Loading...
2025/09/23 City Council Agenda Packet "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL, ROHNERT PARK FINANCING AUTHORITY (RPFA), SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JOINT REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, September 23, 2025 Open Session: 5:00 PM MEETING LOCATION: CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBER 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: The Rohnert Park City Council welcomes your attendance, interest and participation at its regular meetings scheduled on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Members of the public are encouraged to observe the meeting on Cable Channel 26, by visiting meeting central on our website https://www.rpcity.org/city_hall/city_council/meeting_central, or at our YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/CityofRohnertPark. 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 with a maximum allowance of 30 minutes allotted per comment period, with time limits subject to modification by the City Council in accordance with the adopted City Council Protocols). Speakers are encouraged to complete a Public Comment card and submit it to the Clerk at the time of the meeting. This helps ensure an orderly and efficient meeting, but it is not required. Members of the public may also provide advanced comments by email at publiccomment@rpcity.org Comments are requested by 3:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting, but can be emailed until the close of the Agenda Item for which the comment is submitted. Email comments must identify the Agenda Item Number in the subject line of the email. The emails will not be read for the record but will be provided to Council. Please note that all e-mails sent to the City Council are considered to be public records and subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act. City Council/RPFA agendas and minutes may be viewed at the City's website: www.rpcity.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 1.CITY COUNCIL/RPFA/SUCCESSOR AGENCY JOINT REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL (Adams_____Elward_____Rodriguez_____Sanborn______Giudice______) 2.READING OF THE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT The City of Rohnert Park acknowledges Indigenous Peoples as the traditional stewards of the land. Let it be acknowledged that the City of Rohnert Park is located within the traditional homelands of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, comprised of Coast Miwok and Southern Pomo peoples. 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4.SSU REPORT 4.A By Vanessa Mendoza, Vice President of External Affairs, Sonoma State University Associated Students, Inc. (SSU ASI) 5.PRESENTATIONS 5.A Mayor's Proclamation: Proclaiming October 13, 2025 as Indigenous Peoples' Day in the City of Rohnert Park Item 5.A. 5.B Mayor's Proclamation: Proclaiming September 15 through October 15, 2025 as Hispanic/Latine Heritage Month in the City of Rohnert Park Item 5.B. 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 Section 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. CITY COUNCIL GOALS: On May 14, 2024, the Rohnert Park City Council adopted the following multi-year broad goals (listed below in no particular order): 1.Long Term Financial Sustainability 3.Planning and Infrastructure 2.Community Quality of Life 4.Organization Well Being THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK WANTS TO CONNECT WITH YOU! Our cross-departmental communications team works together on media relations, social media, internal and external communications, stakeholder relations, the City's website, branding, media, and communications support to the City as a whole. Please visit rpcity.org/i_want_to__/connect to stay connected and informed. 5.C Presentation from Committee on the Shelterless (COTS) Chief Executive Officer Chris Cabral Regarding Keep People Housed Homeless Prevention Program (December 16, 2024 through June 30, 2025) Item 5.C. 6.DEPARTMENT HEAD BRIEFINGS 7.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 should refer to Page 1 for information on how to submit public comments. 7.A Public Comments Received via Email and Materials Received at the Meeting Item 7 Supplemental Item - Public Comments Received via Email Item 7 Supplemental Item -Written Materials Submitted at Meeting 8.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. Council Motion/Vote: (Adams_____Elward_____Rodriguez_____Sanborn______Giudice______) 8.A Acceptance of Reports from Finance Department (This is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)): Item 8.A.1. 1. City Bills/Demands for Payment dated August 26, 2025 through September 8, 2025 Item 8.A.2. 2. Successor Agency- Cash Report as of August 30, 2025 Item 8.A.3. 3. City- Cash Report for Month as of August 30, 2025 8.B Approval of Minutes (This is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)): Item 8.B.1. City Council/RPFA/Successor Agency Joint Regular Meeting, September 9, 2025 Item 8.B.2. City Council Special Meeting, September 9, 2025 8.C Receive Progress Report on the Status of the Emergency Public Safety Antenna and Radio System Replacement Project (CIP2412), as required by the Public Contract Code and by Minute Order, authorize the continuation of Resolution 2024-051 until the emergency action is completed (This action is not a Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)) Item 8.C. 8.D By Minute Order, Authorize the Mayor to Execute and Deliver the City’s Response to the Grand Jury Report titled “Who Can Afford to Live in Sonoma County: A Tale of Two Cities” (This is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)) Item 8.D. 8.E Adopt Resolution 2025-072 Authorizing and Accepting a Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement with Redwood Lodging, LLC for the Development Located at APN 143-391-022 (This Project is Exempt Under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)) Item 8.E. 8.F Adopt Resolution 2025-073 Authorizing and Approving the Director of Finance to Amend the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to Appropriate $30,617 from General Fund Restricted Fund Balance to Development Services Contract Services (10002000-64000) (This is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)) Item 8.F. 9.REGULAR ITEMS 9.A Consider Canceling and Rescheduling the November 25, 2025 City Council Meeting, and By Minute Order, Schedule a December 2, 2025 Special Meeting for the Water Rate Public Hearing and Cancel the December 23, 2025, Regular City Council Meeting (This is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)) A. Staff Report B. Public Comments C. Council Motion/Vote Item 9.A. Staff Report 9.B Accept the 2025 Water Rate Study Report, Direct Staff to Send a Notice of Public Hearing, and Provide Direction Regarding Rate Adjustment Timelines and Notices (This is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)) A. Staff Report B. Public Comments C. Council Discussion/Direction Item 9.B. Staff Report and Attachments Item 9.B. Presentation 9.C Receive Department of Public Safety Annual Staffing and Recruiting Report for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 (This is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)) A. Staff Report B. Public Comments C. Council Discussion Item 9.C. Staff Report Item 9.C. Supplemental Presentation 9.D Consider Designating a Voting Delegate and Alternates for the League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Oct. 8-10, 2025, in Long Beach CA, Authorizing the Voting Delegates to Vote on Late Resolutions or Alternate Recommendations Made at the October 10, 2025 General Assembly, and Directing Staff to Complete the Voting Delegate Form and File it with the League of California Cities (This is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)) A. Staff Report B. Public Comments C. Council Motion/Vote Item 9.D. Staff Report and Attachments 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. Per Government Code Section 53232.3(d), Councilmembers shall provide brief reports on meetings attended at the expense of the City. No action may be taken. 10.A City Standing Committees, Council Liaison Assignments, Outside Agency and Mayors & Councilmembers/City Selection Committee Appointments: 1. Adams 2. Elward 3. Rodriguez 1. Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors (9/16) 4. Sanborn 1. Zero Waste Sonoma Board of Directors Meeting (9/18) 5. Giudice 1. Sonoma County Mayors and Councilmembers Board of Directors, Legislative Committee and General Membership Meeting in Petaluma, CA (9/11) 2. Sonoma County Mayors and Councilmembers Legislative Committee (9/19) 6. Reports Under Government Code Section 53232.3(d): Santa Rosa Junior College Foundation 2025 President’s Address (9/18) Item 10.A.5.1. Supplemental Item 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.ADDING AGENDA ITEMS TO A FUTURE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA At this time, any Councilmember may request the City Manager or Designee to add an item to a future agenda. Pursuant to the City Council Protocols, a concurrence of two Councilmembers is needed for the City Manager to consider the request. In accordance with the Brown Act, Councilmembers may only discuss whether the item should be placed on a subsequent agenda for deliberation and action. The City Manager will be responsible for placement of requested items on the agenda after evaluation of all requests for, among other things, time-sensitivity, and number of items already agendized. 13.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 should refer to Page 1 for information on how to submit public comments. 14.ADJOURNMENT 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, please refer to page 1 for more details on submitting a public comment. 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. AGENDA REPORTS & DOCUMENTS: A paper copy 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, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 94928. Electronic 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 on https://www.rpcity.org/city_hall/city_council/meeting_central. 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 be made available for inspection at City Hall and on our website at the same time. Any writings or documents subject to disclosure that are provided to the City Council during the meeting will be made available for public inspection during meeting and on our website following the meeting. AMERICAN DISABILITY ACT ACCOMMODATION: Any member of the public who needs accommodations should email the ADA Coordinator at jcannon@rpcity.org or by calling 707-588-2221. Notification at least 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the ADA Coordinator to use her best efforts to provide reasonable accommodations to provide as much accessibility as possible while also maintaining public safety in accordance with the City procedure for resolving reasonable accommodation requests. Information about reasonable accommodations is available on the City website at https://www.rpcity.org/city_hall/departments/human_resources/a_d_a_and_accessibility_resources. CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA I, Sylvia Lopez Cuevas, City Clerk for the City of Rohnert Park, declare that the foregoing agenda was posted and available for review on September 18, 2025, 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 18th day of September, 2025 at Rohnert Park, California. Sylvia Lopez Cuevas Office of the City Clerk A PROCLAMATION OF THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Proclaiming O CTOBER 13, 2025 AS I NDIGENOUS P EOPLES’ D AY Whereas, Indigenous Peoples’ Day is observed on the second Monday of October to honor and celebrate the histories, cultures, and contributions of Indigenous peoples across the United States; and Whereas, the City of Rohnert Park recognizes that Indigenous peoples were the original stewards of this land, and their knowledge, traditions, and resilience continue to enrich our community; and Whereas, this day provides an opportunity to honor, celebrate, and learn more about Indigenous People and their contributions towards our City’s development and progress; and Whereas, the City of Rohnert Park values the partnership and contributions of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, who continue to support education, cultural preservation, environmental stewardship, and community well-being. Now, Therefore, be it Proclaimed that I, Gerard Giudice, as Mayor and on behalf of the City Council, do hereby proclaim October 13, 2025, as Indigenous Peoples’ Day in the City of Rohnert Park. I encourage everyone to honor and learn from the rich histories, traditions, and contributions of the Indigenous peoples, including the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. Duly and Regularly Proclaimed on this 23rd day of September 2025. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gerard Giudice, MAYOR Item 5.A. A PROCLAMATION OF THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Proclaiming S EPTEMBER 15 THROUGH O CTOBER 15, 2025 AS H ISPANIC/LATINE H ERITAGE M ONTH & R ECOGNIZING A LMAS L IBRES FOR THEIR L EADERSHIP & A DVOCACY Whereas, Hispanic/Latine Heritage Month is observed each year from September 15 through October 15, celebrating the histories, cultures, and contributions by the Hispanic and Latine American people whose ancestors came from Spain, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central and South America; and Whereas, this observance highlights the lasting value and impact of Hispanic and Latine heritage on our nation and local community, enriching the arts, education, business, government, and every aspect of civic life; and Whereas, Hispanic/Latine Americans have enriched the social, cultural, and economic fabric of our community, contributing greatly to the arts, education, business, government, and every aspect of civic life; and Whereas, in Rohnert Park and throughout Sonoma County, Hispanic/Latine heritage is deeply woven into the community’s identity, reflected in vibrant traditions, resilient spirit, and strong cultural values; and Whereas, we recognize those who preserve and uplift Hispanic and Latin culture, including Almas Libres, a program of the Raizes Collective, comprised of immigrant and Indigenous women who provide know- your-rights education, leadership development, and advocacy; and Whereas, Almas Libres leads efforts such as the Northern California Coalition for Just Immigration Reform, advances legalization policies for undocumented persons, and uplifts voices through projects like Teatro Almas Libres, where women share their lived experiences as undocumented workers; and Whereas, the work of Almas Libres strengthens community bonds, encourages cross-cultural understanding, and ensures that future generations can take pride in their heritage. Now, Therefore, be it Proclaimed that I, Gerard Giudice, as Mayor and on behalf of the City Council, do hereby proclaim September 15 – October 15, 2025, as Hispanic/Latine Heritage Month in the City of Rohnert Park, and proudly recognize Almas Libres for their leadership, advocacy, and invaluable contributions to the cultural and civic life of our community. Duly and Regularly Proclaimed on this 23rd day of September 2025. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gerard Giudice, MAYOR Item 5.B. 46% COTS launched Keep People Housed (KPH), a new homelessness prevention program, on December 16, 2024. KPH serves families throughout Sonoma County. COTS’ biannual report is intended to show the impact of the KPH program and to share what we have learned about the importance of homelessness prevention in Sonoma County. It’s far easier and more cost-effective to keep a family in their home than to help them rebuild their lives after experiencing homelessness. Once the keys are gone, so is the safety, stability, and hope that a home provides. We’re grateful to be keeping people housed in Sonoma County. This project is made possible thanks to generous funding from the County of Sonoma, the City of Santa Rosa, the City of Petaluma, and Bay Area nonprofit All Home. KPH Biannual Program Update Goal to Serving 400 Households in Sonoma County Primary Reasons for Needing KPH Assistance Job Change: reduced hours or job loss Family Change: birth of new baby, death of spouse, or separation. Medical Diagnosis: injury or illness resulting in the loss of work. Personal Comments of Presenting Agency Item 5.&. Total Applications 1448 Households Received Assistance 184 Total Assistance Provided $566,458 Referrals to Legal Aid 192 Average Household Assistance $3,078 Back Rent 46% Future Rent 17% Utility Assistance 14% First Months Rent 11% Security Deposit 4% Types of Financial Assistance for KPH Adults 60.3% Children 39.7% Individuals Receiving Assistance for KPH Other Financial Assistance 3% KPH Biannual Program Update Participants remaining housed six months after receiving assistance 90% Personal Comments of Presenting Agency Individuals Served by Region Adults Children 0 10 20 30 40 Adults Children North Sonoma County Adults Children 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Adults Children South Sonoma County Adults Children 0 20 40 60 80 100 Adults Children Central Sonoma County Adults Children 0 10 20 30 40 50 Adults Children West Sonoma County Adults Children 0 5 10 15 20 25 Adults Children Sonoma Valley Total Applications 177 Households Received Assistance 29 Total Assistance Provided $90,847 Referrals to Legal Aid 19 Average Household Assistance $3,132 Back Rent 52% Future Rent 18% Utility Assistance 11% Security Deposit 10% Types of Financial Assistance for KPH Adults 57.7% Children 42.3% Individuals Receiving Assistance for KPH Other Financial Assistance 3% KPH Biannual Data for 94928 Participants remaining housed six months after receiving assistance 100% Personal Comments of Presenting Agency Additional Information Extremely Low Income (0-30% AMI) 78% Monolingual Households 17%Household Applications by Size Single Person Households Multi-Person Households Applicants by Gender Male Female Prefer Not To Say 32% 64% 32% 68% 4% “KPH was helpful because I lost my 1099 job. I got behind on all my bills, and I was scared of what would happen to my housing. This assistance allowed me to focus on getting a better wage job. Now I can use my tax refund to hire someone for aftercare pick up while I can stay longer at work. I am also back in college and have made payment arrangements to pay some debts. I'm very happy [a] non-profit like this helps families. Thank you!” “This program changed my life. I just got divorced and was living with three children in my vehicle. KPH helped me get approved for an apartment, and I am moving in soon! Without this help, my kids and I would have been living in the car for a long time. I have a great job, but I was having a really hard time getting back on my feet after my recent divorce. Thank you so much for putting a roof over our heads and helping us get back into housing so quickly! We are forever grateful.” “I want to share that the Keep People House team gave us great help in these difficult times that we were going through. We are a family of 6, and we are deeply grateful to all who make this possible. May everything you do be multiplied, and [may] your families also be blessed by God. To all who are part of KPH, we thank you with all our hearts for your support. God bless you always.” Lives Transformed Our Partners Personal Comments of Presenting Agency From: To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment for 9/23 City Council Meeting - Resynergi Permit Date:Monday, September 22, 2025 12:00:04 PM EXTERNAL EMAIL Dear Rohnert Park City Council Members, I am writing to express my concern about Resynergi's plans to break down plastics at their facility in SOMO Village. I have a child that attends Credo High, and am also a resident of Rohnert Park, K section. Resynergi states that the process is a new, safe way to break down plastics using microwave technology. Since this is a new technology, I do not see how they can be 100% sure the process is safe. In Denmark, a plastic pyrolysis plant exploded not just once, but twice, leading to release of black smoke and chemicals. For the first explosion, human error was found to be the cause. For the second, the plant was shut down and investigation stopped. The Chemical Engineering Transactions (CET), a leading international journal for publication of original research and review articles in chemical, food, process, environmental engineering, produced a paper on the explosions in Denmark. Per the paper, "(Plastic) Pyrolysis processes generate toxic and flammable gases. Pyrolysis takes place at high temperatures that exceed the autoignition temperature (AIT) of the substances involved. Accidents are frequent – the UK waste sector had a fatality rate around 15 times greater than the rate across all industries over the five-year period up to 2016, and over three times greater than the rate in the construction sector (Rollinson, 2018).Inherent pyrolysis hazards include fire and explosion risk and accidental release of toxic gases such as carbon monoxide. The greatest risk of fire, explosion, and toxic release comes when the system is starting up and shutting down or operating intermittently (Rollinson, 2018). Inert gas purging is essential to manage explosion risks." In addition, according to an article from KCRA, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) issued three violations to the company in August alone for operating without a permit. I don't think it is a good idea to trust a company that violates the rules like this, especially considering the things they plan to do are potentially very hazardous. I am very dismayed at how the city council has handled the permitting process for this facility. It appears that proper procedures were not followed (how on earth did you consider a incinerator at all given the rules? And using an Administrative permit for such a potentially hazardous facility? Totally irresponsible. You are public servants elected to protect the citizens.) From what I see, the process has been the opposite of transparent. The city did not notify people about the project, as was your civic duty in a situation that is so potentially hazardous. I was shocked in July to get a notification about the plant with a very short window for public comment, and I only received the notification because I am a parent of a student at the school. In addition, I thought that Rohnert Park simply does not allow incinerators within city limits - how is this incinerator different? A different heat source does not mean that the plastics are not brought up to a temperature where explosions are possible, so this is an incinerator. How is it that you are bowing to business interests over the health of the community? And how is it possible that this is happening in the middle of a planned residential community that includes a high school? I love the idea of plastics recycling. However, plastic pyrolysis is not classified as recycling by the EPA or the State of California, and so classification of this business as a recycling business should not apply. I believe that the location of the facility simply doesn't make sense - the risks to our community and to children are too great. As a resident and a parent, I am urging you to rescind the permit granted to Resynergi. Thank you, Samantha Sheppard Rohnert Park Resident From: To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment re: Resynergi permit Date:Monday, September 22, 2025 9:50:47 AM EXTERNAL EMAIL Dear Rohnert Park City Council Members: I am the parent of a new Credo High student, and like many Credo families, we spent months learning about our high school options to find the best possible fit. We chose Credo for many excellent reasons—not the least of which is its commitment to environmental education and activism, which is embedded in the curriculum. My student was honored to be chosen by Credo in return. She is someone who takes her commitments very seriously, including the commitment to contribute to a healthy, vibrant, and inclusive community, and to help protect the environment for the good of all. It wasn't until after the school year began that I learned about Resynergi, a plastics and petroleum processing plant that intends to operate 24/7 at SOMO Village within yards of our school, and in close proximity to two additional schools, many small businesses, and the surrounding residential neighborhoods. The timing of this permit process over the summer break does not seem coincidental to me. In the weeks since school started, many more questions and concerns about the health and safety impact of Resynergi's operations have come to light, and few real answers have been provided—aside from the carefully worded marketing materials promoted by Resynergi itself. I support the efforts of the local POWER coalition to block Resynergi from operating in or near SOMO Village. SOMO Village and the City of Rohnert Park are not prepared to respond to—or even properly assess—the many potential risks to public health and safety that such an operation would introduce. At best, this is a class-action lawsuit waiting to happen. The community's concerns about air quality, fire and explosion risk, and other short and long-term health hazards related to this proposed operation should be taken seriously by the Council, and the process to rescind Resynergi's operating permit should begin without further delay. I urge the Council to listen to its constituents. Right now, you have the power to prevent Resynergi from operating where Credo students and staff live, learn, and breathe 7+ hours a day—not to mention the extended SOMO Village community of small businesses and residents who are facing 24/7 risk exposure. The city code of Rohnert Park does NOT allow the operation of an incinerator within city limits—and even if it did, a busy, active neighborhood is no place for such an operation. This is your opportunity to demonstrate to the community what the City of Rohnert Park really stands for: Please take action now to rescind this permit, and prevent Resynergi from operating in or near SOMO Village. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Laurie Weed Laurie Weed Freelance editor & writer she/her | Create your own email signature From: To:Public Comment Cc:CityClerk Subject:Public Comment: Resynergi Project – Rohnert Park City Council Meeting Date:Sunday, September 21, 2025 1:13:34 PM EXTERNAL EMAIL Dear City Clerk, I submitted the below for public comment, though it apprears I may have sent it to an inactive or unmonitored email address. I am resending what I sent today (Sunday, 9/21) at 8:03am, with some additional information. Please utilize the below for public comment, unless both must be posted, in which case, please post both. Thank you for your work. Sincerely, Michael Kopaigorodsky Dear Mayor and Members of the Rohnert Park City Council, I am submitting this correspondence for the public record regarding the proposed Resynergi facility in Rohnert Park. I have also attached, as Addendum A, my recent submission to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD, Permit #704470) for context. While that submission focuses on air quality and emissions, I would like to expand on additional concerns that require consideration at the city and county level. By way of introduction, I hold degrees in Human Physiology, Environmental Toxicology, and Human Health Risk Assessment, and I am a practicing Environmental Health Scientist. I am a California Registered Environmental Health Specialist (REHS) and Certified Hazardous Materials Manager (CHMM). The below information represents my views, solely on my behalf, as a concerned citizen of Rohnert Park. While I am neither opposed to nor in favor of the Resynergi project in principle—and I sincerely hope the company can achieve its stated goals—I have significant concerns with both the specifics of the project and the process by which it is being advanced. Key Concerns 1. Location and Zoning From a human health perspective, siting this type of experimental industrial operation in a residential neighborhood near a school is highly concerning. Such projects should be evaluated in appropriate industrial zones, not in suburban neighborhoods. 2. Human Health Risk Assessment (HRA) and Emissions As detailed in my BAAQMD submission (Addendum A), the current HRA is incomplete. It does not include emissions testing using actual mixed plastic feedstock. Without a comprehensive Local Risk Assessment Plan (LRAP) that addresses variability, human error, equipment malfunctions, and potential non-compliance, any conclusions about public health risks are unreliable. 3. Hazardous Materials Storage and Spill Risk The proposed storage of up to 20,000 gallons of pyrolysis oil—a highly toxic, flammable, and corrosive material—raises serious regulatory and safety concerns. Such storage is subject to APSA/SPCC, Fire Code, the CA Health Health and Safety Code, DOT transport rules, Department Toxic Substances Control, , and fugitive emission oversight. - Utilizing Diesel #2 as a surrogate for the storage of this material is not realistic. The hazards associated with storing 20,000 gallons of Diesel #2, while significant, do not capture potential hazards associated with storing an equivalent volume of pyrolysis fluid. This material must be fully characterized for its hazardous properties under the CA Health & Safety Code, CAL/OSHA, and the Department of Toxic Substances Control for proper characharchterizartion as a hazardous waste, in the event of leaks, spills, and releases.. - A tank of this size, or a tanker truck accident, could result in catastrophic fire, explosion, and contamination of local creeks, groundwater, and even the ocean. - Given the bioaccumulative nature of many associated pollutants, a major release could represent one of the most severe environmental disasters in our history. - Cleanup would likely require managing the material as dioxin-containing hazardous waste, which is land-disposal restricted in California and beyond the capacity of local jurisdictions to handle. 4. Compliance Record and Technical Leadership While remaining unbiased in scientific review, a company’s compliance history is relevant. Resynergi has already been cited for operating without proper permits, raising concerns about regulatory adherence. Additionally, technical leadership lacks advanced degrees in chemical engineering, toxicology, or environmental science. Most leadership credentials are management and business focused, which is inadequate for oversight of a novel, high-risk process. While plastic pollution is a pressing global problem, solutions must not create equal or greater hazards. Investment in upstream alternatives to plastic use, rather than recycling into new feedstocks is of utmost importance. I urge the City Council to pause advancement of this project until full, independent scientific review has been conducted and all community concerns are addressed. While I hope Resynergi can fulfill its mission, placing this experimental facility in suburban Rohnert Park, near schools and residences, presents risks that cannot be responsibly overlooked. Thank you for your attention and commitment to protecting the health and safety of Rohnert Park residents. Respectfully submitted, Michael Kopaigorodsky, MSPH, REHS, CHMM Resident, Rohnert Park Addendum A: Public Comment Submitted to BAAQMD (Permit #704470) [Full BAAQMD submission included as written] Dear Ms. Cabral My name is Michael Kopaigorodsky. I am a resident of Rohnert Park and an Environmental Health Professional. I have reviewed various records obtained through public records requests and am sending this communication for incorporation into public comment for this project. I have summarized my concerns with regard to human health risk assessment, specific to potential air exposures below. If you have any information that addresses the below concerns, please advise on how I can obtain related information. Thank you for your work and please let me know if there are questions. Sincerely, Michael Subject: Request for Full-Scale Emissions Testing and Health Risk Assessment for Resynergi Facility (Permit #704470) To: Bay Area Air Quality Management District From: Michael Kopaigorodsky, MSPH, REHS, CHMM Dear BAAQMD Staff, I am submitting this comment regarding the proposed Resynergi plastic recycling facility in Rohnert Park (Permit #704470, CA-002 Somo Village). Based on the publicly available draft engineering evaluation, it appears that the Health Risk Assessment (HRA) and emissions evaluation relied primarily on modeled emissions from the non- condensable gas (NCG) and manufacturer-provided data. While these estimates are helpful for screening purposes, they do not represent actual emissions from the facility’s mixed-plastic feedstock, which can include PVC, PET, PE, PP, PS, and plastics with various additives and flame retardants. These feedstocks may produce halogenated compounds, dioxins/furans, PAHs, acid gases, and heavy metals under real operating conditions, especially if combustion in the thermal oxidizer is not perfectly complete. To ensure a scientifically robust assessment of public health risks and to comply with BAAQMD Toxics New Source Review, I respectfully request the following be required before the facility is allowed to operate commercially: 1. Lab-Scale Testing of Representative Feedstock Conduct pyrolysis on representative plastic mixes under controlled conditions. Analyze outputs: non-condensable gas, condensable liquids, and solid residue for VOCs, PAHs, dioxins/furans, acid gases, and heavy metals. Compare emissions data to Cal/OEHHA Acute, 8- hour, and Chronic Reference Exposure Levels.. 2. Pilot-Scale / Stack Testing If RELs are within acceptable limits, perform stack testing during startup, steady-state, and shutdown conditions. Measure actual emissions from the thermal oxidizer treating real NCG derived from plastic feedstock. 3. Emission Factor Development Calculate realistic mass emission rates for all relevant pollutants. Include worst-case operational scenarios and variability in feedstock composition. 4. Air Dispersion Modeling Using Actual Emissions Use measured emissions to perform a full air dispersion model. Evaluate concentrations at all sensitive receptors, including nearby schools and residences. 5. Independent Verification Require that testing be conducted or verified by an accredited third-party laboratory. Make all raw data, lab reports, and stack test results publicly available. Develop Risk Communication strategy to inform Rohnert Park residents regarding findings of the above steps taken. Without these steps, the HRA cannot be considered fully representative of real-world conditions, and community members cannot be assured that emissions will remain below thresholds for cancer risk, chronic hazard, and acute hazard. I strongly urge BAAQMD to condition final approval on full-scale, feedstock-based emissions testing and verified HRA, ensuring protection of nearby residents, schools, and other sensitive receptors. While have additional concerns with regard: Inappropriate zoning of this project; Potential adverse impacts to soil and drinking water; Potential impacts to recreational and navigable waterways; Bulk hazardous materials storage at or above Maximum Allowable Quantities (including related operational air emissions); Potential for catastrophic spills, fire, explosion, injuries. My understanding is that these items must be addressed at City and County level, as they are not under the purview of BAAQMD. If any of the items do fall under the purview of BAAQMD, please advise so that I may add additional detail for record to public comment. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Michael Kopaigorodsky From: To:Public Comment Subject:Concerned Resident of RP area re: Permit #704470 Date:Friday, September 12, 2025 1:47:03 PM EXTERNAL EMAIL Please do not approve the opening of Resynergi, in the middle of neighborhoods and near schools (permit number #704470). No matter how careful they are or the potential job opportunities, the risk is too high with plastic incineration! It causes so many health issues. As someone recovering from longterm health concerns that are very much affected by pollution, a plastic incinerator plant will make this so much worse. Any financial benefit to Rohnert Park now will be beyond overshadowed by the costs - emotional, financial, political - of resulting health issues and the pain that will be suffered by families and the community. Please do not let this happen! Thank you, Amanda From: To:Public Comment Subject:STOP! Resynergi Date:Thursday, September 11, 2025 4:53:33 PM EXTERNAL EMAIL To whom it may concern, I am against this plant being in Rohnert Park. Dr. E. Burch, Professor, RP Resident Walmart Neighborhood Expansion To whom it may concern, I am opposed to the expansion at the Walmart store on Golf Course Drive. Walmart does not need to expand at the cost of driving local businesses out so they can become a bigger store. If customers want to pick up their groceries they can do what customers do at Safeway and Raley’s. Customers can drive in the existing parking lot and park at the designated location and have their groceries delivered to the car. Walmart has a large operation on Redwood Drive which would be a better location to provide the service they want to do on Golf Course. This would not dislocate the local barber who services provide a service to the surrounding area. The residents who live on Elenor Drive and Emily do not need addition cars and trucks going into their neighborhood to justify the expansion. The noise of diesel engines as well as pollution of additional vehicles idling is a detriment to the neighborhood and the surrounding area. I would urge you to reject the expansion of Walmart. Thank you for your time, Jerry Andersen 1 Lopez, Sylvia From:Patrick Mundy Sent:Tuesday, September 23, 2025 3:42 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Revoke Resynergi's Administrative Permit. It is defective. EXTERNAL EMAIL City Council Members - I demand that you immediately revoke with prejudice the Administrative Permit that was issued to Resynergi in violation of several sections of the Municipal Code. One: The EPA pro-actively affirmed as recently as 2023 that it continues to categorize plastics pyrolysis as incineration. In Zoning Ordinance section 17.06.840 incineration of any kind is banned in all of Rohnert Park. The Resyergi work-play about the dictionary definition of incineration is irrelevant. What matters here is the statutory definition. And the Air Quality Management District correctly identified the Resynergi CMAP as an “Other Solid Waste Incinerator” so ANY use permit for Resynergi in ANY part of Rohnert Park must be summarily denied. The law says they can’t operate here at all. Two: Calling Resynergi’s operation a “recycling facility” in order to issue it an Administrative Permit is incorrect. “Recycling Facility” is clearly defined in Zoning Ordinance Section 17.04, and refers to either large or small collection facilities, or to a reverse vending machine. That section of the code does NOT contemplate processing that involves pelletizing the recyclables and then vaporizing them them at between 800F and 1000F. Resynergi, from a statutory perspective, is neither a collection facility nor a reverse vending machine, and is ineligible for an Administrative Permit, no matter how much you want them to have a permit so that they can close their $18 million Series B round and stay in business, which is what happened, isn’t it? The permit is invalid, illegal, null and void, and worthless. Its issuance is in violation of several parts of municipal code and more and more people are become aware of this. City Council, exercise your authority under Zoning Ordinance section 17.25.142 and revoke the existing permit now by your own motion. The grounds for revocation are clear, as you’ve been shown MANY times in the last several months, under section 17.25.141 (1) “The permit or variance was issued on the basis of erroneous or misleading information, misrepresentation, or fraud.” Thank you. Patrick Mundy 2 RocketWeave LLC (415) 652-3919 pat@rocketweave.com 3 Lopez, Sylvia From:Dallas Carter Sent:Tuesday, September 23, 2025 2:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Regarding the Resynergi plant EXTERNAL EMAIL Hello, I wanted to make sure my voice was heard regarding the microwave electrolysis system undergoing the permitting process from Rysenergi. I agree that plastic waste is an issue and we should as a society be taking steps to combat it, but the centralized location for Rysenergi's electrolysis facility makes me exceptionally uncomfortable as a resident of this town. Even a slight oxygen leak in the process can lead to the production of dioxin, which is a component of Agent Orange. These leaks have the capacity to reach for miles from their origin point. Furthermore, the electrolysis facility is located less than five miles from a school and a groundwater pump facility, as well as surrounded by residences and then dairy farmland not further past that. Given that even one accident can release toxic dioxin for miles around, and that Rysenergi has received 5 violations from the Bay Area Clean Air District, I have extreme doubts that Rysenergi can operate this facility safely. I hope you will reconsider extending operating permits for this facility. Thank you for your time Sincerely, Dallas '-'J~.3J· -vu~ ______:;::::>" ~ t~e 9 ~-. Mb-.-~ . • ., 0th d . . . 0 H• . • .• ~ . . ay foJJoWin oXE I J~.L~t.10 · f · • • •· · ·. . ". :~-•. - • ' •. -1 . MbRr: • .. -\ ?17. Super Herot\ •:~-. -com: ., .. : . • i, '-S W , . . . ~c.,· . ~ ... __ .. ,,.-: _ _ ~----.. ~ . .. • ~hted .. _, . -~~-, -. • .1•)"~ .,........ --~· ~-·y • 1·~1· . . ~-'-,/ . • • "'-~~.; ~ ··¾~·,· i-~~ : ~;~!:,~~ . ·,·· . . :... • ,• ~ ~:·:..· ... • • •t.~:;.: <; ;:; .... ~~ .,· ~~-, .. l : • · v, ~'I.~::-~_ • ~ ~-; _.. -· ·Qutteh , . \_~:-. .. ... -. :1 ............ " ... ..... • .>'J. • ~ •• r/.,.. • ~ ' :r ·-,~ ~. . .. .. . r· 'l '-Oe A.~•·1s .)'--~ "' -• 4 • .... • • ,. ,,, en . • • ••. -_.:. . -~:. ,~.-;·-:~. • ·_ . _I ~ • . : ' • :: : CHARLIE ~ROWN'~ little ~ed_Haired·_~i~l~rien~;a~d_ • _ ._ <' the 2023 "'.'." 2024 Hohday S _ l .r.J or the y~r in::C • .~ifornia . ·. • . This. h~Jf story will be toldie"~l'Y Holy D.ay s: ::.,~ciri. , . J:. • ••• · • : , _·. knowin9\the P.EAMtlTS GA1 G ·& YESHU~ had;_', • : ( · · ·• , · .• ~·~ • something in Cpmmon fo:: Very Goood. ~E1'MQN,/·; ·__ • -· • , . • g:, • Th.~y ~?J~ .. S~9~~ to an~:,~;~~ as Almighff rTI~a:nu~r • . · .. :;( . . . . . . .. ,. . . . PIE,~CE_~--. . . . A :' .. ·-.}~ -~" -~\.V .. ' • • • ' • l .. • . . . ~ • '· ·•. . • .;·:·,i : • . ~ ~ • ~.. -=· ,,r, .• • ·_ '?,,:Char,le~;.~S..c~~~-Itz· PP~rayecf..=.he P,EANUTS;G~N.¢:•·as: .. ~~ ·-•• ~ \-/:E~A~ '. ·,: ·j;.,: ~.-"'--'.~&-~ _-.~; ~ -.e{7~~~;~~.!o~,ff}-~1~·V-Jo~l&.-•.--.•~ ... ¢,:TT>,;-·· to--:.-·-:....-"'"~. :~ • . .•, . . ~-~• w.r1 a ,~, .. ~J ;_ ;I l~ -~· lir--.. ·: '··1 • •. ': . . . • ~e Cryi,;: JiQ:fi~:_ SJQP.;fE ·:~S w plenty <>f F~ARS.,.~ ·_ '·; • J~. • J\st~ef~atf.i~rnhal'~~.-bul,ic{ ;~~jug teli'gtol1S & :~tJ • •. ~-,:· •• : ! \.t.: _ poli~~.l~~ :~~~~g~·~~.~1,~ _ as\·~~~ter vampire~ in -(>~ _ _ • • ·: · ... ·:-.:. • se.rv.1ce. .t(l Mort1c1a-ns, ..•. ~:~}. ·VE-R·-WANTED---YOU_.REA-D . · · , __ · '.:· • • l..eT'Al.'ONE J~~Eij:15EQ .. , HE ~~ENES GO~PEL,OF , ~ • ·PEA~E .. ·Jeq~~ing theJQ ~y FreedOm Strike !o_r~n -.. -. • _: l'J VVarmoo~Je.rs to CEAS_E ..... ,lave You g~t_ E~rs ~? _::.> • · • -~ --I-IEAR. .. ~ee Pr9phebc CO imandopenmg.thee _· ,,-~ .... • -· ._._ -P-rcifyjJs··e;cll.and .is CL-EAR :~.tF'REE Lepnard Peltier~.---·-_. -~-• • So;}~-r T~UE FREEDoMy~ ::r~'ir~lwe MU~T FR_eE\he • . __ _ -A~-im~l-~}Fi~ST .... And s·o_·t .P to F_REE the_e E~RTH f~r i • _ ;the i~f!if. iSed ~pirit~d BiR ,_ . .. _ • • • '. .; • t. • • _ YES HU-A .Q·uote fronl • the E: enes-G9spel of. PEACE -~ \ • • states Cl.iEARL y ;,\f erily}s y;unto you, they 'Who <,_ L.,_ ,::. p3rtake ?f benefits,which al~ gotten by wron~ing one'; ·~ _ -•···. __ •· _. __ -..... ..... ___ ~I\J.. _ --~-__ l_ ... ~ _,__~r•.,.~ __ • :. _ .. _. -··--··· ·-.. ~ \ .. __ . ,,? _ •• ,.·_ ..... ____ • r• r._ .. _.,." Written Comment From Peter Alexander l(~ . f GOD's~·c~eature~ .. · --~c,, ... : . .. • .·.• . • . o_ . -_:..~--.. i .. c~llfl . J • ~,,ht~ous _: no~ can . . I l f .. theY und.e.fstand ~~ly thi~t .l!P ~ 1-j'.1;:ACH the MY: .. ster~es • , of the KIN1~DOM, Whose~~,:, 0\1re Stained Wi~lood or· • whose m.qt1ths are:deft a,/ds . veshua Amen AHO ·· . I • • • ; • 'r· • ..' • . • I e.ct w f I es 11. . . . . . • I .. : • . . . ,' • I • . . .. yeshuaaka.Jes~~ lndeeej : ys the.VEGAn cl:~r~fied·· ~~ I am A~ways y a1-wa · · . • .. . •• •• : • .-= i ,·, --· .. • . ~ ou and ~-f -Itow Me-'~ as a _yegan . • . · -,. ···· to O r ~ ' The FiStlf}~O~ve~ True ~t~· • being He c3:5q9~ !he • ~ • - . TRU.TH \1:e QREAD) AiOd re~ed in .the Believer.~( fish) • So just ~o:is Vegan Chari~_erOwn's Red tfai!"Sd . ~irlfrien·q1~-~-Well She just ;~1ke~ a~~und the':~nd . mto the ~~~O!LIGHT to assist finishing the FIG,HT.... ~ • • Sh8 beil19 '~,nOwn_ as 201: w~o Now being the ~~~d in . • -~ • • • this SHOVV~~i~ -Beihg Tr'ui{8ea'Utiflll meaning .J' . : ;· ·· ~-• Spiri!uall~ pu_fiful ... A Ros·~ AriSen to bust tht,chains ~- . ou_h~s ~nson.... • I ·.. . . . •.. t~.· _· : . -~ ~ . -~·•s ~~ I~~i!y.l'~~I~ry~M~~;~lene t~~Jruest 91~crple • __ • ~ _ . unto _thn.e,~IVIRQ L_or~ ... -C~l~n,ffQr~_AII t9 get:~ ~oa:-d \i:.. ; as thE:~-tO·ply Authority thati_Lays down· tt,e '~~-.<:., • • • SW9Rl?1~ . .for the Greates~!Racist assault,Stdl .~e . . towar;_~sJl)eFEMIN,NE,sosayeth thee Que~n-~!:1Light • ~ GreaFG~d, Go~d Lo.rd \he'~P~ARbe 1 ~~\f.~ryielate~-N to the-_,S''("ORO~ ... the very S~~AR tha.t P1~rce·d~H1~ Side . LIv;n .. • .. -~1FThat.Whomever-.. ssesses tt,e '.'~:P~~R. O.F I • \ • • y , .... • • ( ~ • • • _. • • • :-'fl DESTI-NYi/hol:ds the _FATE l·the WORLD in. th:Efir·· • ·. . • -\ hands",fj,'is~ refers tO· our. 1igraqt Mexican lab.or_who by STRl~I~~ the System t 'laying d~wn 1be'' Sabre'' / See~/Pete~ Tsch8rn~ fitG_ yout~b8" •. / . / Har~ Bridges use<:) t -•· ~amme~ ·ot '1HOA tO Ceas~ / ; that '.porpora_te store f-~Nar ... s.eaport General Strike f .'. bein._,_40 nites· 4Q Day· Jl .. ritma't-fend.rix_-~urpl~ ~a~e ; -' . . -,~ . . I : l . .... j .... • • • ...... --__ J r --· · •• ,.. . ....... --: -... dL ______ .:___ .... • ......... • . ' · · ...::____ .. --.. . . t l [ ] . ., f ( I 3 !l I Zoe Rosenberg RESCUES Distressed Female Poultry FACTS for JURORS_ and Supporters against Torture & Violence FACT :_ Sonoma County Courts have ACTIVELY Protected Organized Child CIA Programs Which always include sexual abuse of children •••• one example of many when they released Dr Maurice Wolin in 2008 after the 2006 DATELINE Predator Sting where 29 men showed up to have sex w a 13 yr old girl. Wolin's buddy Jeffrey Epstein CIA FINDERS Ops ~ontinues as all BAY AREA ESCORT SERVICES (thousands of ~omen & girls & boys) are run under Epstein's CIA FINDERS to this very moment. LAW ENFORCEMENT is constrained as noted by Detective James Rothsteins "HUMAN COMPROMISE" Investigations & Legislation·. The Co.urts & Judges are complicit & paid large sums to maintain this.abuse ONGOING~ .. -. So you think they care about innocent abused animals ? The Patriarchy of Insanity ruling our Religious, Politikal, Educational and Court Systems continues. Of all the animals abused then slaughterhouse murdered 90% are female ..... this insanity be the greatest CORE of All Ongoing WAR. I am Peter Alexander Tscherneff, both myself & former FBI LA Chief Ted Gunderson provided the Judge & DA in Wolin case sufficient evidence to put this murderous Genocidal Vaccine Blood Impact Board member of Chiron Pharma in Emeryville that has 16 patent_s on COVID 3 years be~or.e any of you ever d f C ·d which is a Military Slow k1ll 1noculant FACT ..... hear O OVI I RECEIVED SEP 2 3 2025 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF SONOMA I, Peter, attend ed Sha"out at B'nai Jewish Temple and responded to the Posed query "Can we eat meat on Shavout"? After several answers I stated that the New TeS t ament (Acts lO:lo) conceals what the Old testament reveals (Genesis 1=29 ) and furthermore is supported by perhaps the currently rnost well known Rebbi on this world Rebbi Gabriel Cousens of Petaluma currently residing in Israel who as an ESSENE (as was Jesu_s & Disciples) lives as a VEGAN according to the INSTRUCTION & Clarification of Christ both now & then when he stated "Anyone w flesh or blood on their mouth CANNOT comprehend the Kingdom of Heaven nor have they the AUTHORITY to teach such" .... The 4 Rabbis and 70 congregants turned COLD Shoulder towards Me as I was repeatedly ir.as_ulted and tol~ _to F##K Off by one of their senior women. The blind are so sure of themselves here in the Land of Promise w Luther Burbank and the PEANUTS GANG portrayed by Charles Schulz as VEGANS all 55 years. It should be noted that the Commercial Venue Chickens are anything but Organic as the main component of their "Chinese Meatfiller" pellets contains Chinese cadavers w all their vaccines so too Chinese & American Euthanized Pets by the tens of thousands. And lastly let us consider the hypocrisy demonstrated by the Mormon owners of this disgusting murderous ongoing Holocaust against the feminine as they deny Spiritual Law and Indigenous Prophecy in favor of profiting by poisoning the Public while terrorizing life loving Sentient FEMALE birds ... Truly murderously UNACCEPTABLE ! 7 Item 8A1 Item 8.A.2. Item 8.A.3. 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, September 9, 2025 1. CITY COUNCIL/RPFA/SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE CDC JOINT REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Mayor Giudice called the joint regular meeting to order at 5:01 p.m., which was legally noticed on September 4, 2025. Council Present: Gerard Giudice, Mayor Emily Sanborn, Vice Mayor Susan H. Adams, Councilmember Jackie Elward, Councilmember Samantha Rodriguez, Councilmember Staff present: City Manager Piedra, Assistant City Attorney Murphy, Director of Finance Howze, Director of Community Services Bagley, Director of Public Safety Mattos, Senior Analyst Carey, Public Works General Services Operations Manager Bunte, Information Systems Operations Manager Cotter, and Assistant City Clerk Machado. 2. READING OF THE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT Recited by Mayor Giudice. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Mayor Giudice. 4. PRESENTATIONS A. Swearing In and Introduction of New Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers Jolena Powell, Andrew Sines, and Justin Zang. Director of Public Safety introduced Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers Jolena Powell, Andrew Sines, and Justin Zang. B. Zero Waste Sonoma Community Update Presented by Executive Director Leslie Lukacs. Executive Director Leslie Lukacs provided information about Zero Waste Sonoma’s mission and vision, outreach and education activities, programs, and their new facility. C. Mayor's Proclamation: Proclaiming October 11 through October 18, 2025 as Zero Waste Week in the City of Rohnert Park. Mayor Giudice read the proclamation and presented it to Zero Waste Executive Director Leslie Lukacs. 5. DEPARTMENT HEAD BRIEFINGS None. Item 8.B.1. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes for City Council September 9, 2025 RPFA/CDC Successor Agency Page 2 of 4 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS ACTION: Moved/seconded (Rodriguez/Elward) to extend the public comment period to allow all 53 speakers who submitted speaker cards to speak and allow each speaker 2.5 minutes. Motion carried by the following unanimous 5-0-0-0 voice vote: AYES: Adams, Elward, Rodriguez, Sanborn, and Giudice, NOES: None, ABSENT: None, ABSTAINS: None. Brad Baker, Brian Bauer, Agata Baker, Tina Montgomery, Sasha Kosek, Kenny Davis, Steve Price, Tom Adamski, Ted Aanestad, Lindsay Austin, Che Voit, Lizz Fabozzi, Jack Daigle, Andrea Tegson, Polo Greco, Angela Gilardi, Rayan Long, Ty Mooney, Wayne Britton, Stephanie Bostrom, Lisa Fones, Isabela Pucholie, Leslie Lukacs, Paramesh Adhikari, Michele Chaboudy, Adina Flores, Maria Pozzi, and Eric Reid spoke in support of Resynergi. Molly Rubardt, Sean Kallaway, Stephanie Lennox, Patrick Mundy, Omar Figueroa, Kimberly Schultz, Sharon Wultich, Blake Johnson, Midori Seppa, Kahleen Novak, Noa Ravini, Karen Hudson, Sylvia Binstela, and Shane Woodlief spoke against Resynergi. Denise Gentry spoke about SOMO Village. Terry Winter spoke about evaluating Resynergi based on data and science instead of fear and misinformation. Steve Keith spoke about public debate and incinerator and pyrolysis definitions. Anna Mitsunaga spoke about questions she has about Resynergi. Rey Magee thanked everyone for providing new insights into Resynergi and trust and transparency. Jack Mackenzie spoke about SOMO Village, one planet living, and Brad Baker. Mayor Giudice declared a recess at 7:02 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:13 p.m. Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: Mayor Giudice stated he leases premises in SOMO Village and therefore has a potential financial conflict of interest on Item 7.I. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR 7.A Acceptance of City Bills/Demands for Payment dated August 12, 2025 through August 25, 2025 Report from Finance Department 7.B Approval of Minutes: 1. City Council/RPFA/Successor Agency Joint Regular Meeting Minutes for August 26, 2025 2. City Council Special Meeting, August 26, 2025 7.C Receive Progress Report on the Status of the Emergency Public Safety Antenna and Radio System Replacement Project (CIP2412), as required by the Public Contract City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes for City Council September 9, 2025 RPFA/CDC Successor Agency Page 3 of 4 Code and by Minute Order, authorize the continuation of Resolution 2024-051 until the emergency action is completed 7.D Adopt Resolution 2025-067 Approving the Second Amendment to Antenna Site License Agreement with New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC for Telecommunications Facility at Northern Fire Station 7.E Adopt Resolution 2025-068 to Expand the Cash For Grass Program to Include Commercial, Industrial, and Homeowner’s Association (HOA) Customers Under the Existing Reimbursement Agreement with the Sonoma County Water Agency 7.F. Adopt Resolution 2025-069 Authorizing and Approving a Letter Agreement to the Memorandum of Agreement for the Rohnert Park Employees’ Association (RPEA) 7.G Adopt Resolution 2025-070 Authorizing and Approving a Letter Agreement to the Outline of Certain Conditions of Employment, Fringe Benefits, and Salary for the Confidential Unit and the Management Unit 7.H Adopt Resolution 2025-071 Approving Cooperative Funding Agreement Between the City of Rohnert Park and the Sonoma County Library for Building Systems Replacements Project at Rohnert Park Cotati Regional Library and Finding this Action Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15301 7.I Adopt Resolution 2025-072 Partially Accepting the SOMO Village Phase 1N-A Park and Landscape Improvements Public Improvement Agreement and Directing Related Actions (CEQA Status: Consistent with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village Planned Development Certified by City Council Resolution 2021-028 Adopted on March 9, 2021) 7.J Adopt By Minute Order, Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Consultant Services Agreement with MeterSYS, LLC in an amount not to exceed $195,913.00 to Provide Project Management Services for the First Phase of the Potable Water Metering System Improvements Project (CIP2019-18) 7.K By Minute Order, Authorize the Mayor to Execute and Deliver the City’s Response to the Grand Jury Report Titled “ Local Fees, Local Subsidies” ACTION: Moved/seconded (Rodriguez/Elward) to approve the consent calendar with the exception of Item 7.I. Motion carried by the following unanimous 5-0-0-0 voice vote: AYES: Adams, Elward, Rodriguez, Sanborn, and Giudice, NOES: None, ABSENT: None, ABSTAINS: None. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Adams/Rodriguez) to approve Item 7.I. Item 7.I. was adopted by the following 4-0-0-1 roll call vote: AYES: Adams, Elward, Rodriguez, and Sanborn, NOES: None, ABSENT: None, ABSTAINS: Giudice. 8. REGULAR ITEMS A. Receive an Informational Report and By Minute Oder, Authorize the Mayor to Execute and Deliver the City’s Response to Civil Grand Jury Report, “Animal Services in Sonoma County: Separate and Not Equal – The Costs and Consequences of City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes for City Council September 9, 2025 RPFA/CDC Successor Agency Page 4 of 4 Decentralization.” Director of Community Services Cindy Bagley presented this item. Recommended Action(s): Receive an informational report and by Minute Order, authorize the Mayor to execute and deliver the City’s response to the Civil Grand Jury Report, “Animal Services in Sonoma County: Separate and Not Equal – The Costs and Consequences of Decentralization.” PUBLIC COMMENTS: Steve Keith spoke about this item. ACTION: By consensus (none opposed), Council authorized the Mayor to execute and deliver the City’s response to the Civil Grand Jury Report, “Animal Services in Sonoma County: Separate and Not Equal – The Costs and Consequences of Decentralization.” 9. COMMITTEE / LIAISON/ OTHER REPORTS A. City Standing Committees, Council Liaison Assignments, Outside Agency and Mayors & Councilmembers/City Selection Committee Appointments and Reports Under Government Code Section 53232.3(d): • Councilmember Elward reported on the Homeless Coalition Board (8/27) meeting. • Mayor Giudice reported on the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway & Transportation District Board of Directors (9/3) and Sonoma County Transportation Authority/Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority Board of Directors (9/8) meetings. • Councilmember Adams reported on the Noon Times Networking Luncheon (9/3). 10. COMMUNICATIONS Councilmember Rodriguez shared upcoming events and congratulated the Community Equity Foundation and Rohnert Park Warriors on successful festivals. Vice Mayor Sanborn shared upcoming recycling events and Sonoma State University art exhibit. Mayor Giudice congratulated Dr. Claudia Luke, Sonoma State University Environmental Chair, on her retirement. 11. ADDING AGENDA ITEMS TO A FUTURE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA None. 12. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Giudice adjourned the meeting at 8:02 p.m. _____________________________________ __________________________________ Elizabeth Machado, Assistant City Clerk Gerard Giudice, Mayor City of Rohnert Park City of Rohnert Park MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL Thursday, September 9, 2025 MEETING LOCATION: CITY HALL – CONFERENCE ROOM 2A 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 1. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Mayor Giudice called the special meeting to order at 4:06 p.m., which was legally noticed on September 4, 2025. Council Present: Gerard Giudice, Mayor Emily Sanborn, Vice Mayor Susan H. Adams, Councilmember Jackie Elward, Councilmember Samantha Rodriguez, Councilmember Staff present: City Manager Piedra, City Attorney Kenyon, Deputy City Attorney Murphy, and Assistant City Clerk Machado. 2. CLOSED SESSION A. Public Comments: None. B. Mayor Giudice made the closed session announcement pursuant to Government Code §54957.7 and Council recessed to Closed Session at 4:06 p.m. in CONFERENCE ROOM 2A to Consider Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4): One Case Assistant City Clerk Machado departed the meeting at 4:06 p.m. C. Mayor Giudice reconvened the open session in Council Chambers at 5:01 p.m. At 7:58 p.m. Deputy City Attorney Murphy stated there was no reportable action. 3. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Giudice adjourned the special meeting at 5:01 p.m. _____________________________________ __________________________________ Elizabeth Machado, Assistant City Clerk Gerard Giudice, Mayor City of Rohnert Park City of Rohnert Park Item 8.B.2. ITEM NO. 8.C. 1 Meeting Date: September 23, 2025 Department: Public Safety Submitted By: Tim Mattos, Director of Public Safety Agenda Title: Receive Progress Report on the Status of the Emergency Public Safety Antenna and Radio System Replacement Project (CIP2412), as required by the Public Contract Code and by Minute Order, authorize the continuation of Resolution 2024-051 until the emergency action is completed. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Receive Progress Report on the Status of the Emergency Public Safety Antenna and Radio System Replacement Project (CIP2412), as required by the Public Contract Code and 2. By Minute Order, authorize the continuation of Resolution 2024-051 until the emergency action is completed. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: On June 25, 2024, the Rohnert Park City Council adopted Resolution 2024-051 Declaring an Emergency Project Pursuant to Public Contract Code Sections 20168 and 22050, Amending the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-24 Capital Improvement Plan to Add the Public Safety Antenna and Radio System Replacement Project (CIP2412) with a project budget of $1,500,000.00, Approving a budget Amendment to Transfer $1,500,000.00 from Non-Departmental Operating Fund, Equipment Over $5,000 to the new CIP2412 Project, and award the Construction Contract to Dailey-Wells. The City Council is required to review the status of this emergency project at each regular meeting of the City Council and vote to authorize the continuation of Resolution 2024-051 until the emergency action is completed. Staff previously reported that electrical upgrades were needed at all City radio antenna sites. The City contracted with CM Taylor, Inc. to complete the electrical work and with Dailey Wells to reinforce the cell tower base at Magnolia Park due to a structural issue. Building permits for this work were secured, and the electrical upgrades at the Pump Station, Fire Station No. 2, and Magnolia Park are now complete. The structural modifications at Magnolia Park have also been successfully finished. Since the last report presented to the Council on September 9, 2023, Dailey and Wells and their subcontractor have installed 3 of the 5 new Dispatch consoles at Public Safety Main. In parallel, Dailey Wells has also aligned the microwave and installed the radio frequency equipment at Magnolia Park, Pump Station, and Fire Station No. 2 radio sites. 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 ITEM NO. 8.C. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it does not qualify as a “project” pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the City’s action would cause either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Public Safety Antenna and Radio System Replacement Project (CIP2412) involves replacement of existing equipment and is categorically exempt from the requirements CEQA pursuant CEQA Guidelines sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction without an increase in use), (14 Cal. Code Regis. §§ 15301, 15302). STRATEGIC PLAN AND COUNCIL PRIORITIES ALIGNMENT: Presenting this progress report is consistent with the City’s values of communication and integrity and the City’s strategic priority Goal C “Ensure the effective delivery of public services.” OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Receive Progress Report on the Status of the Emergency Public Safety Antenna and Radio System Replacement Project (CIP2412), as required by the Public Contract Code and by Minute Order, authorize the continuation of Resolution 2024-051 until the emergency action is completed. 2. No other options were considered as this action is required by law and by Council Resolution 2024-051. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the progress report. Department Head Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: N/A Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 09/16/2025 Attachments: 1. None. ITEM NO. 8.D. 1 Meeting Date: September 23, 2025 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Alicia Giudice, Director of Development Services Prepared By: Jenna Garcia, Housing Manager Agenda Title: Authorize the Mayor to Execute and Deliver the City’s Response to the Grand Jury Report titled “Who Can Afford to Live in Sonoma County: A Tale of Two Cities” RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Minute Order, authorize the Mayor to execute and deliver the City’s response to the Grand Jury report titled “Who Can Afford to Live in Sonoma County: A Tale of Two Cities.” BACKGROUND and ANALYSIS: On June 17, 2025, the Sonoma County Grand Jury released its report titled “Who Can Afford to Live in Sonoma County: A Tale of Two Cities.” The report contains both findings and recommendations directed at specified jurisdictions within Sonoma County. Those jurisdictions are required to formally respond to each finding by indicating agreement or disagreement. If a jurisdiction disagrees in whole or in part with a finding, an explanation must be provided. Responses to the recommendations must fall into one of four categories: already implemented; to be implemented in the future with a specified timeline; requiring further analysis with a follow- up report due within six months; or will not be implemented as the recommendation is deemed unreasonable or unwarranted. The City of Rohnert Park’s response for this report is due by October 8, 2025. The Grand Jury’s investigation resulted in six findings and two recommendations (Attachment 1). The report explores the challenges of developing affordable housing through a comparative case study of two cities, Healdsburg and Rohnert Park. The analysis centers on four key elements: Growth Management and Land Acquisition, the Entitlement Process, Financing Mechanisms, and Leadership and Community Involvement. The report highlights the policies, programs, and collaborative efforts undertaken by these cities, emphasizing both successful strategies and ongoing challenges in addressing regional housing affordability. City staff have reviewed the findings and recommend that the City Council agree with all six. Of the two recommendations, only one calls for a response from Rohnert Park. This recommendation has already been implemented, as detailed in the proposed response below. The full City response to the Grand Jury Report is included as Attachment 2. Recommendation 1: By January 30, 2026, Healdsburg and Rohnert Park will each create an ongoing community engagement plan, which includes multilingual community outreach and education, surveys, public workshops, and dedicated working groups. 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 ITEM NO. 8.D. 2 Response: This recommendation has been implemented and will continue to be carried out. The City of Rohnert Park’s certified 6th Cycle Housing Element integrates ongoing and robust community engagement within many of its policies and programs. City staff have successfully initiated multilingual outreach, community surveys, public events, and collaborations with community-based organizations to ensure broad and inclusive resident participation. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: This action is not a project under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5) because the providing a response to the Grand Jury report is an administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. No additional environmental analysis is necessary. STRATEGIC PLAN AND COUNCIL GOALS/PRIORITIES ALIGNMENT: None. The recommended action is required by law. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: None. The recommended action is required by law. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: None. Department Head Approval Date: 09/03/2025 Finance Director Approval Date: NA City Attorney Approval Date: 09/03/2025 City Manager Approval Date: 09/04/2025 Attachments: 1. Grand Jury Report “Who Can Afford to Live in Sonoma County: A Tale of Two Cities” 2. City Response to Grand Jury Report, “Who Can Afford to Live in Sonoma County: A Tale of Two Cities” READ AND CONSIDE ED BY Who Can Afford to Live in Sonoma County? A Tale of Two Cittes SI]MMARY Sonoma County, renowned for its picturesque landscapes and vibrant culture, is increasingly becoming a challenging place for many of its essential residents to call home. Service workers, agricultural laborers, teachers, and young families-the very backbone of the community-are finding it increasingly difficuh to afford housing in a region where the median sales price of a home reached a staggering $900 000 in April 2025. This price tag is simply out of reach for most homebuyers. The pressing question beconps: how can Sonoma County makehousingmore affordable for these vital populations? To address &is issue, it is crucial to define what we mean by "affordable housing." The U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development ([IUD) defines affordable housing as housing that costs no more than 3 0olo of a household's gross income, encompassing both rental options and homeownership. A report from the 2021-22 Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury,ritled " and FutureL", provided a thorough examination ofthe affordable housing landscape in the county. The report revealed a significant shortfall in affordable housing, a situation exacerbated by rising construction costs, inticate financing challenges, and a scarcity of available land. Unfortr:nately, the situation has not improved over the past two years. The California Departrnent of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has mandated that Sonoma Cowrty constuct 14.562 neu houlinllunits belween 2Q23 and 203 ! I throu gh the Regional Housing Needs Allocation GHNA) process. While this figure may seem substantial, organizations like the non-profit Generation Ilousinq argue that it falls short of meeting the County's futcre housing needs. The importance of foste ring a diverse mix of housing options cannot be overstated. A stable community benefits everyone. It is essential for families and workers to be able to afford to stay in the area. Accordingto the October2024 report Star.of Horsinsin I from Generation Housing 3 1.4% of Sonoma County's worldorce commutes from outside the region, a tend that strains the local economy, exacerbates traffic congestion, increases the carbon footpring and adversely affects the health and educational outcomes of those workers and their families. This report aims to shed light on the complexities of developing affordable housing and to showcase the strategies employed by two particular cities to promote such development. It discusses the contrasting approachesoftwo communities: Healdsburg, an affluent town celebrated for its tourism, historic plaza, and wine estates, and Rohnert Park, a more modest community known for is family-friendly afinosphere, Sonoma State Univenity, and the Graton Rancheria. Both cities have received the hohousing Designation from the State of Califomia and are on track to meet their expanded RHNA goals, offering a glimpse of hope in the ongoing struggle for affordable housing in Sonoma County. This analysis examines the multifaceted strategies employed by these two municipalities to foster the development of affordable housing. It focuses on four critical elements: Growth Management and Land Acquisition, Entitlement Process, Financing Mechanisms, and Leadership and Community Involvemort lhtlps://sonoma.courts.cagov/syste(n,/lrles/affordable-housing-past-present-future.pdf 2 htQs://permitsonoma"org/housiDgelement 3hups ://generationhousingorg/resources/ Who Can Live h SGrma C-ounty?Page I of l7 snrGf '/f ?-; Through a comparative case study approach, this report sets out the policies, programs, and collaborative efforts undertaken by these cities, highlighting successful interventions and persistent challenges in addressing regional housing affordability crises. GLOSSARY o ABAG: Association of Bay Area Govemments o Affordable Housing: As defined by HUD, housing that costs no more that 30 percent ofa household's gross income o Deed Restricted: A mechanism to ensure that homes or rental units remain affordable for low- income residents for a set period, typically 55 years o Inclusionary Housing: A program that requires developers to build a percentage of new residential units which will be rented or sold at affordable prices based on income o Prevailing Wage: The minimum hourly rate of wages and benefits that contractors must pay workers on public works projects, set by the Califomia Department of Indusrial Relations o Pmhousirg Designation: Califomia Departrnent of Housing and Community Development acknowledges a jurisdiction that has gone beyond the state law to help accelerate housing production o RHNA: Regional Housing Needs Allocation - State-mandated process that determines the number of housing units each city and county need o Surplus Pmperty: Per the Surplus Property Act, land owned bya local public agency that is no longer necessary for the agency's use and that has been formally declared surplus by the agency. This land is then made available for affordable housing development under ceftain conditions BACKGROUND Sonoma County is grappling with a critical shortage of affordable housing, a situation worsened by rising construction costs, intricate financing challenges, and a scarcity of available land. ln 2022, the Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury released a report titled "Affordable Housing: Past, Present, and Future," which provided an in-depth analysis of the affordable housing landscape in Sonoma County. This report examined historical policies, cunent obstacles, and future stategies to tackle the region's housing crisis, including a discussion of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation EffNA) process. The California Sate Legislature mandates that all cities, towns, and counties proactively plan for the housingneeds of their residents. This planning is executed through a Housing Element and the RHNA process. The Califomia Departrnent of Housing and Community Development (HCD) determines the total number of new homes each region must constuct, and the affordability levels required to meet the diverse housing needs of its population. Once these figures are established, regional authorities, such as the Association of Bay Area Govemments (ABAG) for Sonoma County, allocate housing responsibilities among municipalities. Each municipality then updates its Housing Element to demonstrate its capacity to zone sufficient landforthe construction of the required housing units based on its RHNA allocation. Housing Element plans operate on an eight-year cycle. The current sixth cycle (2023-2031) has set a RHNA goal of 14,562 new housingunits for tle county, a significant increase from the fifth cycle's goal Who Can Live h S0lGna C-ountv?Page 2 of 17 of 8,444 units. These targets encompass a range of housing types, from very low-income to market-rate units. It is important to note that the RHNA goals do not fully capture the total housing need within each county; rather, they represent the number of units for which the county is accountable. Municipalities may notdirectly construct all these units butcan collaborate with and/or incentivize private or non-proffi developers to meet these goals. This report focuses on two distinct communities: Healdsburg an affluent area renowned for its wineries and tourism, and Rohnert Park, a family-oriented planned community. Both cities are on track to meet thet expanded RHNA goals for 2023-2031 and have achieved a Prohousing Designation. The 2019- 2020 Budget Act introduced a range of support, incentives, and accountability measures aimed at fulfilling California's housing objectives, including the establishment of the hohousing Designation Program. This program recognizes and supports jurisdictions that exceed state housing laws to expedite housing production Jurisdictions with a Prohousing Desigration may benefit from priority processing or additional fundingpoints when applying for various funding programs, including At-fordable Housinq and Slrstainable Communities (AHSC ).4 Furlhermore , this designation allows jurisdictions to apply for the Prohousinq Incentive Prolnarn (PlP):, which rewards local governments with extra funding to accelerate the production and preservation of affordable housing. Ilealdsburg Healdsburg has a long and rich history, beginning as the home of the Indigenous Pomo people. In the 19th century, the region came under Mexican control following a military campaign led by General Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo. In I 841, 50,000 acres were granted to Henry Delano Fitch, who introduced catde ranching to the area. Following Fitch's death, his widow sold portions of the land to the Anglo govemment. Harmon Heald, who had been homesteading in the area, purchased I 00 acres and formally incorporated the City of Healdsburg in 1867. Healdsburg quickly grew into a commercial hub, supported by agriculture, timber, and mineral extraction-industries made more accessible by the Northwest Pacific Railway line. Over time, the region's agricultural base expanded to include orchardsand vineyards. By the 1970s, Healdsburg began to establish itself as a premier wine-producing region, drawing estate wineries to Dry Creek and Alexander Valleys and ushering in a growing tourism industry. During the past 40 years, the City of Healdsburg has transformed from a small town serving the surrounding northem Sonoma County agriculture and other resource-based industries into a vibrant communitSr-center of the county's wine industry, as well as an attraction for destination-based tourism. Healdsburg growth has been influenced by the county's wine industry, and the city's central plaza where award-winnhg restaurants, destination-oriented retail, and wine tasting shops now dominate retail space. The plaza's pleasant surrounding residential neighborhoods, protected by planning policies and ballot- based gro*t}r restrictions, have all contributed to this transformation. Healdsburg's fiscal and economic policies have been highly successful-the expanded retail uses, restaurants and lodging have created a stable and growing tax base for the city which supports high levels of municipal services to its residents. Increasing home values have led to substantial reinvestment and improvement of the existing housing stock, new developrnent, including higher density housing and lodging, and revitalization of existing commercial buildings. 4 htF://nlrw.hcd. ca- gov/gratrrs -arld-funding/programs -active/affordable-hous ing-and-su stainab le-commuoities 5 hnps://w\*1{.hcd. ca.goy/gran ts -and-fundin g/program s-active/prohousing-incentive-program Who Can Live b Smorna County?Page 3 of 17 However, this success has created a housing market that has become unaffordable to long-term residents and families with young children. The city's teachers, agricultural, and hospitality workers are increasingly displaced by rising land prices driven by a supply-constrained market. With a continuing decrease in working families and full-time residents, a variety of demographic effects have set in, including an overall aging of the population, a reduction in school-age population and attendance in local public schools, and a decrease in the percentage of Hispanic households, which have, over the rEcent decades, become the foundation of the local workforce serving agriculture, construction, retail, and lodging industries and which still comprise over 30 percent of the City's population. Rohnert Park Rohnert Park, originally agricultural land tied to the Rohne( family and seed farming in the early 20th century, was developed as one of the first planned communities in the United States in the 1950s and officially incorporated in l962.The intent was to develop a family-oriented community with cohesive neighborhoods, whereno child would have to walk more than one-third of a mile to school. At the time, each neighborhood would have 200 to 250 homes around local schools and parks. At incorporation, Rohnert Park was 2.1 square miles with a population of 2,775. Growth exploded in the l970sand 80s, when two-thirds of the current housingunir were built. By 1999, the city occupied 6.9 square miles, nearly half of which was dedicated to residential use for its population of approximately 41,000. Since the year2000, the city has continuedto grow in size and add population. As of January l, 2020,the city had a populaion of 44,330 and land area of approximately 7.7 square miles. Rohnert Park is the third largest city in Sonoma County and has the highest population density in the county at over 6,000 residents per square mile. Housing Goals for llealdsburg and Rohnert Park Below are charts which describe the Regional Housing Needs Assessme t Goals for both communities, detailing the number of units by income category. Healdsbwg ln the fifth cycle Q014-2022),Heald$urg's RHNA goal was to build 157 housing units. The city built 342 units, exceeding its goal in all income categories. For the sixth cycle, Healdsburg's goal is 476 units. The city anticipates building 977 units, again exceeding goals in all income categories. Table I was provided to the Grand Jury by Healdsburg Housing staff. Table 1: HeaLdsbu Housin P ress 202331 RH See Appendix A for income range chaft Rohnert Park For the fifth cycle, Rohnert Park's RHNA goal was 899 new houses. It actually built I ,978, although the majority were above moderate income. Rohnert Park's sixth cycle RHNA goal is 1,580 units. Table 2, provided to the Grand Jury by Rohnert Park Housing staff, shows the city plans to build 2,834 units, again exceeding their RHNA goal. Metric Extremely Low lncome Very Low lncome Low lncome Moderate lncome Above Moderate lncome Totats 476RHNA Target 83 109 124 Totat, Credits 54 174 161 75 513 977 Page 4 of l7 107 49 Who Can Live ir Suroma County? Metric very Lou, lncome Low lncome Moderate lncome Above Moderate lncome Totat RHNA Target 399 230 265 686 1,580 Total Units (Credits + Sites)375 128 2,123 2,834 Tabte 2: Rohnert Park Housin Progress (2023-31 RHtIA) This report will discuss the unique aspects of each city and the strategies each employed to build community will and secure the essential land and financing to make it a reality. METHODOLOGY The 2024-2025 Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury conducted is investigation into affordable housing issues in the cities of Rohnert Park and Healdsburg. This inquiry was prompted by ongoing community concems regarding the adequacy, availability, and planning of affordable housing in compliance with state mandates, particularly those related to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). To understand the scopeand nuances of affordable housing efforts in these two cities, the Grand Jury undertook the following activities: o Interviews: The Grand Jury conducted confidential interviews with city officials and staff from the affordable housing depa(ments ofboth Rohne( Park and Healdsburg. Members ofthe respective city councils were also interviewed to gain insight into local housing policy priorities and political considerations. o Media Review: The Grand Jury reviewed reports and articles from local and regional mass media sources. o Ilousing Advocate Input: Conversations were held with unaffiliated housing advocates and nonprofit representatives working within Sonoma County. These advocates provided perspectiyes on systemic barriers, funding limitations, and the lived experiences of residents impacted by the lack of affordable housing. o Document and Data Analysis: The Grand Jury reviewed housing element updates submitted by each city, planning commission meetingrecords, and RHNA allocation data as provided by the Califomia Departnent of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Additional online sources were used to verifo state laws and regulatory frameworks goveming local housing obligations, per the Association of Bay Area Govemments (ABAG). DISCUSSION The following discussion focuses on the key components each city is utitizing to reach its goals. The strategies of the cities differ but ultimately result in exceeding their housing targets. The salient ingredients of each city's success are the depth of understanding of necessary resources and development of community will. The catalyst in both cases is a knowledgeable, dedicated staff. The following sections ofthe discussion will focus on the individual facets of each city's comprehensive strategy to accomplish their goals. Examples from each city are shown. Who Can Live h Scnqna Cou y?Page 5 of l7 208 1. Introduction: Key Components for Affordable Housing Development The creation and preservation ofaffordable housing in urban and suburban environments necessitate a multi-pronged approach addressing systemic barriers and leveraging local assets. This section investigates how two Sonoma County cities, Healdsburg and Rohnert Park, have addressed four pivotal elements influencing affordable housing provision: l Growth Management and Land Acquisition 2. Entitlement hocess 3. Financing 4. Leadership and Community Involvement l.l Growth Management and Land Acquisition Strategies Effective urban planning requires cities to balance growth pressrres with the imperative to acquire land suitable for affordable housing development in a cost-efficient manner. Both Healdsburg and Rohnert Park have instituted growth management saategies to regulate residential expansion. Growlh Management Ordinances and General Plans Healdsbure's Measure M !, enacted in 2000, established limits on residential building permits within the City's urban growth boundry. Subsequent modifications via Veasure P (2018 )l and Measure H (202 0 )! aimed to increase affordable housing opportunities by adjusting these permit allocations. Conversely, Rohnert Park utilizes its General Plan, specific plan areag and zoning ordinances as primary instrumens for growth managemenq thereby facilitating orderly development aligned with regional housing needs assessments. The City monitors demographic trendg employment data, and commute pattems to inform development strategies and address workforce housing requirements. Headsb urg : Adoptive Growth Manageme nt Healdsburs's 2000 Growth Manasement Ordinance (GMO)9 resticted the City to an average issuance of 30 residential building permits annually (maximum 90 per triennium), a measure intended to preserve the City's perceived small-town character. In response to escalating housing affordability concems, Measure P (2018) authorized an additional average of 50 annual permits for multi-family rental units, restricted to households eaming up lo ,60% of the Area Median Income (AMI). Measure H (2020) subsequently expanded this allowance to include for-sale units. An attempt in 2024 to further modify the GMO, Measure O, proposed allowing multi-family housing along desigrated Healdsburg Avenue corridors to stimulate middle-income and workforce housing. This measure was not adopted by voters. Data from the Grand Jury's interviews suggests that yoter concerns centered on potential dilution of downtown character and insufficient safeguards for commrnity interess within the proposed legislation. Nevertheless, the legislative intent underlying Measure O remains a significant consideration for Healdsburg s housing leadersh ip. Rohnerl Parh: Urban Growlh Boundaries and Exemptions Rohnert Park adopted its Urban Growth Bormdaries Act Measure N lo in 2000 to demarcate areas tor development and mitigate urban sprawl. The City's Grouth Manaeement Ordinance (*667)!1, 6https://healdsburggov/Agerdac€rte/ViewFileltem/3 I 47?f etF2403 8 ?https://ballotpedia.org/Healdsburg_Califomi4_Measure_P,_Additiona.l_HousinLPermils-for Retrtal-Units-(November-201 8) 8 htFs://ballotpediaorg/Healdsburg_Califomi4-Measure H,-ltrcome-ResEicted_HousinLfor_Rent_or_Sale_Ordhatrce_(March_2020) t hq:/Avww.ci.hea.ldsburgcaus/Documentcenter/Viewr66/Crowrh-ManagEment-Ordhance-Policies-and-Procedures-PDF f0 https://$.rrrf,.trorthb ay biz.cann\OS/O2l2gtpreserving-rohaert-parks-potentia, rr htgs://rpcity.granicus.com./Meraviewer.php?view_id=4&clip_id:358&E€ta id:333 l8 Page 6 of l7Who Can Live h Soncrna Cr;nty? established in 2001 , aimed to align new housing development with infrastructure and public service capacities, stipulating a lo% annual population growth cap (approximately 225 new housing units per annum). Notably, this ordinance exempts specihc housing categories, including affordable units for low- and very low-income households, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), model homes, mobile home park conversions, residential infill projects, and conversions of non-residential properties to residential use. Such legislative provisions indicate a pro-housing orientation within the electorate. 1.2 Land Acquisition Mechanisms Municipalities employ diverse strategies for acquiring land suitable for affordable housing. These include the disposition of surplus lands, partnerships with community land tmsts, and the formation of public-private partnerships. Along with direct land acquisition, cities develop incentive programs designed to encourage developers to integrate affordable units into larger, mixed-use projects. Within Sonoma County, prevalent strategies include the use of surplus land, land banking and navigating the land entitlement process. Sarp lus Land atifizatio n Cities may sell or lease publicly owned land for affordable housing development, subject to compliance with Califomia's Surplus Land Act (SLA )-. The SLA was updated in August2024 to further incentivize affordable housing through streamlined disposition processes. Key SLA provisions mandate: o Formal declaration ofland as surplus by local agencies at regular public meetings. o Submission of annual surplus property inventory reports to HCD. e Maintenance by HCD ofa list ofinterested affordable housing developers known as "sponsors". If land is not sold or leased to a sponsor, the public entity mu$ record an Affordable Housing Covenant mandating at least I 5% affordable units in any future project comprising l0 or more units. Healdsburs Example: In 2 003 , Healdsburg's former Redevelopment Agency acquired a property at I 5 5 Dry Creek Road for $ I .8 million that was designated for low to moderate-income housing. Following the surplus land process and securing an exemption, the city transferred the property to Burbank Housinq.:, a non-profit housing development corporation, for the nominal sum of $1. An additional $1.7 million in grants has been secured for construction, with Burbank Housing actively pursuing $9.7 million in farmworker housing grants and tax credits. Rohnert Park Example: Over a decade ago, Rohnert Park purchased a 30-acre parcel for $12.5 million for a proposed downtown mixed-use developrnem. The city, in collaboration with HCD, designated this parcel as surplus, formulated a detailed development plan incorporating 150,000 sq. ft. of retail space and 400 residential units (25% designated affordable). It subsequently selected a developer via a competitive bidding process. Itnd Banking Land banking involves the acquisition and holding of land by public or private entities for future developmeng often prioritized for affordable housing or community revitalization. This shtery may encompass undeveloped, vacant, or blighted properties. Healdsburs Example: The ci ty is currently exploring the establishment of a Housing Trust Fund to support land banking for future affordable housing initiatives. This fund may evolve into a Housing l2 htp:/tu'wT v. hcd.ca gov/ptatrdng-ed-community -development/public-lods -affordab le-hous ing-developmeat l3 httss://burbankhou sing org/ Who Can Live h Sorma County?Page 7 of 17 ra hnp:/A,rr,r,r,v. congres s.gov/crs-product/RS2 2 3 t9#:-:texr-TheTrolow- incomeTrohousingoz20t,,<o/o20credigo20(LlHTC)%20Itrogatno/A0is,fromo/o2050yo25o/Ahoo/o2025o/45; Who C-an Live h Sarcrna C.ounty?Page 8 of l7 Land Trust, with the primary objective of securing land for long-term affordability, operating independently but in alignment with city housing goals. Rohnert Park Examole: The aforementioned acquisition of the 30-acre downtown parcel for $ 12.5 million, using city funds, also exemplifies land banking for future mixed-use development. 2. The Entitlement Process A sigrrificant portion of Sonoma County's undeveloped land requires regulatory entitlements prior to residential or other forms ofdevelopment. This process entails adherenc€ to zoning regulations, land use policies, environmental review (Califomia Environmental Quality Act), and public inpul culminating in the issuance of necessary permis and approvals. Both Healdsburg and Rohnert Park have implemented mea$rresto streamline their entitlement processes to meet sixth Cycle Housing Element objectives. These include offering early developer feedback and utilizing Development Agreements @As) for large-scale projects. DAs are negotiated contracts specifyingterms for land use, public benefits, project timelines, and vesting rights, providing developers with regulatory certainty. Healdsburg Examole: The city provides no-cost pre-application meetings, offers fast-track processing for ADUs and affordable housing projects, and has established formal written pre-application procedures. Furthermore, Heald$urg prepares Program Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) to reduce environmental review costs andtimelines for projects covered under these programmatic assessments. The city actively applies state housing laws. Rohnert Park Examole: The city offers optional pre-4plication meetings with multidisciplinary staff to provide early project feedback. Upon formal application submission, projects undergo a structured review process, typically involving three-week cycles for staff feedback. Larger multifamily projects generally necessitate Site Plan and Architectural Review, a process taking approximately 90 days from application completeness to approval. While most projects receive administrative approval, Planning Commission review may be required under specific circumstances. 3. Financing Affordable Housing Financing constitutes a critical, albeit complex, component of new housing development. A comprehensive delineation ofthe intricate and innovative financing strategies that influence the scope and viability of affordable housingprojects is beyond the purview ofthis report. This section, therefore, offers only a foundational overview. Affordable housing finance typically necessitates a confluence of public funding, private investment, and strategic partnerships. The Low-[ncome Housins Tax Credit (LIHTC).il program serves as the principal federal instrument supporting affordable rental housing, incentivizing developers through Federal tax credits. Municipalities augrnent these efforts by offering local incentives such as land donations, impact fee waivers. and density bonuses. "lnclusionary housing" has emerged as a significant mechanism for affordable housing production in Sonoma County. As housing valuations increase, cities incentivize developers and landowners by allowing higher-value property development contingent upon the inclusion of affordable units. A typical inclusionary housing program might mandae that 10-3002 of new residential units be sold or rented to Iower-income households. Califomia state policy empowers municipalities to implement such local inclusionary policies. Most municipalities require deed restrictions for a minimum of 45 years for for-sale projects and 55 years for rental projects on units approved under inclusionary housing programs that receive ciry financial assistance or state housing density bonuses. These restrictions ensure long-term affordability for targeted income goups and dictate terms conceming sale, rent controls, and property aesthetics. Cities also employ other financing tools, including fee waivers, density bonuses, public-private partnerships, and state funding allocations. 3.1 City-SpecificFinancingExamples Healdsbwg: A Muhi-Tiered Approach Healdsburg has advanced its affordable housing initiatives through a combination of inclusionary housing mandates, state funding, and targeted special taxes. Inclusionary llousing: Healdsburg requies 20%o of residential units to be affordable. Through negotiated Developmort Agreements @A), the city has secured affordable housing units in significant developments such as the Mill Disrict, North Village, Montage, and Hotel Trio. A notable provision in Healdsburg's DAs requires developers to obtain "certificates ofoccupancy" for affordable housing unis prior to constructing market-rate units. Project & Unit Allocation: o Mill Disrict: 42 units (The Randalt), 30 Middle Income Units o Hotel Trio: 37 Unit Citrine Apartnents (Low-to-Moderate Income) o North Village: 53 Very Low-Low Income, 27 Middle Income . Montage: 110 Affordable Units State Funding: In August 2024, Healdsburg secured $21 .l million in state funding via the Affordable Housingand Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program for Phase I of the Saggio Hills development This phase, targeting households eaming between 16-60% of area median income (AMI), will deliver 48 affordable rental units within a larger 1 l8-unit project. The funds will support the constuction of these 48 units, a 3,00o-square-foot commrmity building and essential infrastructure and transportation improvements with broader community benefits. Notably, Saggio Hills achieved the highest score in the Rural Innovation Pro ect Area zuPA rsreflecting strong alignment with state objectives for greenhouse gas emission reduction. The development is projected to reduce 3,880 metric tons of COu equivalent over its lifespan. Funding Allocation: . $15.3 million: Housing development (48 affordable rental units, associated infrastructure). o $5.2 million: Public works and transportation (Healdsburg Shuttle expansion with ZEV multi- use trails, sidewalk enhancements, new bus shelters, CalVans vanpools). o $605,750: Community programs (transit passes, legal aid, workforce developmen! improved intemet access). I5 hnps://sgc.ca.gov/grant-programVahsc/docs/20250325-AHSC R9 _Program_Overview_PDF_ADA.pdf Who Can LiYe h Scncma County?Page 9 of 17 Special Taxes: The Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), levied on lodging establishments, was increased by Healdsburg voters via Measure Sll in 2016. This authorized a 2% increase, raisingthe maximum rate from l2o/o to l4%, generating approximately $ 1.5 million annually, with all additional revenue restricted to supporting affordable housing services and programs. Rohnen Park: Diverse Financial Instrumenls Rohnert Park has employed inclusionary housing, state funding, density bonuses, and essential housing bond financing to bolster its affordable housing efforts. Inclusionary llousing: Rohnert Park is undergoing significant residential growth. During the sixth housing cycle, the city anticipates the construction of 2,834 new housing units, of which 587 are projected for very low- and low-income households, and 128 for modaate-income households. Rohnert Park's inclusionary housing policies require that all new developmots of 50 unie or more include I 5olo affordable housingunits. Generally, the city requires market-rate develop€rs to donate land to non-profit housing developers, who then secure financing (e.g., LIHTCs) for affordable unit conskuction. These completed projects are typically owned and managed by the non-profit entities. Development agreements may stipulate various arrangements for land dedication and financing sometimes requiring certificates of occrpancy for affordable units before market-rate construction can proceed. For instance, in the Willow Glen subdivision, the developer partnered with Burbank Housing for the construction of 38 low-income rental units, sharing construction and financing responsibilities, and also built affordable duet units sold via the Sonoma [,and Trust. State Funding: In August 2024, Rohnert Park secured $670,000 through the state's Prohousing Incentive Program (PIP). These funds are designated for predevelopment activities for affordable housing units in downtown Rohnert Park. Density Bonus: Density bonus programs, mandated by Califomia law, incentivize developers to include affordable units by permitting increased project density beyond standard zoning regulations. While Rohnert Park currently has a density bonus program, the city is conducting a feasibility study for a Supplemental Density Bonus Program. This study will examine provisions such as deeper affordability levels, a higher proportion of affordable units, units for indMduals exiting homelessness, and universal design standards. The study is slated for completion by luly 2026, with recommendations to be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council by year-end 2026, potentially leading to municipal code adoption within six months thereafter. Essential Housing Bond Financing: Rohnert Park is a member of the Califomia Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA), a Joint Powers Authority (JPA). CSCDA administers the Workforce Housing Program, issuing tax-exempt govemmental purpose bonds to acquire existing market-rate apartrnent buildings and convert them to rent-restricted housing for lower- and moderate- income households. The city has authorizedthe JPA to issue approximately $191,264,100 in bonds. This entails foregoing an estimated $337,346 in annual property tax revenue and committing staff resources (200 hours for program establishment and 200 hours per acquisition project). This initiative is projected to deliver at least222 affordable housing unis (99 veryJow-income, 57 low-income, 66 moderate- income). The city is also committed to a 2027 evaluation of housing production, with provisions for designating additional sites if RHNA obligations are not met. l6 https://ba.[oQedia-org/Healdsburg_C.a.lifomia.-Horel-Tax-AdjusElen! Measure S-(November_2016) Who Can Live h Smoma Co.rnty?Page 10 of l7 4. Leadership and Community Involvement Leadership Dynamics: For the purposes of this analysis, leadership encompasses the city councils and dedicated housing staff. A salient finding is the recognition by leadership in both municipalities that sustainable community development is untenable if it displaces the working-class populations- including farmworkers, caregivers, teachers, and service workers-who form the socio-economic bedrock of the region. City councils in both Healdsburg and Rohnert Park have demonstrated a consistent alignment on the concept of affordable housing as a core. nonpartisan community priority. thus creating a political foundation conducive to pursuing ambitious initiatives. This commitment is manifested through strategic planning, funding allocations, and policy reforms, supported by knowledgeable and empowered staff. The collaboration between housing staffand city councils is instrumental to the success ofthe affordable housing effort. Their efforts are focused on strategic planning, developing regulatory frameworks, r€source allocation, and community engagement. Healdsb urg : Slr uctured Collab o ralio n Recently, the Healdsburg City Council approved the establishment ofa forrnal Housing Departrnent and authorized a new position dedicated to implementing ie housing saates/. Key collaborative activities include: Strategic Planning: Housin g staffand the City Council collaboratively develop affordable housing targets, considering market conditions, infrastructure capacity, community service needs, and resource availability. Policv Develooment and lmplementation: The City Council enacts ordinances such as inclusionary zoning policies, while housing staff ensure effective implementation and monitor ongoing compliance. Resource Allocation: The City Council actively engages in generating fmancial resources and supports viable affordable housing in itiatives. alignment, referring meritorious projects to the City Council for review, amendmenq or approval ensuring conformity with community priorities. lncentive hosrams: Housing staffdesign, implement, and manage incentive programs (e.g., reduced fees, infrastructure support), which, upon Council approval, encourage development. Regular Reporting and Assessment: Hous ing staffmonitor projects and provide ongoing updates to the City Council on successes and failures, ensuring policies remain current. Public-Private PartnershiDs:Housing staffengage with developers and non-profit organizations to leverage resources and expertise, with City Council support in negotiating agreements aligned with affordable housing objectives. Rohnert Park: Integruted Polic!-Making Rohnert Park's collaborative approach involves: o Collaborative Policy-Makins: The City Council and housing staffjointly create and refine policies, such as density bonuses and streamlined approval processes, to facilitate affordable housing development, and continually review policies to reflect evolving needs. Proiect Evaluation and A pproval: Hous ing staffevaluate housing proposals for viability and goal Who Can Live ir Sonona County?PagelloflT Public Engagement Initiatives: Both entities prioritize public involvement through transparent communication and public hearings, fostering a collaborative environment. This close parurership between municipal staff and elected ofhcials is essential for crafting and implementing effective, integrated, and well-supported affordable housing strategies. 5. Community Involvement and the "Communit5r Will" While legally mandated communiry review is a component of every proposed housing project, the successful realization of affordable housing objectives usually hinges on a proactive "community will." This implies a recognized and enthtsiastically embraced need for housing by community stakeholders, driven by motivations ranging from expanding the tax base to providing housing for essential service workers. The Spanish term "chispa," or "spark," aptly describes a driving force observed in both Healdsburg and Rohnert Park, crucial for fostering a proactivg "yes in my backyard" (YIMBY) stance. Healdsbttrg: Catalyzing Engagement Healdsburg's increasing affluence has exacerbated the problem of housing affordability for long-term residents, families, and service industy workers, a situation compounded by state-mandated housing goals. The "spark" in Healdsburg was significantly fanned by the Housing Element Working Group (HEWG), a diverse nine-person body including representatives from the business community, individuals with lived experience of homelessnes, non-profits, renters, the planning commission, faith- based organizations, and the community at large. The [{EWG, in conjunction with housing staff, developed the roadmap for the 6th cycle Housing Element. Through their analysis and community surveys, the Growth Management Ordinance (GMO) was identified as the primary govemmental constaint on development, while high construction costs (land, materials, labor) were noted as the principal non-govemmental constraints. The following from Healdsburg's "Housing Element" and from the Grand Jury's interviews illustrate the city's outreach, philosophy, and culture: o A community outreach interview captured the sentiment: "Aqui en Healdsburg la renta es muy caro... Tres o m6s personas tienen que vivirjuntos para cubrir la renta." @nglish: "Here in Healdsburg, the rent is very expensive... Three or more people need to live together to cover the rent. ") . A comment by an HEWG member highlighted the city's partnership with Reach for Home, a non-profrt addressing homelessness, emphasizing a personalized approach: "In Healdsburg, they know those experiencing homelessness by name, not numbers..." o Another IIEWG committee member underscored the necessity of aust between the community, local legislature, and developers, alongside a clear, transparent plan for housing development. This holistic, community-centric approach has yielded significant outcomes: o Increasing deed-restricted affordable housing to over l0oZ oftotal housing stock in eight years. o Passage of Measure S, allocating 2oZ ofTOT revenue (approx. $1.5M annually) to affordable housing. . Passage of Measures P and H, allowing middle-income deed-restricted housing outside GMO constraints, allowing middle-income deed-restricted housing outside GMO constraints. o Negotiating workforce housing inclusion in hotel developments. Who C.an Live ir Sqrma County?Page l2 of l7 . Preserving 39 units of older, lower rent housing (often referred to as naturally occurring) affordable housing and establishing I 0 units for Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH), a term used to combine long-term affordable housing with supportiye services to help individuals, particularly those experiencing chronic homelessness, achieve housing stability. o Planning 168 affordable units on two city-owned sites. r Developing a Navigation Center providing homes for I I formerly homeless families/individuals. r Securing over $7 million in Proiect Homeker.Ll funding for an interim housing program. o Establishing a formal Housing Departsnent and new staffpositions. Healdsburg's coordinared efforts have exceeded fifth Cycle Housing Element goals and established a foundation for the sixth Cycle, driven by this "spark" of community will. Rohnert Park: hoacttve Odreach and Planning Rohnert Park has emerged as a rcgional leader, surpassing its fifth Cycle Housing Element goal (1,794 units) and positioning itself to exceed the sixth cycle requirement (1,580 units, 2023-2031). This achievement reflects a strong commurity commitnent. Rohnert Park's demographic-younger and less affluent than the county average-faces significant rental cost burdens. In response, City leadership, including a supportive mayor and city council, empowered housing saff to conduct broad public engagement and community-based planning. Key outreach elements included: o A Housin Element .!! webpage attracting over 1,200 email subscribers. o A bilingual housing needs survey (Dec 2021) with 1,344 responses. o Five public workshops engagingover30 stakeholders, includingthe Federated Indians ofGraton Rancheria- . Citywide newsletter distribution and targeted social media campaigns. o Door-to-door outeach in Spanish-speaking communities, distributing over 1,000 door hangers with multilingual QR-coded survey access. . Repeated outreach in 2023 for feedback on the draft Housing Element. o A community-wide survey offering incentives generated over 1 ,500 comments, indicating strong public interest in addressing affordability, homelessness, and infrastructure related to new housing. This consisten! multilingual, and inclusive approach fostered an informed and supportive resident base, reflecting a proactive "community will" instrumental in advancing Rohnert Park's affordable housing objectives. CONCLUSION The experiences of Healdsburg and Rohnert Park demonstrate that addressing affordable housing challenges requies a synergistic combination of adaptive growth management, strategic land acquisition, steamlined entitlement processes, diverse financing mechanisms, and robust leadership, I 7 \\I*wt /.hcd.cagov\gratrts-ed-fu trditrglhomekey rE htF:/ ^,ww.rpcity.org/city_hslydepduaenrs/development_servic.es/housing/housingelement_2123-2O3lx Who Can Live h Sonma County?Page l3 of l7 along with deep community involvenrent. While specific instrumants and approaches may vary based on local contexts, the underlfng commitrnent to proactive planning and collaborative engagement appears to be a crucial determinant of success in expanding affordable housing opportunities. The Grand Jury concluded that the key ingredient of this collaborative engagement is community will, which exists within Healdsburg and Rohnert Park and should be fostered throughout the county. The Grand Jury believes that cities, unincorporatod municipalities and the County can leam from each other by meeting periodically, sharing experiences and identifying best practices. Rohnert Park and Healdsburg housing staff, community members and city leadership generously shared their successes and challenges with the Civil Cnand Jury, and we strongly encourage the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, housing staff, city mayors, city council members, grassroots representatives, and housing advocates throughout Sonoma County to meet with and leam from each other. FIl\DINGS The Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury determined that: Fl. Adaptive growth management is crucial but faces limits: Both Healdsburg (Measures P & H) and Rohnert Park (exemptions for affordable housing within its GMO) have actively adapted their growth management ordinances to facilitate affordable housing. However, community concems regarding local character and a perceived lack of safeguards can limit further expansions, as evidenced by the failure of Healdsburg's Measure O. F2. Strategic use of public land is a key lever: Both municipalities used land banking (e.g., Healdsburg's 155 Dry Creek Road, Rohnert Park's 30-acre downtown parcel) and then went through the surplus property process to make sites available for affordable housing development. F3. A diverse portfolio of financing mechanisms is employed: Cities do not rely on a single funding source. Healdsburg utilizes inclusionary housing, significant state grants (e.9., $21.1 million AHSC for Saggio Hills), and dedicated local revenue from special taxes (Measure S TOQ. Rohnert Park also uses inclusionary housin& state pro-housing incentives, density bonuses, and innovative bond financing through the CSCDA Workforce Housing hogram. F4. Streamlined entitlement processes expedite development: Both Healdsburg (no-cost pre- application meetings, fast-tracking) and Rohnert Park (optional pre-application meetings, structured review cycles) have implemented measures to streamline their entitlement processes, offering early feedback and utilizing Development Agreements (DAs) to provide certainty for developers of affordable housing. F5. Aligned political leadership and empowered staff are foundational: The success in both cities is partly attibuted to city councils that view affordable housing as a nonpartisan, moral imperative, coupled with knowledgeable and empowered housing staff who can effectively implement strategic plans, policy reforms, and resource allocation. Healdsburg even established a dedicated Housing Departsnent. F6. Proactive and inclusive community engagement cultivates "community will": Both cities demonstrated that extensive, tailored community involvement-such as Healdsburg's diverse HousingElement Working Group (HEWG) and Rohnert Park's broad, multilingual outreach and surveys-is essential for building public understanding and the "community will" (or "chispa") needed to support and overcome opposition to affordable housing projects. Who Can Live h Somra County?Page 14 of l7 RECOMMENDATIONS The Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury recommends that: Rl. By January 30, 2026, Healdsburg and Rohnert Park will each create an ongoing community engagement plan, which includes multilingual community outreach and education, surveys, public workshops, and dedicated working groups. R2. By January 30,2026, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors @OS) and each of the nine city councils will agree to create an ongoing Affordable Housing Collaboraive, which includes jurisdiction leaders, community members, grass roots organizations and housing advocates, who will share both positive and negative experiences and identify "best practices." REQUIRED RESPONSES Pursuant to Penal Code $$ 933 and 933.05, the Grand Jury requires responses as follows: o Fl -6. City Councils ofHealdsburg and Rohnert Park. . Rl. Crty Councils of Healdsburg and Rohnert Park. o R2. Sonoma County Board of Supervisors IITVITED RESPONSES o R2: Mayor, Cloverdale; Mayor, Cotati; Mayor, Petaluma; Mayor, Santa Rosa; Mayor, Sebastopol; Mayor, Sonoma. The governing bodies indicated above should be aware that their comments and rcsponses must be conducted subject to the notice, agenda and open meeting rcquircments of the Bruwn Act. BIBLIOGRAPHY City of Healdsburg. (c. 2023). City of Healdsburg [6th Cycle] Housing Element. Healdsburg, CA: City of Healdsburg, Planning Department. City of Healdsburg. (Various Years). Growth Management Ordinance (GMO) (Healdsburg Municipal Code Title 18, Appendix A" as amended by Measure M (2000), Measure P (2018), Measure H (2020). Healdsburg, CA: City of Healdsburg. City ofHealdsburg. (2018). Measure S: Transient Occupancy Tax Increase for Affordable Housing. Healdsburg, CA: City of Healdsburg. City ofRohnert Park (c. ZO23). City of Rohnert Park [6th Cycte] Housing Elemort. Rohnert Parlq CA: City of Rohnert Park, Development Services Department. City of Rohnert Park. (2000). Measure N: Urban Growth Boundaries Act. Rohnert Park, CA: City of Rohnert Park. City ofRohnert Park. (2001). Growth Management Ordinance (#667). Rohnert Park, CA: City of Rohnert Park. Califomia Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). (Various Years). Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program Guidelines. Sacramento, CA: HCD. California Departrnent ofHousing and Community Development (HCD). (Various Years). Prohousing Incentive Program (PIP) Guidelines. Sacramento, CA: HCD. California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). (Vadous Years). Surplus t and Act (Government Code sections 54220-54234) - Guidelines and Notices. Sacramento, CA: HCD. Fage 15 of 17Who Can Live h Scnorna County? Califomia Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA). (Various Years). WorKorce Housing Program InformationA,Iaterials. Walnut Creeh CA: CSCDA. Generation Housing Q024). "State of Housing in Sonoma County" Interviews conducted by Sonoma County Grand Jury. @. 2023-2024). With Healdsburg City officialq housing staff, HEWG members, and other community stakeholders. State of California- Califomia Government Code. Sections relevant to Housing Elernents (e.g., Article 10.6, $ 65580 et seq.), Density Bonus law (e.g., $ 65915 * seq.), ard other housing legislation mentioned (SB 9, SB 35, SB 330, AB 2162, Government Code Section 65583.1(c)). Sonoma County Civic Grand Jury QU2-2023). "Affordable Housing: Pasl, Present, and Future" Reports issued by the Civil Grand Jury do not identfy individuak interviewed. Penal Code Section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person orfacts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Civil Grand Jury. APPENDD( Income Limits for Affordable Housing in Sonoma County (2025 )re There are multi ple definitions of low-income limits for affordable housing. The above link provides charts for state prograrns and for federal programs for Sonoma County. All limits are based on the percentage of Area Median Income and Household size. The charts below provide income limits and rent limis for both slate and federal programs. State and Local Programs IncoDe Limits* The income limits below apply to the following programs: Sonoma County Density Bonus, Sonoma County Second Dwelling Unit, County Fund for Housing Califomia Redevelopment Law These Income Limits apply only to Sonoma County Community Development Commission assisted units. They are not to be used as a guide for programs regulated by any agency other tlan the Sonoma County Community Development Commission. Please contact staff with any questions or concerns. These lncome Limits do not apply to CDBG, HOME or NSP restricted units. Please refer to separate schedule for these units which are regulated by federal income limits set annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Efeaive June 1, 2025 *The Califcrnia Department ofHousiDgandccxnmunity Develognent (IICD) has made its flmal decbion to implement a new State Income Limit Hold Harmless (HH) Policy beginning20l3. l9 htps ://sonomacouoty.ca.gov/incooelimits#tocal 1 $13,8s0 $31,750 $52,850 $63,420 $84,6s0 $92,400 $110,900 2 15,850 36,250 60,400 72,44O 96,750 105,600 126,700 3 17,800 40,800 67,950 81,540 108,850 118,800 '142,550 75,500 90,600 120,900 132,000 158,400419,800 45,300 171,050521,400 48,950 81,550 97,860 130,600 142,550 6 22,950 52,550 87,600 105,120 140,250 153,100 183,750 7 24,550 56,200 93,650 112,380 149,950 163,700 '196,400 8 26,150 59,800 99,700 119,640 159,600 17 4,250 209,100 Who Can Live h Smmra County?Page l6 of l7 \REA Studio (1-2)$794 $1,321 $1,s86 $2,116 1 gedroom (1-4)906 1,510 1,A12 2,419 2 Bedroom (2-6)1020 1,699 2,039 2,721 3 Bedroom (3-8)1133 't,888 2,265 3,023 4 Bedroom (4-10)1224 2,039 2,447 3,265 LOW INCOMI RENT LIMIT a(P6 Rent Limit Maximu Rent Linrrlts.' Uses Formula in California Health & Safew Code 50052.5 & 50053 afility Allob'arrce: Subtract from the maximum rent the approved utility allowance for any utilities that the tenant pays in addition to the rent. Confirm the appropriate utility allowance with the Sonoma County Community Development Commission. Asumption: The rents are computed based on the income limits for an assumed household size equal to the number ofbedrooms in the unit plus one person. For example, the rents for a three-bedroom unit are based upon the income limits for a four-person household Federul Prugams Income Limils: Tl'te inmme limits below apply to the following programs: Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG), Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) and Enrrgency Solutions Grant (ESG). These income limits apply only to Sonoma County Community Development Commission assisted units. They are NOT to be used as a guide for programs regulated by any agency other than the Sonoma County Community Development Commission. These Income Limis do not apply to state or locally regulated programs (Density Bonus, Second Dwelling Unit, County Fund for Housing, Califomia Redevelopment taw). These units are regulated by state income limits set annually by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Area Median lncome for a erson household: $128 100 Rent Limits: Maximum rent limits for all HOME, CDBG, and NSP Units as set by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 1 $31,7s0 s52,850 $63,420 $84,650 2 36,250 60,400 72,440 96,750 3 40,800 67,950 81,540 108,850 4 45,300 75,500 90,600 120,900 5 48,950 81,550 97,860 130,600 6 52,550 87,600 105,120 140.250 7 56,200 93,650 1 12,380 149,950 8 59,800 99,700 '119,640 159,600 HOME Low (Very Low-lncom e - 5095)$1,321 61,41s $1,6s8 $1,963 $2,190 HONIE High (Low lncome -65%)S1,699 $1,821 $2,1a7 $2,s19 $2,790 Who Can Live h Smcma County?Page l7 of l7 UNITSIZE PERSONS IN HOUSEHOLD (MTNTMUM - MAXIMUMI EXTREMELY LOW INCOME RENT LIMIT VE RY LOW INCOME RENT LIMIT :.. ] Revised June 2022 Response to Grand Jury Report Form Response to Grand Jury Report Form Report Title: Who Can Afford to Live in Sonoma County “A Tale of Two Cities” Report Date: June 17, 2025 Response by: Gerard Giudice Title: Mayor Agency/Department Name: City of Rohnert Park FINDINGS: F1, F2, F3, F4, F4, F6 I (we) agree with the findings numbered: _F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6_________________________ I (we) disagree wholly or partially with the findings numbered: _N/A______________________ RECOMMENDATIONS: R1 • Recommendations numbered: __R1_________________________ have been implemented. A description of implementation is attached. • Recommendations numbered: __N/A______________________________ have not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. • Recommendations numbered: __N/A__________________________ require(s) further analysis. • Recommendations numbered: __N/A___________________________ will not be implemented because they are not warranted or are not reasonable. (Attach an explanation.) Date: Signed: Number of pages attached: 1 Revised June 2022 Response to Grand Jury Report Form Response to Grand Jury Report titled “Who Can Afford to Live in Sonoma County “A Tale of Two Cities” Response to Recommendations R1. By January 30, 2026, Healdsburg and Rohnert Park will each create an ongoing community engagement plan, which includes multilingual community outreach and education, surveys, public workshops, and dedicated working groups. Rohnert Park Response: This recommendation has been implemented and will continue to be carried out. The City of Rohnert Park’s certified 6th Cycle Housing Element embeds ongoing and robust community engagement into many of its policies and programs. City staff have already established multilingual outreach, community surveys, public events, and collaboration with community- based organizations to ensure broad and inclusive resident participation. In 2024 and 2025, the City has hosted annual Housing and Resource Fairs in partnership with Cotati and the Cotati-Rohnert Park Library. The first event, held in September 2024, included over 20 organizations tabling, with housing needs surveys available in English and Spanish at the City of Rohnert Park’s table, and a workshop on tenant-landlord rights. The second annual fair, held in September 2025, continued this robust outreach, featuring more than 20 organizations, bilingual surveys, and a workshop for first-time homebuyers. These efforts are part of an ongoing outreach strategy that also includes culturally appropriate marketing and outreach procedures for affordable housing programs. The City now requires developers of affordable units to submit marketing plans prioritizing inclusive, multilingual outreach, subject to City Housing staff review. All marketing materials must be provided in English and Spanish and shared with a diverse range of local organizations and community members using City platforms. Previously, the City convened the Homelessness Roundtable, a dedicated working group that met regularly to address issues of homelessness. While this group no longer meets, City staff maintain a robust email list and provide regular email updates to stakeholders on housing and homelessness topics. Rohnert Park remains committed to fostering inclusive community engagement on housing matters by ensuring language accessibility, hosting public workshops and community surveys, and supporting working groups, as part of its ongoing effort to involve all residents meaningfully in housing discussions. ITEM NO. 8.E. 4898-5803-6071 v1 1 Meeting Date: September 23, 2025 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Alicia Giudice, Director of Development Services Prepared By: Justin Brandt, Deputy City Engineer Agenda Title: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing and Accepting a Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement with Redwood Lodging, LLC for the Development Located at APN 143-391-022 (CEQA: Exempt Under California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution authorizing and accepting a grant of emergency vehicle access easement with Redwood Lodging, LLC for the development located at APN 143-391-022. BACKGROUND: The Home2Suites Hotel Development Project (Project), is a 95-room hotel located at 6490 Redwood Drive (APN 143-391-022) in Rohnert Park. On September 24, 2020, by Resolution No. 2020-021, the City’s Planning Commission approved the Project to allow development of the 95-room hotel. The approval included a condition of approval requiring the applicant to provide the necessary easements including an emergency vehicle access easement. ANALYSIS: As required by the City, the developer has submitted documents in the form of an emergency vehicle access easement to ensure emergency vehicle access. The easement agreement, provides the ability to the City to legally enter and respond in an emergency. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: This Project qualifies for an exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because the activity is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Here, the acceptance of an emergency access easement will have no effect on the environment. 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 ITEM NO. 8.E. 4898-5803-6071 v1 2 STRATEGIC PLAN AND COUNCIL GOALS/PRIORITIES ALIGNMENT: The recommended action is consistent with City Council’s Goals and Priorities – Planning and Infrastructure; this easement will provide Public Safety the ability to access the Project in case of an emergency to ensure the safety of the community. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: None. Executing the Easement Agreements is required to complete close out of the Project. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: This action has no direct fiscal impacts. At project completion, the City will receive an easement. Code Compliance Approval Date: N/A Department Head Approval Date: 08/19/2025 Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: 09/08/2025 City Manager Approval Date: 09/10/2025 Attachments 1. Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Execute Easement Agreement A) Exhibit A – Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement Agreement a) Exhibit A – Legal Description and Plat of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement RESOLUTION NO. 2025-072 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING AND ACCEPTING A GRANT OF EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT WITH REDWOOD LODGING, LLC FOR THE DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT APN 143-391-022 WHEREAS, on September 24, 2020, at the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park adopted Resolution No. 2020-021 approving a 95-room hotel located at 6490 Redwood Drive, APN 143-391-022 (“Project”) with Redwood Lodging, LLC (“Developer”); and WHEREAS, the City requires an emergency vehicle access easement to ensure public safety of the community; and WHEREAS, the City and Developer desire to establish a formal emergency vehicle access easement for the benefit of the City; and WHEREAS, the approval and acceptance of this emergency vehicle access easement is exempt under California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because there is no possibility that the acceptance of this emergency access easement will have an effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby approve the Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement Agreement, attached as Exhibit A incorporated herein by reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement Agreement, in substantially similar form to Exhibit “A,” subject to modifications approved by the City Manager and City Attorney, and to take all actions to effectuate these agreements, including executing a Certificate of Acceptance accepting the Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement Agreement. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 23 day of August, 2025. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ____________________________________ ATTEST: Gerard Giudice, Mayor ______________________________ Sylvia Lopez Cuevas, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ Michelle M. Kenyon, City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A ADAMS: _________ ELWARD: _________ RODRIGUEZ: _________SANBORN: _________ GIUDICE: _________ AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT: ( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) OAK #4822-1985-9231 v1 1 City as Grantee 4927-8362-8903 v1 This Document is Recorded For the Benefit of the City of Rohnert Park and is Exempt from Fee Per Government Code Sections 6103 and 27383 When Recorded, Mail to: City of Rohnert Park 130 Avram Ave. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Exempt from the fee per GC27388.1 (a); Transfer Tax = 0, deed to public agency SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE GRANT OF EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT AGREEMENT This EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into effective as of this ______ day of ______________, 2025, by and between Redwood Lodging, LLC (the “Grantor”), and the City of Rohnert Park, a municipal corporation (the “Grantee” or “City”), with reference to the following facts and intentions: R E C I T A L S A. Grantor is the owner of that certain real property located in the City of Rohnert Park, County of Sonoma, State of California, as more particularly described as 6490 Redwood Drive, Rohnert Park, California (APN 143-391-022) (the “Property”); and B. On September 24, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park adopted Resolution No. 2020-021 approving a 95-room hotel on the Property; and C. Grantor is granting an emergency vehicle access easement to City to satisfy the Conditions of Approval for the Project and in order for the Grantee to ensure public safety of the community; and D. Grantor is willing to grant to Grantee and Grantee is willing to accept an easement over those certain portions of the Property more particularly described in the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit “A” (the “Easement Area”), for the purpose of Emergency Vehicle Access on the terms and conditions as provided herein. NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor and Grantee hereby agree as follows: OAK #4822-1985-9231 v1 2 City as Grantee 4927-8362-8903 v1 1. Grant of Easement. Grantor hereby grants to Grantee, its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive, perpetual easement in, on, over, under, across, and through the Easement Area for emergency vehicle access (the “Easement”), together with all necessary and convenient means of ingress and egress to and from said Easement at all times, on the terms and conditions set forth herein. For the purposes of this Agreement, the right to use the Easement Area for emergency vehicle access shall include the installation, construction, repair, replacement, maintenance, operation, inspection, restoration, modernization and use of the Easement Area for any activity reasonably related to providing emergency access. 2. Restrictions on Use of Easement Area. The Easement Area shall not be used for any purpose other than for emergency vehicle access. The Parties agree that no building, wall, fence, barrier or other permanent structure of any kind which impairs or impedes access to, or use of, any of the Easement shall be constructed or maintained on the Easement Area, nor shall any deep rooted tree, deep rooted shrubs or other plants or vegetation be installed, constructed, erected, placed, planted or maintained in the Easement Area, nor shall the Parties do anything which shall prevent, impair or discourage the use of the Easement. 3. Maintenance of the Easement Area. Grantor may, at its sole cost and expense without reimbursement make such use of the surface of the Easement Area that will not unreasonably interfere with Grantees’ use and enjoyment of the Easement. Any damage caused by Grantor, or by any of Grantor’s lessees, licensees, permittees, agents, employees, contractors and/or successors and assigns that occur in the Easement Area, as a result of the Grantor maintaining the Easement Area shall be promptly repaired, replaced, or compensated for by Grantor, at its sole cost and expense. 4. Indemnification. Grantor shall, indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless Grantee, and its officers, agents, employees, contractors licensees, permittees, transferees, successors and assigns (each, an “Indemnitee” and collectively, “Indemnitees”) from and against all claims, losses, actions, demands, damages, costs, expenses (including, but not limited to, experts fees and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs) and liabilities of whatever kind or nature (collectively, “Claims”), that arise from or occur in whole or in part as a result of the actions during the construction or maintenance of the Easement by Grantor or its employees, agents, representatives, contractors, subcontractors, consultants, or invitees, or the performance of, or failure to perform, Grantors’s duties under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, Claims arising out of: (a) injury to or death of persons, including but not limited to employees of Grantor or Grantee; (b) injury to property or other interest of Grantor, Grantee, or any third party; (c) violation of any applicable federal, state, or local laws, statutes, regulations, or ordinances, including all of the foregoing relating to the environment and including any liability imposed by law or regulation without regard to fault, excepting only with respect to any Indemnitee, to the extent of any Claim arising from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of such Indemnitee. In the event any action or proceeding is brought against any Indemnitee for any Claim against which Grantor is obligated to indemnify or provide a defense hereunder, Grantor upon written notice from Grantee shall defend such action or proceeding at Grantor’s sole expense by counsel reasonably acceptable to Grantee. OAK #4822-1985-9231 v1 3 City as Grantee 4927-8362-8903 v1 5. Rights of Grantor. Grantor shall retain the right for itself, and its personal representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns all rights accruing from its ownership of the Easement Area, including the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in all uses of the Easement Area that are not inconsistent with the terms of this Agreement. 6. Recordation and Binding on Successors. This Agreement shall be recorded in the Recorder’s Office in the County of Sonoma and, upon such recordation, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. 7. Non-Exclusivity. The Easement granted hereunder is non-exclusive and Grantor reserves the right to use and grant other easement rights in and to the Easement Area, subject to the terms of this Agreement, and provided that such easement rights shall not unreasonably interfere with the Easement rights granted hereunder. 8. Term of Agreement. This Agreement and the Easement contained herein may be terminated upon mutual written consent of the parties. 9. Attorneys’ Fees and Governing Law. This Agreement may be enforced by an action at law or in equity and in the event that suit is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement or as the result of any alleged breach thereof, the prevailing party in such suit shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees from the other party and any judgment or decree rendered in such suit shall include an award therefore. This Agreement shall be governed by, enforced and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 10. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined to be illegal or unenforceable, this determination shall not affect any other provision of this Agreement, and all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. 11. Notices. All notices or demands which either party is required or desires to give to the other shall be given in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested with the appropriate postage paid, by personal delivery, by facsimile or by private overnight courier service to the address or facsimile number set forth below for the respective party, or such other address or facsimile number as either party may designate by written notice to the other. All such notices or demands shall be effective as of actual receipt or refusal of delivery. Should any act or notice required hereunder fall due on a weekend or holiday, the time for performance shall be extended to the next business day. If to Grantor: Codding Enterprises P.O. Box 3550 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Attn: _____________________ Phone: ____________________ Email: ____________________ With a copy to: Redwood Lodging, LLC 16398 Cannon Lane OAK #4822-1985-9231 v1 4 City as Grantee 4927-8362-8903 v1 Chino Hills, CA 91709 Attn: Tejal Patel Phone: (951) 283-9852 Email: tejal@shivamproperties.com If to Grantee: City of Rohnert Park 130 Avram Ave. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Attn: City Manager’s Office Phone: 707-588-2232 Email: admin@rpcity.org With a copy to: Michelle Marchetta Kenyon Rohnert Park City Attorney Burke, Williams & Sorensen 1901 Harrison Street, Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: 510-273-8780 Email: mkenyon@bwslaw.com 12. Operative Date. This Agreement shall become effective, operative and enforceable upon the last date upon which a party duly executes this Agreement. 13. Cooperation. Grantor and Grantee promise and agree to use their best efforts to cooperate together in the performance of the rights and obligations provided for in this Agreement. Each party shall use their best efforts to perform their rights and obligations under this Agreement in a manner that is respectful of the others’ quiet enjoyment of their property. 14. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and when taken together they shall constitute one and the same Agreement. 15. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties relating to the rights herein granted and the obligations herein assumed. Any oral representations or modifications concerning this instrument shall be of no force and effect excepting a subsequent modification in writing signed by the parties to be charged. [Signatures on the Following Page] OAK #4822-1985-9231 v1 5 City as Grantee 4927-8362-8903 v1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor and Grantee have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written. GRANTEE: GRANTOR: City of Rohnert Park, a municipal corporation By: ___________________________________ Name _________________________________ Title: __________________________________ By: ________________________________ Name _____________________________ Title: ______________________________ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss COUNTY OF ________________________________ ) On , before me, , Date Name And Title Of Officer (e.g. “Jane Doe, Notary Public”) Personally appeared , Name of Signer(s) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(is), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public (S E A L) OAK #4822-1985-9231 v1 6 City as Grantee 4927-8362-8903 v1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss COUNTY OF ________________________________ ) On , before me, , Date Name And Title Of Officer (e.g. “Jane Doe, Notary Public”) Personally appeared , Name of Signer(s) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(is), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public (S E A L) OAK #4822-1985-9231 v1 7 City as Grantee 4927-8362-8903 v1 CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE (California Government Code Section 27281) This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the GRANT OF EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS AGREEMENT, dated from to CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, a municipal corporation of the State of California (“City”), is hereby accepted by the City Manager on behalf of the City pursuant to authority conferred by Resolution No. ___, dated ______________, and the City consents to recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer. Date: ____________________, 2025 CITY CITY OF ROHNERT PARK _ ______________, City Manager CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document, to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ______________ On this _____ day of _______________, 20__, before me, ____________________________, a Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally appeared _______________________________________________ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL the day and year first above written. ____________________________________ NOTARY OAK #4822-1985-9231 v1 8 City as Grantee 4927-8362-8903 v1 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PLAT email: office@phelpslandsurveyors.com January 18, 2023 EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT Being a portion of the lands of Redwood Lodging, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company as described in that Deed recorded as Document Number 2017-006594, Sonoma County Records, also being a portion of Lot 2 of Parcel Map No. 77 filed in Book 313 of Maps, Page 26, Sonoma County Records, said portion being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at an angle point in the Northerly line of said Lot 2, said point being the common intersection point with Lots 2 and 3 of Parcel Map No. 101, filed in Book 379 of Maps, Page 1, Sonoma County Records; thence along said Northerly line S89°52’00”E, 13.51 feet to a point, said point being the True Point of Beginning of the herein described Easement; thence continuing along said Northerly line S89°52’00”E, 30.00 feet; thence leaving said Northerly line S00°08’00”W, 19.47 feet; thence S89°52’00”E, 455.97 feet; thence S08°08’39”E, 42.94 feet; thence S00°08’00”W, 5.04 feet to the Southerly line of said lands; thence along said Southerly line N89°52’00”W, 27.00 feet; thence leaving said Southerly line N00°08’00”E, 15.28 feet; thence N41°40’16”W, 8.39 feet; thence N89°52’00”W, 390.08 feet; thence S00°08’00”W, 14.45 feet; thence S49°34’04”E, 10.96 feet to aforementioned Southerly line; thence along said Southerly line N89°52’00”W, 46.38 feet; thence leaving said Southerly line N49°34’04”W, 30.15 feet; thence S40°10’04”W, 136.04 feet to the Southwesterly line of said lands; thence along said Southwesterly line N49°36’19”W, 30.00 feet; thence leaving said Southwesterly line N40°10’04”E, 136.98 feet; thence N55°14’34”E, 16.86 feet; thence N00°08’00”E, 17.75 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 19,200 sq.ft. more or less. Basis of Bearing: Parcel Map No. 77 filed in Book 313 of Maps, Page 26, Sonoma County Records. See Exhibit “B” for a plat to accompany this legal description. ___________________________________________ Joseph L. Hughes PLS 8992 Sheet 1 of 2 Redwood Lodging, LLC R E D W O O D D R LOT 2 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 3 PARCEL MAP NO. 58 281 MAPS 8 PARCEL 1 N40 ° 1 0 ' 0 4 " E 1 3 6 . 9 8 ' N55°14'34"E 16.86' N00°08'00"E 17.75' S89°52'00"E 30.00' S00°08'00"W 19.47'S89°52'00"E 455.97' S08°08'39"E 42.94' N89°52'00"W 27.00' N00°08'00"E 15.28' N41°40'16"W 8.39' N89°52'00"W 390.08' S40 ° 1 0 ' 0 4 " W 1 3 6 . 0 4 ' N89°52'00"W 46.38' S00°08'00"W 14.45' Redwood Lodging, LLC R E D W O O D D R Lot 2 PARCEL MAP NO. 101 379 MAPS 1 PARCEL MAP NO. 77 313 MAPS 26 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 3 S89°52'00"E 13.51' S49°34'04"E 10.96' N49°34'04"W 30.15' PARCEL MAP NO. 58 281 MAPS 8 PARCEL 1 N 4 9 ° 3 6 ' 1 9 " W 3 0 . 0 0 ' S00°08'00"W 5.04' KEY MAP EXHIBIT "B" (plat to accompany legal description) Emergency Vehicle Access Easement ITEM NO. 8.F. 1 `3333 Meeting Date: September 23, 2025 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Betsy Howze, Director of Finance Prepared By: Jenna Garcia, Housing Manager Agenda Title: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing and Approving the Director of Finance to Amend the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to Appropriate $30,617 from General Fund Restricted Fund Balance to Development Services Contract Services (10002000-64000) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing and approving the Director of Finance to amend the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to appropriate $30,617 from General Fund Restricted Fund Balance to Development Services Contract Services (10002000-64000). BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget on June 10, 2025. At the beginning of FY 2025-26 the City had a fund balance of $30,617 in Account 10000000- 31100 – Restricted FB-Housing Projects. These funds are restricted for housing-related programs and were last used several years ago for housing fee studies. The balance has remained unused for more than five years, and staff has determined that those monies could be used to cover specific housing related costs in FY 2025-26. Staff recommends using these restricted funds to fund a City contract with a housing consultant who assists City staff in housing program administration. This request will use these restricted funds to increase appropriations for Development Services in account 10002000-64000 by $30,617, which will be designated solely to cover the consultant’s contract. This is an eligible use of restricted housing funds. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: The recommended action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it does not qualify as a “project” as defined in Public Resource Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378. STRATEGIC PLAN AND COUNCIL GOALS/PRIORITIES ALIGNMENT: The recommended action is consistent with the City Council’s strategic goal priority of long- term financial sustainability. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Option 1: Recommended. Approve the FY 2025-26 budget amendment to use restricted housing funds to enable the City to apply these restricted funds toward an eligible housing-related expense. 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 ITEM NO. 2 2. Option 2: Not Recommended. Do not approve the FY 2025-26 budget amendment. Without this amendment, the restricted fund balance will not be used and another use for the funds will need to be identified. In addition, the General Fund will likely need to cover the cost of the contract. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The proposed action will appropriate $30,617, of Restricted Housing Project funds, to Development Services contract services for a hosing contract. This action has no impact on the General Fund. Department Head Approval Date: 09/16/2025 City Attorney Approval Date: N/A Finance Director Approval Date: 09/16/2025 City Manager Approval Date: 09/16/2025 Attachments: 1. Resolution Authorizing and Approving Director of Finance to amend the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to appropriate $30,617 from General Fund Restricted Fund Balance to Development Services Contract Services (10002000-64000) RESOLUTION NO. 2025-073 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO AMEND THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE $30,617 FROM GENERAL FUND RESTRICTED FUND BALANCE TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CONTRACT SERVICES (10002000-64000) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park adopted the Fiscal Year 2025- 26 Budget on June 10, 2025; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority to amend the budget; and, WHEREAS, the City currently maintains a fund balance of $30,617 in Account 10000000-31100 – Restricted FB-Housing Projects; and, WHEREAS, these funds are restricted for housing-related programs, was last utilized several years ago for housing fee studies and has remained unused for more than five years; and, WHEREAS, staff has determined that those monies could be used to cover specific housing related costs in FY 2025-26; and, WHEREAS, staff recommends appropriating the $30,617 in Restricted Fund Balance to Development Services, Contract Services (10002000-64000), to support a City contract with a housing consultant who assists staff with housing program administration, which is an eligible use of restricted housing funds; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and that it does hereby authorize and approve the Director of Finance to amend the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to appropriate $30,617 from General Fund Restricted Fund Balance to Development Services Contract Services (10002000- 64000). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Finance is authorized to make any administrative adjustments necessary to process the amendment in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 23 day of August, 2025. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ____________________________ ATTEST: Gerard Giudice, Mayor ______________________________ Sylvia Lopez Cuevas, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ Michelle M. Kenyon, City Attorney ADAMS: _________ ELWARD: _________ RODRIGUEZ: _________SANBORN: _________ GIUDICE: _________ AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT: ( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) ITEM NO. 1 cncell Meeting Date: September 23, 2025 Department: Administration Submitted By: Marcela Piedra, City Manager Prepared By: Sylvia Lopez Cuevas, City Clerk Agenda Title: Consider Canceling and Rescheduling the November 25, 2025 City Council Meeting, and By Minute Order, Schedule a December 2, 2025 Special Meeting for the Water Rate Public Hearing and Cancel the December 23, 2025, Regular City Council Meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Discuss and provide direction regarding the November 25, 2025, meeting and either: a) Hold the meeting on November 25, 2025 as scheduled to hear limited business (such as the selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor and SSU Student Report), or b) Cancel the November 25, 2025 meeting and instead conduct that business at a City Council Joint Special Meeting on either November 18, 2025, or December 2, 2025. 2. Schedule a City Council Joint Special Meeting on December 2, 2025, to meet the noticing requirements for the public hearing on the proposed water rate increases. 3. Cancel the City Council Joint Regular Meeting on December 23, 2025, due to the Holiday Season; BACKGROUND: The City Council has the authority to establish meeting dates and times as well as schedule or cancel such meetings with proper and timely notice. The City Council Protocols outline the conditions for canceling a regularly scheduled meeting as follows: Chapter I, Section F Cancellation of Regular Meetings “any meeting of the Council may be canceled in advance by a majority vote of the Council.” Special meetings may be called and held from time to time according to the City Council Protocols Chapter I, Section B. ANALYSIS: Per the City of Rohnert Park Council Protocols, regular Council meeting falling on a legal holiday will be deemed canceled unless otherwise provided by the Council. Therefore, the scheduled November 11, 2025, City Council meeting will be canceled in observance of Veterans Day. 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 ITEM NO. 2 The Council Protocols require the City Council to meet at least once each month but also provide flexibility to cancel meetings in advance by majority vote. In light of the Thanksgiving holiday, staff recommends that the City Council consider whether to: a) Hold the November 25, 2025, meeting with limited business only (such as the selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor), or b) Cancel the November 25 meeting and conduct that business at a Special Meeting on either November 18, 2025 or December 2, 2025. Regardless of the option chosen for November 25, a Special Meeting on December 2, 2025, is required to ensure compliance with statutory noticing requirements related to the proposed water rate increases. Following the Water Rate Study presentation scheduled for the September 23, 2025, City Council meeting, staff will not have sufficient time to meet the noticing period for a November hearing, making December 2 the earliest feasible date. The Council will also meet on December 9, 2025, to formally install the new Mayor and Vice Mayor for 2026 and to celebrate the City's accomplishments over the past year while outlining the vision for the year ahead. The second regularly scheduled meeting in December is traditionally canceled as a respite for City staff. Staff is requesting that the City Council cancel the regular meeting scheduled for December 23, 2025, and direct the City Clerk to handle the required posting and noticing. Over the past 14 years, the City Council has canceled this meeting 13 times, continuing this long- standing practice. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: This item is not a “project” under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) because it is an administrative activity that will not result in a potentially significant impact to the environment. STRATEGIC PLAN AND STRATEGIC PRIORITIES ALIGNMENT: This action supports the City of Rohnert Park’s Strategic Plan and Strategic Priorities by promoting effective governance and organizational efficiency, specifically City Council Priority 4: Organization Well Being. Canceling the November 25 and December 23 meetings avoids scheduling conflicts during the holiday season, ensures compliance with statutory noticing requirements for the water rate public hearing, and provides adequate time for staff preparation. Scheduling the special meeting on December 2 demonstrates the City’s commitment to transparent decision-making and timely public engagement on critical issues, while also supporting staff well-being and resource management. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Recommended Option: a. Provide direction on whether to hold the November 25, 2025 meeting or instead cancel it and conduct that business on November 18, 2025 or December 2, 2025, Special Meeting; and ITEM NO. 3 b. Schedule a City Council Joint Special Meeting on December 2, 2025, for the water rate public hearing; and c. Cancel the City Council Joint Regular Meeting on December 23, 2025. 2. Alternative: Maintain the current meeting schedule and hold the Rohnert Park City Council Regular Meetings; however, this option is not recommended because of staff scheduled time off, potential quorum concerns, and the statutory noticing requirements for the water rate hearing. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: None. City Manager Approval Date: 09/16/2025 Attachments: None. ITEM NO. 9.B. 1 Meeting Date: September 23, 2025 Department: Finance Submitted By: Betsy Howze, Finance Director Prepared By: Betsy Howze, Finance Director Agenda Title: Accept the 2025 Water Rate Study Report, Direct Staff to Send a Notice of Public Hearing, and Provide Direction Regarding Rate Adjustment Timelines and Notices RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept the 2025 Water Rate Study Report and provide direction on the recommended rate adjustment and actions for the City’s water rate adjustment process including: 1. Directing staff to send a Notice of Public Hearing to City of Rohnert Park water utility property owners and customers 2. Approving rate adjustment timeline described herein, including public hearing date and recommended effective date of new water rates BACKGROUND: The City of Rohnert Park provides water service to properties within its boundaries. The City charges for water service based on infrastructure expenses and customer usage with the goal of recovering costs. The costs to operate, maintain, and improve the water system along with revenue from water service charge rates need to be evaluated periodically to ensure that the City recovers the cost of these services and maintains adequate cash reserve levels. Rohnert Park’s water rates continue to be one of the lowest in the region. In 2021 the City adopted a financial plan based on a rate study conducted by Hildebrand Consulting. The City adopted a 5-year water rate schedule that was designed to generate enough revenue to cover then-current operating costs and then made annual inflationary adjustments to absorb increases in operating costs and increases in Sonoma County Water Agency rate increases. The last authorized rate adjustment is scheduled to occur January 1, 2026. These adjustments to the water rates occurred in accordance with Government Code Section 53756. DISCUSSION: The City’s water system is aging and is now over 50 years old. Due to the age of the system, the number of system failures has increased. This includes more water main pipe and water service pipe failures. Deferring needed capital projects as well as rehabilitation and improvement work on an aging water system such as Rohnert Park’s is not a sustainable long-term approach to managing the water utility. When water system capital needs are deferred, the reliability and ability of the utility to provide safe 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 ITEM NO. 9.B. 2 drinking water could be jeopardized. The 2021 rate study estimated that capital spending between FY 2025 through FY 2030 would be approximately $24M. The current estimate for capital spending during that same time period is over $46 million (a 92% increase). In addition, the City’s operating costs have been increasing due to inflation. Inflation has had a tremendous impact on the water utility. In the 2021 Water Rate Study FY 2025-26 operating costs were projected to be $9.2 million. The 2025 Water Rate Study projects FY 2025-26 operating costs at $10.9 million, a difference of $1.7 million dollars, or 19%. Over the past couple of years, the City has purchased approximately 60% of its water from Sonoma Water The City’s wholesale water costs have recently increased by more than 10% per year. More specifically, Sonoma Water costs have increased significantly over the last six years. Costs have gone from $2.0 million in FY 19-20 to a projected $3.8 million in FY 25-26, an increase of $1.8 million or 90%. Using our ground water is less expensive than purchasing water, but that requires that we maintain our wells and pumps in order to use that resource. Over the past several months, City staff have been working with Hildebrand Consulting to evaluate the water utility’s financial condition and develop a plan to adequately fund current and future system needs. A summary of the water rate study preliminary findings has been prepared in PowerPoint format and is attached for reference. The presentation includes a determination of water utility financial needs. ANALYSIS: Proposed Water Rates Details of the water utility’s current and estimated future revenue needs as well as the methodology for calculating the new water rate structure can be found in the presentation. Upon analyzing the financial condition and revenue needs of the water utility, the Study finds that the current water rates need to be increased in order to continue to support the needs of the utility’s capital program and keep up with inflation. The preliminary findings have determined that the revenues generated by the current and proposed water rates and charges would not exceed the City’s cost of providing water service, including maintaining prudent reserves for specified purposes. Staff proposes to adopt a 5-year rate schedule based on general inflation, and the capital needs of the utility. The first rate increase is proposed to be implemented on January 1, 2026, and would replace the rate increase that was previously scheduled to occur on January 1, 2026 based on the 2021 Rate Study. Notification On August 26, 2025, the City adopted new local rules regarding Utility Rate Setting Procedures for making and tabulating written protests and written objections via adoption of Resolution 2025-066 (attached). Article XIIID of the California Constitution (Proposition 218) requires that local governments mail a special notice to affected parcels regarding a proposed water rate increase at least 45 days before holding a public hearing on the matter. Once directed by Council, Staff will have such a notice mailed to each parcel upon which the water service charges are proposed for imposition. If a majority of the parcels that receive water service present valid written protests to the City before the close of the public hearing, Proposition 218 states that the City cannot implement the proposed increase. If a majority of the parcels do not present written protests, the City Council may implement the proposed rate increase. Under the new Utility Rate Setting Procedures, in addition to Proposition 218, the City will follow the “exhaustion procedure,” set forth by Government Code section 53759.1 (known as “AB 2257”). ITEM NO. 9.B. 3 This is to be conducted concurrently with the Proposition 218 process, for the City Council’s consideration of any proposed new or increased water rates or sewer rates. The “exhaustion procedure” provides an opportunity for record owners or tenants to submit a “timely written objection” to identify substantive bases for asserting proposed water rates or sewer rates do not comply with Proposition 218. This written objection as detailed in the Public Hearing Notice must be received by the City by November 12, 2025. NEXT STEPS: If authorized by the City Council, staff would immediately proceed with mailing public hearing notices to property owners and approximately 10,271 City water system customers. Duplicate mailings will be eliminated to the best of our ability. If authorized, staff will receive “written objections” that are due to the City by November 12, 2025. Staff will respond to the written objections and they will be presented to Council at the Public Hearing. If directed, the public hearing will occur on December 2, 2025. Depending on the number of protests received in writing prior to and at the public hearing, the resolution to adopt the new sewer rates could occur at the same meeting. If adopted, the new rates would go into effect for bills rendered after January 1, 2026. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: Recommended Option: Accept the 2025 Water Rate Study Report and provide direction on the recommended rate adjustment and actions for the City’s water rate adjustment process including: 1. Directing staff to send a Notice of Public Hearing to City of Rohnert Park water utility customers 2. Approving the rate adjustment timeline described herein, including public hearing date and recommended effective date of new water rates Alternative: Do not accept the 2025 Water Rate Study and provide new direction to staff. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: This is not a project and is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under 15301c. STRATEGIC PLAN AND COUNCIL GOALS/PRIORITIES ALIGNMENT: The proposed action aligns with the City’s strategic goals and priorities of: • Long Term Financial Sustainability and • Community Quality of Life by ensuring the Water Utility has sufficient funds to provide safe and reliable drinking water to the residents of Rohnert Park. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: There is no fiscal impact in accepting the 2025 Water Rate Study and providing direction to staff to issue the Proposition 218 Notice and setting the public hearing date. Please note that if rates are not sufficiently increased, there are potential significant impacts to utility operations, and possible impacts to the General Fund should the utility not have sufficient funds to operate, maintain and repair the water system. ITEM NO. 9.B. 4 Department Head Approval Date: 09/15/2025 Finance Approval Date: 09/15/2025 City Attorney Approval Date: 09/12/2025 City Manager Approval Date: 09/16/2025 Attachments: 1. 2025 Water Rate Study Report 2. Public Hearing Notice 3. Resolution No. 2025-066 Utility Rate Setting Procedures 2025 Water Rate Study Report September 15, 2025 Betsy Howze, Finance Director City of Rohnert Park 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928-3126 Re: 2025 Water Rate Study Dear Ms. Howze, Hildebrand Consulting, LLC is pleased to present this 2025 Water Rate Study for the City of Rohnert Park (City). We appreciate the fine assistance provided by you and all members of City staff who participated in the Study, as well as the input and guidance provided by the City Council. If you or others at the City have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at: mhildebrand@hildco.com (510) 316-0621 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service and look forward to the possibility of doing so again in the near future. Sincerely, Mark Hildebrand Hildebrand Consulting, LLC Enclosure City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Table of Contents 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... 4 UTILITY BACKGROUND .............................................................................................. 4 SCOPE & OBJECTIVES OF STUDY ................................................................................ 4 STUDY METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 5 FINANCIAL PLAN ...................................................................... 6 FUND STRUCTURE ................................................................................................... 6 BEGINNING FUND BALANCES ..................................................................................... 8 CUSTOMER GROWTH AND WATER USAGE .................................................................... 8 RATE REVENUE........................................................................................................ 9 NON-RATE REVENUES .............................................................................................. 9 OPERATING AND DEBT EXPENSES ............................................................................. 10 COST ESCALATION ................................................................................................. 12 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ............................................................................ 13 DEBT STRATEGY .................................................................................................... 13 CASH RESERVE POLICIES ........................................................................................ 15 PROPOSED RATE REVENUE INCREASES ...................................................................... 16 CURRENT AND PROPOSED RATES ............................................................................. 18 2.12.1 Bill Impacts of Proposed Water Rates ....................................................................................19 ADOPTION OF PROPOSED RATES .............................................................................. 20 WATER SHORTAGE SURCHARGE POLICY .................................. 21 CONCLUSION ........................................................................ 28 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: RECOMMENDED WATER RATE REVENUE INCREASE .....................................................................................17 TABLE 2: CURRENT AND PROPOSED RATES ............................................................................................................19 TABLE 3: BILL IMPACTS FOR A SAMPLING OF CUSTOMERS .........................................................................................20 TABLE 4: PROPOSED WATER SHORTAGE SURCHARGES & FINANCIAL STRATEGY ...........................................................22 TABLE 5: ILLUSTRATION OF WATER SHORTAGE SURCHARGE APPLICATION ..................................................................24 TABLE 6: ESTIMATED RATE REVENUE UNDER WATER SHORTAGE CONDITIONS .............................................................24 TABLE 7: SAMPLE SINGLE FAMILY RES. BILLS WITH SHORTAGE RATE SURCHARGES ......................................................26 City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Table of Contents 2 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: SCHEMATIC OF WATER FUNDS AND CASH FLOWS ........................................................................................8 FIGURE 2: REVENUE CATEGORIES (FY 2025/26 BUDGET) ........................................................................................10 FIGURE 3: OPERATING AND DEBT EXPENSE CATEGORIES (FY 2025/26 BUDGET)..........................................................12 FIGURE 4: HISTORIC AND PROJECTED CAPITAL SPENDING ........................................................................................13 FIGURE 5: PROJECTED CAPITAL SPENDING WITH PROPOSED DEBT ............................................................................15 FIGURE 6: FINANCIAL PROJECTION WITH RECOMMENDED RATE REVENUE INCREASES ...........................17 LIST OF SCHEDULES Schedule 1 – Budgeted and Projected Operating Expenses…………………………… S1 Schedule 2 – 5-Year Capital Spending Plan……………………………………………… S2 Schedule 3 - Cash Flow Pro Formas (Funds 3430 and 3433)……………………………. S3 City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Acronyms 3 List of Acronyms AF acre-feet (measure of water volume) AWWA American Water Works Association CIP capital improvement program CY calendar year DCR debt service coverage ratio FY fiscal year (which ends on June 30 for the City) HMGP Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (a federal grant program) mgd million gallons per day O&M operations and maintenance pay-go “pay as you go” (i.e., cash financing for capital projects) SB Senate Bill TGAL thousand gallons WSCP water shortage contingency plan City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Introduction 4 INTRODUCTION Hildebrand Consulting, LLC. has been retained by the City of Rohnert Park (City) to conduct a water rate study (2025 Water Rate Study) for the City’s water enterprise. This report describes in detail the assumptions, procedures, and results of the Study, including conclusions and recommendations. UTILITY BACKGROUND The City of Rohnert Park provides water service to its residents. On average, approximately 60 percent of the City’s water supply is produced by the Sonoma County Water Agency (Sonoma Water) which supplies treated Russian River water to multiple jurisdictions throughout Sonoma and Marin counties. The remainder of the City’s potable water supply originates from deep ground water wells located throughout the City. These combined sources supply an average of 1.5 billion gallons of drinking water annually and a daily production average of 4.1 million gallons per day (mgd). Additionally, Rohnert Park has eight water storage tanks with a total capacity of approximately five million gallons of treated water. City’s Water Production Division operates and maintains water storage, pumping, and treatment facilities throughout the water system. The City’s last water rate study was conducted in 20211 (2021 Rate Study) and led to the approval of a 5-year schedule of adjusting water rates through January 2026. SCOPE & OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The scope of this Study is to prepare a multi-year financial plan, propose a 5-year rate schedule, and update the City’s Water Shortage Surcharge policy. Given the recency of 1 2025 Water Rate Study, The Reed Group, Inc, November 30, 2021 City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Introduction 5 the last comprehensive rate study, the scope of this study does not include an update to the cost of service analysis (COSA) nor the current rate structure. The existing rate structure remains valid since the underlying assumptions and analyses have not changed since the recent 2021 Rate Study, and that 2021 Study provides sufficient bases for the reasonable allocation of costs to rate payers set forth herein. The primary objectives of this Study are to: i. Develop a multi-year financial plan that integrates operational and capital project funding needs with a funding strategy. ii. Identify future annual adjustments to water rates to help ensure adequate revenues to meet the City’s ongoing financial obligations. iii. Update the City’s existing water shortage surcharge policy . STUDY METHODOLOGY This Study applied methodologies that are aligned with industry standard practices for rate setting as laid out in the AWWA M1 Manual, and all applicable law, including California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 6(b), commonly referred to as Proposition 218. The Study began with a review of the City’s current financial dynamics and latest available data for the City’s operations. A multi-year financial management plan was then developed to determine the level of annual rate revenue required to cover projected annual operating expenses, debt service (including coverage targets), and capital cost requirements while maintaining adequate reserves. This portion of the Study was conducted using an MS Excel©-based financial planning model which was customized to reflect financial dynamics and latest available data for the City’s operations in order to develop a long-term financial management plan, inclusive of projected annual revenue requirements and corresponding annual rate adjustments. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 6 FINANCIAL PLAN This section presents the Water Enterprise’s 10-year Financial Plan, including a description of the source data, assumptions, and the City’s financial policies. The City provided historical and budgeted financial information , including historical and budgeted operating costs, a multi-year capital improvement program (CIP), and outstanding debt service obligations. City staff also assisted in providing other assumptions and policies, such as reserve targets and escalation rates for operating costs (all of which are described in the following subsections). The 10-year Financial Plan was developed through numerous interactive work sessions with City staff. As a result of this process, the Study has produced a robust financial plan intended to enable the City to meet its future revenue requirements and achieve financial performance objectives throughout the projection period while striving to minimize rate increases. The analysis identifies a revenue shortfall in upcoming years, which leads to a conclusion that revenue adjustments and new debt are required for the water utility. The schedules attached to this report include detailed data supporting the Financial Plan discussed herein. The Financial Plan reflects assumptions and estimates believed reasonable at the present time. However, conditions change. It is recommended that the City review its financial condition and scheduled rate adjustments as part of the annual budget process, as well as perform a more comprehensive financial plan and water rate update every 3 to 5 years, as conditions dictate. FUND STRUCTURE The financial plan is an annual cash flow model. As a cash flow model, it differs from standard accounting income statements and balance sheets. The financial plan models City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 7 sources and uses of funds into, out of, and between the various funds and reserves of the water utility. The financial plan model is based on the fund structure currently used by the City and incorporates proposed reserve policies for specified purposes. The Water Enterprise’s fund structure includes an Operating Fund (Fund 3430), a Capital Preservation Fund (3433), and a Water Capacity Fund (Fund 3436). Figure 1 provides a schematic diagram of the funds and major cash flows associated with the financial plan model. An understanding of the fund structure is helpful in understanding the financial plan worksheets that model estimated annual cash flows through the water utility from one year to the next. The fund structure is comprised of: • Water Operating Fund (3430) – The Operating Fund is the primary fund within the Water Enterprise. Most of the water system’s revenues, including water rate revenues, flow into the Operating Fund and all operating and maintenance costs, including water purchases and debt service payments, are paid out of this fund. In addition, the Operating Fund also supports part of the water enterprise’s capital improvement program. • Capital Preservation Fund (3433) – The Capital Preservation Fund receives a portion of rate revenue to pay for most capital preservation projects. In the past the City assessed a separate Capital Preservation Charge to support this fund but that charge no longer exists and the diversion of revenue to Fund 3433 is an internal process. Capital projects funded from this fund are intended to preserve (rehabilitate and upgrade) the water system (as opposed to expanding the water system to serve new growth). • Water Capacity Fund (Fund 3436) – The City maintains the Water Capacity Fund to account for Water Capacity Charge revenue received from developers. Money in this fund is available for expansion projects needed to meet the infrastructure capacity needs of new development. Because this fund is independent of the issues affecting water rates, it does not play an active role in the financial plan and development of water rate recommendations. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 8 Figure 1: Schematic of Water Funds and Cash Flows BEGINNING FUND BALANCES The combined beginning cash balance for fiscal year (FY) 2024/25 in the Operating Fund (3430) and the Capital Preservation Fund (3433) was approximately $17.4 million2. The previous year capital project encumbrances amount to $10.7 million, therefore the effective starting “available” cash balance for the water utility is $6.7 million. This effective cash balance was used to establish the “starting point” for the reserve levels for this 10-year financial plan. The amount of cash that the City keeps in reserves is a product of its reserve policies (see Section 2.9). CUSTOMER GROWTH AND WATER USAGE Based on the City’s General Plan, this Study assumes that growth in Rohnert Park has been, and will continue to average, about 1% over the next 10 years. Per capita water usage is assumed to remain consistent with recent usage patterns. 2 Both of the beginning cash balance values account for previous year capital project encumbrances. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 9 RATE REVENUE Rate revenue is the revenue generated from customers for water service. The City collects rate revenue from water customers in the form of a fixed monthly “Service Charge” assessed based on meter size and a “Usage Rate” assessed based on actual water use (measured in thousands of gallons or “TGAL”). The Financial Plan assumes that the baseline rate revenue in FY 2025/26 will be the same as the budgeted rate revenue in FY 2024/253. The Financial plan assumes that per capita water usage will remain the same for the 10-year planning period. In the event that a water shortage event significantly affects water usage, the City has a water shortage surcharge policy that has been updated by this study (see Section 3). Estimated future water demand and rate revenues accounts for the small amount of customer growth (see Section 2.3) as well as the annual rate revenue adjustments proposed by this Study. Budgeted and projected rate revenues (including proposed rate adjustments) are listed in Schedule 3. NON-RATE REVENUES In addition to rate revenue, the City receives additional “non-rate revenue” from sources such as miscellaneous service fees, OPEB trust distributions, Capacity Charges, penalties, interest revenue on investments and transfers from other City funds (namely the City’s vehicle replacement fund). Projections of all non-rate revenues were based on FY 2025/26 budgeted revenues, as directed by City staff, with the exception of interest income which was calculated annually based upon projected fund balances and assumed interest rate of 3 percent in the near term4 and decreasing to 1.5 percent over the long term. This study does not attempt to account for Water Capacity Charge 3 The previously adopted 5-percent rate increase scheduled for January 1, 2026 will be superseded by the rate increase proposed by this study. 4 The Water Utility’s recent effective interest earnings rate is above 3 percent. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 10 revenue since it is treated as restricted revenue that does not impact Fund 3430 and 3433 (see Figure 1). Forecasted non-rate revenues are listed in in Schedule 3. Figure 2 below depicts the relative amount of budgeted Water Enterprise revenues for FY 2025/26. Figure 2: Revenue Categories (FY 2025/26 Budget) OPERATING AND DEBT EXPENSES The City’s expenses include operating and maintenance expenses, internal loan repayments, and capital spending. The following section addresses operating expenses and the internal loan, while capital spending is addressed separately in Section 2.8. This financial plan uses budgeted expenditures for FY 2025/26 as a starting point for projecting future operating and maintenance expenses. Current day expenses were adjusted for inflation over the 10-year planning period (see Section 2.7). Utility Rate Revenue 87.7% Penalties 0.7% Interest Earnings 4.3% Operating Revenue 4.5%Transfer In 2.8% City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 11 Recently about 45 percent of the City’s water supply has been pumped groundwater with the balance purchased from the Sonoma Water. The current ratio of groundwater use is up from 33 percent in 2017. A 2017 financial plan had recommended that the City maximize the use of groundwater (because groundwater is less expensive than purchased water) while continuing to comply with a 2002 settlement agreement which stipulates the City can use no more than 2,576 acre-feet (AF) of groundwater per year (which is a bit more than 50 percent of the City’s recent water needs). The City’s long- term goal of managing groundwater use sustainably is consistent with the adopted Groundwater Management Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Basin. By definition, managing the groundwater sustainably means limiting long -term groundwater extraction to the amount of recharge, thereby avoiding long-term depletion of the aquifer. Based on recent trends, this Study assumes that 45 percent of the City’s water supply will continue to come from groundwater over the next 10 years (about 2,050 AF annually). The Water Enterprise’s current debt obligation is limited to an internal loan, with average repayments of about $300 thousand per year through FY 2028/29. Major budgeted expense categories for FY 2025/26 are depicted in Figure 3. Projected operating and maintenance costs are listed in detail in Schedule 1. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 12 Figure 3: Operating and Debt Expense Categories (FY 2025/26 budget) COST ESCALATION Annual cost escalation factors for the various types of expenses were developed based upon a review of historical inflation trends, published inflation forecasts, industry experience, and discussions with City staff. The study assumed the following inflation rates during the planning period: - Salaries, benefits, utilities, chemicals and vehicle replacement: 5% per year based on recent historical trends - Wholesale water: 12% for two years, then 10% thereafter based on recent historical trends and forecasts provided by Sonoma Water - Insurance: 10% per year based on recent historical trends - All other costs: 3% per year based on long term historical averages City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 13 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Figure 4 shows that from FY 2021/22 to FY 2023/24 the City averaged $1.7 million in cash financed (“pay-go”) capital spending. Going forward (between FY 2024/25 and FY 2030/31), the City is planning to increase its annual spending to an average of $7.0 million per year (not including inflation). The City is increasing its capital spending in order to proactively address water system rehabilitation needs associated with aging pipes, pump stations, water tanks, and other system deficiencies. A 5-year detailed list of capital projects and associated costs is provided in Schedule 2 (capital spending from FY 2031/32 through FY 2034/35 was assumed to be equal to the average of the previous 4 years, plus inflation). Figure 4: Historic and Projected Capital Spending DEBT STRATEGY As part of this Study, we worked with City staff to evaluate alternative financing approaches for the capital expenses described in Section 2.8. Debt can be a useful tool for managing sudden increases (or “spikes”) in capital spending. The spike in capital spending in FY 2025 and FY 2027 shown in Figure 4 is driven primarily by a $13.0 million “Well and Tank Site Improvements” project (formerly referred to as the “Seismic City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 14 Upgrades” project). There is a chance that this project will receive grant funding (FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program) up to 75 percent), however the project must be delivered regardless of whether grant funding is received or not. As such, in order to ensure that the project is adequately funded, this financial plan assumes that the City will increase rate sufficiently to support debt-financing the project. Cash financing is not proposed because it would require more significant near -term rate increases. In the event that a grant is (eventually) received, the City can assess the Water Fund’s financial condition, including consideration of reserve levels, and decide whether future (adopted) rate increases can be reduced in order to account for the windfall revenue. Regarding the terms of the Well and Tank Site Improvements project debt, it is assumed that the $3.6 million that was budgeted for FY 2024/25 will be cash financed while the remaining balance ($9.5 million in 2025 dollars) budgeted for FY 2026/27 will be debt financed. The interest rate is assumed to be 5 percent and the repayment period is 20 years. The cost of debt issuance is assumed to be 1 percent of the debt principal. One of the requirements associated with debt financing is to maintain revenues at levels sufficient to meet “debt service coverage ratio” (DCR) requirements (a measure of how easily the enterprise can afford its debt obligations). At present, the City is required to maintain water system revenues at a level that covers all ongoing operating and maintenance costs, as well as 1.10 times annual debt service . Based on recently published guidance from Fitch Ratings5, utility systems with midrange financial profiles should maintain a DCR greater than 1.50 times annual debt service. Figure 5 shows projected capital spending with the proposed debt strategy. 5 As published on July 31, 2013. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 15 Figure 5: Projected Capital Spending with Proposed Debt CASH RESERVE POLICIES Cash reserve policies are cash balances targets that are retained for specific cash flow needs. The target for reserves is an important component when developing a multi-year Financial Plan and maintaining prudent reserves is an essential component of any sound financial management strategy. Utilities rely on reserves for financial stability; credit rating agencies evaluate utilities in part on their adherence to formally adopted reserve targets; and lending agencies require utility enterprises to maintain specific debt reserves for outstanding loans. The target levels of the policies below are consistent with 1) the City’s established policies and practices; 2) the findings of reserve studies conducted by the AWWA; 3) a healthy level of reserves for a utility per the evaluation criteria published by rating agencies (e.g., Fitch, Moody’s, and Standard & Poor’s); and 4) the consultant’s industry experience for similar systems. The following recommended reserve policies are based on adopted policies (Resolution No. 2020-008). The policy recommendations are intended to help the City mitigate and manage financial risk while meeting service and financial obligations. $0.0 $2.0 $4.0 $6.0 $8.0 $10.0 $12.0 $14.0 Mi l l i o n s Forecasted Debt Forecasted Cash City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 16 - Operating Reserve – The City maintains an Operating Reserve equal to 50 percent of annual operating and maintenance costs, including debt service when applicable, for the water system. The purpose of the Operating Reserve is to provide working capital and funds for unplanned operating and maintenance expenditures. The reserve target for FY 2025/26 was about $5.6 million. - Rate Stabilization Reserve – The City also maintains Rate Stabilization Reserve of $1.5 million within the Operating Fund. This reserve bolsters financial stability and can be drawn upon for drought or other emergency purposes and would reduce the utility’s financial risk. The balance in the Operating Fund in excess of the target amounts for the Operating Reserve and the Rate Stabilization Reserve can be considered “available balance.” The financial plan model generally seeks to reduce any available balance over time. A negative value for the available balance would indicate shortfalls in maintaining the minimum Operating Reserve and Rate Stabilization Reserve. While not included in the current financial plan, the City may want to eventually consider adoption of a Capital Reserve policy which would serve the dual purpose of protecting the Water Enterprise from catastrophic failure of a major asset as well as providing a financial cash flow “cushion” for funding future spikes in capital spending (although no such spike is forecasted at this time). PROPOSED RATE REVENUE INCREASES All of the above data and assumptions were entered into an MS Excel© financial planning model to produce a 10-year projection of the sufficiency of current rate revenues to meet projected financial requirements and determine the level of rate revenue increases necessary in each year of the projection period. Based upon the previously discussed financial data, assumptions, and policies, this Study proposes a 5-year schedule of annual overall rate revenue adjustments as detailed in Table 1. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 17 Table 1: Recommended Water Rate Revenue Increase The numbers provided in Schedule 3 (cash flow pro forma) are summarized graphically in Figure 6, which shows that the combined reserves for Fund 3430 and Fund 3433 are maintained over the course of the planning period and the DCR is maintained a healthy levels. Figure 6: Financial Projection with Recommended Rate Revenue Increases Rate Adjustment Date Proposed Rate Revenue Increase Jan. 1, 2026 14.0% July 1, 2026 9.0% July 1, 2027 9.0% July 1, 2028 7.0% July 1, 2029 6.0% City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 18 CURRENT AND PROPOSED RATES The structure for the City’s current water rates was updated as part of the 2021 Rate Study and follows a common industry practice with a two-part structure that is comprised of a fixed component (the monthly Service Charge) and a consumption- based Usage Rate. The Service Charge is charged based on the individual account’s meter size and currently recovers approximately 43 percent of total rate revenue. The Usage Rates primarily recover the Water Enterprise’s variable costs, such as water purchase costs and energy costs. The Usage Rates are made up of tiered rates for Single Family Residential and uniform rates for all other customers. Tier 1 rate is charged for the first 3,000 gallons of water per month and the Tier 2 rate is charged for water usage in excess of that amount. The tiered rates are designed such that the average of all tiered water sold to Single Family Residential is equal to the uniform rate. The basis for the difference between Tier 1 versus Tier 2 rates is the fact that Tier 1 rates reflect the cost of providing local groundwater while Tier 2 rates reflect the cost of providing (more expensive) imported water. The City also charges a fixed monthly charge for dedicated private fire service connections. The current and proposed rate schedule is summarized in Table 2. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 19 Table 2: Current and Proposed Rates 2.12.1 Bill Impacts of Proposed Water Rates Table 3 summarizes how the proposed water rates for Year 1 would affect a sample of customers. Since there are no structural changes to the rates, every customer will experience the same percentage impact to their bill (assuming there is no change in water usage). January 1, 2026 July 1, 2026 2 July 1, 2027 July 1, 2026 July 1, 2029 Rate Revenue Increases:14.0%9.0%9.0%7.0%6.0% Current Single Family Usage Rate ($/gal.) Tier 11 $0.004133 $0.004712 $0.005136 $0.005598 $0.005990 $0.006349 Tier 2 $0.005718 $0.006519 $0.007106 $0.007746 $0.008288 $0.008785 Multi-Family and Non-Residential Usage Rate ($/gal.) Uniform Rate $0.005013 $0.005715 $0.006229 $0.006790 $0.007265 $0.007701 Fixed Monthly Service Charges Up to 1"$34.30 $39.10 $42.62 $46.46 $49.71 $52.69 1.5"$63.99 $72.95 $79.51 $86.67 $92.74 $98.30 2"$99.62 $113.57 $123.79 $134.93 $144.37 $153.04 3"$182.75 $208.34 $227.09 $247.52 $264.85 $280.74 4"$301.52 $343.73 $374.67 $408.39 $436.98 $463.19 6"$598.45 $682.23 $743.63 $810.56 $867.30 $919.34 8"$954.75 $1,088.42 $1,186.37 $1,293.15 $1,383.67 $1,466.69 Monthly Fire Protection Service Charge 2"$25.80 $29.41 $32.06 $34.94 $37.39 $39.63 3"$32.85 $37.45 $40.82 $44.49 $47.61 $50.46 4"$41.08 $46.83 $51.05 $55.64 $59.53 $63.11 5"$50.47 $57.54 $62.71 $68.36 $73.14 $77.53 6"$55.15 $62.87 $68.53 $74.70 $79.93 $84.72 8"$75.09 $85.60 $93.31 $101.70 $108.82 $115.35 10"$90.35 $103.00 $112.27 $122.37 $130.94 $138.80 12"$105.60 $120.38 $131.22 $143.03 $153.04 $162.22 1 For the first 3,000 gallons per month 2 This marks a change from the current practice of changing rates on the first of the calendar year. 3 Fire Protection Service Charges are also proposed to increase by the same percentages. Proposed City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Financial Plan 20 Table 3: Bill Impacts for a Sampling of Customers ADOPTION OF PROPOSED RATES The 5-year schedule of proposed water rates is presented in Table 2. The rates in Year 1 are proposed to be effective as of January 1, 2026 (6 months before the end of the fiscal year) and thereafter the rate increases are proposed to occur on J uly 1 of their respective fiscal year. Monthly Meter Water Use Current Proposed Size (TGAL)Bill Bill $% Single Family Low Use 1"3.4 $48.39 $55.17 $6.78 14.0% Average Use 1"6.2 $65.00 $74.10 $9.10 14.0% High Use 1"18.6 $135.90 $154.93 $19.03 14.0% Multifamily Example #1 1"15.0 $109.50 $124.83 $15.33 14.0% Example #2 1.5"30.0 $214.38 $244.40 $30.02 14.0% Example #3 2"50.0 $350.27 $399.32 $49.05 14.0% Non-Residential Example #1 1"10.0 $84.43 $96.25 $11.82 14.0% Example #2 2"50.0 $350.27 $399.32 $49.05 14.0% Example #3 3"150.0 $934.70 $1,065.59 $130.89 14.0% Example #4 4"300.0 $1,805.42 $2,058.23 $252.81 14.0% Example #5 6"600.0 $3,606.25 $4,111.23 $504.98 14.0% Change City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Water Shortage Surcharge 21 WATER SHORTAGE SURCHARGE POLICY This section presents recommended updates to the City’s existing Water Shortage Surcharge policy, which are to be overlaid on then-current water usage rates during the time that a water shortage is declared by the City. Water Shortage Surcharges would be temporary and affect only the Usage Rate and not the fixed Service Charge. The Water Shortage Surcharge is a tool the City would use to reduce the (potentially severe) financial impacts associated with reduced water sales and increases in operating costs during a drought or other water shortage event. The multi-pronged approach includes implementing the temporary surcharge, reducing capital spending, and relying (modestly) on reserves to help bridge the financial deficit created by reduced water sales. The proposed updates to the City’s Water Shortage Surcharges addresses the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 606 (Statutes of 2018) and the updates to the City’s 2022 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP), which defines six stages of water shortage. The surcharges are expressed as a percentage of the then-current usage rates and are developed based on a “test year” (in this case, FY 2025/26). Table 4 presents: 1) The water usage reduction goals by WSCP-defined stage (row 1) 2) The assumed actual water use reduction during each respective stage (rows 2 & 28-30) 3) The proposed Water Shortage Surcharge expressed as a percentage increase to the Usage Charge (row 3) 4) The changes in revenue for each respective stage (rows 4 - 9) 5) The changes in expenditures for each respective stage (row 10 – 26) 6) The financial deficit that will occur even with the mitigating measures (row 27). The Water Shortage Surcharges have been calibrated to yield an overall deficit between $228 thousand and $307 thousand per year. This means that the surcharge will not totally offset the financial impact of the water shortage event. Given the City’s reserve policies, this size of a deficit was deemed sustainable for the duration of an extended drought (up to 6 City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Water Shortage Surcharge 22 years). In the event the financial deficits are larger or if reserve levels are already low, the City has the option of reducing capital spending to further mitigate the revenue shortfall. Table 4: Proposed Water Shortage Surcharges & Financial Strategy Normal Supply Stage 1 Voluntary Stage 2 Mandatory Stage 3 Mandatory Stage 4 Mandatory Stage 5 Mandatory Stage 6 Mandatory Percent Shortage Range 1 -->None Up to 10%Up to 20%Up to 30%Up to 40%Up to 50%Over 50% 1 Assumed Demand Reduction -->None 5%15%25%35%45%50% 2 Water Supply from Groundwater 2 -->45%48%53%61%70%83%91% 3 Water Shortage Surcharge 3 -->NA None None 5%10%17%22% Revenues 4 Fixed Rate Revenue $5,415,000 $5,415,000 $5,415,000 $5,415,000 $5,415,000 $5,415,000 $5,415,000 5 Water Usage Charge Revenue 4 $7,698,000 $7,313,000 $6,543,000 $5,774,000 $5,004,000 $4,234,000 $3,849,000 6 Water Shortage Surcharge Revenue 5 $0 $0 $0 $288,700 $500,400 $719,780 $846,780 7 Other Operating Revenue $1,735,000 $1,735,000 $1,735,000 $1,735,000 $1,735,000 $1,735,000 $1,735,000 8 Total Revenues $14,848,000 $14,463,000 $13,693,000 $13,212,700 $12,654,400 $12,103,780 $11,845,780 9 % of normal 97%92%89%85%82%80% Expenditures and Transfers 10 Salaries & Benefits $2,357,000 $2,357,000 $2,357,000 $2,357,000 $2,357,000 $2,357,000 $2,357,000 11 Operational Expense $361,000 $361,000 $361,000 $361,000 $361,000 $361,000 $361,000 12 Water Conservation 6 $75,000 $75,000 $105,000 $135,000 $165,000 $195,000 $225,000 13 Groundwater Pumping 8 $795,000 $795,000 $795,000 $795,000 $795,000 $795,000 $795,000 14 Professional Services $1,025,000 $1,025,000 $1,025,000 $1,025,000 $1,025,000 $1,025,000 $1,025,000 15 Internal Services and transfers $1,293,000 $1,293,000 $1,293,000 $1,293,000 $1,293,000 $1,293,000 $1,293,000 16 Insurance & Fees $348,000 $348,000 $348,000 $348,000 $348,000 $348,000 $348,000 17 Purchase of Water 7 $3,146,000 $2,857,000 $2,281,000 $1,705,000 $1,129,000 $552,000 $264,000 21 Utilities 8 $846,000 $842,000 $833,000 $825,000 $816,000 $808,000 $804,000 22 Average Capital Spending $4,279,000 $4,279,000 $4,279,000 $4,279,000 $4,279,000 $4,279,000 $4,279,000 23 Debt Service $301,000 $301,000 $301,000 $301,000 $301,000 $301,000 $301,000 24 Increase in Reserves 9 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 25 Total Expenditures & Transfers $14,848,000 $14,555,000 $14,000,000 $13,446,000 $12,891,000 $12,336,000 $12,074,000 26 % of normal 100%98%94%91%87%83%81% 27 Surplus/(Deficit) Due to Shortage 10 $0 ($92,000)($307,000)($233,300)($236,600)($232,220)($228,220) Estimated Water Production (AF) 28 Groundwater 2,048 2,048 2,048 2,048 2,048 2,048 2,048 29 SCWA Water 2,461 2,236 1,785 1,334 883 432 207 30 Total Water Supply 4,509 4,283 3,833 3,382 2,931 2,480 2,254 Notes: 1 Per the 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan 4 Water usage charge revenue will decline in proportion to water sales volume. 5 Additional revenue derived from temporary water shortage surcharge during periods of mandatory use restrictions. 6 Water conservation costs are expected to increase incrementally during periods of water shortage. 7 SCWA water purchase costs decrease due to reduced demand and reduced purchase volume. 8 Utility costs are not expected to decrease significantly since groundwater pumping will remain the same. 3 Temporary water shortage surcharges are an incremental increase in water usage rates at the percentages shown. 9 When compared to this Study's Pro Forma (see Schedule 3), the change in reserves doesn't match the Test Year because this table has been calibrated to account for average capital spending and typical water purchases rather than the Test Year budget. 10 These deficits have been mitigated by water shortage surcharge revenues sufficiently to be supportable by emergency reserves. While not modeled here, modest decreases in capital spending could be used to further mitigate revenue shortfalls. 2 The City has forecasted that groundwater reliance will remain at the same level for the study period, therefore the relative amount of supply from groundwater will increase as total water usage decreases. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Water Shortage Surcharge 23 The temporary water shortage rate surcharge is not intended to be a penalty for excessive use; rather it represents each customer’s fair share of the cost of partially bridging the financial deficit created by reduced water sales during periods of water shortage. Customers would participate in bearing this cost in proportion to their water use. Water shortage rate surcharges provide revenue increases for addressing water supply shortages and the resulting reduced water demand. Table 5 provide an example of how the Water Shortage Surcharge would be applied to the rates proposed to be effective January 1, 2026. As illustrated graphically in Table 6, the water shortage rate surcharge revenue only partially replaces lost revenue due to reduced water sales. As a result, even with the water shortage rate surcharges, the proposed water rates for water shortage conditions are less than the total cost of providing water service. The information in Table 6 reflects revenue estimates based on implementation of water shortage rate surcharges in FY 2025/26 (with some costs changed to reflect average costs). If adopted, the temporary water shortage rate surcharges would depend on the specific stage of shortage, as declared by the City Council. The surcharges are intended to continue only as long as the shortage conditions exist. The water shortage rate surcharges should be discontinued by City Council when the shortage is declared over. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Water Shortage Surcharge 24 Table 5: Illustration of Water Shortage Surcharge Application Table 6: Estimated Rate Revenue Under Water Shortage Conditions Water shortage rate surcharges have been specifically designed such that customers achieving required water use reduction goals will have lower water bills than they would with normal water rates and normal water usage. Customers that do not meet water use 1 Normal Supply Stage 1 Voluntary Stage 2 Mandatory Stage 3 Mandatory Stage 4 Mandatory Stage 5 Mandatory Stage 6 Mandatory 2 Assumed Demand Reduction-->None 5%15%25%35%45%50% 3 Water Shortage Surcharge 1-->None None 5%10%17%22% Water Usage Rate with Surcharge Applied ($/gallon)2 Single Family Residential 4 Tier 1 (0 to 3,000 gal/mo)$0.004712 $0.004712 $0.004712 $0.004950 $0.005180 $0.005510 $0.005750 5 Tier 2 (above 3,000 gal/mo)$0.006519 $0.006519 $0.006519 $0.006840 $0.007170 $0.007630 $0.007950 6 Multi-Family and Non-Res. (all water)$0.005715 $0.005715 $0.005715 $0.006000 $0.006290 $0.006690 $0.006970 7 Hydrant Meters $0.007960 $0.007960 $0.007960 $0.008360 $0.008760 $0.009310 $0.009710 Fixed Monthly Charge 3 8 Service Charge Varies Notes: declared by the City Council. 2 This table shows the temporary water shortage surcharges applied to the proposed rate increases for FY 2025/26 for illustrative purposes. -------------- No changes to the service charge ---------------- 1 Temporary water shortage surcharges are incremntal increases in the normal water usage rates appplied during periods of water shortage, as The percentages shown in this table would be applied to any then-current rates in future years. 3 No changes to the fixed monthly services charges would be imposed as a result of declared water shortages. $- $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 Normal Supply Stage 1 Voluntary Stage 2 Mandatory Stage 3 Mandatory Stage 4 Mandatory Stage 5 Mandatory Stage 6 Mandatory Water Shortage Surcharges Water Usage Charges Monthly Service Charges City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Water Shortage Surcharge 25 reduction goals may have higher water bills. Because the water shortage rate surcharges apply to all water usage, all customers will participate in bridging the financial gap created by water shortage. Of course, those customers that use the least amount of water or conserve the most will pay less through the water shortage rate surcharges. Table 7 illustrates how three different single family customers would be affected by the water shortage rate surcharges across various shortage conditions. Comparative monthly water bills are shown for customers that use 6,200 gallons of water (average water usage), 4,000 gallons of water (low water usage), and 10,000 gallons of water (high water usage). Water bills for each stage are then calculated to show the bill impact for customers that reduce their usage in order to meet requested water use reduction goals and the bill impact for customers that do reduce their usage to meet the reduction goals. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Water Shortage Surcharge 26 Table 7: Sample Single Family Res. Bills with Shortage Rate Surcharges City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Water Shortage Surcharge 27 Water Shortage Level Water Use Reduction Goal Monthly Water Use (Gal.) Service Charge Usage Charge Water Shortage Surcharge Total Water Bill % Change from Normal Bill Average Single Family Customer Meeting Reduction Goals Normal Supply None 6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $0.00 $56.15 0.0% Stage 1 Voluntary Up to 10%5,890 $29.63 $24.99 $0.00 $54.62 -2.7% Stage 2 Mandatory Up to 20%5,270 $29.63 $21.92 $0.00 $51.55 -8.2% Stage 3 Mandatory Up to 30%4,650 $29.63 $18.86 $0.94 $49.43 -12.0% Stage 4 Mandatory Up to 40%4,030 $29.63 $15.80 $1.58 $47.01 -16.3% Stage 5 Mandatory Up to 50%3,410 $29.63 $12.74 $2.17 $44.53 -20.7% Stage 6 Mandatory Over 50%3,100 $29.63 $11.20 $2.46 $43.30 -22.9% Average Single Family Customer With No Water Use Reduction Normal Supply None 6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $0.00 $56.15 0.0% Stage 1 Voluntary Up to 10%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $0.00 $56.15 0.0% Stage 2 Mandatory Up to 20%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $0.00 $56.15 0.0% Stage 3 Mandatory Up to 30%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $1.33 $57.47 2.4% Stage 4 Mandatory Up to 40%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $2.65 $58.80 4.7% Stage 5 Mandatory Up to 50%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $4.51 $60.66 8.0% Stage 6 Mandatory Over 50%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $5.83 $61.98 10.4% Water Shortage Stage Water Use Reduction Goal Monthly Water Use (Gal.) Service Charge Usage Charge Water Shortage Surcharge Total Water Bill % Change from Normal Bill Low Water-Using Single Family Customer Meeting Reduction Goals Normal Supply None 4,000 $29.63 $15.65 $0.00 $45.28 0.0% Stage 1 Voluntary Up to 10%3,800 $29.63 $14.66 $0.00 $44.29 -2.2% Stage 2 Mandatory Up to 20%3,400 $29.63 $12.69 $0.00 $42.32 -6.5% Stage 3 Mandatory Up to 30%3,000 $29.63 $10.71 $0.54 $40.88 -9.7% Stage 4 Mandatory Up to 40%2,600 $29.63 $9.28 $0.93 $39.84 -12.0% Stage 5 Mandatory Up to 50%2,200 $29.63 $7.85 $1.34 $38.82 -14.3% Stage 6 Mandatory Over 50%2,000 $29.63 $7.14 $1.57 $38.34 -15.3% Low Water-Using Single Family Customer With No Water Use Reduction Normal Supply None 4,000 $29.63 $15.65 $0.00 $45.28 0.0% Stage 1 Voluntary Up to 10%4,000 $29.63 $15.65 $0.00 $45.28 0.0% Stage 2 Mandatory Up to 20%4,000 $29.63 $15.65 $0.00 $45.28 0.0% Stage 3 Mandatory Up to 30%4,000 $29.63 $15.65 $0.78 $46.06 1.7% Stage 4 Mandatory Up to 40%4,000 $29.63 $15.65 $1.57 $46.85 3.5% Stage 5 Mandatory Up to 50%4,000 $29.63 $15.65 $2.66 $47.94 5.9% Stage 6 Mandatory Over 50%4,000 $29.63 $15.65 $3.44 $48.72 7.6% Water Shortage Stage Water Use Reduction Goal Monthly Water Use (Gal.) Service Charge Usage Charge Water Shortage Surcharge Total Water Bill % Change from Normal Bill High Water-Using Single Family Customer Meeting Reduction Goals Normal Supply None 10,000 $29.63 $45.29 $0.00 $74.92 0.0% Stage 1 Voluntary Up to 10%9,500 $29.63 $42.82 $0.00 $72.45 -3.3% Stage 2 Mandatory Up to 20%8,500 $29.63 $37.88 $0.00 $67.51 -9.9% Stage 3 Mandatory Up to 30%7,500 $29.63 $32.94 $1.65 $64.22 -14.3% Stage 4 Mandatory Up to 40%6,500 $29.63 $28.00 $2.80 $60.43 -19.3% Stage 5 Mandatory Up to 50%5,500 $29.63 $23.06 $3.92 $56.61 -24.4% Stage 6 Mandatory Over 50%5,000 $29.63 $20.59 $4.53 $54.75 -26.9% High Water-Using Single Family Customer With No Water Use Reduction Normal Supply None 10,000 $29.63 $45.29 $0.00 $74.92 0.0% Stage 1 Voluntary Up to 10%10,000 $29.63 $45.29 $0.00 $74.92 0.0% Stage 2 Mandatory Up to 20%10,000 $29.63 $45.29 $0.00 $74.92 0.0% Stage 3 Mandatory Up to 30%10,000 $29.63 $45.29 $2.26 $77.18 3.0% Stage 4 Mandatory Up to 40%10,000 $29.63 $45.29 $4.53 $79.45 6.0% Stage 5 Mandatory Up to 50%10,000 $29.63 $45.29 $7.70 $82.62 10.3% Stage 6 Mandatory Over 50%10,000 $29.63 $45.29 $9.96 $84.88 13.3% City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Conclusion 28 CONCLUSION This Study used methodologies that are aligned with applicable laws (including California’s Proposition 218) and are consistent with industry standard practices for rate setting as promulgated by AWWA. The proposed annual adjustments to the water rates are expected to enable the City to continue to provide reliable water service and deliver an increase in capital reinvestment in critical infrastructure. The water rates, including the Water Shortage Surcharges, will need to be adopted in accordance with Proposition 218, which will require a detailed notice describing the proposed charges to be mailed to each affected property owner or customer at least 45 days prior to conducting a public hearing to adopt the rates. The City should consult with its legal counsel on the appropriate procedures for those fees. The City Council has adopted Rate Setting Procedures (Resolution No. 2025 -066). Those Procedures document the City’s compliance with procedural requirements of (a) Proposition 218 (California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 6; as it is implemented by the Legislature at Government Code Sections 53750- 53759.2) as well as (b) the procedures for requiring potential challengers to exhaust administrative remedies by filing timely written objections pursuant to Assembly Bill 2257 (“AB 2257”). Based on those Procedures, members of the public have an opportunity to participate in the public hearing by one or more methods: providing spoken comments during the hearing, a written protest, or a written objection. As with past practice, the City should monitor financial conditions and needs on an ongoing (annual) basis and update the financial plan model if conditions or plans change sufficiently to warrant an update. Actual future conditions, such as water demand, water sales revenue, water purchase costs, operating and maintenance expenses, capital preservation project costs/timing, project financing, etc., may differ from the financial plan assumptions reflected herein. Material differences affecting the overall financial condition of the water system may warrant closer review and/or an City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Conclusion 29 earlier update. The need for and magnitude of annual water rate increases may also be affected by differences between assumed and actual conditions. City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Schedules 1 SCHEDULES _____________________________________________________ Schedule 1 – Projected Operating Expenses Schedule 2 - Capital Spending Plan Schedule 3 - Cash Flow Pro Formas (Funds 3430 and 3433) City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Schedules 1 S1 Budgeted and Projected Operating Expenses Schedule 1 FY2025/26 FY2026/27 FY2027/28 FY2028/29 FY2029/30 FY2030/31 FY2031/32 FY2032/33 FY2033/34 FY2034/35 SALARIES AND WAGES 1 Salaries & Wages $1,636,000 $1,718,000 $1,804,000 $1,894,000 $1,989,000 $2,088,000 $2,192,000 $2,302,000 $2,417,000 $2,538,000 2 Overtime $35,000 $37,000 $39,000 $41,000 $43,000 $45,000 $47,000 $49,000 $52,000 $54,000 3 Annual Admin Pay $7,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $9,000 $9,000 $10,000 $10,000 $11,000 $11,000 4 Stipend Pay $12,000 $13,000 $14,000 $14,000 $15,000 $16,000 $17,000 $17,000 $18,000 $19,000 5 Acting Pay $8,000 $8,000 $9,000 $9,000 $10,000 $10,000 $11,000 $11,000 $12,000 $12,000 6 Stand-By Weekends $15,000 $16,000 $17,000 $17,000 $18,000 $19,000 $20,000 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 7 Stand-By Weekday $20,000 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 $24,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 $30,000 $31,000 BENEFITS 8 Allowance Auto $8,000 $8,000 $9,000 $9,000 $10,000 $10,000 $11,000 $11,000 $12,000 $12,000 9 Medicare $23,000 $24,000 $25,000 $27,000 $28,000 $29,000 $31,000 $32,000 $34,000 $36,000 10 Benefits-Medical $224,000 $235,000 $247,000 $260,000 $273,000 $286,000 $301,000 $316,000 $331,000 $348,000 11 Benefits-Vision $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 12 Benefits-Life Insurance $4,000 $4,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $7,000 13 Benefits-Dental $15,000 $16,000 $17,000 $17,000 $18,000 $19,000 $20,000 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 14 Benefits-EAP $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 15 Disability-Long Term $9,000 $9,000 $9,000 $10,000 $10,000 $11,000 $11,000 $12,000 $13,000 $13,000 16 Disability-Short Term $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 17 PERS-ER $148,000 $155,000 $163,000 $171,000 $180,000 $189,000 $198,000 $208,000 $218,000 $229,000 18 PERS- ER UAL $139,000 $146,000 $153,000 $161,000 $169,000 $178,000 $186,000 $196,000 $206,000 $216,000 19 RHSA Plan $20,000 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 $24,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 $30,000 $31,000 20 Workers Comp $26,000 $27,000 $29,000 $30,000 $32,000 $33,000 $35,000 $37,000 $39,000 $41,000 SERVICES AND SUPPLIES 21 Postage & Shipping $66,000 $70,000 $73,000 $77,000 $81,000 $85,000 $89,000 $93,000 $98,000 $103,000 22 Office Expense $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 23 Equipment, Small Office & Tool $65,000 $68,000 $72,000 $75,000 $79,000 $83,000 $87,000 $91,000 $96,000 $101,000 24 Communication-Phone $15,000 $16,000 $17,000 $17,000 $18,000 $19,000 $20,000 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 25 Software Lic. & Sbscrptn Maint $55,000 $57,000 $58,000 $60,000 $62,000 $64,000 $66,000 $68,000 $70,000 $72,000 26 Rental-Equipment $10,000 $10,000 $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $13,000 $13,000 27 Uniform - Purchase $10,000 $10,000 $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $13,000 $13,000 28 Dues & Subscriptions $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $5,000 29 Hazard Material $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 30 Meter & Supplies Existing $60,000 $62,000 $64,000 $66,000 $68,000 $70,000 $72,000 $74,000 $76,000 $78,000 31 Meter & SUpplies New $120,000 $124,000 $127,000 $131,000 $135,000 $139,000 $143,000 $148,000 $152,000 $157,000 32 Conservation Measures $25,000 $26,000 $27,000 $27,000 $28,000 $29,000 $30,000 $31,000 $32,000 $33,000 33 License & Permit $70,000 $72,000 $74,000 $76,000 $79,000 $81,000 $84,000 $86,000 $89,000 $91,000 34 Bank & Merchant Fees $125,000 $129,000 $133,000 $137,000 $141,000 $145,000 $149,000 $154,000 $158,000 $163,000 35 Tax-Property Tax $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 36 Travel and Training $15,000 $15,000 $16,000 $16,000 $17,000 $17,000 $18,000 $18,000 $19,000 $20,000 37 Contract Services - Staffing $25,000 $26,000 $27,000 $27,000 $28,000 $29,000 $30,000 $31,000 $32,000 $33,000 38 Contract - Outside Services $860,000 $886,000 $912,000 $940,000 $968,000 $997,000 $1,027,000 $1,058,000 $1,089,000 $1,122,000 39 Contracts - Ground WTR $90,000 $93,000 $95,000 $98,000 $101,000 $104,000 $107,000 $111,000 $114,000 $117,000 40 Professional Legal Fees $50,000 $52,000 $53,000 $55,000 $56,000 $58,000 $60,000 $61,000 $63,000 $65,000 41 Fuel $50,000 $52,000 $53,000 $55,000 $56,000 $58,000 $60,000 $61,000 $63,000 $65,000 42 Repair & Maintenance $40,000 $41,000 $42,000 $44,000 $45,000 $46,000 $48,000 $49,000 $51,000 $52,000 43 Utility-Electric $795,000 $819,000 $843,000 $869,000 $895,000 $922,000 $949,000 $978,000 $1,007,000 $1,037,000 44 Utility-Water and Sewer $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 45 Water Purchase $3,830,000 $4,289,000 $4,804,000 $5,284,000 $5,813,000 $6,394,000 $7,033,000 $7,736,000 $8,510,000 $9,361,000 46 Services - Info Tech $102,000 $105,000 $108,000 $111,000 $115,000 $118,000 $122,000 $125,000 $129,000 $133,000 47 Services - Fleet $87,000 $90,000 $92,000 $95,000 $98,000 $101,000 $104,000 $107,000 $110,000 $114,000 48 Services - Vehicle Replacement $202,000 $256,000 $295,000 $321,000 $362,000 $388,000 $425,000 $455,000 $472,000 $472,000 49 Services - Gen Liab ISF $166,000 $183,000 $201,000 $221,000 $243,000 $267,000 $294,000 $323,000 $356,000 $391,000 50 Special Dept Expense $95,000 $98,000 $101,000 $104,000 $107,000 $110,000 $113,000 $117,000 $120,000 $124,000 51 Other Exp-Repair System $175,000 $180,000 $186,000 $191,000 $197,000 $203,000 $209,000 $215,000 $222,000 $228,000 52 Cost Allocation Plan Expense $794,000 $817,000 $842,000 $867,000 $893,000 $920,000 $947,000 $976,000 $1,005,000 $1,035,000 53 T-Out General Fund CERBT $108,000 $111,000 $115,000 $118,000 $122,000 $125,000 $129,000 $133,000 $137,000 $141,000 54 Capital Asset-Equipment $60,000 $62,000 $64,000 $66,000 $68,000 $70,000 $72,000 $74,000 $76,000 $0 55 Capital Asset-Vehicles $400,000 $200,000 $300,000 $200,000 $275,000 $225,000 $125,000 $0 $0 $0 56 Total Operating Expenses $10,930,000 $11,501,000 $12,424,000 $13,107,000 $14,047,000 $14,911,000 $15,809,000 $16,747,000 $17,891,000 $19,026,000 City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Schedules 1 S2 Schedule 2 – 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan * * Expressed in 2025 dollars FY 2024/25 FY2025/26 FY2026/27 FY2027/28 FY2028/29 FY2029/30 FY2030/31 Funding Notes 1 Water System Controls and Telemetry $452,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 2 Snyder Lane Parallel Pipeline Ph. 2 (RPX to Hinebaugh Creek)$300,000 $4,000,000 3 Utilities Office $250,000 $400,000 4 Water Meter Replacements $4,180,000 $1,710,000 $1,500,000 50% funded by Sewer 5 Well and Tank Site Improvements (formerly Seismic Upgrades)$3,651,000 $9,509,000 Proposed debt funding, potential grant funding (60%) 6 Well/Tank Site Improvements Ph. 2 & Water Quality $2,000,000 $2,000,000 7 A Section/Commerce Water Line Replacement Ph 2 $1,184,000 8 Water Tank #9 $1,397,000 $2,500,000 Funded by capacity charges 9 Tank Interior Recoating $150,000 $1,000,000 $150,000 $2,000,000 10 SCADA Upgrade & PRV Integration $125,000 $500,000 11 Water Line Replacement Program $315,000 $4,200,000 12 Pipe Condition Assessment $500,000 $500,000 13 Aqueduct Tie-Ins and Pipe Runs Upsizing $300,000 $900,000 14 Total:$11,114,000 $2,735,000 $12,584,000 $5,125,000 $5,075,000 $5,340,000 $4,325,000 City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Schedules 1 S3 Schedule 3 - Cash Flow Pro Forma for Water Utility Fund (Funds 3430 and 3433) Budget Budget Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 FY2033 FY2034 FY2035 FY2036 1 Rate Revenue Increase:14.00%9.00%9.00%7.00%6.00%6.00%4.00%4.00%4.00%4.00%4.00% Rate Revenue 2 Utility Rate Revenue $12,142,000 $12,142,000 $13,963,000 $15,360,000 $16,896,000 $18,248,000 $19,525,000 $20,892,000 $21,937,000 $23,033,000 $24,185,000 $25,395,000 3 Change due to growth & use $121,000 $140,000 $154,000 $169,000 $182,000 $195,000 $209,000 $219,000 $230,000 $242,000 $254,000 4 Increase due to rate adjustments $850,000 $1,257,000 $1,382,000 $1,183,000 $1,095,000 $1,172,000 $836,000 $877,000 $461,000 $484,000 $508,000 Non-Rate Revenues 5 Penalties $83,000 $101,000 $104,000 $107,000 $110,000 $114,000 $117,000 $120,000 $124,000 $128,000 $132,000 $136,000 6 Interest Earnings $347,000 $606,000 $106,000 $99,000 $61,000 $95,000 $91,000 $112,000 $133,000 $153,000 $164,000 $174,000 7 Operating Revenue $361,000 $628,000 $677,000 $714,000 $755,000 $790,000 $824,000 $859,000 $887,000 $915,000 $945,000 $975,000 8 Transfer In $0 $400,000 $200,000 $300,000 $200,000 $275,000 $225,000 $125,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 9 Total Revenue $12,933,000 $14,848,000 $16,447,000 $18,116,000 $19,374,000 $20,799,000 $22,149,000 $23,153,000 $24,177,000 $24,920,000 $26,152,000 $27,442,000 O&M Costs 10 Salaries $1,835,000 $1,734,000 $1,820,000 $1,911,000 $2,007,000 $2,107,000 $2,213,000 $2,323,000 $2,439,000 $2,561,000 $2,689,000 $2,824,000 11 Benefits $614,000 $623,000 $655,000 $687,000 $722,000 $758,000 $796,000 $835,000 $877,000 $921,000 $967,000 $1,015,000 12 Operational Expenses $1,213,000 $1,231,000 $1,059,000 $1,188,000 $1,118,000 $1,224,000 $1,207,000 $1,140,000 $1,049,000 $1,085,000 $1,044,000 $1,080,000 13 Professional Services $820,000 $1,025,000 $1,056,000 $1,087,000 $1,120,000 $1,154,000 $1,188,000 $1,224,000 $1,261,000 $1,298,000 $1,337,000 $1,378,000 14 Insurance $322,000 $166,000 $183,000 $201,000 $221,000 $243,000 $267,000 $294,000 $323,000 $356,000 $391,000 $431,000 15 Fees and Subscriptions $162,000 $182,000 $188,000 $193,000 $199,000 $206,000 $212,000 $218,000 $225,000 $232,000 $240,000 $247,000 16 Utilities $879,000 $846,000 $871,000 $897,000 $924,000 $952,000 $980,000 $1,010,000 $1,040,000 $1,071,000 $1,103,000 $1,136,000 17 Cost Allocation Plan $358,000 $794,000 $817,000 $842,000 $867,000 $893,000 $920,000 $947,000 $976,000 $1,005,000 $1,035,000 $1,066,000 18 Purchase of Water $3,300,000 $3,830,000 $4,289,000 $4,804,000 $5,284,000 $5,813,000 $6,394,000 $7,033,000 $7,736,000 $8,510,000 $9,361,000 $10,297,000 19 Transfer Out $111,000 $108,000 $111,000 $115,000 $118,000 $122,000 $125,000 $129,000 $133,000 $137,000 $141,000 $145,000 20 Internal Services $328,000 $391,000 $450,000 $495,000 $528,000 $574,000 $607,000 $650,000 $687,000 $711,000 $718,000 $725,000 21 Total Operating Expenses $9,942,000 $10,930,000 $11,499,000 $12,420,000 $13,108,000 $14,046,000 $14,909,000 $15,803,000 $16,746,000 $17,887,000 $19,026,000 $20,344,000 Capital and Debt 22 Total Capital Spending $11,114,000 $2,735,000 $12,962,000 $5,437,000 $5,546,000 $6,010,000 $5,014,000 $5,109,000 $5,263,000 $5,421,000 $5,583,000 $5,751,000 23 Cash Funded Capital Projects $7,627,000 $1,880,000 $2,395,000 $5,437,000 $2,814,000 $6,010,000 $5,014,000 $5,109,000 $5,263,000 $5,421,000 $5,583,000 $5,751,000 24 Capacity Charge Funded Capital Projects*$1,397,028 $0 $0 $0 $2,731,818 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 25 Debt Funded Capital Projects $0 $0 $9,795,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 26 Grant Funded Capital Projects $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 27 Sewer Funded Capital Projects $2,090,000 $855,000 $773,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 28 Existing Internal Loan Repayment $298,000 $301,000 $298,000 $300,000 $301,000 $152,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 29 New Debt Service $0 $849,000 $849,000 $849,000 $849,000 $849,000 $849,000 $849,000 $849,000 $849,000 $849,000 30 Total Capital Expenses $7,925,000 $2,181,000 $3,542,000 $6,586,000 $3,964,000 $7,011,000 $5,863,000 $5,958,000 $6,112,000 $6,270,000 $6,432,000 $6,600,000 31 Total Revenue Requirement $17,867,000 $13,111,000 $15,041,000 $19,006,000 $17,072,000 $21,057,000 $20,772,000 $21,761,000 $22,858,000 $24,157,000 $25,458,000 $26,944,000 32 Beginning Year Balance $6,719,000 $1,785,000 $3,522,000 $4,928,000 $4,038,000 $6,340,000 $6,082,000 $7,459,000 $8,851,000 $10,170,000 $10,933,000 $11,627,000 33 Surplus/(Shortfall)($4,934,000)$1,737,000 $1,406,000 ($890,000)$2,302,000 ($258,000)$1,377,000 $1,392,000 $1,319,000 $763,000 $694,000 $498,000 34 End of Year Balance $1,785,000 $3,522,000 $4,928,000 $4,038,000 $6,340,000 $6,082,000 $7,459,000 $8,851,000 $10,170,000 $10,933,000 $11,627,000 $12,125,000 35 Combined Reserve Target $6,620,000 $7,116,000 $7,823,000 $8,285,000 $8,629,000 $9,024,000 $9,379,000 $9,826,000 $10,298,000 $10,868,000 $11,438,000 $12,097,000 36 Debt Coverage Ratio na na 5.48 6.36 7.03 7.78 8.53 8.66 8.75 8.28 8.39 8.36 * The sufficiency of capacity charge revenue to fund these projects was not within the scope of this study. En Español Este aviso contiene información importante sobre las propuestas tarifas de agua potable. Para solicitar una copia en español, llame al (707) 585-6750. To Our Residents and Property Owners: The City Council will hold a public hearing on December 02, 2025, beginning at 5:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the City Council Chambers, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California, 94928. During the hearing, City Council will consider increasing the rate charged by the City for providing water service to customers, and all members of the public will be provided an opportunity during the public hearing to address the City Council to express support or opposition to the updated water service rates. As a matter of practice water rates are studied every 3-5 years. The rates are proposed to be increased because although the 2021 Water Rate Study adopted rate increases through January of 2026, this increase is not expected to be sufficient for continuing safe, reliable, and efficient operations of the water system. This shortfall is due to the impacts of previous drought restrictions, from which the Utility has not yet financially recovered, and higher than anticipated inflation that together have reduced available cash reserves. In addition to necessary capital improvements, new technology for water meters has been delayed due to funding constraints and needs to be addressed to improve meter reading capabilities and customer service with regard to water leaks. Recently the City has purchased approximately 60% of its water from Sonoma Water. Sonoma Water costs have increased significantly over the last six years. Costs have gone from $2.0 million in FY 2019-20 to a projected $3.8 million in FY 2025-26, an increase of $1.8 million or 90%. Using our ground water is less expensive than purchasing water, but that requires that we maintain our wells and pumps in order to use that resource. Inflation has had a tremendous impact on the water utility. In the 2021 Water Rate Study FY 2025-26 operating costs were projected to be $9.2 million. The 2025 Water Rate Study projects FY 2025-26 operating costs at $10.9 million, a difference of $1.7 million dollars, or 19%. If approved by City Council, the updated water service rates will generate revenue that is sufficient to pay for the City’s costs of providing the water services to customers. The amount of the proposed updated rates will incorporate annual cost of living adjustments over five years, with effective dates on January 1, 2026, and July 1 of each of the following years 2026 through 2029. See full notice below. Details regarding the City’s calculation of the water service rates and the corresponding water services provided by the City are documented in the 2025 Water Rate Study Final Report. This report is available online at: https://www.rpcity.org/586/Water-Sewer-Rate-Updates-What-to-Know 2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED INCREASED WATER RATES WHERE: Rohnert Park City Hall – Council Chamber 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, California WHEN: Tuesday, December 02, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter is reached on the agenda. PURPOSE: To receive public comment on a proposal for the City Council to consider adopting increased water rates in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park. At the public hearing, the City Council will accept oral and written testimony, as well as written protests, regarding the water rates. Why am I Receiving this Notice? You are receiving this notice because our records indicate that you are listed as an account holder and/or as the owner of a parcel receiving water service from the City of Rohnert Park (City). The purpose of this notice is to give you information about proposed increased water rates to be effective January 1, 2026, and how you can participate in the rate-setting process, including opportunities to participate in the public hearing or submit a written protest or written objection. Rate History The City of Rohnert Park works to ensure that residents and businesses receive safe, and reliable water service, and that the City’s water system is maintained to all required standards in order to protect our community’s health and safety, as well as the environment. As a matter of practice water rates are studied every 3-5 years. The City last conducted a water rate study in 2021, which resulted in the adoption of a water rate schedule with rate adjustments through January 2026. A recent financial plan update, however, recommends that a new schedule of rate increases should replace the previously adopted rates in order to generate sufficient revenue to support the water utility’s long-term rehabilitation and replacement needs. The new financial plan includes the cost of critical capital projects identified by the City’s engineering team. The financial plan concludes that these capital projects will need to be deferred if water rates are not sufficiently increased. The full report (City of Rohnert Park 2025 Water Rate Study Report, September 15, 2025) can be viewed at www.rpcity.org/586/Water-Sewer-Rate-Updates- What-to-Know. Rate Calculation Methodology The structure for the water rates follows a common industry practice with a two-part structure that is comprised of a fixed components (the Service Charge) and a consumption-based Usage Rate. The Service Charge is composed of a customer charge (which is assessed equally to all accounts) and a meter charge (which is assessed based on meter size). The Service Charge is designed to fund a majority of the utility’s fixed costs, including administrative costs, capital preservation projects, and a portion of salaries and benefits. 3 The Usage Charge is assessed based on actual water usage. The Usage Charge is tiered for single family residential customers and flat (or “uniform”) for all other customers. The basis for the difference between Tier 1 versus Tier 2 rates is the fact that Tier 1 rates reflect the cost of providing local groundwater while Tier 2 rates reflect the cost of providing (more expensive) imported water. The tiered rates are designed such that the average of all tiered water sold to Single Family Residential is equal to the uniform rate. The Tier 1 rates are charged for the use of up to 3,000 gallons of water per month by single family residential customers. Proposed New Water Rates In September 2025, the City completed a 10-year water financial plan study. The financial plan reflects the water utility’s operation and maintenance costs (including wholesale water costs), debt service obligations, and capital program needs with consideration of financial reserves. The table below presents the percentage increases and proposed water rates for the next five years. The rates proposed for January 1, 2026 would supersede the previously adopted water rates for January 1, 2026. January 1, 2026 July 1, 2026 2 July 1, 2027 July 1, 2026 July 1, 2029 Rate Revenue Increases:14.0% 9.0% 9.0% 7.0% 6.0% Current Single Family Usage Rate ($/gal.) Tier 11 $0.004133 $0.004712 $0.005136 $0.005598 $0.005990 $0.006349 Tier 2 $0.005718 $0.006519 $0.007106 $0.007746 $0.008288 $0.008785 Multi-Family and Non-Residential Usage Rate ($/gal.) Uniform Rate $0.005013 $0.005715 $0.006229 $0.006790 $0.007265 $0.007701 Fixed Monthly Service Charges Up to 1"$34.30 $39.10 $42.62 $46.46 $49.71 $52.69 1.5"$63.99 $72.95 $79.51 $86.67 $92.74 $98.30 2"$99.62 $113.57 $123.79 $134.93 $144.37 $153.04 3"$182.75 $208.34 $227.09 $247.52 $264.85 $280.74 4"$301.52 $343.73 $374.67 $408.39 $436.98 $463.19 6"$598.45 $682.23 $743.63 $810.56 $867.30 $919.34 8"$954.75 $1,088.42 $1,186.37 $1,293.15 $1,383.67 $1,466.69 Monthly Fire Protection Service Charge 2"$25.80 $29.41 $32.06 $34.94 $37.39 $39.63 3"$32.85 $37.45 $40.82 $44.49 $47.61 $50.46 4"$41.08 $46.83 $51.05 $55.64 $59.53 $63.11 5"$50.47 $57.54 $62.71 $68.36 $73.14 $77.53 6"$55.15 $62.87 $68.53 $74.70 $79.93 $84.72 8"$75.09 $85.60 $93.31 $101.70 $108.82 $115.35 10"$90.35 $103.00 $112.27 $122.37 $130.94 $138.80 12"$105.60 $120.38 $131.22 $143.03 $153.04 $162.22 1 For the first 3,000 gallons per month 2 This marks a change from the current practice of changing rates on the first of the calendar year. Proposed 4 How Much Will My Water Bill Be? Monthly water bills vary for each customer depending on the customer classification (single family or multi-family/non-residential), the size of the water meter, and the amount of water consumed. As an example for the water rates proposed to be effective January 1, 2026, the monthly charge for a single family residential customer using 6,200 gallons (an average amount of water) would equal the service charge for a 1” meter ($39.10 ) plus the tier 1 cost (3,000 gallons x $0.004712 = $14.14) plus the Tier 2 cost (3,200 gallons x $0.06519 = $20.86) for a total bill of $74.10. You can find more information about your water usage patterns from your past water bills. If you would like assistance in determining how the proposed water rates may affect your water bill, please contact a Customer Service Representative at (707) 585-6750 Monday through Friday from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Temporary Water Shortage Rate Surcharge Water usage restrictions during extended drought have had a financial impact on the water utility because the reduction in water sales revenue exceeded the reduction in water system costs. The proposed temporary water shortage rate surcharges were calculated by estimating the financial deficit created by water shortage conditions during defined water shortage stages (as defined by the City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan). Temporary water shortage surcharges would be applied to the water usage rates (but not the monthly service charges) and are expressed as a percentage of the then-current water usage rates. The percentage amounts of the water shortage surcharge set forth below have not changed since initially approved on February 8, 2022. (Resolution No. 2022-020) As an example, during FY 2025/26, a Stage 4 water shortage rate surcharge (10 percent) would temporarily increase the Tier 1 residential water usage rate from $0.004712 per gallon to $0.005180 per gallon (a surcharge of $0.000468 per gallon). Other Water Usage rates would be similarly affected. Monthly service charges would be unaffected. The temporary surcharge would be repealed when the City Council declares an end to mandatory water use restrictions. At this time the City Council has no plans to implement the proposed temporary water shortage rate surcharges. SUBMITTING A WRITTEN PROTEST OR A WRITTEN OBJECTION The proposed increases in water rates are considered property-related fees and charges governed by California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 6, Government Code sections 53750 through 53759.2, and other applicable laws that together are commonly referred to as Proposition 218. There are multiple ways that property owners and ratepayers subject to the proposed water rates Normal Supply Stage 1 Voluntary Stage 2 Mandatory Stage 3 Mandatory Stage 4 Mandatory Stage 5 Mandatory Stage 6 Mandatory Assumed Demand Reduction -->None 5% 15%25%35% 45% 50% Water Shortage Surcharge 1-->NA None None 5%10% 17% 22% 1 These percentages are applied to then-current Water Usage rates. 5 may participate in the Proposition 218 process, including providing spoken comments during the public hearing, filing a written protest, or a written objection. How Do I File a Written Protest? Proposition 218 allows the owner of record of a parcel that receives water service to submit a written protest at or before the close of the December 2, 2025, Public Hearing. If the person signing the protest is not listed as the owner on the last equalized assessment roll for Sonoma County, the protest must be accompanied by written evidence that the signer owns the property. In rental situations, if a tenant is the utility account holder for water service, the tenant also has the right to submit a written protest for the property. Only one protest per parcel will be counted. If valid protests are filed on behalf of a majority of the parcels that receive water service, the increased water rates will not be adopted. All Protests Must: • Be in writing with the printed name and an original signature from the property owner of record or tenant directly liable for the payment of the fee/account holder. • Identify the parcel for which the protest is filed, by street address or Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN). • State that the signer opposes the proposed water rates. • Be received at City Hall at or before the close of the public hearing that will begin at 5:00 p.m. on December 2, 2025 at Rohnert Park City Hall – Council Chamber, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California. A protest may be: (a) mailed to the City Clerk at 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928; or (b) delivered to the same address during regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M; or (c) delivered to the Rohnert Park City Hall Council Chamber so that it is received by the City Clerk at or before the close of the public hearing. Email, fax, or telephone, and oral protests of any kind will not be counted. Mailed protests received after the close of the public hearing will not be counted, even if they were postmarked earlier. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies – HOW TO SUBMIT A WRITTEN Objection Notice is hereby given that any person who wishes to object to the proposed water rates must first file a timely written objection as described below. Written objections will only be considered timely and valid if they meet the following procedural and substantive requirements: • Be in writing with the printed name and an original signature from the property owner of record or tenant directly liable for the payment of the fee/account holder. • Identify the parcel for which the protest is filed, by street address or Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN). • Be received by the City Clerk by no later than 5:00 p.m., November 12, 2025, at 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 95928. Note that this date is earlier than the deadline to receive written protests, which must be received before the close of the public hearing. 6 • Written objections must include the following information: o A statement that your communication constitutes a written objection. o A description of the nature of the written objection, with sufficient specificity to allow the City to respond in writing. The objection must state the specific facts and grounds for concerns with the proposed water rates and why the rates do not comply with the law, and more specifically, Proposition 218. The objection should include the desired resolution or outcome. A statement that the proposed water rates violate Proposition 218 without an explanation as to the basis of your claim is not sufficient to constitute a valid written objection. (See Utility Rate Setting Procedures, Section 3(c), at www.rpcity.org/586/Water-Sewer-Rate-Updates- What-to-Know.) At its December 2, 2025 meeting to be held at Rohnert Park City Hall – Council Chambers at 5:00 p.m. at 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA, the City Council shall consider any timely written objections and written responses prepared by the City. The City’s responses shall explain the substantive basis for retaining or altering the proposed water rates in response to written objections, including any reasons to reject requested changes. Limitations for Challenging Proposed Rates You are hereby notified that, in order to file a judicial action or legal proceeding to challenge the proposed rates described in this Notice, you must file a timely written objection, and you must commence the action or proceeding within 120 days of the City’s approval of the rates. Failure to submit a timely written legal objection bars any right to challenge the proposed rates through a judicial action or legal proceeding. (Government Code Section 53759.1(b).) There is a 120-day statute of limitations for judicially challenging the rates set forth in this Notice that runs from the date of the City action to approve the rates, and any legal action is limited to the issues raised in a timely legal objection. (Government Code Section 53759.) 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 make sure the City Clerk’s Office is notified as soon as possible if you have a visual impairment requiring meeting materials to be produced in another format (Braille, audio-tape, etc.). Questions? For more information or to ask questions, please call Utility Billing at (707) 585-6750 Monday through Friday from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M, visit www.rpcity.org/586/Water-Sewer-Rate-Updates- What-to-Know or scan the QR Code. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-066 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ESTABLISHING UTILITY RATE SETTING PROCEDURES (FOR WATER RATES AND SEWER RATES) UNDER PROPOSITION 218, AND ASSEMBLY BILL 2257 GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 53750 THROUGH 53759.2); AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2011-25 WHEREAS,The City of Rohnert Park("City")provides utility services for water service and sewer service to property owners(who may also be referred to as"owners")within the relevant City service area, and establishes the amount of water rates and sewer rates to be charged customers in accordance with Rohnert Park Municipal Code ("Municipal Code") Chapter 13.44 and applicable law; and WHEREAS, California law authorizes the City to charge a fee to the property owners or property owners' "tenants" (who may be collectively referred to as "ratepayers" or"customers") for the proportionate cost of providing water services and sewer services to each customer in accordance with the procedural and substantive requirements of the voter-approved ballot measure known as "Proposition 218" (California Constitution Article XIII D; as it is implemented by the Legislature at Government Code sections 53750—53759.2;and as it has been judicially interpreted by appellate court decisions). The City refers to those fees as water rates and sewer rates (which may be referenced herein individually as"water rates"or"sewer rates,"or referenced collectively as"rate"or"rates"); and WHEREAS, Under Proposition 218, the City's water rates and sewer rates are each considered to be a "fee" for a "property-related service" (also referred to as a "property-related fee"), subject to the particular requirements of Constitution Article XIII D, Section 6. A property- related fee is one imposed upon any parcel or person as an incident of property ownership. In general, the City may only increase its existing rates if the City (1) calculates the rates in accordance with Proposition 218, (2) conducts a public hearing before the City Council ("City Council"), as described in this resolution, and (3) a"timely written protest" is not submitted by property owners representing a majority of the parcels served by the City; and WHEREAS, Under Government Code sections 53759.1 and 53759.2 ("AB 2257"; Chapter 561, Statutes of 2024), the City may establish a supplemental process for objecting property owners to exhaust administrative remedies, also described in this resolution, by which the City will take specified actions in response to any "timely written objection." Any timely written objection will also be counted by the City as a timely written protest. However, under this process, only an owner who submits a timely written objection will have a right to challenge a proposed increase in sewer service charges through a legal proceeding. (These supplemental processes were authorized by Assembly Bill No. 2257, Chapter 561, Statutes of 2024, effective January 1, 2025.); and WHEREAS, the purpose of this resolution is to provide a meaningful opportunity for a property owner to submit a written objection to a proposed new or increased rates before resorting to litigation after the new or increased rates are approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, this resolution is intended to provide a procedure for property owners to submit a written objection regarding a new or increased rates to the City's attention early in the rate consideration process, and to provide an opportunity for the City to address or resolve any objections before the City Council makes a final decision on whether to adopt a proposed rate pursuant to Proposition 218; and WHEREAS, this resolution will identify the process the City will follow in order to implement the administrative remedies to be exhausted by property owners under Government Code sections 53759.1.In general,the City will make available the proposed rates,post the written basis for the proposed rates on its internet website,provide 45 days for a property owner to review the proposed rates and timely submit to the City a written objection to the rates that specifies the grounds for alleging noncompliance with Proposition 218, and require the City to consider and respond in writing to timely submitted objections prior to the close of the public hearing described in these recitals; and WHEREAS, for any rates approved by the City implementing the procedures described in this resolution, a person or entity shall be prohibited from bringing a judicial action or proceeding alleging noncompliance with Article XIII D of the California Constitution for those rates, unless that person or entity has timely submitted to the City a written objection to that rate that specifies the grounds for alleging noncompliance with Proposition 218; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby intends to adopt the exhaustion of administrative remedies procedure as outlined in Government Code section 53759.1, and the administrative record principles contained in Government Code section 53759.2; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted Resolution No. 2011-25 to establish procedures for conducting protest hearings for property related fees (such as the water rates and sewer rates) in accordance with Proposition 218, and the City intends Resolution No. 2011-25 to be superseded and replaced by this resolution in order to establish procedural implementation of Proposition 218 as well as AB 2257. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park, as follows: A. The City Council hereby adopts the utility rate setting procedures attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and incorporated herein by reference ("Utility Rate Setting Procedures"). The Utility Rate Setting Procedures explicitly incorporate and implement the requirements contained in Proposition 218 and the procedures by which property owners are required to exhaust administrative remedies as set forth in Government Code section 53759.1, subdivision(c). B. For any rate adopted or approved by the City implementing the procedures described in this resolution, a person or entity shall be prohibited from bringing a judicial action or proceeding alleging noncompliance with Article XIII D of the California Constitution for those rates,unless that person or entity has timely submitted to the City a written objection to those rates in accordance with this resolution that specifies the grounds for alleging noncompliance with Proposition 218. C. The City Council hereby adopts the administrative record principles contained in Government Code section 53759.2. Resolution 2025-066 Page 2 of 3 D. This resolution will take effect immediately upon adoption by City Council, and will apply to any proposed new or increased rates of which notice is provided in accordance with this resolution. E. The City Council authorizes the City Manager to take such other and additional actions as may be reasonably necessary to implement the purpose of this resolution and implement the exhaustion of administrative remedies procedure adopted herein. F. The City Council hereby repeals Resolution No. 2011-25. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ON this 26th day of August, 2025. CITY . 40, O ERT PARK y-A.W. IdGi •' ,ayor ATTEST: Sylvia Lopez Cuevas, City Clerk AP R D AS TO FORM: ich lle Marche enyon, City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A, Utility Rate Setting Procedures ADAMS ELWARD: 4 V 4_ RODRIGUEZ: SANBORN. GIUDICE: AYES: ( 5. NOES: (AB NT: ( ) ABSTA A Resolution 2025-066 Page 3 of 3 Resolution No. 2025-066 (Exhibit “A”) Page 1 of 6 Utility Rate Setting Procedures These “Utility Rate Setting Procedures” (“Procedures”) describe the processes that will be followed by the City of Rohnert Park (“City”) in establishing any new or increased water rates or sewer rates, as summarized in the Resolution identified in the header of this Exhibit “A.” The Utility Rate Setting Procedures include compliance with Proposition 218 as well as the procedures for exhausting administrative remedies under Government Code section 53759.1 known as “AB 2257”). 1. Overview of Exhaustion Procedure (AB 2257) The City will follow the “exhaustion procedure” set forth herein, to be conducted concurrently with the Proposition 218 process, for the City Council’s consideration of any proposed new or increased water rates or sewer rates. This exhaustion procedure shall be conducted in accordance with “Proposition 218” (California Constitution Article XIII D; as it is implemented by the Legislature at Government Code sections 53750 – 53759.2; and as it has been judicially interpreted by appellate court decisions), and the particular procedures set forth in Government Code section 53759.1. The exhaustion procedure provides an opportunity for record owners to submit a “timely written objection” to identify substantive bases for asserting proposed water rates or sewer rates do not comply with Proposition 218. NOTE that a “record owner” may be referred to in these Procedures as the “owner” or property owner”; and a “record owner” shall include a tenant who is directly liable to pay the rates. The processes described herein may be referred to as “these Procedures.” As used in these procedures, the term “rates” may be used to refer to a proposed update to either the City’s water rates or sewer rates. a. City staff will post on its internet website a notice of the exhaustion procedure, and this notice will be prominently incorporated in the Proposition 218 public hearing notice mailed to each record owner. b. The notice will identify the date and time by which timely written objections must be submitted to the City, and the date will be no less than 45 calendar days after the notice is mailed to record owners. c. City staff will review timely written objections and draft written responses providing the substantive basis for retaining or altering the proposed rates in response to the written objections. City staff will present its written responses to the City Council prior to the close of the public hearing for the Proposition 218 protest hearing, and the City Council will review to determine whether action is needed in response to the written objections or written responses. d. Following the City Council’s review and response to timely written objections and written responses, it is within the discretion of the City Council to proceed with the Proposition 218 protest hearing process, as described herein, to consider approval of the proposed rates. e. Rate Challenger Must Exhaust Administrative Remedies. No claim, suit for damages, suit for injunctive relief, petition for writ of mandamus, or administrative or judicial proceeding shall be brought against the City (including the City Council, or its Resolution No. 2025-066 (Exhibit “A”) Page 2 of 6 employees, officers, or designees) regarding a challenge to the proposed rates unless the challenging party first exhausts its administrative remedies by complying with these Procedures and submitting to the City a timely written objection. 2. Notice of Proposition 218 Public Hearing and Initiating Exhaustion Procedure (AB 2257) Prior to approving or imposing any new or increased rates, the City will conduct a public hearing and provide prior written notice to each record owner of the hearing and the exhaustion procedure as described in these Procedures. To the extent the City sends a regular billing statement for water service or sewer service provided to a “customer” (e.g., a “tenant” or other ratepayer”) who is not the record owner, the City will also mail the written notice to the customer at the address for the billing statement. The City will mail the public hearing notice to each record owner no later than 45 days prior to the public hearing. The contents of the hearing notice will include: a. Compliance with Proposition 218: 1) The date, time, and location of the public hearing. 2) The amount of the rates imposed on each parcel. 3) The basis upon which the amount of the proposed rates were calculated. 4) The reason for the rates. 5) The location to which owners must submit written protests via mail, or personal delivery. 6) If required by Government Code section 54354.5, the notice will identify the opportunity for record owners to be heard as to whether the proposed rates are not in compliance with any requirements of the Revenue Bond Law of 1941 Government Code Sections 53000 – 55821), including: (a) are discriminatory or excessive, or (b) will not be sufficient under the provisions of any outstanding revenue bonds (including Government Code section 54515). 7) How members of the public may obtain additional information regarding the proposed new or increased fee, including a link to information that is available on the City’s website or by requesting a mailed copy. This may include a copy of the resolution or ordinance by which the proposed new or increased rates are proposed to be adopted. b. Compliance with the Exhaustion Procedure for Written Objections. If the City chooses to follow the exhaustion procedure for written objections, concurrently with mailing the public hearing notice, the City will post on its internet website the written basis for the proposed rates and a link to the Proposition 218 public hearing notice which will be supplemented with the following prominently displayed information: 1) The “deadline” (date and time) by which a “timely written objection” must be submitted to the City. The deadline will be no earlier than 45 days after the City mails to property owners the notice of the public hearing. Resolution No. 2025-066 (Exhibit “A”) Page 3 of 6 2) The location to which written objections must be submitted to the City via mail, or personal delivery. 3) All substantive requirements for submitting a written objection. The record owner must comply with the requirements set forth in Procedures section 3, below, including specifying the grounds on which the owner alleges the proposed new or increased rates does not comply with Proposition 218. 4) Notice that: (a) any person’s failure to submit a timely written objection bars any right of that person to challenge the proposed new or increased fee through a legal proceeding; and (b) there is a 120-day statute of limitations for challenging the proposed new or increased rates (in accordance with Government Code section 53759). c. The City will mail the public hearing notice to each record owner of a parcel that is subject to payment of the new or increased fee. The notice shall be mailed to owner’s address shown on the last equalized property tax assessment roll. 1) There is a rebuttable presumption that the most recent equalized property tax assessment roll of the Sonoma County Recorder is sufficient evidence of the record owner of each parcel. A person may rebut the presumption by providing to the City written proof of ownership. 2) The City Clerk, or designee, may certify by affidavit the proper mailing of notices described in these Procedures, and any such affidavit shall constitute conclusive proof of mailing in the absence of fraud. 3) Failure of any person to receive notice shall not invalidate the hearing or its results. 4) The City will also provide supplemental notices to the address where the City customarily mails the billing statement for rates. d. Concurrently with publishing and mailing the public hearing notice, the City will post on its website relevant information regarding the proposed new or increased fee including a copy of the cost of service analysis (which may be referred to as a “rate study”) which provides documentation of compliance with all substantive requirements of Prop 218 regarding the calculation of the amount of the proposed new or increased fee. 3. Requirements for Submitting Timely Written Objections (AB 2257) For the purpose of considering written objections, the City will consider the term “record owner” to include tenancies of real property where tenants are directly liable to pay the rates to the City (consistent with Proposition 218; California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 2(g)). In order for a record owner to submit a timely written objection, it must: a. Be received by the City at the location identified on the public hearing notice, no later than the deadline identified on the public hearing notice. The deadline may be no earlier than 45 days after the City mails to record owners the notice of public hearing. Resolution No. 2025-066 (Exhibit “A”) Page 4 of 6 b. Be in writing (1) identifying the name of the record owner, and the street address or assessor’s parcel number (or other clear identification) of the property subject to the rates; and (2) signed by the record owner. c. Specify the grounds for alleging the proposed rates do not comply with Proposition 218. The grounds must identify (i) the substantive requirement of Proposition 218, and (ii) the reason the proposed rates do not comply with that requirement. For any proposed new or increased “fee” for a property-related service (such as water rates or sewer rates), relevant substantive requirements of Proposition 218 include: 1) Revenues derived from the rates shall not exceed the funds required to provide the property related service (water service or sewer service). 2) Revenues derived from the rates shall not be used for any purpose other than that for which the fee or charge was imposed. 3) The amount of the rates shall not exceed the proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel. 4) No rates may be imposed for a service unless that service is actually used by, or immediately available to, the owner of the property in question. Rates based on potential or future use of a service are not permitted. 5) No rates may be imposed for general governmental services including, but not limited to, police, fire, ambulance or library services, where the service is available to the public at large in substantially the same manner as it is to property owners. 4. Requirements for Submitting Timely Written Protests (Proposition 218) For the purpose of considering and counting written protests, the City will consider the term record owner” to include tenancies of real property where tenants are directly liable to pay the rates to the City (consistent with Proposition 218; California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 2(g)). In order for a record owner to submit a timely written protest, to be considered as a part of the Proposition 218 protest hearing described in Section 6, below, it must: a. Be received by the City at the location identified on the public hearing notice, no later than the close of the public testimony portion of the public hearing. b. Be in writing (1) identifying the name of the record owner, and the street address or assessor’s parcel number (or other clear identification) of the property subject to the rates; and (2) signed by the record owner. A written protest must be submitted in paper form. Any protest will not satisfy this requirement if it is submitted in any non-paper format such as: email, facsimile, or oral protest via telephone or in person. c. Must clearly identify that the record owner opposes the proposed new or increased rates that are the subject of the hearing. Resolution No. 2025-066 (Exhibit “A”) Page 5 of 6 d. Will only be counted as one protest per parcel. That means if any one or more record owners of a parcel submits a timely written protest (or timely written objection) for the same parcel, it will be counted as one timely written protest. e. Record owners of multiple parcels within the City may file one protest for each parcel owned within the City’s service area. f. A record owner may withdraw a written protest only if the withdrawal is submitted in writing by the record owner clearly indicating an intent to withdraw for an identified property, and it is received by the City at the location (and no later than the time) for submitting written protests. After a written protest is withdrawn, a record owner may submit a new or replacement written protest in accordance with the requirements of these Procedures. No other modification to a timely written protest may be made. g. The City Clerk shall take custody of all submitted written objections and written protests. 1) In order to protect the integrity of the procedures for considering written objections and written protests as described in these Procedures, all written objections and written protests shall remain confidential until the City Manager (or designee) has determined they may be published in accordance with the criteria in paragraph 4(g)(2). 2) Any submitted written objection and written protest shall be a public record; however, the City may withhold disclosure if the City determines that the public interest served by not disclosing clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure under Government Code section 7922.000. As a general rule, the City finds there is a substantial public interest in not disclosing written objections and written protests to protect the integrity of the process described herein during the time that: (A) written objections are still being submitted and (B) prior to the time that the Brown Act meeting agenda is posted (e.g., at least 72 hours before a regular meeting under Government Code section 54954.2). 5. City’s Response to Timely Written Objections (AB 2257) At the close of the written objection period, City staff shall review timely written objections (as defined in Section 3, above) and shall draft written responses to the written objections. The City’s written response will include: (i) the grounds on which the objection is (or is not) resulting in amendments to the proposed new or increased rates; and (ii) an explanation of the substantive basis for retaining or altering the proposed new or increased rates. City staff shall present the written responses to the City Council at the public meeting that was specified in the public hearing notice described in Section 2, above. a. In accordance with the Brown Act, the public will be provided an opportunity to address the City Council prior to the Council’s action related to the timely written objections and written responses. (See Government Code section 54954.3(a).) b. In accordance with Government Code section 53759.1(d), the City Council, in exercising its legislative discretion in considering timely written objections and written Resolution No. 2025-066 (Exhibit “A”) Page 6 of 6 responses, shall determine for the proposed new or increased rates whether further review, clarification, or reduction is needed, and whether to proceed to the Proposition 218 protest hearing. 6. Conducting the Proposition 218 Protest Public Hearing If the City Council determines to proceed to the Proposition 218 protest public hearing for proposed new or increased rates (as previously noticed in accordance with Section 2, above), the public hearing shall be conducted consistent with the following: a. The City Council will open the public hearing and consider all evidence presented during the hearing including the public hearing notice and all documents referenced therein (particularly including the Rate Study), all written objections (AB 2257), written responses, written protests, and any testimony, documents, or information presented during the public hearing. b. Prior to closing the public hearing, the City Council will request if there are any additional written protests, under Proposition 218, to be submitted to (or withdrawn from) the City. c. The City Council will then close the public hearing and request a report from the City Clerk to identify the number of timely written protests compared to the total number of parcels subject to the new or increased fees. The City Clerk shall seek legal advice from the City Attorney if there are any questions regarding the counting of timely written protests that meet the requirements of these Procedures. 1) A majority protest exists only if the number of timely written protests exceeds one-half of the parcels served by the City. 2) If the City Clerk determines that additional time is needed to tabulate timely written protests, the City Council shall recess or continue the public meeting to provide sufficient time for the City Clerk to complete the tabulation. 3) If the City Clerk determines that there is a majority protest, the City shall not impose the new or increased rates. 4) If the City Clerk determines that there is not a majority protest, the City Council shall continue its deliberations and take action on the proposed new or increased rates. 5) The City Clerk’s determinations under these Procedures shall be the final determination of the City subject to appropriate judicial review. This shall include the City Clerk’s determinations that: (a) a written protest meets the requirements for a timely written protest in accordance with these Procedures; or (b) a majority protest has (or has not) been submitted for the proposed rates. 2025 Water Rate StudyRecommendations September 23, 2025 2 Agenda 1.Utility Rate Setting 101 2.Water Enterprise Financial Plan •Capital Funding Scenarios 3.Project Schedule 4.Recommendations 5.Next Steps 3 Monthly Water Bill Comparisons Single Family Homes with Average Water Usage (7,000 gallons) The Rate Setting Process Compares the revenues of the utility to its expenses to determine the overall level of rate adjustment Equitably allocates the revenue requirements between the various customer classes of service Design rates for each class of service to meet the revenue needs of the utility, along with any other rate design goals and objectives Revenue Requirements Cost-of-Service Rate Design 4 Current Water Rate Update 5 Legal Requirements for Setting Water Rates In California Proposition 218 (Article XIIID, Section 6 of California Constitution) •Revenues shall not exceed funds required to provide service; nor used for another purpose •Amount shall not exceed the proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel •Service must be actually used or immediately available •Approval process includes 45-day notice, public hearing, and written majority protest. Does not require a voting process (unlike taxes) 6 City Rate Setting Procedures City Adopted New Rate Setting Procedures August 26, 2025 •Provides processes that will be followed by the City of Rohnert Park (“City”) in establishing any new or increased water rates or sewer •The Utility Rate Setting Procedures include compliance with Proposition 218 as well as the procedures for exhausting administrative remedies (AB2257) •AB 2257 establishes formal written objection procedures for ratepayers to raise substantive concerns about potential increases, which must be received by the City prior to the deadline established as part of the rate setting process (no less than 45 days after the public hearing notice is mailed) •The City will respond to the written objections and provide response to Council at the Public Hearing 7 Schematic of Water Utility Fund Cash Flow 8 Reserve Policies The following are established City reserve policies. In addition to protecting the City against unforeseen circumstances, these policies also contribute towards the City’s credit rating. Operating Reserve: 50% of O&M budget ($5.6 million target) Rate Stabilization Reserve: Target balances of $1.5 million. The Rate Stabilization Reserves may fluctuate above and below the $1.5 million target balances. Recommended Policy: Capital Reserve: A capital reserve gives the water utility a cushion for managing the inherent volatility of capital spending. A preliminary reserve of $3 million is recommended (about 50% of average annual capital spending). Revenue FY2025/26 Budget 9 Utility Rate Revenue $12,357,000 Non-Rate Revenue Penalties $101,000 Interest Earnings $606,000 Operating Revenue $628,000 Transfer In $400,000 Total:$14,092,000 * Vehicle replacement fund * Utility Rate Revenue 87.7% Penalties 0.7% Interest Earnings 4.3% Operating Revenue 4.5%Transfer In 2.8% Operating and Debt Expenses FY2025/26 Budget 10* Does not include capital spending * Salaries $1,734,000 Benefits $623,000 Operational Expenses $1,231,000 Professional Services $1,025,000 Insurance $166,000 Fees and Subscriptions $182,000 Utilities $846,000 Cost Allocation Plan $794,000 Purchase of Water $3,830,000 Transfer Out $108,000 Internal Services $391,000 Internal Loan $301,000 Total Budget:$11,231,000 Cost Inflation Assumptions 11 Salaries, benefits, utilities, chemicals and vehicle replacement….. 5% per year Wholesale water………………………….... 12% for two years, then 10% thereafter Insurance……………………………….……. 10% per year Other Costs…………………………… …….. 3% per year Sonoma Water Rates Increases 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 12 Rohnert Park’s Water Purchase Costs in Dollars $ Fiscal Year 13 14 Rate Increase Drivers •Inflation – Operating costs will be 19% higher in FY25/26 than projected during 2021 Study, including: •Salaries up 22% •Vehicle replacement fund costs up 82% •Utilities up 41% •Professional Services up 145% •Capital Spending – Capital spending from FY2025 through FY2030 was projected to be $24 million. Current plan is to spend $46.1 million (a 92% increase) Water Main Break – Commerce/State Farm 15 Water Main Break – Commerce/State Farm 16 Well Site Fencing and Controls 17 7-Year Capital Project List 18* Expressed in 2025 dollars Project Cost Status Notes 1 Water System Controls and Telemetry $1,077,000 Construction on going and/or as needed for maintenance 2 Snyder Lane Parallel Pipeline Ph. 2 (RPX to Hinebaugh Creek)$4,300,000 Design FY26-27 ; Construction FY27-28 3 Utilities Office $650,000 Permitting; Construction anticipated Winter 2025 4 Water Meter Replacements $7,390,000 Design; Construction FY26-27 50% funded by Sewer 5 Well and Tank Site Improvements (formerly Seismic Upgrades)$13,160,000 Design; Construction FY26-27 Potential grant funding (60%) 6 Well/Tank Site Improvements Ph. 2 & Water Quality $4,000,000 Design FY28-29;Construction FY29-30 7 A Section/Commerce Water Line Replacement Ph 2 $1,184,000 Design FY25-26;Construction FY26-27 8 Water Tank #9 $3,897,000 Construction FY28-29 Funded by capacity charges 9 Tank Interior Recoating $3,300,000 Design FY27-28; Construction FY29-30 10 SCADA Upgrade & PRV Integration $625,000 Design FY27-28; Construction FY29-31 11 Water Line Replacement Program $4,515,000 Design FY28-29;Construction FY29-30 12 Pipe Condition Assessment $1,000,000 FY26-27 13 Aqueduct Tie-Ins and Pipe Runs Upsizing $1,200,000 Design FY28-29; Construction FY29-30 14 Six-Year Costs:$46,298,000 Projected Capital Spending 19 Recent Average Capital: $1.7M Forecasted Average Capital: $7.0M Assumed Long-Term Average Capital: $4.3M 20 Capital Spending Scenarios The Water Utility financial plan will be significantly impacted based on whether a $13 million Well and Tank Improvement Project will receive grant funding* (up to 60%). As such, we have prepared three scenarios: Scenario #1 – The project receives the 60% in grant funding Scenario #2 – The project receives no grant and is cash funded (this will require spreading the cost of the projects over four additional years Scenario #3 – The project receives no grant and debt funds the final $9.5M in costs (cash funding the first $3.5M) (recommended) * Contingent of FEMA approval Financial Forecast & Rate Revenue Increases #1 Assumes $8M in Grant Funding for $13M Well and Tank Project 21 Non Rate Revenue Operating Expenses Debt Service Existing Rate Revenue Cash Capital Additional Rate Revenue Debt Service 10-Year cumulative rate increase: $91% FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 FY2033 FY2034 FY2035 FY2036 Rate Revenue Increase:12.0%9.0%8.0%8.0%4.0%5.0%5.0%4.0%4.0%4.0%4.0% Grant Funded Capital:$2.2M $5.9M Sewer Funded Capital:$2.1M $0.9M $0.8M Proposed Projected Increases (TBD) $0 $5 $10 $15 RE S E R V E S ($ M ) Projected Ending Fund Balance Reserves Target Minimum Reserves $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 FY2033 FY2034 FY2035 FY2036 To t a l R e v e n u e / E x p e n s e s ($ M ) E x p e n s e s Re v e n u e s FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 FY2033 FY2034 FY2035 FY2036 Rate Revenue Increase:18.0%16.0%8.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%4.0%4.0% Sewer Funded Capital:$2.1M $0.9M $0.8M Proposed Projected Increases (TBD) $0 $5 $10 $15 RE S E R V E S ($ M ) Projected Ending Fund Balance Reserves Target Minimum Reserves $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 FY2033 FY2034 FY2035 FY2036 To t a l R e v e n u e / E x p e n s e s ($ M ) E x p e n s e s Re v e n u e s 22 Non Rate Revenue Operating Expenses Debt Service Existing Rate Revenue Cash Capital Additional Rate Revenue Debt Service Financial Forecast & Rate Revenue Increases #2 Assumes Cash-Funding for $13M Well and Tank Project 10-Year cumulative rate increase: $91% 23 Non Rate Revenue Operating Expenses Debt Service Existing Rate Revenue Cash Capital Additional Rate Revenue Debt Service Financial Forecast & Rate Revenue Increases#3 Assumes Partial Debt Funding for $13M Well and Tank Project* 10-Year cumulative rate increase: $98%* Recommended FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 FY2033 FY2034 FY2035 FY2036 Rate Revenue Increase:14.0%9.0%9.0%7.0%6.0%6.0%4.0%4.0%4.0%4.0%4.0% Debt Coverage Ratio:na 5.48 6.36 7.03 7.78 8.53 8.66 8.76 8.29 8.40 8.36 Debt Proceeds:$9.8M Sewer Funded Capital:$2.1M $0.9M $0.8M Proposed Projected Increases (TBD) $0 $5 $10 $15 RE S E R V E S ($ M ) Projected Ending Fund Balance Reserves Target Minimum Reserves $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 FY2033 FY2034 FY2035 FY2036 To t a l R e v e n u e / E x p e n s e s ($ M ) Ex p e n s e s Re v e n u e s 24 Proposed Water Rates $$$$$$ 1 For the first 3,000 gallons per month 2 This marks a change from the current practice of changing rates on the first of the calendar year. 3 Fire Protection Service Charges are also proposed to increase by the same percentages. January 1, 2026 July 1, 2026 2 July 1, 2027 July 1, 2026 July 1, 2029 Rate Revenue Increases:14.0%9.0%9.0%7.0%6.0% Current Single Family Usage Rate ($/gal.) Tier 11 $0.004133 $0.004712 $0.005136 $0.005598 $0.005990 $0.006349 Tier 2 $0.005718 $0.006519 $0.007106 $0.007746 $0.008288 $0.008785 Multi-Family and Non-Residential Usage Rate ($/gal.) Uniform Rate $0.005013 $0.005715 $0.006229 $0.006790 $0.007265 $0.007701 Fixed Monthly Service Charges Up to 1"$34.30 $39.10 $42.62 $46.46 $49.71 $52.69 1.5"$63.99 $72.95 $79.51 $86.67 $92.74 $98.30 2"$99.62 $113.57 $123.79 $134.93 $144.37 $153.04 3"$182.75 $208.34 $227.09 $247.52 $264.85 $280.74 4"$301.52 $343.73 $374.67 $408.39 $436.98 $463.19 6"$598.45 $682.23 $743.63 $810.56 $867.30 $919.34 8"$954.75 $1,088.42 $1,186.37 $1,293.15 $1,383.67 $1,466.69 25 Monthly Bill Impacts Monthly Meter Water Use Current Proposed Size (TGAL)Bill Bill $% Single Family Low Use 1"3.4 $48.39 $55.17 $6.78 14.0% Average Use 1"6.2 $65.00 $74.10 $9.10 14.0% High Use 1"18.6 $135.90 $154.93 $19.03 14.0% Multifamily Example #1 1"15.0 $109.50 $124.83 $15.33 14.0% Example #2 1.5"30.0 $214.38 $244.40 $30.02 14.0% Example #3 2"50.0 $350.27 $399.32 $49.05 14.0% Non-Residential Example #1 1"10.0 $84.43 $96.25 $11.82 14.0% Example #2 2"50.0 $350.27 $399.32 $49.05 14.0% Example #3 3"150.0 $934.70 $1,065.59 $130.89 14.0% Example #4 4"300.0 $1,805.42 $2,058.23 $252.81 14.0% Example #5 6"600.0 $3,606.25 $4,111.23 $504.98 14.0% Change 26 Water Rates – Grant Scenario $$$$$$ 1 For the first 3,000 gallons per month 2 This marks a change from the current practice of changing rates on the first of the calendar year. 3 Fire Protection Service Charges are also proposed to increase by the same percentages. January 1, 2026 July 1, 2026 2 July 1, 2027 July 1, 2026 July 1, 2029 Rate Revenue Increases:12.0%9.0%8.0%8.0%4.0% Current Single Family Usage Rate ($/gal.) Tier 11 $0.004133 $0.004629 $0.005046 $0.005450 $0.005886 $0.006121 Tier 2 $0.005718 $0.006404 $0.006980 $0.007538 $0.008141 $0.008467 Multi-Family and Non-Residential Usage Rate ($/gal.) Uniform Rate $0.005013 $0.005615 $0.006120 $0.006610 $0.007139 $0.007425 Fixed Monthly Service Charges Up to 1"$34.30 $38.42 $41.87 $45.22 $48.84 $50.79 1.5"$63.99 $71.67 $78.12 $84.37 $91.12 $94.76 2"$99.62 $111.57 $121.62 $131.35 $141.85 $147.53 3"$182.75 $204.68 $223.10 $240.95 $260.23 $270.63 4"$301.52 $337.70 $368.10 $397.54 $429.35 $446.52 6"$598.45 $670.26 $730.59 $789.03 $852.16 $886.24 8"$954.75 $1,069.32 $1,165.56 $1,258.80 $1,359.51 $1,413.89 27 Monthly Bill Impacts – Grant Scenario Monthly Meter Water Use Current Proposed Size (TGAL)Bill Bill $% Single Family Low Use 1"3.4 $48.39 $54.20 $5.81 12.0% Average Use 1"6.2 $65.00 $72.80 $7.80 12.0% High Use 1"18.6 $135.90 $152.21 $16.31 12.0% Multifamily Example #1 1"15.0 $109.50 $122.64 $13.15 12.0% Example #2 1.5"30.0 $214.38 $240.12 $25.74 12.0% Example #3 2"50.0 $350.27 $392.32 $42.05 12.0% Non-Residential Example #1 1"10.0 $84.43 $94.57 $10.14 12.0% Example #2 2"50.0 $350.27 $392.32 $42.05 12.0% Example #3 3"150.0 $934.70 $1,046.93 $112.23 12.0% Example #4 4"300.0 $1,805.42 $2,022.20 $216.78 12.0% Example #5 6"600.0 $3,606.25 $4,039.26 $433.01 12.0% Change 28 Monthly Water Bill Comparisons Single Family Homes with Average Water Usage (7,000 gallons) Water Shortage Surcharge Policy 29 Water shortage events can have significant financial impact on the City’s water utility: 1)Water sales drop, resulting in less revenue 2)Water purchases also drop, resulting in less costs 3)Water conservation efforts increase, resulting in more costs The net impact of the above results in financial deficits for the Water Utility. Water Shortage Surcharges are designed to keep the Water Utility financial whole during major water shortage events. Updated Drought Surcharge Policy 30 Normal Supply Stage 1 Voluntary Stage 2 Mandatory Stage 3 Mandatory Stage 4 Mandatory Stage 5 Mandatory Stage 6 Mandatory Assumed Demand Reduction 1-->None 5%15%25%35%45%50% Water Shortage Surcharge 2-->None None 5%10%17%22% Estimated Financial Deficit from Water Shortage Reduced Water Rate Revenue $0 ($389,000)($1,167,000)($1,945,000)($2,723,000)($3,501,000)($3,890,000) Increased Water Conservation Costs $0 $0 ($30,000)($60,000)($90,000)($120,000)($150,000) Estimated Total Financial Def $0 ($389,000)($1,197,000)($2,005,000)($2,813,000)($3,621,000)($4,040,000) Multi-Pronged Corrective Strategy Reduce SCWA Water Purchase Costs $0 $289,000 $865,000 $1,441,000 $2,017,000 $2,594,000 $2,882,000 Reduced Utility Costs 1 $0 $4,000 $13,000 $21,000 $30,000 $38,000 $42,000 Water Shortage Surcharge Revenue $0 $0 $0 $291,800 $505,800 $727,600 $856,020 Reduce Capital Program Expenses 3 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Corrective Actions $0 $293,000 $878,000 $1,753,800 $2,552,800 $3,359,600 $3,780,020 Surplus/(Deficit) Due to Shortage 3 ($96,000)($319,000)($251,200)($260,200)($261,400)($259,980) Notes: 1 All water use reductions are assumed to come from SCWA purchases, therefore pumping costs are expected to remain the same. 2 Temporary water shortage surcharges generate supplemental revenue during certain stages of shortage. modeled here, modest decreases in the capital spending could be used to further mitigate revenue shortfalls. 3 These deficits have been mitigated by water shortage surcharge revenues sufficiently to be supportable by emergency reserves. While not Water Surcharge Surcharge Impacts 31 Water Shortage Level Water Use Reduction Goal Monthly Water Use (Gal.) Service Charge Usage Charge Water Shortage Surcharge Total Water Bill % Change from Normal Bill Average Single Family Customer Meeting Reduction Goals Normal Supply None 6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $0.00 $56.15 0.0% Stage 1 Voluntary Up to 10%5,890 $29.63 $24.99 $0.00 $54.62 -2.7% Stage 2 Mandatory Up to 20%5,270 $29.63 $21.92 $0.00 $51.55 -8.2% Stage 3 Mandatory Up to 30%4,650 $29.63 $18.86 $0.94 $49.43 -12.0% Stage 4 Mandatory Up to 40%4,030 $29.63 $15.80 $1.58 $47.01 -16.3% Stage 5 Mandatory Up to 50%3,410 $29.63 $12.74 $2.17 $44.53 -20.7% Stage 6 Mandatory Over 50%3,100 $29.63 $11.20 $2.46 $43.30 -22.9% Average Single Family Customer With No Water Use Reduction Normal Supply None 6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $0.00 $56.15 0.0% Stage 1 Voluntary Up to 10%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $0.00 $56.15 0.0% Stage 2 Mandatory Up to 20%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $0.00 $56.15 0.0% Stage 3 Mandatory Up to 30%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $1.33 $57.47 2.4% Stage 4 Mandatory Up to 40%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $2.65 $58.80 4.7% Stage 5 Mandatory Up to 50%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $4.51 $60.66 8.0% Stage 6 Mandatory Over 50%6,200 $29.63 $26.52 $5.83 $61.98 10.4% 32 Present Findings to Water Committee July 29 Recommendation to Council September 23 Issue Prop 218 Notification No later than Sept. 26 Written Objections Due November 12th Public Hearing December 2nd New rates are implemented January 1st (tentative) Project Schedule Recommendations •Accept the Water Rate Study •Direct Staff to mail the Prop 218 Hearing Notice •Set the time for the Public Hearing (December 2) 33 Next Steps if Approved •Staff mails the Prop 218 Hearing Notice •Receive and respond to “Written Objections” •Objections are due by November 12th •Responses will be developed prior to the Public Hearing •Hold Public Hearing •Council tallies “Written Protests” •Vote to adopt rates (if majority protest does not exist) 34 ITEM NO. 9.C. 1 Meeting Date: August 26th, 2025 Departments: Public Safety Submitted By: Tim Mattos, Director of Public Safety Prepared By: Tim Mattos, Director of Public Safety Agenda Title: Receive Department of Public Safety Annual Staffing and Recruiting Report for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive Staffing and Recruitment Report from Public Safety for Fiscal Year 2024/25. BACKGROUND: On June 25th, 2024, Chief Mattos presented a discussion and direction item to the City Council regarding an update to the presentation calendar which had been accepted in 2022. The presentation calendar was part of the nine recommendations presented to the City Council to address the council’s goal regarding Police Accountability & Police/Community Relations. The updated presentation calendar excluded some outdated items on the original calendar, and added new items to be presented moving forward. One of the new presentation items is a report on the Department of Public Safety staffing and recruiting for the prior fiscal year. Staffing a Public Safety agency is a continual challenge due to several factors. Recruitment and retention are a daily conversation and goal of every agency. During the past few years the public safety profession has experienced a decrease in the number of interested individuals wanting to become a law enforcement officer. Although the industry is beginning to see a slight shift, recruitment in Rohnert Park remains a challenge for the following reasons: 1. There is competition between agencies offering large signing bonuses and lucrative compensation packages 2. There is a lack of specialty assignments for staff to diversify their career opportunities. 3. Law enforcement agencies throughout Sonoma County and statewide are competing for the same candidates. 4. The recruitment process is demanding. Law enforcement agencies require a rigorous selection process that includes written exams, physical fitness tests, psychological and medical evaluations, and extensive background checks. These stringent requirements, while necessary for ensuring the high quality and reliability of law enforcement officers, deter many from pursuing a law enforcement career. 5. Remote work in the private sector is appealing to those who may have personal schedule challenges. 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 ITEM NO. 9.C. 2 The Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety (RPDPS) has been in a continual recruitment stage for several years as a result of retirements, both service and medical, officers resigning, those leaving to work in other agencies, or individuals who are not able to successfully complete the extensive training required for the profession. In addition to recruitment, RPDPS has a secondary challenge pertaining to the staffing of a Public Safety model. When an individual is hired by the department, they must first successfully complete a five-month Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) approved law enforcement academy. After completing the law enforcement academy, the individual completes a three-week in-house orientation prior to beginning a four-month field training program. After completing this nearly ten-month process, the individual becomes a solo officer and can be placed into the schedule for deployment. After becoming a solo officer, the individual is placed on the fire academy list and awaits their turn to attend the fire academy. Once selected for the fire academy, the individual will attend a four-month fire academy, followed by a three-week in-house fire orientation. Once the employee completes both academies and subsequent training, they are then a fully qualified public safety officer (PSO). Due to the need to have fire-trained personnel spread evenly throughout patrol, the department must ensure that the two annual fire academies have RPPDS personnel in attendance. The two annual fire academies consist of a full-time (four months), and an extended (six months) training schedule. ANALYSIS: During Fiscal Year 2024/2025, (6) Public Safety Officers, (4) full-time Dispatchers, (1) part-time Dispatcher, (1) Community Engagement Coordinator, and (2) Record Clerks left the department. To maintain a steady recruitment of agency personnel, the department has incorporated the following strategies: 1. A side-letter agreement with the Rohnert Park Public Safety Officer Association to define and attract lateral officers 2. Continual recruitment and testing • The Department of Public Safety actively recruits both entry-level and lateral candidates. The 24/25 recruitment efforts focused on local outreach through events such as the Sonoma State University Career Festival, the Women in Public Safety Day event, as well as the Santa Rosa Junior College Fire Academy. • In addition, department personnel leverage professional networks and external trainings, such as the Women in Law Enforcement Annual Conference, to identify qualified lateral applicants from other agencies. 3. Sending recruits to alternative academies (Santa Rosa Junior College, Butte Community College) 4. Incentives to department personnel for recruiting a successful candidate • In FY 24/25, 9 Department of Public Safety employees referred 9 new employees. Each referring employee received a Referral Bonus of $3,000, totaling $27,000 for FY 24/25. 5. Signing bonuses for lateral officers • In FY 24/25, we successfully recruited 3 lateral officers. Each lateral officer is eligible for a Signing Bonus of $20,000, payable over the first three years of employment. 6. Staff dedicated to recruitment ITEM NO. 9.C. 3 During Fiscal Year 2024/2025 the department hired (14) PSOs, (1) Dispatcher, and (1) part-time Dispatcher. Currently, the department has (2) PSO trainees attending the Santa Rosa Junior College Police Academy, and (4) PSO’s currently in the department field training program. As of today, the department has (2) Public Safety Officer vacancies; however, (2) additional PSO Trainees are slated to attend the Santa Rosa Junior College Policy Academy beginning January 2026. The typical cost associated with the onboarding of a Public Safety Officer is approximately $115,594. The costs are broken out as follows: Recruitment/Onboard Item Cost Polygraph 250 Livescan 150 Psych Evaluation 625 Background Investigation 1,400 Medical Evaluation/Occu-med 1,100 P.O.S.T. Academy 3,426 Trainee Salary/Benefits (6 months) 53,372 PSO I Salary/Benefits (4 months) 52,442 FTO Trainer Stipend (4 months) 2,829 Total $115,594 In addition to an ongoing recruitment effort, Public Safety Director Tim Mattos, in (2024), changed the structure of the department as a result of the new twenty-four-hour Battalion Chief coverage model. The department is no longer divided between Fire and Police Divisions. The department is now separated into Operations and Administration Divisions based on duties. Staffing and Recruitment are an ongoing effort, statewide. Our agency, along with many others in California face the same challenges. As noted above, the Rohnert Park Public Safety Department makes a concerted effort to attract qualified and diverse applicants. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report reflects the Strategic Plan’s goals of delivering effective public services by maintaining Community Quality of Life. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it does not qualify as a “project” pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the City’s action would cause either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: There is no additional fiscal impact from receiving and accepting this report. Department Head Approval Date: 07/29/2025 ITEM NO. 9.C. 4 Finance Director Approval Date: N/A Human Resources Director Approval Date: 09/03/2025 City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 09/16/2025 Attachments: None Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety There is competition between agencies offering large signing bonuses and lucrative compensation packages There is a lack of specialty assignments for staff to diversify their career opportunities. Law enforcement agencies throughout Sonoma County and statewide are competing for the same candidates. The recruitment process is demanding. Remote work in the private sector is appealing to those who may have personal schedule challenges. Staffing/Recruitment Challenges Police Hiring process/background (4-6 months) Police Academy (5 Months) Orientation ( 3 Weeks) Field Training Program (4 Months) Fire Fire Academy (4-6 Months) Orientation (3 Weeks) Hiring Process Recruitment/Onboard Item Cost Polygraph 250 Livescan 150 Psych Evaluation 625 Background Investigation 1,400 Medical Evaluation/Occu-med 1,100 P.O.S.T. Academy 3,426 Trainee Salary/Benefits (6 months)53,372 PSO I Salary/Benefits (4 months)52,442 FTO Trainer Stipend (4 months)2,829 Total $115,594 Cost During Fiscal Year 2024/2025, (6) Public Safety Officers, (4) full- time Dispatchers, (1) part-time Dispatcher, (1) Community Engagement Coordinator, and (2) Record Clerks left the department. During Fiscal Year 2024/2025 the department hired (14) PSOs, (1) Dispatcher, and (1) part-time Dispatcher. Losses and Hirings Currently, (2) PSO trainees attending the Santa Rosa Junior College Police Academy. (4) PSO’s currently in the department field training program. (3) additional PSO Trainees are slated to attend the Santa Rosa Junior College Policy Academy beginning January 2026. Current Recruitment Status Questions ITEM NO. 9.D. 1 Meeting Date: September 23, 2025 Department: Administration Submitted By: Marcela Piedra, City Manager Prepared By: Sylvia Lopez Cuevas, City Clerk Agenda Title: Consider Designating a Voting Delegate and Alternates for the League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Oct. 8-10, 2025, in Long Beach CA, Authorizing the Voting Delegates to Vote on Late Resolutions or Alternate Recommendations Made at the October 10, 2025 General Assembly, and Directing Staff to Complete the Voting Delegate Form and File it with the League of California Cities. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Designate Voting delegates for the League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Oct. 8-10, 2025, in Long Beach CA. 2. Authorize the Voting Delegates to Vote on late Resolutions or alternate recommendations made at the October 10, 2025 General Assembly. 3. Direct Staff to Complete the Voting Delegate Form and file it with the League of California Cities; BACKGROUND: At the Annual Conference, the League conducts its Annual Business Meeting where League Members take action on conference resolutions. These resolutions help guide cities and the League in efforts to improve the quality, responsiveness and vitality of local government in California. The League’s bylaws stipulate that each city be entitled to one vote on matters affecting League policy. ANALYSIS: The League of California Cities (League) will be holding its Annual Conference October 8 through October 10, 2025 in Long Beach, California. The voting delegate and/or alternate must be registered for the conference and present in order to vote on behalf of Rohnert Park at the Annual Business Meeting scheduled for Friday, October 10, 2025. According to the League’s bylaws, Council may appoint a Council Member and/or a staff member as either a primary or an alternate voting delegate. Should the City Council wish to select a delegate, the City Council may appoint a primary voting delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates and direct staff to complete the Voting Delegate Form and submit it to the League of California Cities by Wednesday, September 24, 2025. 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 ITEM NO. 9.D. 2 During the General Assembly on October 10, 2025, voting delegates debate and consider general and petitioned resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions Committee. Potential Cal Cities bylaws amendments are also considered at this meeting. The deadline to submit resolutions for consideration was Saturday, Aug. 9, 2025. As of September 18, 2025, zero resolutions have been filed for consideration by the General Assembly. Petitioned resolutions may still be introduced during the conference, and if qualified, will be considered by the General Assembly. Therefore, staff is asking Council to authorize the voting delegates to vote on late resolutions or alternate recommendations made at the Friday, October 10, 2025 General Assembly. STRATEGIC PLAN AND COUNCIL/GOALS PRIORITIES ALIGNMENT: Involvement with outside authorities, governmental agencies, and advisory groups supports the City’s values of communication and collaboration and Goal A – Practice participative leadership at all levels. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it does not qualify as a “project” pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the City’s action would cause either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Designate Voting delegates for the League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Oct. 8-10, 2025, in Long Beach CA. (Recommended) 2. Authorize the Voting Delegate to Vote on Late Resolutions or Alternate Recommendations Made at the October 10, 2025 General Assembly. (Recommended) 3. Direct Staff to Complete the Voting Delegate Form and File it with the League of California Cities. (Recommended) 4. By not appointing voting delegates, the City would forfeit its right to vote on the League’s business matters dedicated to improving the quality, responsiveness and vitality of local government in California. (Not Recommended) FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: None. City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 09/18/2025 Attachments: 1. Cal Cities 2025 Resolution Packet 1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org DATE: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 TO: Mayors, Council Members, City Clerks, and City Managers RE: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Oct. 8-10, 2025 Long Beach Convention Center Every year, the League of California Cities convenes a member-driven General Assembly at the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo. The General Assembly is an important opportunity where city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. Taking place on Oct. 10, the General Assembly is comprised of voting delegates appointed by each member city; every city has one voting delegate. Your appointed voting delegate plays an important role during the General Assembly by representing your city and voting on resolutions. To cast a vote during the General Assembly, your city must designate a voting delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote if the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity. Voting delegates may either be an elected or appointed official. Action by Council Required. Consistent with Cal Cities bylaws, a city’s voting delegate and up to two alternates must be designated by the city council. Please note that designating the voting delegate and alternates must be done by city council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor or city manager alone. Following council action, please submit your city’s delegates through the online submission portal by Wed., Sept. 24. When completing the Voting Delegate submission form, you will be asked to attest that council action was taken. You will need to be signed in to your My Cal Cities account when submitting the form. Submitting your voting delegate form by the deadline will allow us time to establish voting delegate/alternate records prior to the conference and provide pre-conference communications with voting delegates. Conference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternates must be registered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. Conference registration is open on the Cal Cities website. Council Action Advised by September 24, 2025 For a city to cast a vote, one voter must be present at the General Assembly and in possession of the voting delegate card and voting tool. Voting delegates and alternates need to pick up their conference badges before signing in and picking up the voting delegate card at the voting delegate desk. This will enable them to receive the special sticker on their name badges that will admit the voting delegate into the voting area during the General Assembly. Please view Cal Cities’ event and meeting policy in advance of the conference. Transferring Voting Card to Non-Designated Individuals Not Allowed. The voting delegate card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but only between the voting delegate and alternates. If the voting delegate and alternates find themselves unable to attend the General Assembly, they may not transfer the voting card to another city official. Seating Protocol during General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate. The voting delegate desk, located in the conference registration area of the Long Beach Convention Center in Long Beach, will be open at the following times: Wednesday, Oct. 8, 8:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. and Thursday, Oct. 9, 7:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. On Friday, Oct. 10, the voting delegate desk will be open at the General Assembly, starting at 7:30 a.m., but will be closed during roll calls and voting. The voting procedures that will be used at the conference are attached to this memo. Please share these procedures and this memo with your council and especially with the individuals that your council designates as your city’s voting delegate and alternates. Once again, thank you for submitting your voting delegate and alternates by Wednesday, Sept. 24. If you have questions, please contact Zach Seals at zseals@calcities.org. Attachments: •General Assembly Voting Guidelines •Information Sheet: Cal Cities Resolutions and the General Assembly 1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org General Assembly Voting Guidelines 1. One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy. 2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the voting delegate form provided to the Cal Cities Credentials Committee. 3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the voting delegate desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the voting delegate desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the General Assembly. 4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city’s voting card by providing a signature to the credentials committee at the voting delegate desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution. 5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in their possession the city's voting card and voting tool; and be registered with the credentials committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate nor alternate. 6. Voting Area at General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate. 7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the credentials committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the General Assembly. Sixty days before the Annual Conference and Expo, Cal Cities members may submit policy proposals on issues of importance to cities. The resolution must have the concurrence of at least five additional member cities or individual members. How it works: Cal Cities Resolutions and the General Assembly General Assembly General Resolutions Policy Committees Developing League of California Cities policy is a dynamic process that engages a wide range of members to ensure Cal Cities represents cities with one voice. These policies directly guide Cal Cities’ advocacy to promote local decision-making, and lobby against statewide policies that erode local control. The resolutions process and General Assembly is one way that city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy. Here’s how resolutions and the General Assembly work. The petitioned resolution is an alternate method to introduce policy proposals during the annual conference. The petition must be signed by voting delegates from 10% of member cities, and submitted to the Cal Cities President at least 24 hours before the beginning of the General Assembly. Petitioned Resolutions The Cal Cities President assigns general resolutions to policy committees where members review, debate, and recommend positions for each policy proposal. Recommendations are forwarded to the Resolutions Committee. Who’s who The Resolutions Committee includes representatives from each Cal Cities diversity caucus, regional division, municipal department, and policy committee, as well as individuals appointed by the Cal Cities president. Voting delegates are appointed by each member city; every city has one voting delegate. The General Assembly is a meeting of the collective body of all voting delegates —one from every member city. Seven policy committees meet throughout the year to review and recommend positions to take on bills and regulatory proposals. Policy committees include members from each Cal Cities diversity caucus, regional division, and municipal department, as well as individuals appointed by the Cal Cities president. During the General Assembly, voting delegates debate and consider general and petitioned resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions Committee. Potential Cal Cities bylaws amendments are also considered at this meeting. Cal Cities policy development is a member- informed process, grounded in the voices and experiences of city officials throughout the state. For more information visit www.calcities.org/general-assembly Prior to the Annual Conference and Expo Resolutions Committee The Resolutions Committee considers all resolutions. General Resolutions approved1 by either a policy committee or the Resolutions Committee are next considered by the General Assembly. General resolutions not approved, or referred for further study by both a policy committee and the Resolutions Committee do not go to the General Assembly. All Petitioned Resolutions are considered by the General Assembly, unless disqualified.2 During the Annual Conference and Expo 1 The Resolution Committee can amend a general resolution prior to sending it to the General Assembly. 2 Petitioned Resolutions may be disqualified by the Resolutions Committee according to Cal Cities Bylaws Article VI. Sec. 5(f). Joanna Paun, MA, PPSC Foster & Homeless Youth Education Services Coordinator (707) 524 -2661 ~ jpaun@scoe.org Providing Support for Foster & Homeless Youth Leading with empathy Foster Youth A child or youth who has been removed from their home, is a dependent-victim of abuse or neglect, a juvenile who has violated the law Homeless students Children and youth who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence. From the 2025 Sonoma County Point-in-Time Count Portrait of Sonoma The Portrait of Sonoma is meant serve as a roadmap to direct institutional, political, philanthropic, and community-based efforts, investments, and resources in Sonoma County. Homelessness in California is driven by a number of factors, chief among them the state’s outsized housing costs and lack of affordable housing. 23%of people experiencing homelessness report having a physical disability 16%of Sonoma County residents who are unhoused identified as LGBTQ. 28%of youth experiencing homelessness identified as LGBTQ LGBTQ youth who are homeless often experienced family rejection and abuse related to their sexual orientation or gender identity. Statistics and Equity Check-in 60,000 foster youth in California and approximately 350-400 in Sonoma County, disproportionately impacting Black and Latinx youth. Only 50% of foster youth graduate high school, and less than 3% graduate college. In Sonoma County, the graduation rate for homeless youth is 64% and 57% for foster youth. “Justice for these populations requires federal legislation providing targeted interventions, supports, and wraparound services.” -21CSLA “Justice also means that we’re not engaging in the blame game of these young people but rather understanding structural factors disproportionately affecting communities of color.” -21CSLA Equity now: Centering our most vulnerable students (webinar) McKinney -Vento H omeless Assistance Act ●Sharing of housing (doubled/tripled) ●Motels/Hotels ●Public/private place not designed for sleeping ●Cars, parks, abandoned buildings ●Trailer parks w/o sufficient access to plumbing/electricity, physical space/etc ●Campgrounds ●Couchsurfing ●Transitional Housing Programs ●Safe Houses ●Youth Shelters ●Substandard housing ●Runaways (often not actively in school, however, they should be noted and tracked) ●Unaccompanied Youth ●Migratory children who qualify as homeless because they are children who are living in similar circumstances listed above. It defines homeless children and youth as individuals who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence. “Individuals who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence as a result of economic circumstances or natural disasters” The McKinney Vento Act exists to: ●ensure educational rights and protections for children & youth experiencing homelessness ●protect the rights of students to enroll and/or stay in school even when housing becomes uncertain. Two Federal Definitions of Homeless: McKinney-Vento & HUD Homeless Data 2024-2025 Students of color are disproportionately impacted by homelessness Academic performance for youth impacted by homelessness in Sonoma County Recent Call for Action & Collaboration The staff of Sonoma County Office of Education’s McKinney-Vento program provides school districts, families, and community partners with training, assistance, and resources to help meet students’ most basic educational needs, including backpacks, school supplies, and hygiene kits. All of this is done to meet the needs of the 1,432 homeless students on a budget of just $79,000 a year. That adds up to approximately $55 per student per year, equating to less than $5.00/month.And all of this funding that SCOE gets is from a competitive grant. McKinney-Vento is funded by the US Department of Education. The staff received additional funding during the pandemic, but those funds have expired. There has been a recent call for the State of California to match the federal funding received so that we can do more for our students. The state has no dedicated funding for this student group. While these students may benefit from initiatives that address the needs of socioeconomically disadvantaged students more broadly, students who are experiencing homelessness often have distinct and unique needs that are not addressed by broader reaching interventions. With the continued fires in our state are poised to exacerbate the homelessness crisis, an investment of resources into meeting the needs of homeless students is more essential now than ever before. How are your local resources being used to address students experiencing homelessness? Increased collaboration with your local school districts & PTA; staff and board trustees. Members of your community include parents and children. Leveraging relationships with SRJC & Sonoma State University Recent Call for Action & Collaboration