 $7,598 $17,475 INDINST Toilets 2018 2019 $10,043 $7,7251 $17,768 fNDINST Faucets 2019 2020 $10,209 $7,8531 $18,061 I NDINST Dishwashers 2020 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.000791 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $23,920 community $60,313 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i Utility $43,747 community $77,399 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 1 0.55 �ommunityl 0.78 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume (: End Use Savings Per Replacement Targets INDINST Total % Savings per Account COM Toilets 25.0% COM Urinals 25.0% COM Faucets 25.0% COM Showers 25.0% COM Dishwashers 25.0% GOM Glothes Washers 25.0% COM Process 25.0% OM Kitchen Spray Rins 25.0% INDINST Toilets 25.0% INDINST Urinals 25.0% fNDINST Faucets 25.0% INDINST Showers 25.0% I NDINST Dishwashers 25.0% DINSTClothes Washe 25.076 INDINST Process 25.0% IN ST Kitchen Spray Ri 25.0% Target Method Percerdage % of Accts Targeted I yr o. --,m% Only Effects New Accts - ccouni COM Targets INDINST Total Water Sav Total Savings 0 0 0 2015 D.000000 0 0 0 2016 0.000000 a o 0 2017 0.000000 3 0 3 2018 0.000408 3 0 3 2019 0.000820 3 0 3 2020 0.001235 76 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Administration Costs Markup Percentage 30% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: EfficieMToilet ReplacementProgiam -CII. Provutearebateor voucher for the installation of a high efficiency flushometer toilet - toilets flushing 1.28 Rpt or less. Rebate amounts reflect the incremental purchase cost. I Customer Classes I End Uses Overview m Name Efficient Toilet ReplacementProg utility I Customer I Fixe' t Abbr 9 $260.001 $150.001 10 Category $260.00 51-50.001 10 Measure Type I Standard Measure Efficient Toilet r Repent Time Period Measure Life Program _ q $14,685 $47,776 First Year 2015 1 Permanentl :o r Last Year 2019 Faucets Measure Length 5 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 30% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: EfficieMToilet ReplacementProgiam -CII. Provutearebateor voucher for the installation of a high efficiency flushometer toilet - toilets flushing 1.28 Rpt or less. Rebate amounts reflect the incremental purchase cost. I Customer Classes I End Uses Fixture Costs m � utility I Customer I Fixe' t COM $260.001 $150.001 10 INDINST $260.00 51-50.001 10 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 30% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: EfficieMToilet ReplacementProgiam -CII. Provutearebateor voucher for the installation of a high efficiency flushometer toilet - toilets flushing 1.28 Rpt or less. Rebate amounts reflect the incremental purchase cost. I Customer Classes I End Uses Customer m � � 0 v m z z z W a` Total Savings ( Toilets $14,430 $46,946 r ry 2015 0.000689 Urinals $14,685 $47,776 r r 2016 0.001378 Faucets $14,940 $48,606 r- r 2017 0.002068 Showers $15,195 $49,435 r 0 10 2018 0.002760 Dishwashers $15,450 $50,265 (- T - 2019 0.003454 Clothes Washers $0 $01 (- 1— 2020 0.003429 Process Kitchen Spray Rinse f- r r Internal Leakage I Baths Other r Irrigation r Pools I Wash Down Car Washing External Leakage r IF Doi Cooling (' I Comments Current outreach is regional and these costs are included in the public outreach measure. Farm processing and check cutting are managed by the water contractor. Rebate forcontractoris$260 premium (less than 1.0 gpf) toilet purchase. The $150 customer cost is for installation. Assumes 10 toilets per CH account. Savings are eonservarrve and assume 50% of replaced toilets using 1.6 gpf and 50% using 3.5 gpf or mo re are replaced with 1.28 gpf rodures. City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.003035 Lifetime Savings - Present Value ($) utilityl $83,568 Communityl $83,568 Lifetime Costs - Present Value ($) utility $158,613 Community I $229,DD3 Benefit to Gust Ratio utility 1 0.53 Communityl 0.36 Cost of Savings per unit Volume ($Img) utiIitVI $5,502 End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account COM Toilets 42.0% INDiNSTToilets 42.0% Targets Target Method Percentage 1% of Accts Targeted I yr 2.01)0% Onty Effects New Accts F Water utility Customer Total COM INDINST Total Total Savings ( 2015 $32,516 $14,430 $46,946 2015 10 0 10 2015 0.000689 2016 $33,090 $14,685 $47,776 2016 10 0 10 2016 0.001378 2017 $33,665 $14,940 $48,606 2017 10 0 10 2017 0.002068 2018 $34,240 $15,195 $49,435 2018 10 0 10 2018 0.002760 2019 $34,815 $15,450 $50,265 2019 10 0 10 2019 0.003454 2020 $0 $0 $01 2020 0 101 0 2020 0.003429 77 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Time Period Overview First Year Name Urinal Rebates -CII 1 Permonentl I Al 10 2020 Category Measure Length Measure Type Standard Measure Urinal Rebal 2017 —CE $2.,490 Time Period Measure Life First Year 2016 1 Permonentl I Last Year 2020 2016 Measure Length 5 $16, Fixture Costs Costs Samma ! Utility Customer Utility I Customer I FirJAcct CDM $4-50.001 $100.00 10 INDINST $450.001 $100.OUI 10 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 25% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Provide a rebate or voucher for the installation of a Fi gh efficiency urinals. WaterSense standa rd is 0.5 gpf or less, though models flushing as low as 0.125 gpf {1 pint] are available and function well, so could be specified. Rebate amounts would reflect the incremental purchase cost. Customer Classes End Uses Costs Samma ! Utility Customer Total 2015 $0 $0 Urinals 2016 $13,761 $2,448 $16, 2017 $14,006 $2.,490 $16, 2018 $14,.246 $2.,533 $16, 2019 $14,485 $2,575 $17, 2020 914J241 S2.6181 517, Customer Classes End Uses m � z o z z W W_ Toilets r F Urinals F F Faucets r r Showers r r Dishwashers r r Clothes Washers r r Process r I Kitchen Spray Rinse r r Internal Leakage r r Baths Other Irrigation I Pools r Wash Down Car Washing External Leakage I' Dotdo or ce°Img r r Comments Per Santa Rosa's current program, rebate amount is up to $450 per urinal. Water savings of 75% is based on reply ting a 1.0 gpf or more urinal and a 0.25 gpf to 0.125 gpf (1 pint} urinal. Assumes 10 urinals per Cll account. Customer cost reflects installation and rDaure costs. Targets View Accounts COM INDINST Total 2015 0 0 0 2016 2 0 2 2017 2 0 2 2018 3 0 3 2019 3 0 3 2020 3 0 3 78 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (ml 0.000392 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Lifetime Costs - Present Value fSl Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 1 0.17 Communityl 0.14 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume ($!mg) Utility $17,486 End Use Savings Per Replacement %° Savings per Account COM Urinals 75.0% INDINST Urinals 75.0% Target Method I Percentage + of Accts Targeted / yrj 0.50076 Onlv Effects New Accts I r Water Sav IF Total Savings 2015 0.000000 2016 0.000106 2017 0.000210 2018 0.000311 2019 0.000409 2020 o.000504 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 Pliumber Inflated UHET d HEU Retrnffi Overview Name Plumber I ritiated UHET & HEU Abbr 11 Category Measure Tvpe Standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2079 1 Permanent Last Year 2023 Measure Length 5 Fixture Costs Costs Summar; Utility Customer Utility I Customer I FixiAl COM $325.001 $100.001 10 INDINST $325.001 $100.00 1 10 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 30% CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Plumber Initiated High Efficiency Toilet and / o r U rina I Retrotd Program. SMWSP would subsidize installation oast of a new UHET/ HEU purchased by SMWSP. Licensed plumbers, pr"Lialitied by SMWSP would saficit customers directly. Customers would get a new UHET and HEU installed at a discounted price. Total Customer Classes End Uses Costs Summar; Utility Customer 2015 $0 $0 2016 $0 $0 2017 $0 $0 2018 $0 $0 2019 $21,759 $5,150 2020 $22,1191 $5,235 Total Customer Classes End Uses Targets � o m z z z W W_ 2015 Toilets 0 0 r r 0 Urinals Faucets 2017 0 Fv f P T' 2018 Showers 0 0 r r 0 Dishwashers 2020 5 (- r Clothes Washers t- r Process (- r - Kitchen Spray Rinse f r Internal Leakage F F Baths Other Irrigation r r Pools Wash Down Car Washing E-.ternal Leakage r- r Dutdaor cearng r- r - Comments Utility cost based on installation cost of $325 per Carrie Pollard at SCWA provided costs. Customer cost based an the fixture cost plus reduced installation cost. Water savings based on the average ddference between 1.0 gpf urinal and a 0.25 gpt to 0.125 gpt [3 pint] urinal and a 1.6 gpf toilet and 1.0 gpf toilet. Assumes 10urinals ortoilets per Cll account. 79 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.002013 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utilityl $51,970 Communityl $51,970 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i utility $92,968 Community $114,972 Benefit to Cost Ratio utility 0.56 Communityl 0.45 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume (: End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account COM Toilets 42.0% COM Urinals 75.0% iNDINSTToilets 42.0% INDINST Urinals 75.0% Targets Target Method I Percentage % of Accts Targeted / yrj 1.000% Only Effects New Accts I I- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Water Sav tal Savings ( 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000567 0.001129 Targets cconlS C010 INDINST Total 2015 0 0 0 2016 0 0 0 2017 0 0 0 2018 0 0 0 2019 5 0 5 2020 5 0 5 79 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.002013 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utilityl $51,970 Communityl $51,970 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i utility $92,968 Community $114,972 Benefit to Cost Ratio utility 0.56 Communityl 0.45 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume (: End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account COM Toilets 42.0% COM Urinals 75.0% iNDINSTToilets 42.0% INDINST Urinals 75.0% Targets Target Method I Percentage % of Accts Targeted / yrj 1.000% Only Effects New Accts I I- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Water Sav tal Savings ( 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000567 0.001129 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Requine <U.725 gaVllsh Urinals in New Develnprnerrt Overview Name Require <D.125 galJflush Urinals i Abbr 12 Category + Measure Tyne I Standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2017 1 Permanent•� Last Year 2021 Measure Length 5 Fixture Costs Costs summa Utility Customer Utility I Customer I FirJAcct CDM $75.00 $_-700.00 1 10 INDINST $75.00 1 $300.00 10 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 1076 Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Require that new buildings be fitted with .125 gpf (1 pint) or less urine Is rather than the current sta nda rd of 0.5 gal/flush models. Customer Classes End Uses Costs summa Utility Customer Total 2015 $0 $0 Urinals 2016 $0 $0 Showers 2017 $7,015 $25,511 $32, 2018 $7,015 $25,511 $32, 2019 $7,015 $25,5111 $32, 2020 S7,015 S25.5111 532 Customer Classes End Uses - Present Value ($) m � z o zW z rr $27,467 Toilets r F Urinals I✓ h3 Faucets r r Showers r r Dishwashers r r Clothes Washers r r Process r I Kitchen Spray Rinse r r Internal Leakage r r Baths Other I r Irrigation I Pools r Wash Down Car Washing External Leakage I' Dutdaor Cooling r r Comments utility costs of $75 reflects irupection costs. Customer costs represent the incremental cost of the more efficient future. Savings assumes 0.5 gpf urinals are being replaced with .125 gpf urinals. Assume 10 futures per CII account. .counts � � C010 INDINST Total 2015 0 0 0 2016 0 0 0 2017 8 0 9 2018 8 0 9 2019 8 0 9 2020 8 0 9 80 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.001112 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Lifetime Costs - Present Value ($) Utility $27,467 Community $127,349 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utlilty 1.10 Communityl 0.24 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume ($Img) Litilitvl $2,600 End Use Savings Per Replacement %° Savings per Account COM Urinals 75.0% INDINST Urinals 75.0% Target Method I Percentage + of Accts Targeted / yrj 100.00076 Onlv Effects New Accts I P Water Sav Total Savings 2015 0.000000 2016 0.000000 2017 0.000362 2018 0.000708 2019 0.001040 2020 0.001358 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model W HE Faucet Aerator I Showerhead Giveaway— CE Overview Name HEFauuetAerator/Showerhead Abbr 13 Category Measure Tyne Standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 Permanent Last Year 2019 Yearsl 5 Measure Length 5 Repeall r Fixture Costs $ Utility I Customer I FirJAcct COM SIL2.001 $25.001 10 INDINST $12.001 $25.001 10 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 25% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: High Efficiency Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway —CII. Utility would buy showerheads and faucet aerators in hulk and give them away at Utility office a Community events. Costs Room Summa Utility I Customer I Total 2015 $3,6081 $6,013 $ 2016 $3,671 $6,119 $ 2017 $3,735 $6,225 $ 2018 $3,799 $6,331 $1 2019 $3,863 $6,438 $1 2020 $0 $0 r r - Customer Classes End Uses Targets Accounts COM INDINST m � m � z o zX v z rr 0 Toilets 2016 24 r IF Urinals Faucets 2017 25 r r (« r Showers 2018 25 r P Dishwashers 2019 26 r r - Clothes Washers 2020 0 r- F Process r— F Kitchen Spray Rinse r I Internal Leakage i I— Bathe Other Irrigation r r Pools L Wash Down Car Washing External Leakage I _ Dutdo or Cooling I— F Comments Assumes 10 bathrooms per CH account. Utility cost for 1.80m showedread and 1.5 gpm aerator kit is $12. Customer cost $25 is to repair leaks or other minor costs. Assume kits save 27.6% (reduced to be conservative) by assuming o my 25% of kits are actually installed in the businesses and yield water savings. Petalumaprovidedactual cost data: 2.OGPM SH, 1.0 and 0.5 GPM FA. Unit cost per 1.0GPM FA- $0.78 per 2.0GPM SH - $3.51. Or just over $4 per kit. The $12 per kit cost assumes that only 25% are actually insta lied. ($4 times 4 kits to obtain one installation). 81 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.000282 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $9,982 Communityl $26,365 Lifetime Costs - Present Value I Utility $17,598 Community $46,927 Benefit to Gust Ratio utility 0.57 Communityl 0.56 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume (: utility $6,581 End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account COM Faucets 6.9% COM Showers 6.9% INDINST Faucets 6.9% INDINST Showers 6.9% Targets Target Method I Percentage r % of Accts Targeted 1 yrJ 5.000% Only Effects New Accts r - Water 2015 0.000283 2016 0.000571 2017 0.000863 2018 0.001161 2019 0.001464 2020 0.001181 Targets Accounts COM INDINST Total 2015 24 0 24 2016 24 0 24 2017 25 0 25 2018 25 0 25 2019 26 or 26 2020 0 or 0 81 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.000282 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $9,982 Communityl $26,365 Lifetime Costs - Present Value I Utility $17,598 Community $46,927 Benefit to Gust Ratio utility 0.57 Communityl 0.56 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume (: utility $6,581 End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account COM Faucets 6.9% COM Showers 6.9% INDINST Faucets 6.9% INDINST Showers 6.9% Targets Target Method I Percentage r % of Accts Targeted 1 yrJ 5.000% Only Effects New Accts r - Water 2015 0.000283 2016 0.000571 2017 0.000863 2018 0.001161 2019 0.001464 2020 0.001181 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 HE Faucet Aerafior I ShOwertlead Giveaviray - SF, YF Overview Name HE Faucet Aerator/Showerhead Abbr 14 Categ ory Measure TvDL Standard Measure 17 Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 Permanent Last Year 2019 Years 5 Measure Length 5 Repeat r Fixture Costs Costs Summa Utility Customer Utility I Customer I FirJAcct SF SIL2.001 $25.001 2 MF $32.001 $25.001 8 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 25% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: High Efficiency Faucet Aerator/ Showerhead Giveaway - SF, MF. Utirdy would bury showerheads and taucet aerators in hulk and give them away at Utility office a community events. Need to coordinate this pmWam with the Schaal Education measure an retmtit kit giveaways to the same customer Categories. Customer Classes End Uses Costs Summa Utility Customer Total 2015 $5,872 $9,787 $15, 2016 $5,918 $9,863 $15, 2017 $5,963 $9,939 $15, 2018 $6,009 $10,015 $16, 2019 $6,055 $10,091 $16, 2020 $01 $0 Kitchen Spray Rinse Customer Classes End Uses Targets Accounts 1 2.02 m � z o zW z a` SF Toilets r Total 2015 Uri na.s 1.1 164 Faucets r is 1.1 Showers 8✓ 2017 155 Dishwashers F r 2018 Clothes Washers r r 167 Process 15811 Kitchen Spray Rinse 2020 0 Internal Leakage r r Baths r T Other r Irrigation r Pools r Wash Down F F Car Washing r IF External Leakage r r DAonor Cooling Comments Assumes minimum 2 bathrooms per SF account and 4 units or 8 bathrooms per MF account. Utility cost for 1.8gpm showerhead and 1.5 gpm aerator kit is $12. Customer cost $25 is to repair leaks orather minarcosts. Assume kits save 27.6% (reduced to be conservall by assuming only 25%af kits are actually installed in the homes and yield water savings. 82 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.001600 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $56,761 Communityl $124,355 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i Benefit to Cost Ratio Targets Accounts 1 2.02 Communityl SF MF Total 2015 153 1.1 164 2016 154 1.1 165 2017 155 11 166 2018 157 1.1 167 2019 15811 169 2020 0 0 0 82 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.001600 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $56,761 Communityl $124,355 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 1 2.02 Communityl 1.66 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume ($Img) Utility $1,851 End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account SF Faucets 6.9% SF Showers 6.9% MF Faucets 6.9% ME Showers 6.9% Target Method I Percentage % of Accts Targeted 1 yrj 2.DDD% Onty Effects New Accts I r Water Sav Total Savings 2015 0.001662 2016 0.003325 2017 0.004987 2018 0.006651 2019 0.008316 2020 0.006656 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 Indoor and Outdoor Surveys- SF, Overview Name indoor and Outdoor Abbr 15 Measure Tvil I Standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 Permanent Last Year 2040 Years 5 Measure Length 26 Repeall r Fixture Costs Costs Utility I Customer Fix1ACCt SF $162.00 I $50.00 1 MF $534.00 1 $50.001 1 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 30% REGIONAL OR CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Indoor and outdoor r water surveys for existing residential customers. Target those with high water use and pmvde a customized repo rt to owner. May include give-away of efficient shower heads, aerators, and toilet devices. Customer leaks can go uncorrected at properties where owners are least able to pay costs of repair. These programs may require that customer leaks be repaired, with either part of the repair subsid"aed and/or the cost paid with revolvingfunds paid back with crater bilk overtime. May am include an o ptio n to replace inefficient plumbing Fixtures at low- inoo me residences. May include adjustments to ingiafron schedules on automatic irrigation controllers. Provide incenfrve to install pressure regulatingvahre on existing properties with pressure exceeding 80 psi. Customer Classes End Uses Costs % Savings per Account m � z o z z X X_ ' Summa Utility Customer Total 2015 $9,909 $2,046 $11, 2016 $9,986 $2,061 $12, 2017 $10,063 $2,077 $12, 2018 $10,140 $2,093 $12, 2019 $10,217 $2,109 $12, 2020 $10,2941 $2,125 $12, Customer Classes End Uses Targets % Savings per Account m � z o z z X X_ SA% Toilets fv 5V SF Showers Uri na.s SF Dishwashers 5.0% Faucets lv 5.0% SF Baths Showers lv .v 5.0% Dishwashers T 5.0% SF Irrigation Clothes Washers F SF Pools 10.0% Process 10.0% SF Car Washing Kitchen Spray Rinse SF External Leakage 10.0% Internal Leakage P P MF Faucets Baths P7 FJ 5.0% Other Pv !✓ MF Clothes Washers Irrigation ry 50 5.0% Pools V v MF Other Wash Down r✓ 10.0% Car Washing Fv External Leakage Pr P P MF Wash Down Dutdaor MF Car Washing 10.0% Cooling 10.0% Utility costs to r staff survey time and any giveaway devices. Customer cost reflects Utility costs for staff survey time a nd any giveaway devices. Cull mer cost reflects average cost to address report reeommerdafions. Includes $12 per unit for kit giveaways. Assumes 1 kit to r SF and 4 kits for MF units (1 per unit not ane per bathroom). Assume 5% savings for indoo r suggestia ns a of 10% savings to r a utdoor suggestin ns. Savings reflect average values since survey suggestions, device distribution and fixture and appliance recommendations and upgrades will vary. City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mgd 0.006158 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utility $167,107 Community $246,030 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i utility $198,683 Community 1 $239,696 Benefit to Cost Ratio utility 1 0.84 Communityl 1.03 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume (: utilitV1 $3,397 End Use Savings Per Replacement Targets % Savings per Account SF Toilets SA% SF Faucets SA% SF Showers 5.0% SF Dishwashers 5.0% SF Clothes Washers 5.0% SF Baths 5.0% SF Internal Leakage 5.0% SF Other 5.0% SF Irrigation 10.0% SF Pools 10.0% SF Wash Down 10.0% SF Car Washing 10.0% SF External Leakage 10.0% MF Toilets SA% MF Faucets SA% MF Showers 5.0% MF Dishwashers 5.0% MF Clothes Washers 5.0% MF Baths 5.0% MF Internal Leakage 5.0% MF Other 5.0% MF Irrigation 10.0% MF Pools 10.0% MF Wash Down 10.0% MF Car Washing 10.0% MF External Leakage 10.0% Target Methed % of Accts Targeted / yr Only Effects New Accts 83 0.500% Targets Water Savings _ Accounts SF MF Total Total Savings (mgd) 2015 38 3 41 2015 0.001257 2016 39 3 41 2016 0.002519 2017 39 3 42 2017 0.003787 2018 39 3 42 2018 D.005060 2019 39 3r 42 2019 D.006337 2020 40 3r 421 2020 0.006374 83 0.500% Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Overview Name Efficient Toilet Abar 16 Categ ory Efficietrt Toilet Measure Type standard Measure lacers nt Rep e Program—SF Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 1 Permanentl v Last Year 2019 Measure Length 5 Fixture Costs Costs Summa utility Customer utility Customer I Fi:Q'ACCt SF $1-50.001 $150.001 2 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 25% description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Provide a rebate or voucher for the installation of a ultra high efficiencytoilet(UHET). UHET toilets flush 1.28 gpf or less a nd include dua I flush technology. Rebate amounts would reflect the incremental purchase cost. Replacement program ran be eiithera direct install or rebate program. Includes replacement of 1.6 gpf that are not well functioning. Customer Classes End Uses Costs Summa utility Customer Total 2015 $2,524 $2,019 $4, 2016 $2,543 $2,035 $4, 2017 $2,563 $2,050 $4, 2018 $2,582 $2,066 $4, 2019 $2,602 $2,082 $4, 2020 $0 $0 Kitchen Spray Rinse Customer Classes End Uses Targets m � z o z X z X_ SF Toilets Fv 2015 13 Urinals 2016 14 Faucets 2017 14 Showers r 2018 14 Dishwashers F 2019 14 Clothes Washers r - 2020 07 Process Kitchen Spray Rinse Internal Leakage r Baths F Other F Irrigation F Pools Wash Down Car Washing F External Leakage r- outdoorling Coo Comments Rebate for utility is $150 premium (less tha n 1.0 gpn toilet purchase. The $150 customer cost is for installation. Assumes 2 toilets per SF account. Model water savings of 42% and cosi/benefits based on MMWD provided data using an average toilet flush vo lume of 2.2 gpf for existing toilets (weighted average of Field measured toilets Sample sil toilets. 84 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi D.DOD369 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utility $10,180 Community $10,180 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i Benefit to Cost Ratio utility 1 0.84 Communityl 0.47 Cost of Savings per unit Volume ($Img) utility $3,444 End Use Savings Per Replacement Savings per Account SF Toilets 41.8% Target Method Percentage %u of Accts Targeted / yr 0.080% only Effects New Accts r - Water Sav Total Savings 2015 0.000085 2016 0.000170 2017 0.000254 2018 0.000338 2019 0.000422 2020 0.000420 Targets SF Total 2015 13 13 2016 14 14 2017 14 14 2018 14 14 2019 14 14 2020 07 0 84 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi D.DOD369 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utility $10,180 Community $10,180 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i Benefit to Cost Ratio utility 1 0.84 Communityl 0.47 Cost of Savings per unit Volume ($Img) utility $3,444 End Use Savings Per Replacement Savings per Account SF Toilets 41.8% Target Method Percentage %u of Accts Targeted / yr 0.080% only Effects New Accts r - Water Sav Total Savings 2015 0.000085 2016 0.000170 2017 0.000254 2018 0.000338 2019 0.000422 2020 0.000420 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 Direct Install UHET, Shovnerheads, and Faucet Aerators - SF, YF Overview Name Uirett Install UHET Showerhea All 17 Category Measure Tvpe Standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2039 1 Permanent Last Year 2023 Measure Length 5 Fixture Costs Utility I Customer I FirJAcct SF $325.00 $100.00 2 MF $325.001 $100.001 4 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 25% Description CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: Direct Install High EWw-wncyToilets, Showerheads, and Faucet Aerators in Residenfial Buildings. Utirdy would suhsidae installation cost of a new UHET purchased by the utility. Licensed plumbers, pre- qualified by the Utility would solicit customers directly. Customers would get a new UH ET and showerheads and faucet aerators installed at a discounted price. Customer Classes End Uses % Savings per Account m � z o z z X X_ 60.0% Toilets fv 5V SF Showers Urinals MF Toilets 60.0% Faucets rr MF Showers Showers )✓ 9 2016 0 Dishwashers T F 2017 $0 $0 $0 Clothes Washers T r 2017 0.000000 Process 2018 0 0 Kitchen Spray Rinse 2019 $36,514 $8,988 $45,502 2019 39 Internal Leakage r T 2020 $36,789 $9,056 $45,845 Baths r T 2020 0.009320 Other r r Irrigation r r Pools r r Wash Down r F Car Washing r External Leakage r r r Dutdo or Cooling Comments Utility cost of current "on bill payment" direct installation program From Santa Rosa costs: $375 for one package and $649 for two. Research for new grant direct install program costs $530 each package. Assume one unit package includes: - 1 UHET {0.6 gpt) Includes tank, bowl, seat, wax ring, brass bolts. - 1 Showell (3.5 gpm) - Bathroom aerator (up to 2) (1.5 gpm) - 1 IGtchen aerator (1.5 gpm) Assume 2 units per SF all a of 4 per MF all Customer cost based on incremental fixture and installation costs ($100). Toilet crater savings is based on 1.6 gpf and 3.5 gpf toilets being replaced with 1.0 gpf toilets. Showerhead a nd faucet aerator savings based on the replacement of 2.0 gpm or more showerheads with 1.5 gpm showerheads; and 3.0 gpm or greater faucets with 1.0 gpm faucet aerators. City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mgd 0.017399 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utilityl $447,214 Communityl $794,662 Lifetime Costs - Present Value t Utility $155,226 Community $193,435 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 1 2.88 Communityl 4.11 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume i End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account SF Toilets 60.0% SF Faucets 50.0% SF Showers 50.0% MF Toilets 60.0% MF Faucets 50.0% MF Showers 50.0% Target Method Percentage % of Accts Targeted I yr O.SDD% Only Effects New Accts >- costs Targets Water Sav Summa Utility Customer Total Accounts SF MF Total Savings 2015 $0 $0 $0 2015 0 0 2015 0.000000 2016 $0 $0 $0 2016 0 0 2016 0.000000 2017 $0 $0 $0 2017 0 0 Q42 2017 0.000000 2018 $0 $0 $0 2018 0 0 2018 0.000000 2019 $36,514 $8,988 $45,502 2019 39 3 2019 0.004662 2020 $36,789 $9,056 $45,845 2020 40 3 2020 0.009320 85 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 HE Ckdhes Washer Rebalte - SF, YF Overview Name HE Clothes washer Rebate - Abbr 18 Category Measure Tvpe Standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2035 Permanent Last Year 2D19 Measure Length 5 Fixture Costs Costs Utility I Customer I FirJAcct SF $125.001 $675.001 1 MF SV5.001 %75.001 1 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 25% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: provide arebate tar efficient washing machines to residerdia 1 customers. Itis assumed that the rebates would remain consistent with relevant state and federal regulations (Department of Energy, Energy Star) and only offer the best available technology. Customer Classes End Uses Costs � o m z z z W W_ Total Toilets r F 6 98 2016 $15,460 $66,789 $82,250 Urinals Faucets r 0 2017 $15,580 $67,305 $82,884 2017 93 7 Showers r- r 7 100 2019 $15,818 $68,335 $84,153 Dishwashers r - 101 2020 s0 s0 1 so 2020 0 or Clothes Washers !w -`✓ Process Kitchen Spray Rinse Int oral Leakage r A— Baths r- T Other Irrigation T r- T r - pools r- r Wash Down r r Car Washing E-.ternal Leakage F i- Outdaor Cooling Comments Current outreach is regional and these costs are included in the public outreach measure. Form processing and check cutting are managed by the water contractor. Watersavings is based on difference between a 34 gallon per load machine compared to a 12 gallon per load CEE Tier 3 machine. Rebate of $125/unit based on current average rebate amount a ma rig water contractors. Customer costs include insta Ilafion. 86 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.013034 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utilityl $365,103 Communityl $921,332 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i Utility $73,444 Community $390,724 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 4.97 Communityl 2.36 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume (: End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account SF Clothes Washers 64.7% MF Clothes Washers 64.7% Target Method Percentage % of Accts Targeted / yr 1.200% Onty Effects New ACGtsIr- Water Sav Total Savings 2015 D.003254 2016 0.006528 2017 0.009812 2018 0.013094 2019 0.016367 2020 0.016290 Costs - counts SF Targets PINININIONMEME MF Total Summar; Utility Customer Total 2015 $15,341 $66,274 $81,615 2015 92 6 98 2016 $15,460 $66,789 $82,250 2016 92 6 99 2017 $15,580 $67,305 $82,884 2017 93 7 100 2018 $15,699 $67,820 $83,519 2018 94 7 100 2019 $15,818 $68,335 $84,153 2019 95 7 101 2020 s0 s0 1 so 2020 0 or 0 86 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.013034 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utilityl $365,103 Communityl $921,332 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i Utility $73,444 Community $390,724 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 4.97 Communityl 2.36 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume (: End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account SF Clothes Washers 64.7% MF Clothes Washers 64.7% Target Method Percentage % of Accts Targeted / yr 1.200% Onty Effects New ACGtsIr- Water Sav Total Savings 2015 D.003254 2016 0.006528 2017 0.009812 2018 0.013094 2019 0.016367 2020 0.016290 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Overview ; Name Submeters Incentive Abbr 19 Category Measure Type standard Measure Sabmebers Incentive Time Period Measure Life First Year 2016 Permanent d Last Year 2040 Measure Length 25 Fixture Costs Costs Utility I Customer I FirJAcct MF $120.00 $50.00 50 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 25% CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Require or provide a partial cost rebate to meter all remaining mobile home parks that are currently master metered but not separately metered. Provide a rebate (per unit] to assist MF buildngowners instalfing submeters on each existing ind'nidual apartment or condominium unit. Provide a rebate (per unit) to assist MF building owners insta IGng submeters on each new individual apartment unit. Require the submeteringof individual units in new muRFfarr y, condos, townhouses, and mobile - home parks. Customer Classes End Uses Costs Targets -I � 0 Summar; Utility Customer Total 2015 $0 $0 $0 2016 $10,918 $3,639 $14,557 2017 $11,002 $3,667 $14,670 2018 $11,086 $3,695 $14,782 2019 $11,171 $3,7241 $14,894 2020 $11,255 $3,7521 $15,006 Customer Classes End Uses Targets -I � 0 m z o z X �_ MF Toilets 2015 0 0 2016 73 Urinals Faucets 2017 (✓ 73 2018 74 Showers 2019 r 74 2020 75 Dishwashers P Clothes Washers Process Kitchen Spray Rinse Internal Leakage �e Baths Other Irrigation Pools Wash Down F - Cal -Washing Eatern al Leakage rM Dutdo or Cooling Comments For Rohnert Park estimated $120 utility cost for rebate and $50 customer cost per meter. Assume a total of 65 rebates per year as requested by Rohnert Park. Assume 50 dwelling units (mobile homes) per account. DU = duelling unit (.e., mobile home).- Consider ome)-Consider patterning after Santa Clara Valley Water District program. http://www.vaILVwater.o rg/Progtanis/Submeter RebateProgra ril 87 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (ml 0.008725 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $213,737 Communityl $347,432 Lifetime Costs - Present Value t utility $206,385 Community $275,180 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 1.04 Communityl 1.26 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume i Utility $2,491 End Use Savings Per Replacement Targets -I Ferz ur rs - 15.0% MF Total 2015 0 0 2016 73 73 2017 73 73 2018 74 74 2019 741 74 2020 75 75 87 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (ml 0.008725 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $213,737 Communityl $347,432 Lifetime Costs - Present Value t utility $206,385 Community $275,180 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 1.04 Communityl 1.26 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume i Utility $2,491 End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account MF Toilets 15.0% MF Faucets 15.0% MF Showers 15.0% MF Dishwashers 15.0% MF Clothes Washers 15.0% MF Internal Leakage 15.0% MF Irrigation 15.0% MF External Leakage 15.0% Target Method Percentage o/n of Accts Targeted / yr 0.270% 0nly Effects New Accts r - Water Sav Fill Total Savings 2015 0.000000 2016 0.000701 2017 0.001404 2018 0.002107 2019 0.002811 2020 0.003516 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 outdoor Large Lame Audtls g Yllaler Budgetingfllon RlOring Overview Name Outdoor Large Landscape Audits Abbr 20 Category Measure Type I Standard Measure + Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 Permanentl F Last Year 2019 Years 5 Measure Length 5 Repeall F Administration Costs Markup Percentage 35% Description CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: Outdoor wateraudits offered forexisting targe landscape customers. Normally those with high water use are targeted and provided a customized report on how to save water. All large multFfarni residential, CII, and public irrigators of large landscapes would be eligible for free landscape water all upon request. Website will provide feedback on irrigation water use (budget vs. actual). May include the cost for dedicated meter Costs Summar Utilitv I Customer I Total 2015 $5,586 $828 Fixture Costs $5,685 $842 utilityCustomer I FirJAcct $857 IRR $2,500.00 1 $500.00 1 1 2019 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 35% Description CONTRACTOR OR REGIONAL MEASURE: Outdoor wateraudits offered forexisting targe landscape customers. Normally those with high water use are targeted and provided a customized report on how to save water. All large multFfarni residential, CII, and public irrigators of large landscapes would be eligible for free landscape water all upon request. Website will provide feedback on irrigation water use (budget vs. actual). May include the cost for dedicated meter Costs Summar Utilitv I Customer I Total 2015 $5,586 $828 2016 $5,685 $842 2017 $5,784 $857 2018 $5,883 $871 2019 $5,982 $886 2020 $0 $0 Customer Classes End Uses Targets - � o m z z z X X_ 2 Toilets 2 2 2017 2 r - Urinals Faucets 2 2 2019 2 F r Showers 0 a Dishwashers (- Clothes Washers r Process r Kitchen Spray Rinse r Internal Leakage Baths r Other Irrigation r 9- VPooIs Pools Wash Down Car Washing External Leakage Iv [Manor Cooling Comments Regional- Green Business Program and some Contractor (more discussion needed). Assumesall large landscape amounts can apply. Assume an average site is 3 acres and costs $500/acre to survey. Total Utility cost assumes $1500 per site survey and $1AW per water budget including some dedicated meter conversions. Savings assumes 15% irrigation and external leakage savings as a result of the survey and an additional 10% savings due to water budgeting and monitaring. Saha Rosa average commerciall/irrigation lot sae is 33AM sq feet. Many companies are helping water utiCdiles including WaterFluence and Eagleaerial. 88 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.000548 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utilityl $19,429 Communityl $19,429 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i utility $27,249 Community $31,286 Benefit to Cost Ratio utility 0.71 Communityl 0.62 Cost of Savings per unit Volume (: End Use Savings Per Replacement Savings per Account IRR Irrigation 25.0% IRR External Leakage 25.0% Target Method Percentage 17° of Accts Targeted / yr 0.500% Only Effects New Accts l - Water Sav Total Savings ( 2015 0.000550 2016 0.001111 2017 0.001681 2018 0.002260 2019 0.002850 2020 0.002299 Targets - Accounts IRR Total 2015 2 2 2016 2 2 2017 2 2 2018 2 2 2019 2 2 2020 0 a 88 City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.000548 Lifetime Savings - Present Value utilityl $19,429 Communityl $19,429 Lifetime Costs - Present Value i utility $27,249 Community $31,286 Benefit to Cost Ratio utility 0.71 Communityl 0.62 Cost of Savings per unit Volume (: End Use Savings Per Replacement Savings per Account IRR Irrigation 25.0% IRR External Leakage 25.0% Target Method Percentage 17° of Accts Targeted / yr 0.500% Only Effects New Accts l - Water Sav Total Savings ( 2015 0.000550 2016 0.001111 2017 0.001681 2018 0.002260 2019 0.002850 2020 0.002299 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Overview Name Landscape Rebates and Incentives for A66r 21 Gategory LaodiSCape Measure Type I standard Measure Rebates and Incentives kw Time Period Measure Life Equipment First Year 2015 Permanent Upgrade Last Year 2019 Years 7D Measure Length 5 Repeat Fixture Costs Utility Customer Fix/Acct N � z SF $250.00 $250.00 1 MF $250.00 $250.00 1 COM $1000.00 $500.00 1 INDINST $1,000.00 $500.00 1 IRR $1,000.00 $500.00 1 Ta Administration Costs Markup Percentage 25% Description I CONTRACTOR MEASURE: For SF, MF, CII, and IRR customers with landscape, provide a Smad landscape Rebate Program with rebates for substantive landscape retrofits orinstaltation of waterefficient upgrades; Rebates contribute towards the purchase and installation of water -wise plants, compost, mulch and selected types of irrigation equipment upgrades inclurling: Large RainwaterCatchment Systems, Rain Barrels, Rain Sensors, RatatingSprinklerNozzles, Drip lrrigafion Equipment, Weather Based IrrigatranContra Ilers and Gray Water Customer Classes End Uses Savings per Account SF Irrigation N � z MF Irrigation 15.0% COM Irrigation 15.0% © o a IRR Irrigation 15.0% sctounts _ Ta Toasts r r r r r Urinals Onlv Effects New Accts r- r r Faucets IF - r 17 - $24,746 showers r= Showers 2016 77 J r r 2016 0.004312 Dishwashers r $24,977 r r Clothes Washers r 3 91 — r T $25,208 Process 2018 78 r- r - Kitchen Spray Rinse 2019 $37,232 IT T r - Internal Leakage T r IT T r Baths r- r- $0 r - Other T r r T r - Irrigation r r r r r Pods r r r Wash Down F Car Washing IF External Leakage r r r r r Outdoor cooling r r Comments Rebate amounts based o n Saha Rosa's current rebate program. Getamer costs assume average installation casts and incremental equipment purchase costs. Average savings of 15% assumed since savrhgs can range from 5%,25% per equipment upgrade. This program can potentially be modified to just target the larger accounts. City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mi 0.004216 Lifetime Savings- Present Value (M Lifetime Costs - Present Value ($} utility 1 $171,921 Community $289,652 Benefit to Cost Ratio utility 1 0.81 Cummunityl 0.48 Gust of Savings per unit Volume ($Img} utility 1 $4,294 89 Savings per Account SF Irrigation 15.0% MF Irrigation 15.0% COM Irrigation 15.0% INDINST Irrigation 15.0% IRR Irrigation 15.0% sctounts _ Ta Target Method I Ae—ntaga 0% of Accts Targeted I yr 1 1.000% Onlv Effects New Accts r - 2015 76 89 Costs Targets Water Summary Utility Customer Toi sctounts _ SF MF COM INDINST IRR Total Total Savings (mgd) 2015 $35,719 $24,515 $60,234 2015 76 5 5 0 3 90 2015 0.002144 2016 $36,097 $24,746 $60,843 2016 77 5 5 0 3 91 2016 0.004312 2017 $36,475 $24,977 $61,452 2017 78 5 5 0 3 91 2017 0.006504 2018 $36,854 $25,208 $62,061 2018 78 5 5 0 3 92 2018 0.008721 2019 $37,232 $25,438 $62,671 20191 79 6 5 0 4 93 2019 0.010961 2020 $0 $0 $0 2020 01 DI 01 01 01 0 2020 0.010961 89 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 Turf Removal - MF, CII Overview Name Turf Remova I - MF, Cl I Abbr 22 Category Measure Tyne standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 Permanent Last Year 2024 Measure Length 10 Fixture Costs Utility Customer Fix/Acct MF $2,500.00 $20,000.00 1 COM $2,500.00 $20,000.00 1 INDINST $2,500-00 $20,000.00 1 IRR $2,500-00 $20,000.00 1 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 30% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE_ Provide a per square foot incentive to remove turf and replace with low water use plants o r hardscape. Rebate is based o in price per square foot removed, and capped at an upper limit for multi -family orcommercial residence. Customer Classes F--F-1.WAN End Uses Targets Costs MF Irrigation v Summa Utility Customer Total 2015 $21,889 $134,700 $156, 2016 $22,190 $136,553 $158, 2017 $22,491 $138,406 $160, 2018 $22,792 $140,258 $163, 2019 $23,093 $142,1111 $165, 2020 $23,394 $143,9641 $167, Customer Classes F--F-1.WAN End Uses Targets z MF Irrigation v � o0 COM INDINST z 2015 Toilets r r r r Urinals F- r r Faucets r r showers r r r r 2 7 Dishwashers r r r r 2 Clothes Washers r r r r 2016 Process r r r 0 Kitchen spray Rinse r r r 3 Intemal Leakage r r 'r r 2 7 Baths r r Other r r r r Irngation r r r F, Pools r r Wash Down r Ca Washing r Extemal Leakage r r r r Outdoor Cooling Comments Utility costs assumes $OS per sf per site with an max of 5,000 square -feet replacement reimbursement (per Santa Rosa's current program). Customer casts include incremental landscape square -footage development casts and installation costs. Passible allow permeable landscape. Savings assume more than 50% of turf replaced with low water -using plants. City of Rohnert Park Re sults Average Water Savings (mgd 0.009753 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $257,066 iunity $257,066 Lifetime Costs - Present Value Utility $202,343 iunity $1,447,531 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility1.27 iunity 0.18 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume 0 End Use Savings Per Replacement Targets % Savings per Account MF Irrigation 25.096 Accounts MF COM INDINST IRR Total 2015 3 2 0 2 7 2016 3 2 0 2 7 2017 3 2 0 2 7 2016 3 3 0 2 7 2019 3 3 0 2 7 2020 3 3 0 2 7 City of Rohnert Park Re sults Average Water Savings (mgd 0.009753 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility $257,066 iunity $257,066 Lifetime Costs - Present Value Utility $202,343 iunity $1,447,531 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility1.27 iunity 0.18 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume 0 End Use Savings Per Replacement Total Saun s % Savings per Account MF Irrigation 25.096 COM Irrigation 25.096 INDINST Iirrigation 25.096 IRR Irrigation 25.096 Target Method Percentage % of Accts Targeted 1 yr 0.500% Only Effects New Accts r Water Sav Total Saun s 2015 0.001124 2016 0.002262 2017 0.003416 2016 0.004584 2019 0.005768 2020 0.006966 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Overview Name Turf Removal - SP Abbr 23 Category Measure Type Standard Measure Turf Removal - SF Time Period Measure Life First Year 2035 Permanent Last Year 2024 Measure Length 10 Showers I Fixture Costs Targets Utility I Customer I FixFAcct SF $2.50.0DI $2AM.001 1 Administration Costs Markup Percentage 30% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE: Provide a per square foot ineen ive to remove turf and replace with low water use plants or permeable hardscape. Rebate based on dollars per square foot removed and capped at an upper limd for single fa milt' residences. 4111osts Summa Utility Customer Total 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 $157 $158 Customer Classes End Uses Targets � z p o r Water Sav Toilets Total 76 77 78 78 79 791 Urinals Faucets r Total Savings Showers I 2015 Dishwashers r 2016 77 Clothes Washers r 0.001597 Process K,tchen Spray Rinse 2017 Internal Leakage I 2018 1 78 Baths 7 0.003220 Other r- 2019 Irngation T 2020 79 Pools i` 0.004867 Wash Down i - Car Washing T External Leakage �^ outdoor Cooling Comments Utility costs assume based an Santa Rosa program, rebate is $.50 per sf, max is $250 and SDDsf. replacement reimbursement per Santa Rosa's current program. Santa Rosa assumes: 75% removed for residerrtial. Customercosts include incremental landscape square -footage development costs and installation costs. Possible allow permable landscape. Savings assume more than 10D% of turf replaced with low water -using plants. City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (ml 0.006791 Lifetime Savings - Present Value ($} Utilit:$179,01616 Communityl $179,066 Lifetime Grits - Present Value ($] utilityl $225,539 Communityl $1,613,473 Benefit to Gost Ratio Utility 0.79 Community 0.11 Gast of Savings Der Unit Volume (S/m( End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account SF Irrigation 15.0% Targets Target Method I Percerdage a/u of Accts Targeted / yrl 1.ODD% Only Effects New Accts r - 91 Targets Water Sav Accounts SF Total 76 77 78 78 79 791 Total Savings 2015 76 2015 0.000796 2016 77 2016 0.001597 2017 78 2017 0.002406 2018 1 78 2010 0.003220 2019 79 2019 0.004040 2020 79 2020 0.004867 91 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model 0 Water Conserving Landscape and Irrigation Codes Overview Name Water Conserving Landscape and Irrigation Abbr 24 Category Measure Type standard Measure Time Period Measure Life First Year 2015 Permanent 9 Last Year 2040 Measure Length 26 Fixture Casts Administration Cosmo Markup Percentage 25% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE= Develop and enforce Water Efficient Landscape Design Standards. Standards specify that development projects subject to design review be landscaped according to climate appropriate principals, with appropriate turf ratios, plant selection, efficient irrigation systems and smart irrigation controllers. The ordinance could require certification of landscape professionals. 2095 2016 2097 2098 2019 2020 Costs „mar lity Customer $2,316 $18,528 $2,316 $18,528 $2,316 $18,528 $2,3161 $18,528 $2,3161 $18,528 $2,316 $18,528 Total $ 20,844 Customer Classes z - U O M c� . — End Uses Utility Customer Fi)dAcct MF $1011.00 $1,000.00 1 COM $1011.00 $1,000.011 1 INDINST $1011.00 $1,000.00 1 IRR $100.00 $1,000.00 1 Administration Cosmo Markup Percentage 25% Description CONTRACTOR MEASURE= Develop and enforce Water Efficient Landscape Design Standards. Standards specify that development projects subject to design review be landscaped according to climate appropriate principals, with appropriate turf ratios, plant selection, efficient irrigation systems and smart irrigation controllers. The ordinance could require certification of landscape professionals. 2095 2016 2097 2098 2019 2020 Costs „mar lity Customer $2,316 $18,528 $2,316 $18,528 $2,316 $18,528 $2,3161 $18,528 $2,3161 $18,528 $2,316 $18,528 Total $ 20,844 Customer Classes z - U O M c� . — End Uses MR 0 z a �r Uz — 2016 Toilets r- r- r- 1 - Urinals r r Faucets r r r r Showers r r r r Dishwashers f r aothes Washers I' Process Kitchen Spraq Rinse Intemal Leakage r r 7 I r- r r r- r- r r r r r Baths r r Other f- r- r V - Irrigation r r I✓ 70 Pools r (- Wash Dawn L - 8 Car Washing r 6 External Leakage F 2016 outdoor Cooling r - Cam ments All new accounts apply and those that require a lardscape permit. Utility cost is an inspection cost_ Customer cost assumes incremental cost to comply versus install typical all-- turf lbturf landscape. Targets MR Accounts 2016 MF COM INDINST IRR Total 2095 4 8 0 6 19 2016 4 8 0 6 19 2017 4 8 0 6 19 2016 4 8 0 6 19 2019 4 8 0 61 19 2020 4 8 0 6r 19 92 City of Rohnert Park Re sults Average Water Savings (mgd) 0.018398 Lifetime Savings - Present Value ($) Utility $463,232 Community $463,232 Lifetime Costs - Present Value ($) Utility $30,879 Community $277,914 Benefit to Cost Ratio Utility 15.00 Community 1.67 Cost of Savings per Unit Volume $1 Utility $177 End Use Savings Per Replacement % Savings per Account MF Irrigation 15.096 COM Irrigation 15.096 INDINST Irrigation 15.096 IRR Irrioation 15.096 Target Method Percentage % of Accts Targeted 1 yr 100.000% Only Effects New Accts V Wate r Sav Total Savings 2015 0.001797 2016 0.003594 2017 0.005390 2016 0.007187 2019 0.008984 2020 0.010781 Appendix D: Assumptions for Water Conservation Measures Evaluated in the DSS Model Overview Customer Classes Name Require Smart Irrigation Controllers and Rai o Abb5 ° r 2 z "I_ Category F r Measure T standard Measure Require Smart End Uses Irrigation Time Period Measure Life z Contra■ers and0 o W m Rain Sensors First Year 2015 Peranent '� ° z 11� in New Last Year 2040 Toilets r r r r Development Measure Length 26 urinals r r Faucets r r r r - Ba Administration Costs Ot Markup Percents a 10% Irrigal Po Description CONTRACTOR M rASU Rr_ Require Weather Adjusting Smart Irrigation Controllers per Cal Green on New Development It is optional to require Rain Sensors in Cal Green for New Development Require developers for all properties of greater than four residential units and all commercial development to install the weather based irrigation controllers. May require landscaper training. Wash Down r r CarWashing r r External Leakage r r r Outdoor Codiiino r r Comments Customer cost assumes $700 device unit cost (per RainBird ITC-L)Q and $50 unit installation oust per controller with 3 controllers needed for large sites. Utility cost reflects inspection casts. Savings used in RAWSCA analysis. Valencia Water Company weather -based irrigation controller pilot study in 2014 concluded 15% irrination savinp_s. City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mgd; 01)17775 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility 1 $438,861 iuni $438,861 Lifetime Costs - Present Value UtilitV1 5174.351 Utility Fixture Costs I Showers r r- I r- r- per Unit Volume $/m Utility Liti lity Customer Fiw+Acct Dishwashers r r r r End Use Savings Per Replacement SF $100.00 $750.00 1 Clothes Washers r r r SF I rrigation is.096 MF $100.00 $750.00 1 PrDcess r r is.096 CQM $100.00 $750.00 3 Kitchen Spray Rinse F- Internal Leakage r r r F r 2017 59 4 INDINST $100.00 $750.00 3 Ba Administration Costs Ot Markup Percents a 10% Irrigal Po Description CONTRACTOR M rASU Rr_ Require Weather Adjusting Smart Irrigation Controllers per Cal Green on New Development It is optional to require Rain Sensors in Cal Green for New Development Require developers for all properties of greater than four residential units and all commercial development to install the weather based irrigation controllers. May require landscaper training. Wash Down r r CarWashing r r External Leakage r r r Outdoor Codiiino r r Comments Customer cost assumes $700 device unit cost (per RainBird ITC-L)Q and $50 unit installation oust per controller with 3 controllers needed for large sites. Utility cost reflects inspection casts. Savings used in RAWSCA analysis. Valencia Water Company weather -based irrigation controller pilot study in 2014 concluded 15% irrination savinp_s. City of Rohnert Park Results Average Water Savings (mgd; 01)17775 Lifetime Savings - Present Value Utility 1 $438,861 iuni $438,861 Lifetime Costs - Present Value UtilitV1 5174.351 Utility 2.52 Communityl 0.32 Cost of Savin s per Unit Volume $/m Utility $1,033 Total Sarins m 2015 $9,802 $66,832 $76,634 End Use Savings Per Replacement 8 0 % Savings per Account SF I rrigation is.096 MF Irrigation 15.096 CCDM Irrigation is.096 INDINST Irrigation 15.096 Target Method Percentage % of Accts Targeted 1 yr 100.000% Costs Targets ACCqunt5 SF MF COM INDINST Total Water Savi Summar; A lity Customer Total Total Sarins m 2015 $9,802 $66,832 $76,634 2015 59 4 8 0 72 2015 0.001327 2016 $9,802 $66,832 $76,634 2016 59 4 8 0 72 2016 0.002653 2017 $9,802 $66,832 $76,634 2017 59 4 8 0 72 2017 0.003980 2018 $9,802 $66,832 $76,634 2016 59 4 8 0 72 2016 0.005307 2019 $9,802 $66,832 $76,634 2019 59 4 8 0 72 2019 0.006633 2020 $9,802 $66,832 $76,634 2020 59 4 81 0 72 2020 0.007960 93 APPENDIX E - LIST OF CONTACTS The following table presents each Water Contractor's contact information. 94 NumberPhone City Engineer/Public Damien O'Bid 707-665-3620 dobid@cotaticity.org Works Director Environmental Services Nick Crump 707-778-4487 ncrump@ci.petaluma.ca.us Technician Environmental Services Leah Walker 707-778-4583 Iwalker@ci.petaluma.ca.us Manager Mary Grace 707-588-2234 mpawson@rpcity.org City Engineer Pawson Senior Water Resources Rocky Vogler 707-543-3938 rvogler@srcity.org Planner Teresa Gudino 707-543-3942 tgudino@srcity.org Water Resources Analyst City Engineer/Public Dan Takasugi 707-933-2230 dtakasugi@sonomacity.org Works Director Steve MacCarthy 707-933-2231 steve@sonomacity.org Water System Supervisor Water Conservation Mike Brett 707-933-2247 mbrett@sonomacity.org Specialist Carl Gowan 415-945-1577 cgowan@marinwater.org Principal Engineer Environmental & Mike Ban 415-945-1435 mban@marinwater.org Engineering Services Manager Oreen Delgado 415-945-1425 odelgado@marinwater.org Finance Manager Water ConservationManager Dan Carney 415-945-1522 dcarney@marinwater.org Alex Anaya 415-945-1588 aanaya@marinwater.org Engineering Technician Lucy Croy 415-945-1590 Icroy@marinwater.org Assistant Engineer Chris DeGabriele 415-761-8905 cdegrabriele@nmwd.com General Manager Water Conservation Ryan Grisso 415-761-8933 rgrisso@nmwd.com Coordinator Drew McIntyre 415-761-8912 drewm@nmwd.com Chief Engineer James M Smith 707-838-5343 imsmith@Townofwindsor.com Senior Civil Engineer Management Analyst/ Paul Piazza 707-838-5357 ppiazza@Townofwindsor.com Water Conservation Analyst Town Engineer/Public Toni Bertolero 707-838-5978 tbertolero@townofwindsor.com Works Director Utility Systems Mike Cave 707-838-5329 mcave@townofwindsor.com Superintendent 94 Appendix E: List of Contacts dmuelrath@vomwd.com swalk@vomwd.com 95 City of Rohnert Park General Manager APPENDIX F - REFERENCES American Water Works Association. Manual of Water Supply Practice, M36, Water Audits and Loss Control Programs, (3rd edition). AWWA, 2009. Online: http://www.awwa.org American Water Works Association. Manual of Water Supply Practice, M52, Water Conservation Programs —A Planning Manual. AWWA, 2006. Online: http://www.awwa.org American Water Works Association. Manual of Water Supply Practice, M50, Water Resources Planning. AWWA, 2007. Online: http://www.awwa.org Association of Bay Area Governments. Draft Preferred Scenario of the Sustainable Communities Strategy (Jobs -Housing Connection Strategy). ABAG, 2013. California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen). Online: http://www.usgbc-ncc.org/index.php?option=com conte nt&view=article&id=401&Item id=90 California Urban Water Conservation Council. Best Management Practices (BMP) Cost and Savings Study. CUWCC, 2005. California Urban Water Conservation Council. Memorandum of Understanding, CUWCC, adopted December 1991, amended September 2014. Online: https://www.cuwcc.org/Resources/Memorandum-of-Understanding City of Cotati. City of Cotati 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Online: http://ci.cotati.ca.us/docs/UMWP2010.pdf City of Cotati. City of Cotati 2011 Water Master Plan. Online: http://ci.cotati.ca.us/docs/WDSMP Final Sep 2011.pdf City of Cotati. City of Cotati Draft General Plan. 2015. Online: http://www.cotati.generalplan.org/ City of Petaluma. City of Petaluma 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Online: http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanwatermanagement/2010uwmps/Petaluma,%20City%20of/CoP%20Final%20UWMP%20 2010.pdf City of Petaluma. City of Petaluma General Plan 2025. May 2008. Revision January 2012. Online: http://cityofpetaluma.net/cdd/pdf/general-plan-may08/general-plan-may08.pdf City of Santa Rosa. Santa Rosa General Plan 2035. City of Santa Rosa, 2009. City of Sonoma. City of Sonoma 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Online: http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanwatermanagement/2010uwmps/Sonoma,%20City%20of/Sonoma%20UWMP%2OFinal.p df City of Sonoma. City of Sonoma 2011 Water Master Plan. Online: http://www.sonomacity.org/uploadimg/Final%20Sonoma%20Water%20Master%20PIan%203-2-11%20(4).pdf City of Sonoma. City of Sonoma Draft 2015 Housing Element. Online: http://www.sonomacity.org/uploadimg/Housing Element PC Review Draft.pdf City of Sonoma. City of Sonoma 2020 General Plan. 2006. Online: www.sonomacity.org/uploads/Planning/2020 General Plan.pdf 96 Appendix F: References City of Rohnert Park DeOreo, W.B., P.W. Mayer, Leslie Martien, Matthew Hayden, Andrew Funk, Michael Kramer -Duffield, Renee Davis, James Henderson, Bob Raucher, Peter Gleick, and Matt Heberger. California Single -Family Water Use Efficiency Study. Sacramento, California: Department of Water Resources, 2011. Online: http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/2013rulemaking/documents/responses/Water Appliances 12-AAER- 2C/California IOU Response to CEC Invitation to Participate - Water Meters REFERENCE/DeOreo 2011 California Single -Family Water Use Efficiency Study.pdf DeOreo, W.B., P.W. Mayer, E.M. Opitz, B. Dziegielewski, J.C. Kiefer, W.Y. Davis, and J.O. Nelson. Residential End Uses of Water: Final Report. Denver, Colorado: AWWA Research Foundation, 1999. Online: http://www.waterrf.org/PubIicReportLibrarV/RFR90781 1999 241A.pdf DeOreo, W.B., P.W. Mayer, E.Caldwell, B.Gauley, B.Dziegielewski, and J.C. Kiefer. Some Key Results from REUWS2: Single Family Residential End Uses of Water Study Update. Water Research Foundation Project 4309. Presentation, Water Smart Innovations Conference, October 2014. (Report is pending publication in 2015 per the AWWARF website.) Online: http://www.waterrf.org/Pages/Promects.aspx?PID=4309 Dziegielewski, B., J. C. Kiefer, W. DeOreo, P. Mayer, E. M. Opitz, G. A. Porter, G. L. Lantz, and J. O. Nelson. Commercial and Institutional End Uses of Water. Denver, Colorado: AWWA, Research Foundation and American Water Works Association with Cooperation of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 2000. Catalog No.90806. 264 pp. ISBN 1-58321-035-0. Online: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WC13511002/00001 Koeller & Company. High Efficiency Plumbing Fixtures - Toilets and Urinals. 2005. Marin Municipal Water District. Marin Municipal Water District 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Online: http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanwatermanagement/2010uwmps/Marin%20Municipal%20Water%20District/2010%20U WMP MMWD June%202011.pdf Mayer, Peter W., Erin Towler, William B. DeOreo, Erin Caldwell, Tom Miller, Edward R. Osann, Elizabeth Brown, Peter J. Bickel, Steven B. Fisher. National Multiple Family Submetering and Allocation Billing Program Study. Aquacraft, Inc. and the East Bay Municipal Utility District, 2004. North Marin Water District. North Marin Water District 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Online: http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanwatermanagement/2010uwmps/North%20Marin%20Water%20District/NMWD%20201 0%20UWMP.odf Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Energy Division, "Bern Clothes Washer Study, Final Report," prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, March 1998. Online: www.energVstar.gov Sonoma County. Sonoma County Draft General Plan 2005. Sonoma County Water Agency. Sonoma County Water Agency 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Online: http://www.scwa.ca.gov/files/docs/FINAL%202010%20UWMP.pdf Spilman & Associates Municipal Consulting Services. City of Sonoma 2014 Water Rate Study. Town of Windsor. Town of Windsor 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Online: http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanwatermanagement/2010uwmps/Windsor,%20town%20of%20Water%20District/Final% 20-%20Town%20of%20W i n dsor%202010%20 U W M P. pdf 97 Appendix F: References City of Rohnert Park Town of Windsor. Town of Windsor General Plan Update. Online: http://www.windsor2040.com/ Town of Windsor. Town of Windsor Water System Information. Online: http://www.ci.windsor.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=225 United States Census Bureau 2010 census. Online: http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/Isf/pages/index.xhtml United States Department of Energy. EnergyStar Calculators for residential and commercial clothes washers and commercial kitchen equipment. Online: http://www.energVstar.gov Valley of the Moon Water District. Valley of the Moon Water District 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Online: http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanwatermanagement/2010uwmps/Valley%20of%20the%20Moon%20Water%20District/V OMD%20UWMP%20Final.pdf Valley of the Moon Water District. 2014 Urban Water Shortage Contingency Plan. Online: http://www.vomwd.com/pdf/UrbanContingencV2014.pdf Valley of the Moon Water District. Valley of the Moon Water District 2015 Water Rate Study. Vickers, A. Handbook of Water Use and Conservation. WaterPlow Press, 2001. Winzler & Kelly. City of Rohnert Park Urban Water Management Plan. 2011. Online: http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanwatermanagement/2010uwmps/Rohnert/20Park,%20City%20of/Report%20RP%20Fina 1%20UWMP.pdf 98 APPENDIX 3 AWWA WATER AUDIT MODEL OUTPUT THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK This spreadsheet -based water audit tool is designed to help quantify and track water losses associated with water distribution systems and identify areas for improved efficiency and cost recovery. It provides a "top-down" summary water audit format, and is not meant to take the place of a full-scale, comprehensive water audit format. Auditors are strongly encouraged to refer to the most current edition of AW WA M36 Manual for Water Audits for detailed guidance on the water auditing process and targetting loss reduction levels The spreadsheet contains several separate worksheets. Sheets can be accessed using the tabs towards the bottom of the screen, or by clicking the buttons below. Please begin by providing the following information Name of Contact Person: I Mary Grace Pawson Email Address: mpawson@rpcity.org Telephone I Ext.: 1 707 588-2234 Name of City / Utility: City of Rohnert Park City/Town/Municipality: I City of Rohnert Park State / Province: lCalifornia (CA) Country: I USA Year: 2014 Calendar Year The following guidance will help you complete the Audit All audit data are entered on the Reporting Worksheet 0 Value can be entered by user 0 Value calculated based on input data 0 These cells contain recommended default values Use of Option Pcnt: Value: (Radio) Buttons: 0.25% Select the default percentage To enter a value, choose by choosing the option button this button and enter a Audit Preparation Date: 06/012016 on the left value in the cell to the right Volume Reporting Units: Acre-feet PWSID/OtherID:j 4910014 The following worksheets are available by clicking the buttons below or selecting the tabs along the bottom of the page Instructions The current sheet. Enter contact information and basic audit details (year, units etc) Grading Matrix Presents the possible grading options for each input component of the audit Reportina Worksheet Enter the required data on this worksheet to calculate the water balance and data grading Service Connection Diagram Diagrams depicting possible customer service connection line configurations Comments Enter comments to explain how values were calculated or to document data sources Definitions Use this sheet to understand the terms used in the audit process Performance Indicators Review the performance indicators to evaluate the results of the audit Loss Control Planning Use this sheet to interpret the results of the audit validity score and performance indicators Water Balance The values entered in the Reporting Worksheet are used to populate the Water Balance Example Audits Reporting Worksheet and Performance Indicators examples are shown for two validated audits If you have questions or comments regarding the software please contact us via email at: wlc awwa.org Dashboard A graphical summary of the water balance and Non -Revenue Water components Acknowledgements Acknowledgements for the AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 AW WA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Instructions 1 Click to access definition Water Audit Report for: #REFI 0 Click to add a comment ReportingYear:1 4910014 1/4910014- 12/4910014 Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it. Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments WATER SUPPLIED <----------- Enter grading in column'E' and'J-----------> Pent: Value: Volume from own sources: ©��7 1,583.223 acre-ft/yr Water imported: Q MO3,041.200 acre-ft/yr Water exported: 0 n/a acre-ft/yr WATER SUPPLIED: AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION 4,624.423 acre-ft/yr Billed metered: ©0 3,960.000 acre-ft/yr Billed unmetered: 0 0[fl1a 6.000 acre-ft/yr Unbilled metered: ©0 acre-ft/yr Unbilled unmetered: Q 0 57.805 acre-ft/yr Default option selected for Unbilled unmetered - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION: 4,023.605 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption) 600.618 acre-fuyr Apparent Losses Unauthorized consumption: D0 11.561 acre-ft/yr mn oa 1 11 3* 0 5 © O 0 acre-fUyr acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr Enter negative % or value for under -registration Enter positive % or value for over -registration Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Customer metering inaccuracies: 0 A� 0.000 acre-ft/yr MNLL acre-ft/ Systematic data handling errors: 0 9.900 acre-ft/yr 0.25%i 0 C acre-ft/yr Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Apparent Losses: 01 21.461 acre-ft/yr Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL) Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses: NON -REVENUE WATER WATER LOSSES: 579.157 acre-ft/yr 18 600.6acre-ft/yr NON -REVENUE WATER: -M 1 658.423 acre-ft/yr = Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered SYSTEM DATA Length of mains:©� 5 115.0 miles Number of active AND inactive service connections: 0 a 8,994 Service connection density: 78 conn./mile main Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? Yes (length of service line, beyond the property boundary, Average length of customer service line: Q that is the responsibility of the utility) Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Average operating pressure: 0 0® 60.0 psi COST DATA Total annual cost of operating water system: © A Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses): Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses): 0 $7,800,000 Click here: 0 $3.23 6 for help using option buttons below Pcnt: Value: 1.25°hJ I acre-ft/yr ...... Use buttons to select percentage of water supplied OR value Pcnt: v Value: I 0.25%F* d 1 Jacre-ft/yr Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Customer metering inaccuracies: 0 A� 0.000 acre-ft/yr MNLL acre-ft/ Systematic data handling errors: 0 9.900 acre-ft/yr 0.25%i 0 C acre-ft/yr Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Apparent Losses: 01 21.461 acre-ft/yr Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL) Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses: NON -REVENUE WATER WATER LOSSES: 579.157 acre-ft/yr 18 600.6acre-ft/yr NON -REVENUE WATER: -M 1 658.423 acre-ft/yr = Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered SYSTEM DATA Length of mains:©� 5 115.0 miles Number of active AND inactive service connections: 0 a 8,994 Service connection density: 78 conn./mile main Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? Yes (length of service line, beyond the property boundary, Average length of customer service line: Q that is the responsibility of the utility) Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Average operating pressure: 0 0® 60.0 psi COST DATA Total annual cost of operating water system: © A Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses): Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses): 0 $/Year $/1000 gallons US $/acre -ft E] Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE: *** YOUR SCORE IS: 75 out of 100 *** A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION: Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components: 1: Billed metered 2: Volume from own sources 3: Billed unmetered AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1 $7,800,000 N10 10 $3.23 6 $/Year $/1000 gallons US $/acre -ft E] Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE: *** YOUR SCORE IS: 75 out of 100 *** A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION: Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components: 1: Billed metered 2: Volume from own sources 3: Billed unmetered AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1 APPENDIX 4 CITY SBX7-7 COMPLIANCE TABLES THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK WUEdata Entry Exceptions The data from the tables below will not be entered into WUEdata tables (the tabs for these tables' worksheets are colored purple). These tables will be submitted as separate uploads, in Excel, to WUEdata. Process Water Deduction SB X7-7 tables 4-C, 4-C.1, 4-C.2, 4-C.3, 4-C.4 and 4-D A supplier that will use the process water deduction will complete the appropriate tables in Excel, submit them as a separate upload to the WUE data tool, and include them in its UWMP. Target Method 2 SB X7-7 tables 7-13, 7-C, and 7-D A supplier that selects Target Method 2 will contact DWR (gwen.huff@water.ca.gov) for SB X7-7 tables 7- B, 7-C, and 7-D. Target Method 4 These tables are only available online at http://www.dwr.water.ca.gov/wateruseefficiency/sb7/committees/urban/u4/ptm4.cfm A supplier that selects Target Method 4 will save the tables from the website listed above, complete the tables, submit as a separate upload to WUE data, and include them with its UWMP. Acre Feet *The unit of measure must be consistent with Table 2-3 NOTES: SB X7-7 Table -1: Baseline Period Ranges Baseline Parameter Value Units 2008 total water deliveries 5,733 Acre feet 2008 total volume of delivered recycled water 1,113 Acre Feet 10- to 15 -year 2008 recycled water as a percent of total deliveries 19.41% Percent baseline period Number of years in baseline period' 13 Years Year beginning baseline period range 1992 Year ending baseline period range2 2004 Number of years in baseline period 5 Years 5 -year Year beginning baseline period range 2003 baseline period Year ending baseline period range; 2007 ' If the 2008 recycled water percent is less than 10 percent, then the first baseline period is a continuous 10 -year delivered in 2008 is 10 percent or greater, the first baseline period is a continuous 10- to 15 -year period. period. If the amount of recycled water 2 The ending year must be between December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2010. 'The ending year must be between December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2010. NOTES: SB X7-7 Table .. for Population Estimates Method Used to Determine Population (may check more than one) I. Department of Finance (DOF) ❑ DOF Table E-8 (1990 - 2000) and (2000-2010) and DOF Table E-5 (2011 - 2015) when available ❑ 2. Persons -per -Connection Method ❑ 3. DWR Population Tool ❑ 4. Other DWR recommends pre -review NOTES: SB X7-7 Table Population Year Population 10 to 15 Year Baseline Population Year 1 1992 38,766 Year 2 1993 39,128 Year 3 1994 39,056 Year 4 1995 39,843 Year 5 1996 40,495 Year 6 1997 41,314 Year 7 1998 42,025 Year 8 1999 42,209 Year 9 2000 42,046 Year 10 2001 41,710 YF 2002 41,687 Y 2003 41,284 Y 2004 40,985 Y" 5 Year Baseline Population Year 1 2003 41,284 Year 2 2004 40,985 Year 3 2005 41,290 Year 4 2006 40,997 Year 5 2007 41,000 2015 Compliance Year Population 2015 F 41,675 NOTES: Census data for 1/1 is used as the population on 12/31 of the prior year 12/31/92 = 1/1/93 DOF Data SB X7-7 Table 4: Annual Gross Water Use Baseline Year Fm 58 X7-7 Table Volume Into Distribution System Fm 58 X7-7 Table(s)4-A Deductions Annual Gross Water Use Exported Water Change in Dist. System Storage (+�_) Indirect Recycled Water Fm eX4-e -B Table Water Delivered for Agricultural Use Process Water Fm 58 X7-7 Table(s) 4-D 10 to 15 Year Baseline - Gross Water Use Year 1 1992 6975.957 0 0 0 0 0 6,976 Year2 1993 7040.858 0 0 0 0 0 7,041 Year3 1994 7510.651 0 0 0 0 0 7,511 Year4 1995 7858.063 0 0 0 0 0 7,858 Years 1996 7927.102 0 0 0 0 0 7,927 Year 6 1997 8094.774 0 0 0 0 0 8,095 Year7 1998 7299.066 0 0 0 0 0 7,299 Year8 1999 7694.626 0 0 0 0 0 7,695 Year9 2000 7332.113 0 0 0 0 0 7,332 Year 10 2001 7459.38 0 0 0 0 0 7,459 2002 7141.948 0 0 0 0 0 7,142 2003 6711.378 0 0 0 0 0 6,711 2004 6632.265 0 0 0 0 0 6,632 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 - 15 year baseline average gross water use 11w6,379 5 Year Baseline - Gross Water Use Year 1 2003 6,711 0 0 0 0 0 6,711 Year2 2004 6,632 0 0 0 0 0 6,632 Year3 2005 5,772 0 0 0 0 0 5,772 Year4 2006 S,S12 0 0 0 0 0 5,512 Years 2007 5,187 0 0 0 0 0 5,187 5 year baseline average gross water use 5,963 2015 Compliance Year - Gross Water Use 2015 1 4,228 1 1 1 0 0 4,228 * NOTE that the units of measure must remain consistent throughout the UWMP, as reported in Table 2-3 NOTES: Name of Source I Sonoma County Water Agency Meter Error Adjustment* Optional (+/-) This water source is: 10 to 15 Year Baseline - Water into Distribution System Year ❑ The supplier's own water source 4,556 ❑� A purchased or imported source 4948.844 Baseline Year Fm SB X7-7 Table Volume Entering Distribution System Meter Error Adjustment* Optional Corrected Volume Entering Distribution System 10 to 15 Year Baseline - Water into Distribution System Year 1992 2420.345 2,420 Year 1993 2092.014 2,092 Year 1994 2636.630 2,637 Year 1995 2512.318 2,512 Year 1996 2555.052 2,555 Tear 1997 2752.340 2,752 Year 1998 2934.600 2,935 Year 1999 3006.658 3,007 Year 2000 2716.065 2,716 Year 10 2001 2978.600 2,979 Year 11 2002 2869.700 2,870 Year 12 2003 3193.600 3,194 Year 13 2004 5103.300 5,103 Year 14 0 Year 0 Year 15 0 Year 0 5 Year Baseline - Water into Distribution System 805 Year 2003 3193.600 3,194 Tear 2004 5103.300 5,103 Year 2005 4966.900 4,967 Year 2006 5163.300 5,163 Year 2007 4253.900 4,254 2015 Compliance Year -Water into Distribution System 2015 2773.52 1 1 2,774 *Meter Error Adjustment -See guidance in Methodology Methodologies Document 1, Step 3 of NOTES: Name of Source Local Groundwater This water source is: ❑�The supplier's own water source ❑ A purchased or imported source Baseline Year Fm 58 X7-7 Table Volume Entering Distribution System Meter Error Adjustment* Optional (+/-) Corrected Volume Entering System System 10 to 15 Year Baseline - Water into Distribution System Year 1992 4555.612 4,556 Year 1993 4948.844 4,949 Tear 1994 4874.021 4,874 Year 1995 5345.745 5,346 Year 1996 5372.05 5,372 Tear 1997 5342.434 5,342 Year 1998 4364.466 4,364 Year 1999 4687.968 4,688 Year 9 2000 4616.048 4,616 Year 10 2001 4480.78 4,481 Year 11 2002 4272.248 4,272 Year 12 2003 3517.778 3,518 Year 13 2004 1528.965 1,529 Year 14 0 0 Year 15 0 0 5 Year Baseline - Water into Distribution System Year 1 2003 3517.778 3,518 Year 2004 1528.965 1,529 Year 2005 805.083 805 7ear4 2006 349.178 349 Year 2007 933.476 933 2015 Compliance Year - Water into Distribution System 2015 1 1,455 1 1 1,455 * Meter Error Adjustment - See guidance in Methodology 1, Step 3 of Methodologies Document NOTES: Year ending 12/31/92 SB X7-7 Table 5: Gallons Per Per D. Baseline Year Fm SB X7-7 Table 3 Service Area Population Fm SB X7-7 Table 3 Annual Gross Water Use Fm SB X7-7 Table 4 Daily Per Capita Water Use (GPCD) 10 to 15 Year Baseline GPCD Year 1 1992 38,766 6,976 161 Year 2 1993 39,128 7,041 161 Year 3 1994 39,056 7,511 172 Year 4 1995 39,843 7,858 176 Year 5 1996 40,495 7,927 175 Year 6 1997 41,314 8,095 175 Year 7 1998 42,025 7,299 155 Year 8 1999 42,209 7,695 163 Year 9 2000 42,046 7,332 156 Year 10 2001 41,710 7,459 160 2002 41,687 7,142 153 Y 2003 41,284 6,711 145 Y 2004 40,985 6,632 144 Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 10-15 Year Average Baseline GPCD 161.11 5 Year Baseline GPCD Baseline Year Fm SB X7-7 Table 3 Service Area Population Fm SB X7-7 Table 3 Gross Water Use Fm SB X7-7 Table 4 Daily Per Capita Water Use Year 1 2003 41,284 6,711 145 Year 2 2004 40,985 6,632 144 Year 3 2005 41,290 5,772 125 Year 4 2006 40,997 5,512 120 Year 5 2007 41,000 5,187113 5 Year Average Baseline GPCD 129.48 2015 Compliance Year GPCD 2015 41,675 4,228 90.58 NOTES: 167.0651 SB X7-7 Table 6: Gallons per Capita per Day Summary From .•-Table10-15 Year Baseline GPCD 161.11 5 Year Baseline GPCD 129.48 2015 Compliance Year GPCD 90.58 NOTES: SB X7-7 Table 7: 2020 Target Select Only One Method Target Method Supporting Documentation ❑ Method 1 SB X7-7 Table 7A ❑ Method 2 SB X7-7 Tables 76, 7C, and 7D Contact DWR for these tables ❑ Method 3 SB X7-7 Table 7-E ❑ Method 4 Method 4 Calculator NOTES: SB X7-7 Table .. Percentage of Agency May Method 3 Service Area "2020 Plan" Select More Regional in This Hydrologic Region Regional Than One as Targets Hydrological Targets Applicable (95%) Region ❑ North Coast 137 130 ❑ North Lahontan 173 164 ❑ Sacramento River 176 167 0 San Francisco Bay 131 124 ❑ San Joaquin River 174 165 ❑ Central Coast 123 117 ❑ Tulare Lake 188 179 ❑ South Lahontan 170 162 ❑ South Coast 149 142 ❑ Colorado River 211 200 Target 0 (if more than one region is selected, this value is calculated.) NOTES: Confirmed 2020 Target SB X7-7 Table Reduction S Year Baseline GPCD From SB X7-7 Table 5 Maximum 2020 Target* Calculated 2020 Target Fm Appropriate Target Table 129.48 123.00 123.00 * Maximum 2020 Target is 95% of the 5 Year Baseline GPCD NOTES: Interim Target 10-15 year Baseline GPCD Fm SB X7-7 Table 5 GPCD 2015 Interim Target GPCD SB X7-7 Table 8: 2015 Confirmed 2020 Target Fm SB X7-7 Table 7-F 123.00 161.11 142.06 NOTES: SB X7-7 Table 9: 2015 Compliance Optional Adjustments (in GPCD) Did Supplier 2015 GPCD Achieve Actual 2015 2015 Interim Extraordinary Weather Economic TOTAL Adjusted 2015 (Adjusted if Targeted GPCD Target GPCD Events Normalization Adjustment Adjustments GPCD applicable) Reduction for 2015? From From From 91 142 Methodology 8 Methodology 8 Methodology 0 90.57781124 90.57781124 YES (Optional) (Optional) 8 (Optional) NOTES: APPENDIX S REGIONAL ALLIANCE SBX7-7 COMPLIANCE TABLES THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Regional Alliance (RA) Submittal to DWR RAs will submit all tables to WUEdata as an attachment only (in Excel format). The data from the RA tables will not be entered into the WUEdata tables. Regional Alliance Options The Methodologies for Calculating Baseline and Compliance Urban per Capita Water Use, Methodology 9, provides the required methodology for an RA to calculate baselines, targets, and compliance GPCD. There are three approaches for an RA to address the requirements of SB X7-7: Option 1* Individual agencies calculate their own baseline and target GPCDs. RA calculates the weighted average of each participating agencies' baseline and target GPCDs. Individual agencies calculate their own population and gross water use. RA sums all individual information to obtain regional population and gross water use. Option 2 RA calculates regional baseline GPCD. RA chooses target method and calculates regional target. RA calculates either regional gross water use, or population, or both, directly for the entire regional alliance area. Option 3 RA calculates regional baseline GPCD. RA chooses target method and calculates regional target. *All participating agencies must submit individual SB X7-7 Tables, as applicable, showing the individual agency's calculations. These tables are: SB X7-7 Tables 0 through 6, Table 7, any required supporting tables (as stated in SB X7-7 Table 7), and SB X7-7 Table 9, as applicable. These individual agency tables will be submitted with the individual or Regional Urban Water Management Plan. This workbook is for a Regional Alliance using Option 1 (RAI) Participating Member Agency Name 10-15 year Baseline GPCD* Average Population During 10-15 Year Baseline Period (Baseline GPCD) X (Population) Regional Alliance Weighted Average 10-15 Year Baseline GPCD City of Cotati 159 6,559 1,043,146 Marin Municipal Water District 149 178,670 26,690,318 North Marin Water District 173 54,061 9,370,435 City of Petaluma 180 52,622 9,491,997 City of Rohnert Park 161 40,811 6,582,847 City of Santa Rosa 145 143,109 20,806,963 City of Sonoma 225 9,679 2,173,212 Valley of the Moon Water Distict 146 20,969 3,058,648 Town of Windsor 156 24,572 3,834,809 Regional Alliance Total 1,495 531,051 83,052,375 156 *All participating agencies must submit individual SB X7-7 Tables, as applicable, showing the individual agency's calculations. These tables are: SB X7-7 Tables 0 through 6, Table 7, any required supporting tables (as stated in SB X7-7 Table 7), and SB X7-7 Table 9, as applicable. These individual agency tables will be submitted with the individual or Regional Urban Water Management Plan. NOTES Weighted 2020 Target Regional Alliance Participating Member 2020 Target 2015 (Target) X Weighted Agency Name GPCD* Population (Population) Average 2020 Target City of Cotati 130 7,288 947,440 Marin Municipal Water District 124 189,000 23,436,000 North Marin Water District 139 61,381 8,531,959 City of Petaluma 141 61,798 8,713,518 City of Rohnert Park 119 41,675 4,959,325 City of Santa Rosa 126 173,071 21,806,946 City of Sonoma 180 11,147 2,006,460 Valley of the Moon Water Distict 124 23,478 2,911,272 Town of Windsor 130 27,486 3,573,180 Regional Alliance Total 1,213 596,324 76,886,100 129 *All participating agencies must submit individual SB X7-7 Tables, as applicable, showing the individual agency's calculations. These tables are: SB X7-7 Tables 0 through 6, Table 7, any required supporting tables (as stated in SB X7-7 Table 7), and SB X7-7 Table 9, as applicable. These individual agency tables will be submitted with the individual or Regional Urban Water Management Plan. NOTES SIB X7-7 RA1 - 2015 Target Weighted Average Weighted Average Regional Alliance 2015 10-15 year Baseline 2020 Target Interim Target GPCD 1561 129 1 143 NOTES SB X7-7 R. . Participating Member Agency Name 2015 Actual GPCD1 2015 Population (2015 GPCD) X (2015 Population) Regional Alliance 2015 GPCD (Actual) City of Cotati 93 7,288 679,016 Marin Municipal Water District 110 189,000 20,715,583 North Marin Water District 105 61,381 6,461,073 City of Petaluma 110 61,798 6,823,500 City of Rohnert Park 91 41,675 3,775,789 City of Santa Rosa 85 173,071 14,765,037 City of Sonoma 141 11,147 1,573,338 Valley of the Moon Water Distict 90 23,478 2,117,236 Town of Windsor 99 27,486 2,720,608 Regional Alliance Totals 925 596,324 59,631,180 100 All participating agencies must submit individual SB X7-7 Tables, as applicable, showing the individual agency's calculations. These tables are: SB X7-7 Tables 0 through 6, Table 7, any required supporting tables (as stated in SB X7-7 Table 7), and SB X7-7 Table 9, as applicable. These individual agency tables will be submitted with the individual or Regional Urban Water Management Plan. NOTES SB X7-7 'A1 - Compliance Verification Adjusted Did Alliance Economic 2015 GPCD Achieve 2015 GPCD 2015 InterimAdjustment) (if economic Targeted Actual Target g Enter t if adjustment Reduction for t adjustment used) 2015? 100 143 0 100 YES 1 Adjustments for economic growth can be applied to either the individual supplier's data or to the aggregate regional alliance data (but not both), depending upon availability of suitable data and methods. NOTES APPENDIX 6 WATER POLICY RESOLUTION THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CITY OF RO)INERT PARK OFFICE OF THE CITY IWANAGERICITY CLERK * * * City Clerk Use Only * * * NOTICE OF COUNCIL/CDC MEETING ACTION Date: April 29, 2004 To: Toni Bertolero, City Engineer For Agenda Title: Consider and approve the Water Policy Resolution Meeting Date: April 27, 2004 Agenda Item No: #8 Council Action: Approved as Amended Vote: 5 - 0 Resolution No: 2004-95 Implementing Requirements Imposed on Specific Plan Areas Outside the City's 1999 Boundaries The City Council approved the above item authorizing you to proceed with the appropriate follow-up and handling process. The enclosed documents checked ✓❑ below are provided for this purpose: ✓❑ Transmittal Report provided to Council for this agenda item. Q Resolution/executed ❑ Ordinance/executed ❑ One set of the fully executed agreement with original signatures for you to forward to the contractor. The second set with original signatures has been retained in the City Manager's Office for the City's Agreement Files. ❑ Two (2) sets of the Agreement signed by the appropriate City representatives and forwarded to you for signing. When available, please RETURN one set to the City Manager's Office for the City's Agreement Files. Q Other: The adoption of this resolution included amendments as recommended by Interim City Attorney, Michelle Kenyon, to change the word "defined" to "estimated" in 4.b.6, and to make some minor typographical corrections as follows: change 4.b.7 to 4.c; change 4.b.8 to 4.d; and change 4.b.9 to 4.e Thank you, Juauff, City Clerk For arl Eric Leivo, City Manager cc: Gabrielle Whelan, Interim City Attorney Mike Bracewell, PW Utilities Services Supervisor Engineering Staff: Darrin Jenkins, Civil Engineer; Rick Pedroncelli, Sr. Eng. Tech.; Eydie Tacata, Admin. Asst. FILE — ENGINEERING DEPT. — Water Policy Resolution FILE — CROSS REFERENCE — Water Policy Resolution ISEE: ENGINEERING DEPT.] FILE - Council Agenda Chron File/ADD TO: Agreement File List JH/cam-M.2004 Council Agenda Action Meeting Date: April 27, 2004 Council.• Department: Engineering Miscellaneous Submitted By: Toni Bertolero, City Engineer A (Name & Title) K y to; Submittal Date: April 20, 2004 y to: Agenda Title: Water Policy Resolution Requested Council Action: Consider and approve the Water Policy Resolution Summary.- The ummary:The Water Policy Resolution implements a provision of the Judgement entered by the Sonoma County Superior Court in South County Resource Preservation Committee v City of Rohnert Park (Case No. 224976 - the "Penngrove litigation"). That provision prevents the City from approving development within the specific plan areas identified in the General Plan if the development's "net consumptive use impact" causes the City to exceed an average annual groundwater pumping rate of 2.3 mgd. The purpose of this resolution is to set forth the procedure the City will follow to implement this provision of the Judgement. This resolution was first presented to Council on February 24, 2004. Three letters of opposition to the resolution were received at the meeting. In an effort to consider the comments and to make appropriate changes, the resolution was continued until such changes were made. Staff has attempted, on several occasions, to meet with John King and his attorney but was unsuccessful in meeting to discuss their concerns. Nevertheless, the attached resolution has been revised from the version presented on February 24, 2004 in an effort to address concerns stated in the letters that were submitted. CITY-AMNAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: ( ) Consent Item ( Regular Time ( Approval () Public Hearing Required ( ) Not Recommended () Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Council ( ) City Comments: City Manager's Signature: Date: Gl Resolution No_ 2004-95 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park Implementing Requirements Imposed on Specific Plan Areas Outside the City's 1999 Boundaries WHEREAS, a Judgment was entered on September 5, 2002 by the Sonoma County Superior Court in South County Resource Preservation Committee and John King v. City ofRohnert Park (Case No. 224976) (hereinafter "Judgment"), which directed that certain General Plan policies be interpreted and applied consistent with language included in the Judgment, and that the language in the Judgment be treated as part of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the General Pian of the City of Rohnert Park requires that all development outside the City's 1999 boundaries be included within one of the specific plan areas identified in the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this resolution is to implement language included in the Judgment by describing the way in which certain interpretations of the General Plan will be applied to new developments in specific plan areas outside the City's 1999 boundaries; and WHEREAS, nothing in this Resolution shall be construed to impair the City's ability to deliver water to its customers or respond to the needs of its water customers. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park does hereby resolve as follows. 1. This Resolution applies to the Specific Plan Areas outside the City's 1999 boundaries that are identified in the General Plan and development projects within those Areas for which the City determines a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration or environmental impact report is required ("Projects"). The City's 1999 boundaries are depicted on Exhibit A to this Resolution: 2_ A negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report for a Project shall include the following information: Projected water demand for the Project before and after water supply reduction measures are implemented and an explanation of how these measures are planned to reduce consumption_ b. 20 -year projection of water supplies available to the City during normal, single -dry, and multiple -dry years_ These terms shall have the same meaning as set forth in the most recent Urban Water Management Plan for the City of Rohnert Park. c_ Analysis of whether the total projected water supplies will meet the projected water demand associated with the Project_ The approval of any tentative map for a Project shall be conditioned upon identification, before final map approval, of the water supply that is projected to serve the Project. Groundwater pumped from new or existing private wells within the Penngrove community (with zip code 94951 as of September 2002) will not be permitted as a water supply source_ 710162vi 00012/0001 4. Net Consumptive Water Use Impact Determinations. The information required by this section shall be submitted as part of the application for'the first discretionary approval for a Project_ a. Definitions for Net Consumptive Water Use Impact Determinations: The following definitions shall be used to make the Net Consumptive Water Use Impact Determinations required by this section. Net Consumptive Water Use Impact is the amount of potable water demand of a Project less reductions for (1) Potable Water Conservation Practices and (2) Potable Water Use Offsets. Only those Potable Water Use Conservation Practices and Potable Water Use Offsets that the City Engineer determines will be acceptable, feasible and consistent with the City's water conservation program may be used in determining a project's Net Consumptive Water Use Impact_ Potable Water Conservation Practices are on-site water conservation equipment and practices, including use of recycled water that reduces the projected potable water consumption of a Project and that can be implemented and completed with the Project_ Potable Water Use Offsets are water conservation equipment, practices or programs that are funded, constructed, installed.or implemented by a Project and that offset the amount of potable water consumed by that Project, including use of recycled water, that are applied outside of the project area ("off-site"), but which reduce demand on the City's water system for potable water, or, the funding, construction or implementation of facilities or practices in any location that increase recharge to the groundwater supplies available to the City's municipal wells; all of which can be implemented and completed with the Project. Average Annual Groundwater Pumping Rate of 2.3 mgd is the projected pumping rate from the City's municipal wells for the year estimated to be the Project's buildout year b. The following calculations shall be included in the application for the first discretionary approval for a Project and shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. Determine a Project's potable water demand (before any proposed Potable Water Conservation Practices or Water Use Offsets) using information and a methodology approved by the City Engineer. 2, Identify Potable Water Conservation Practices and estimated water savings. Potable water conservation practices selected for use in a Project requires concurrence from the City Engineer that the practices are acceptable and consistent with the City's Water Conservation Program_ Water savings shall be determined using information and a methodology approved by the City Engineer, 3. Identify onsite and/or offsite recycled water use that is included in the Potable Water conservation Practices or Water Use Offsets proposed for the Project. Offsite use is limited to areas of use in the City's water service area- 7101620 rea_ 7101620 00012/0001 4. Identify Water Use Offsets- Said offsets must identify a projected reduction in potable water use in the City's water service area and/or increase in recharge of groundwater supplies available to the City's municipal wells. In calculating the projected reduction in potable water use savings from Potable Water Conservation Practices and Water Use Offsets, estimates shall comply with guidelines established by the California Urban Water Conservation Council or other recognized professional water industry organizations such as the American Water Works Association. Estimate the Project's Net Consumptive Water Use Impact taking into consideration the, Potable Water Conservation Practices, and Water Use Offsets. 6. Provide an estimated year of when buildout of all commercial and residential development for the Project will occur. For purposes of this document, the "buildout year" is estimated as the year when 80 percent of the commercial and residential development have been constructed and occupied. For the percentage calculation, commercial development will be based on square footage and residential development will be based on number of dwelling unfits. c- The City Engineer shall determine whether the Project's Net Consumptive Water Use Impact is projected to contribute to the City exceeding an Average Annual Groundwater Pumping Rate of 2.3 mgd. Said determination will consider the City's water supply sources, based on best reasonable information available at the time the determination is made. Such determination is without prejudice to the applicant submitting new or additional information and seeking a different determination_ d. The Project cannot be approved if its Net Consumptive Water Use Impact is determined to contribute to the City exceeding an Average Groundwater Pumping Rate of 2-3 mgd- e- If a Project's Potable Water Conservation Practices and/or Recycled Water Use and/or Water Use Offsets include ongoing activities, the Developer will identify how these ongoing activities will remain in place and identify long-term operation and maintenance of the practices and water systems. 5. This Resolution implements General Plan policy by determining the reasonableness, legality and validity of decisions relating to Specific Plans_ As such this Resolution is subject to the 90 - day statute of limitations of Government Code section 65009(c). DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED by the Rohnert Park City Council this 27`h day of Apnil, 2004. ATTEST: y 710162vl 00012/0001 CITY OF ItPHNERT PARK . N BLO ES: AVE MAC M4ZW-- AYE SPR401A l_ AYE VIDAK-MARTINEZ: AYE NORDIN. AYE AYES: (S) N©E&- (#) ASST NT: (0) ABSTAIN: (0) APPENDIX 7 WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Rohnert Park Water Shortage Contingency Plan Update 2016 draft 6/1/2016 City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan CONTENTS Section1: Introduction.................................................................................................................................................2 Section2 Stages of Action.............................................................................................................................................2 2.1 Potable Water Demand.......................................................................................................................................2 2.2 Water Supplies.....................................................................................................................................................2 2.3 Demand Reductions Required to Meet Supply Reductions.................................................................................3 2.4 Rationing Stages..................................................................................................................................................4 2.5 Prohibitions on Water Use..................................................................................................................................6 Section 3: Emergency Planning Actions..........................................................................................................................7 Section 4: Analysis of Revenue and Expenditure Impacts..............................................................................................8 Section 5 Implementation and Monitoring Proceedures............................................................................................10 List of Tables Table1— Potable Water Demands................................................................................................................................2 Table 2 — Estimated water supply availability for the next three years........................................................................3 Table 3 —Demand Reductions Required To Manage Supply Reductions.......................................................................3 Table 4 - Water Conservation Stages.............................................................................................................................4 Table 5 — Average Demand Reduction Goals by Customer Class..................................................................................5 Table 6- Emergency Planning Actions............................................................................................................................7 APPENDICES Appendix 1— Draft Water Shortage Emergency Resolution Appendix 2 — California Water Code Section 10632 1 City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION The City of Rohnert Park's (City's) Water Shortage Contingency Plan (Shortage Plan) was first adopted by Ordinance in 2004 and is contained in Section 13.66 of the Municipal Code. While the Shortage Plan is revisited every five years as part of the City's Urban Water Management Plan, the City has not made changes to the plan since its original adoption. However, in both 2014 and 2015 the City found it necessary to adopt interim urgency ordinances to respond to the State Water Resources Control Board's (State's) emergency drought regulations, because its codified plan was not sufficiently flexible to demonstrate comprehensive response to the State's requirements. As a result the City is undertaking a comprehensive revision of the Shortage Plan with the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. SECTION 2 STAGES OF ACTION The Water Code requires that the City's Shortage Plan outline the actions it would take to address reduction in supply of up to 50%. In order to do this, it is important to understand how the City's demand, particularly its potable water demand, relates to its water supply. 2.1 POTABLE WATER DEMAND The City is a community of just over 40,000 and it is anticipated to grow to just over 55,000 persons during the planning period considered by the 2015 UWMP. Approximately 80% of the City's current and projected demand is composed of residential uses. Table 1 presents the City's projected potable water demands as reported in its 2015 UWMP. TABLE 1- POTABLE WATER DEMANDS Customer Class 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Single Family 1,903 1,958 1,990 2,039 2,097 Multi -Family 1,711 1,731 1,745 1,779 1,822 Commercial 458 467 477 492 507 Industrial 3 3 4 4 4 Landscape 432 445 459 477 497 Losses 1,098 1,125 1,143 1,170 1,202 TOTAL 5,605 5,729 5,818 5,961 6,129 Note: Losses include unmetered irrigation water billed based on estimates 2.2 WATER SUPPLIES The City currently has three water supply sources: a 7,500 acre-feet per year (AFY) entitlement from the Sonoma County Water Agency (Agency); 2,577 AFY of groundwater from the City's wells; and 1,350 AFY of recycled water from the Santa Rosa Subregional System. The City uses these supplies conjunctively, relying first on Agency supply and recycled water and increasing groundwater production as necessary to respond to local, regional or statewide water shortage conditions. Because recycled water is used only for irrigation and its use can be limited or discontinued to manage any type of a supply emergency, this Water Shortage Contingency Plan only deals with the City's potable water supply. City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan The City's supply from the Agency is constrained by the Agency's water rights and the City considers its "reliable" supply from the Agency to be approximately 6,630 AFY. The Agency's modeling indicates that this "reliable" supply is available under a range of hydrologic conditions, even though the City's contractual supply is not available under all hydrologic conditions. The City's groundwater supply is governed by the City's 2004 Water Policy Resolution which established the City's pumping rate of 2,577 AFY. Technical studies, including most recently The Hydrologic and Geochemical Characterization of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed, Sonoma County California (U. S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2013-5118) document that this pumpage rate is sustainable under a range of hydrologic conditions. Table 2 provides the City's estimated water supply available for the next three years based on the driest three-year historic sequence for the Agency's water supply and compares this to anticipated demand. No water shortages are anticipated. TABLE 2 - ESTIMATED WATER SUPPLY AVAILABILITY FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS 2016 2017 2018 Agency Supply 6,632 6,632 6,632 Groundwater 2,577 2,577 2,577 Recycled Water 1,350 1,350 1,350 Total 10,559 10,559 10,559 While the City's supply is reliable, the City has experienced water shortage conditions and needed to implement its contingency plan as a result of regulatory requirements imposed upon the Agency, the City or both. 2.3 DEMAND REDUCTIONS REQUIRED TO MEET SUPPLY REDUCTIONS Because the City's water supply exceeds its projected water demands, the City has calculated the demand reduction required to meet water supply reductions of 10% up to 50%. This information is presented in Table 3. The table illustrates that because the City's supply is so robust it can manage shortages of over 20% without necessarily needing to curtail demands. The City can manage shortages of up to 50% with a 25% demand reduction. TABLE 3 -DEMAND REDUCTIONS REQUIRED TO MANAGE SUPPLY REDUCTIONS Reduction in Potable Supply % Available Volume Projected 2040 Demand Demand Reduction Required Volume % 10% 8,288 6,129 0 0% 15% 7,828 6,129 0 0% 20% 7,367 6,129 0 0% 25% 6,907 6,129 0 0% 30% 6,446 6,129 0 0% 35% 5,986 6,129 143 2% 40% 5,525 6,129 604 10% 45% 5,065 6,129 1,064 17% 50% 4,605 6,129 1,525 25% 3 City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2.4 RATIONING STAGES While the City's supply is highly reliable, there have been instances, such as the most recent Statewide Emergency Regulations, where the City was required to achieve certain demand reduction targets, even with water supply available. As such the City has developed rationing stages that allow it to respond to both true supply emergencies and regulatory mandates. These are presented in Table 4. TABLE 4 - WATER CONSERVATION STAGES Stage No. Water Supply Conditions % Water Supply Shortage % Demand Reduction Stage 1- Voluntary Up to 15% reduction in supply 0% 10% Stage 1 -Mandatory 15% to 30% reduction in supply 0% 20% Stage 2 - Mandatory 30% to 40% reduction in supply 1 10% 1 25% Stage 3 - Mandatory Jup to 50% reduction in supply 1 25% 1 25% Overall demand reduction will be achieved with different reduction goals in each user class. The following priorities have been established for use in developing demand reduction programs and allocations during a water shortage emergency. Priorities for use of available water, from highest to lowest priority, are: • Health and Safety • Existing Commercial, Industrial and Governmental • Existing Residential Demands • Existing Landscaping - especially trees and shrubs • New Demand - projects without permits when shortage is declared With these guidelines in mind, Table 5 details overall reduction goals by customer class for Stages 2 and 3 of the water shortage emergency. Reduction goals are based on projected use by each customer class. Reduction goals for the single family residential class is generally higher, taking into account that landscape use is not metered separately. 4 City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan TABLE 5 - AVERAGE DEMAND REDUCTION GOALS BY CUSTOMER CLASS Customer Class Projected 2040 Demands Stage 2 Stage 3 % Reduction % Reduction Annual Demand Annual Allocation Annual Allocation 25% 25% Single Family 2,097.0 1,572.8 1,572.8 25% 25% Multi -Family 1,822.0 1,366.5 1,366.5 15% 15% Commercial 507.0 431.0 431.0 10% 10% Industrial 4.0 3.6 3.6 25% 30% Landscape 497.0 372.8 347.9 50% offset required 100% offset required New Development 0.0 0.0 0.0 25% 30% Losses 1,202.0 901.5 841.4 TOTAL 6,129.0 4,648.1 4,563.1 To achieve the overall reduction goals, a community -wide goal is assigned in Stage 1 — Voluntary and Stage 1 — Mandatory and allocations are determined within a customer classes for Stages 2 and 3. Details of reduction strategies for each customer class at each reduction stage are as follows. Stage 1 Voluntary is designed to encourage water conservation behavior when supplies are reduced by up to 15%. Under these conditions, as illustrated in Table 4, the City does not anticipate needing to achieve a fixed reduction in demand in order to avoid shortages. However behavior modifications encourage by this stage can help prepare for multi-year shortage situations. Community -wide reduction is the goal; elimination of all waste; minimization of non-essential use; "water -on -request" restaurant program Stage 1 Mandatory is the City's first mandatory stage and is designed to manage shortages of up to 30%. Again, as illustrated in Table 4, the City does not necessarily need to reduce demand to manage a one-time supply shortage of 30%. Stage 1 Mandatory can also be used to manage regulatory requirements for demand reduction, absent a documented supply shortage. Community -wide reduction is the goal; all Stage 1 -Voluntary requirements as well as a limitation on hours of irrigation for all customers Stage 2 and Stage 3 Mandatory are the conservation stages invoked to manage a water shortage severe enough to require reductions in the City's demands. City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2.5 PROHIBITIONS ON WATER USE The City's Water Waste Ordinance, which is being reconsidered with the 2015 UWMP in response to State requirements includes the following prohibitions: • The application of potable water to outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes runoff such that water flows onto adjacent property, non -irrigated areas, private and public walkways, roadways, parking lots, or structures; • The use of a hose that dispenses potable water to wash a motor vehicle, except where the hose is fitted with a shut-off nozzle or device attached to it that causes it to cease dispensing water immediately when not in use; • The application of potable water to driveways and sidewalks; • The use of potable water in a fountain or other decorative water feature, except where the water is part of a recirculating system; • The application of potable water to outdoor landscapes during and within 48 hours after measurable rainfall; • The serving of drinking water other than upon request in eating or drinking establishments; The City's Water Waste Ordinance also requires: • Compliance with the California Building Standards Commission and the Department of Housing and Community Development requirements for irrigation systems serving new homes; • The operators of hotels and motels shall provide guests with the option of choosing not to have towels and linens laundered daily. The Water Waste Ordinance states that water service will be discontinued for continued violation once notification has been made. In addition to the prohibitions outlined in the Water Waste Ordinance, the following program of actions are established for the Water Shortage Emergency condition: Stage 1 Voluntary • Compliance with the actions in the City's Water Waste Ordinance Stage 1 Mandatory —AII actions established in previous stage plus: • Irrigation limited to the hours of 8:00 pm to 6:00 am • Nonpotable water used for construction purposes wherever feasible. Stage 2 - All actions established in previous stage plus: • Filling new swimming pools is prohibited • Filling or topping -off of existing swimming pools is prohibited • No water -using landscape installation in new construction Stage 3 - All actions established in previous stage plus: • New construction must offset new demand by conserving the equivalent of half the demand within the community R City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan The City's required program of actions takes into account that there are no artificial lakes ponds or waterfalls that are supplied by potable water. A customer will be found in violation of a prohibited use if the use continues after two official City written notifications. Remedies for violation of these prohibited actions are included in Section 6.6. SECTION 3: EMERGENCY PLANNING ACTIONS In addition to responding to drought conditions, the City's Shortage Plan can be used to respond to emergency conditions that interrupt water supplies. Water supplies may be interrupted in the future due to water supply contamination, major transmission pipeline break, regional power outage, or a natural disaster such as an earthquake. In accordance with the Emergency Services Act, the City has developed an Emergency Operation Plan (EOP). This EOP guides response to unpredicted catastrophic events that might impact water delivery including regional power outages, earthquakes or other disasters. The EOP outlines standard operating procedures for all levels of emergency, from minor accidents to major disasters. The EOP has been coordinated with the Agency and neighboring water purveyors. Table 6 TABLE 6- EMERGENCY PLANNING ACTIONS Possible Catastrophe Summary of Actions Earthquake Shut-off isolation valves and use of spare piping for ruptured mains Storage supplies for service interruption Portable and emergency generators available for City facilities Procedures for assessing water quality, notifying public and disinfecting system Flooding Portable and emergency generators available for City facilities Storage supplies for service interruption Procedures for assessing water quality, notifying public and disinfecting system Toxic Spills (interrupts Agency Supply) Use of local groundwater Procedures for assessing water quality, notifying public and disinfecting system Fire Storage supplies forfire flows Mutual aid plans and responders identified Portable and emergency generators available for City facilities Power outage or grid failure Portable and emergency generators available for City facilities Severe Winter Storms Portable and emergency generators available for City facilities Hot Weather Portable and emergency generators available for City facilities 7 City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan SECTION 4: ANALYSIS OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE IMPACTS The Water Code requires the City to analyze the impacts on revenue from a 50% reduction in supplies. As outlined above, a 50% reduction in water supply will require a 25% reduction in water use. Therefore, the City' analysis is based on a 25% reduction in demand and the revenue associated with that demand. This reduced revenue would be balanced by some reduction in costs, since the City would be purchasing less water from the Sonoma County Water Agency. In addition the City would have the option of deferring planned capital expenditures and utilizing its utility system reserves. The City manages its Water Enterprise Fund to maintain cash reserves, and these operating reserves are currently approximately 50% of its annual operating costs. In order to understand the potential impacts of supply reduction on revenues and expenditures, the City has analyzed the effects of 10%, 20% and 25% reductions on water delivered, which would be its response to 15%, 30% and 50% reductions in supply. For the purpose of this analysis, FY 2015-2016 budget data was used. The City's actual costs in FY 2015-16 were significantly impacted by its response to the State Water Board's Emergency Regulations and represent its response to a 17% reduction in demand. The City's current water rate includes a monthly service charge and a commodity charge. These are presented in Table 7. These rates reflect an increase adopted by the City in April 2015. TABLE 7 - RATE SCHEDULE Monthly Service Charge Commodity Rate Charge Residential $18.32 $0.003/gallon Commercial and Multifamily %" or 1" meter $19.03 $0.00323gallon 1 W' meter $34.85 $0.00323gaIIon 2" meter $58.53 $0.00323gaIIon 3" meter $98.12 $0.00323gallon 4" meter $161.39 $0.00323gaIIon 6" meter $319.58 $0.00323gallon 8" meter $509.40 $0.00323gaIIon Note: $0.003/gallon is the estimated average of the City's Tier 1 rate of $0.00277 and Tier 2 rate of $0.00376 per gal Ion Reductions in water use will affect the revenue that the City receives from its commodity charges because less water will be sold. The anticipated revenue from commodity charges can be calculated by subtracting the revenue generated from monthly service charges from the total budgeted revenue. Table 8 illustrates this calculation. 8 City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan TABLE 8 — EFFECT OF REDUCED WATER SALES ON REVENUE a Assumes average Commercial/MFR meter at the 2" rate In order to estimate the revenue loss as a result of a water shortage emergency, the total revenue from commodity charges (as calculated in Table 8) is reduced by 15% for Stage 1 Mandatory, 20% for Stage 2 Mandatory and 25% for Stage 3. This calculation is illustrated in Table 9. TABLE 9 — EFFECT OF REDUCED SUPPLY ON REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES No. of Accounts Monthly Service Charge Revenue from Monthly Service Charge Total Budgeted Revenue Budgeted Revenue Subject to Reduction (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) $3,802,467 $3,574,001 (a)*(b)*12 mos/yr (d) -(c) Residential 1 76471 $19.03 $1,746,269 $4,030,934 $2,284,665 Commercial/MFR 1 13471 $58.83 $950,928 $2,918,7961 $1,967,868 a Assumes average Commercial/MFR meter at the 2" rate In order to estimate the revenue loss as a result of a water shortage emergency, the total revenue from commodity charges (as calculated in Table 8) is reduced by 15% for Stage 1 Mandatory, 20% for Stage 2 Mandatory and 25% for Stage 3. This calculation is illustrated in Table 9. TABLE 9 — EFFECT OF REDUCED SUPPLY ON REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES a Reserves for"Normal" scenario from February 29, 2016 Cash Report from the City Normal 10% Reduction in Demand (up to 15% Reduction in Supply 20% Reduction in Demand (up to 30% Reduction in Supply) 25% Reduction in Demand (up to 50% Reduction in Supply) Revenues Residential $4,030,934 $3,802,467 $3,574,001 $3,459,768 Commercial/MFR $2,918,796 $2,623,616 $2,525,222 $2,426,829 Other $110,000 $93,500 $88,000 $82,500 Totals $7,059,730 $6,519,583 $6,187,223 $5,969,097 Expenditures Purchase of Water $2,308,800 $1,385,280 $1,385,280 $1,385,280 Operations & Maintenance $3,887,577 $3,887,577 $3,887,577 $3,887,577 Demand Management $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 Capital Outlay $155,000 $155,000 $155,000 $155,000 Non -Capital Transfers $1,457,670 $1,457,670 $1,457,670 $1,457,670 Totals $7,820,047 $6,896,527 $6,896,527 $6,896,527 Transfer to the CIP $735,000 $0 $0 $0 Surplus (Deficit) ($760,317) ($376,944) ($709,304) ($927,430) Reserves' $3,916,430 $4,171,722 $4,171,722 $4,171,722 Available Balance $3,156,113 $4,171,722 $4,171,722 $4,171,722 Used to Cover Operations $0 ($376,944) ($709,304) ($927,430) Ending Balance $3,156,113 $3,794,778 $3,462,418 $3,244,292 a Reserves for"Normal" scenario from February 29, 2016 Cash Report from the City City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Should the City experience a drop in revenues as a result of a water shortage emergency, it would incur lower costs (because it would be purchasing less water from the Agency and relying more heavily on groundwater); it would defer capital projects as necessary and use available reserves to cover operational expenses. In Fiscal Year 2015-16, where the City experienced revenue reductions as a result of the State's emergency regulations, it deferred capital projects and discretionary contract services in order to manage the revenue reduction. Currently, the City is able to manage even a 50% reduction in supplies with funding available from its current reserves. Late in Fiscal Year 2015-16, the City did raise water rates by 9% in order to manage increasing costs and provide for more stable reserve levels. At the same time, the City adopted annual escalators that will allow its water rates to better keep up with increasing costs. The impact of these increases on water enterprise revenue was dampened by the demand reductions requires as a result of the State's emergency regulations. The City will continue to monitor its reserves in order to assure that reserve funding remains available to manage unanticipated reductions in demand. SECTION 5 IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING PROCEDURES At the time of a water shortage emergency, the Santa Rosa City Council will adopt a Water Shortage Resolution. A draft Water Shortage Emergency Resolution is found in Appendix 1. With Stages 2 through 4, a Water Shortage Emergency Ordinance will also be adopted. In the event that a Water Shortage Emergency occurs and the City Council cannot assemble to adopt the Water Shortage Emergency Resolution, the Director of Utilities is authorized to implement the appropriate stage, based on the reduction in water supply, of the Shortage Plan. The Director of Utilities' determination to implement the Shortage Plan shall remain effective until the City Council meeting immediately following such determination, at which time the Santa Rosa City Council will adopt the Water Shortage Resolution. Stage 1 — Voluntary and Stage 1 — Mandatory — Monthly delivery records from the Agency meters and from local groundwater sources, if in use, will be reported to the City Manager or his/her designee. If overall reduction goals are not met, the City Manager may notify the City Council and more aggressive measures can be implemented. Stages 2 and 3 - Weekly delivery figures from the Agency meters and local groundwater sources, if in use, and monthly consumption data from the City's Utility Billing Division will be reported to the City Manager or his/her designee. If overall reduction goals are not met, the City Manager may notify the City Council and more aggressive measures can be implemented. 10 City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Appendices City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Appendix 1— Draft Water Shortage Emergency Resolution City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan DRAFT WATER SHORTAGE EMERGENCY RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 20--_ RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK DECLARING A WATER SHORTAGE EMERGENCY, IMPLEMENTING STAGE _ OF THE CITY'S URBAN WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN AND REQUESTING CUSTOMERS TO REDUCE WATER USE BY _PERCENT WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park is empowered to provide water service within certain boundaries; and WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park has the authority and responsibility to adopt water demand reduction measures within its area of service; and WHEREAS, due to (current condition — drought, contamination, etc.), water supply conditions indicate that a % reduction in demand is required to ensure adequate supply and/or comply with regulatory directives; and WHEREAS, City staff is recommending implementation of Stage of the City's Urban Water Shortage Contingency Plan to respond to the water supply condition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Rohnert Park declares a water shortage emergency and directs staff to implement a program of demand management as defined by Stage of the City's Urban Water Shortage Contingency Plan to realize community -wide water reduction of %. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all actions to effectuate the implementation of the City's Urban Water Shortage Contingency Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this day of , 20_ ATTEST: CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Mayor , City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM City Attorney City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Appendix 2 — Water Code Section 10632 City of Rohnert Park 2015 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Water Code Section 10632 10632. (a) The plan shall provide an urban water shortage contingency analysis that includes each of the following elements that are within the authority of the urban water supplier: (1) Stages of action to be undertaken by the urban water supplier in response to water supply shortages, including up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply, and an outline of specific water supply conditions that are applicable to each stage. (2) An estimate of the minimum water supply available during each of the next three water years based on the driest three-year historic sequence for the agency's water supply. (3) Actions to be undertaken by the urban water supplier to prepare for, and implement during, a catastrophic interruption of water supplies including, but not limited to, a regional power outage, an earthquake, or other disaster. (4) Additional, mandatory prohibitions against specific water use practices during water shortages, including, but not limited to, prohibiting the use of potable water for street cleaning. (5) Consumption reduction methods in the most restrictive stages. Each urban water supplier may use any type of consumption reduction methods in its water shortage contingency analysis that would reduce water use, are appropriate for its area, and have the ability to achieve a water use reduction consistent with up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply. (6) Penalties or charges for excessive use, where applicable. (7) An analysis of the impacts of each of the actions and conditions described in paragraphs (1) to (6), inclusive, on the revenues and expenditures of the urban water supplier, and proposed measures to overcome those impacts, such as the development of reserves and rate adjustments. (8) A draft water shortage contingency resolution or ordinance. (9) A mechanism for determining actual reductions in water use pursuant to the urban water shortage contingency analysis. (b) Commencing with the urban water management plan update due July 1, 2016, for purposes of developing the water shortage contingency analysis pursuant to subdivision (a), the urban water supplier shall analyze and define water features that are artificially supplied with water, including ponds, lakes, waterfalls, and fountains, separately from swimming pools and spas, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 115921 of the Health and Safety Code APPENDIX H CALIFORNIA URBAN WATER CONSERVATION COUNCIL REPORTS (NOT PRINTED WITH REVIEW DRAFT THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK APPENDIX 9 PUBLIC NOTICES AND ADOPTION RESOLUTION THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City Council Gina Belforte Mayor Jake Mackenzie Vice Mayor Amy 0. Ahanotu Joseph T. Callinan Pam Stafford Councilmembers Darrin Jenkins City Manager Don Schwartz Assistant City Manager Michelle Marchetta Kenyon City Attorney Alexandra M. Barnhill Assistant City Attorney JoAnne Buergler City Clerk Betsy Howze Finance Director Brian Masterson Director of Public Safety John McArthur Director of Public Works and Community Services Mary Grace Pawson Director of Development Services Victoria Perrault Human Resources Director March 4, 2016 Mr. Tennis Wick Director Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Department 550 Ventura Avenue Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Re: Notice of Review and Preparation of 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Dear Mr. Wick, Each urban water supplier serving more than 3,000 connections is required by the State of California to prepare an Urban Water Management Plan every five years. The due date for the 2015 UWMP is July 1, 2016. The City of Rohnert Park is providing notice that it is in the process of preparing its 2015 UWMP. The 2015 UWMP will provide information relating to water demand, water supply, and water supply reliability for the next 25 years. If Sonoma County would like to provide input on the preparation of the City's 2015 UWMP, please feel free to contact me at (707) 588-2234 or via email at marygracepawsongc' pcity.org. R Mary Grace iowsorl Director of D elopment Services/City Engineer Distribution List: Sonoma County Water Agency, Attn: Grant Davis City of Cotati, Attn: Craig Scott City of Petaluma, Attn: Leah Walker City of Santa Rosa, Attn: Jennifer Bruce City of Sonoma, Attn: Dan Takasugi North Marin Water District, Attn: Chris DeGabriele Town of Windsor, Attn: Toni Bertolero Valley of the Moon Water District, Attn: Dan Muelrath City of Sebastopol, Attn: Henry Mikus Penngrove Water Company, Attn: Jim Downey Sonoma State University, Attn: Christopher Dinno City of Rohnert Park, Attn: John McArthur, Mark Bautista 130 Avram Avenue ♦ Rohnert Park CA • 94928 ♦ (707) 588-2226 ♦ Fax (707) 794-9248 www.rpcity.org [NOTE: Forward completed Notice to City Clerk's Office at least four days prior to first publication. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park will be holding a PUBLIC HEARING. WHERE: Rohnert Park City Hall — Council Chamber 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, California WHEN: Tuesday, June 28, 2016, at the hour of 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter is reached on the agenda. PURPOSE: To solicit input regarding the City's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan The City Council of the City of Rohnert Park will hold a public hearing on June 28, 2016 at 6:00 pm to receive comments on the City's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, including an update to the City's Water Shortage Contingency Plan. The purpose of these plans is to consolidate information regarding the City's water demands and water supplies, to provide public information and to improve statewide water planning. Documents related to this item are available for public review during normal business hours at: City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department 130 Avram Avenue, 2nd Floor, Rohnert Park, CA Rohnert Park —Cotati Regional Library 6250 Lynne Conde Way, Rohnert Park, CA City of Rohnert Park City Web Page http:/www.rpcity.org All persons interested in this matter should appear at the June 28, 2016 City Council meeting. Written statements may be submitted to the City Clerk in advance for presentation to the Council as part of the public hearing. NOTE: If you challenge this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Rohnert Park at, or prior to, the public hearing. Questions regarding this matter should be directed to Mary Grace Pawson, Director of Development Services/City Engineer (707) 588-2234 Dated: June 13, 2016 Published: June 15, June 17, June 24 Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk APPENDIX 10 DWR CHECKLIST (NOT PRINTED WITH REVIEW DRAFT THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Rp11N E RT PA,.t 19 61 CA CIPOAKtiA [NOTE: Forward completed Notice to City Clerk's Office at least four days prior to first publication.] NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park will be holding a PUBLIC HEARING. WHERE: Rohnert Park City Hall — Council Chamber 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, California WHEN: Tuesday, June 28, 2016, at the hour of 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter is reached on the agenda. PURPOSE: To solicit input regarding the City's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan The City Council of the City of Rohnert Park will hold a public hearing on June 28, 2016 at 6:00 pm to receive comments on the City's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, including an update to the City's Water Shortage Contingency Plan. The purpose of these plans is to consolidate information regarding the City's water demands and water supplies, to provide public information and to improve statewide water planning. Documents related to this item are available for public review during normal business hours at: City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department 130 Avram Avenue, 2nd Floor, Rohnert Park, CA Rohnert Park —Cotati Regional Library 6250 Lynne Conde Way, Rohnert Park, CA City of Rohnert Park City Web Page http:/www.rpcity.org All persons interested in this matter should appear at the June 28, 2016 City Council meeting. Written statements may be submitted to the City Clerk in advance for presentation to the Council as part of the public hearing. NOTE: If you challenge this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Rohnert Park at, or prior to, the public hearing. Questions regarding this matter should be directed to Mary Grace Pawson, Director of Development Services/City Engineer (707) 588-2234 Dated: June 13, 2016 Published: June 15, June 17, June 24 Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk City of Rohnert Park 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Rohnert Park City Council June 28, 2016 19 -voiANERT P4 `L�`1LIFOR'S1i 62 Urban Water Management Plan Describes water supplies and uses Describes water use efficiency practices and demand management measures Reports on progress towards water conservation targets Describes the City's water shortage contingency plan Supports development approvals Supply and Demand Comparisons Supplies and Demands are projected from 2015 through 2040 Comparisons are made for "normal" water year,"single dry" water year and "multiple dry" water years Single dry year is the constraint for the City 12,000 I 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 Comparison of DryYearWater Supply Projections (Year 2025) 2004 WSA 2005 UWMP 2010 UWMP 2015 UWMP ■ Recycled Water Supply Groundwater Supply Agency Supply Comparison of DryYear Demand Projections (2025) 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 2004 WSA 2005 UWMP 2010 UWMP 2015 UWMP Recycled Water Irrigation Potable Irrigation Non -Irrigation Demands � Single DryYear Supply Comparison from 2015 UWMP AII Supplies) 1°pL Supply totals Demand totals Difference OP zozozozs 9,662 6,755 9,662 6,929 2030 9,662 7,068 2035,I(Opt)2040 9,662 7,261 29907 29733 29594 29401 9,662 7,479 29183 � ISingle DryYear Supply Comparison from 2015 UWMP (Potable Supplies) v& Supply totals Demand totals Difference Op 2020 2025 8,3 12 5,605 8,312 5,729 2030 2035,I(Opt) 2040 81312 81312 81312 59818 59961 29707 29583 29494 2,35 1 61129 29183 160 a 140 a 120 100 a q �N $ 80 a 60 40 a 20 i 0 Water Conservation Targets (in gallons per person per day) 2015 Target 2020 Target City Region 2015 Performance Water Use Contingency Plan Reduction in Potable Supply Available Volume 10% 8,288 15% 7,828 20% 7,367 25% 6,907 30% 6,446 35% 5,986 40% 5,525 45% 5,065 50% 005 Demand Reduction Required Projected 2040 Demand Volume 6,129 0 0 6,129 0 0 6,129 0 0 6,129 0 0 6,129 0 0 6,129 143 2% 69129 604 10 69129 11064 17% 61129 1,525 25 CurrentWater Use Contingency n, Plan Va Ordinance Based Does not have a "mandatory" Stage I Limited flexibility to respond to regulatory driven demand reduction requirements Stage When Method Takes Projected Consumption Reduction Method Effect Reduction (%) Irrigation morning and evening only Inspection/repair/adjustment of irrigation systems Reduction in irrigation run times for weather Reduction of irrigation run time if runoff occurs Utilization of City information, incentives & rebates Serve water in restaurants on request only Prohibition against filling swimming pools and using ornamental fountains Prohibition against noncommercial vehicle washing Prohibition against use of water from fire hydrants (except for fighting fires) Prohibition against use of water for construction dust control Restrictions on hours for residential irrigation 20% reductions for potable water irrigation accounts 20% reductions for vehicle washing facilities 20% reductions for most non-residential land uses All Stage 2 Prohibitions Restrictions on new landscaping 30% reductions for potable water irrigation accounts 30% reductions for vehicle washing facilities 30% reductions for most non-residential land uses All Stage 3 Prohibitions Irrigation prohibition (exceptions for established perennial plants/trees) Vehicle washing prohibition 50% reductions for most non-residential land uses 100% offset for new development demands I Voluntary 2 Mandatory 3 Mandatory 4 Mandatory 10% 20% 30% 50% Proposed Water Use Contingency Plan Resolution Based Includes a "mandatory" Stage More flexible and adaptable to change if necessary Consumption Reduction Method Irrigate without runoff Shut-off nozzles on hoses Eliminate washing of hardscapes Turn-off non -recirculating fountains No irrigation 48 hours after measurable rainfall Drinking water served on request Compliance with building standards for landscape of new homes Provide hotel guests with laundering options Irrigation limited to 6 pm to 8 am Nonpotable water for construction where feasible No filling of new swimming pools No filling or topping off of existing pools No water using landscape in new construction New construction offset 50% of demand Water Supply Deman Stage No Water Supply Conditions Shortage Reductic Stage I -Voluntary Up to 15% reduction in supply 0% 10% Stage I - Mandatory 15% to 30% reduction in supply 0% 20% Stage 2 - Mandatory 30% to 40% reduction in supply 10% 25% Stage 3 - Mandatory up to 50% reduction in supply 25% 25%